Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Live Event/Special
Three Prosecutors Withdraw From Roger Stone Case After Justice Department Undercuts Recommended Sentence; Trump Says He Didn't Ask Justice Department To Change Roger Stone Sentencing Recommendation But Thought It Was "Ridiculous"; Exit Poll: 81 Percent Say They're "Angry" About Trump Administration; Final Hours Of Voting Underway In New Hampshire; Exit Poll: 61 Percent Describe Themselves As Somewhat Or Very Liberal; Trump: Military Will "Certainly" Look Into Potential Disciplinary Action For Impeachment Witness Vindman; Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) Is Interviewed About The Roger Stone Case. Aired 5- 6p ET
Aired February 11, 2020 - 17:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[17:00:00]
ANDERSON COOPER, CNN HOST: It's extraordinary that the Department of Justice so quickly acquiesce after a tweet by the President of United States.
We have Governor Granholm, you're a former federal prosecutor, attorney general, is this at all normal?
JENNIFER GRANHOLM, (D) FORMER MICHIGAN GOVERNOR: No. It's clearly not normal. It is clearly utterly offensive to the rule of law. This is what sets this country apart. This is what a banana republic does. This is what a dictator does. You help your friends and you use the Justice Department to punish the enemies. It is outrageous.
I hope people are infuriated by this. I mean, really, even his base has to see how important it is to have an unbiased justice system, and what he has done is poisoned it. Shame on him. He's got to go.
COOPER: Governor Kasich.
JOHN KASICH (R), FORMER PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Well, you know, Anderson, following the whole impeachment process where there were a number of Republican senators basically said it was a perfect call that he made. You know, I was so shocked at that.
You make the point and here is the question and I wrote it down, how much will voters put up with? I mean, is -- are these people who were for him -- you know, who were for him before, they look like they are still for him, when they look at these things one after another, will they finally say, we've had enough. I mean, that's really the question. I think.
COOPER: There's also obviously, look, issues in our criminal justice system, issues in our systems of laws and stuff, and, you know, a long history of injustices, but for a president to be able to put their finger on the scale with a tweet and have the Department of Justice scurry around to adjust is --
KASICH: Well, two executives here, Anderson. You know, as a governor --
GRANHOLM: Oh, my god. Could you imagine?
KASICH: -- I would never be putting my self in the middle of some kind of a sentencing.
GRANHOLM: You're politicizing the Justice Department.
(CROSSTALK)
BAKARI SELLER (D), FORMER SOUTH CAROLINA STATE REPRESENTATIVE: I think that it is an assault on our rule of law, because a jury spoke and Roger Stone was found guilty and to go in and undo that and do that within, you know, 280 characters like Donald Trump did is devastating, but I actually disagree with both of the governors here. I don't think that voters are going to be outraged. In fact I think this help --
KASICH: I don't know if they will.
GRANHOLM: Well, we're asking the question whether enough is enough.
SELLERS: What I am saying though is I believe that voters will begin to tune out and become filled with despair, because they are tired of seeing their government not work for them and only work for select few.
That select few all they do is to go over to the Trump hotel, sit in the lobby and drink martinis while the rest of the people in this country are suffering. And so I think what the President does by eroding the rule of law day in and day out is help to build the desperation and despair amongst the voters in this country. I wish that there was an agitation and an anger, right? I wish that there was this overwhelming sense that we have to go out the change something.
But my fear is that people are just -- Fannie Lou Hamer said it best, I am tired of being sick and tired of being sick and tired. And this President does an amazing job, this Republican Party who is complicit through acquiescence, they do an amazing job of sucking the hope out of most Americans.
KASICH: Somebody who's running on the Democratic side has got to create an excitement. It got to create a situation where they say this is not right and spell out the way going forward, Bakari, because in my judgment, you know, you have a lot of people -- look at the rally that he had in New Hampshire. I mean, the place is absolutely jammed. Draws more people than, you know, the Rolling Stones. It's amazing. So somebody has to effectively articulate the ramifications of the erosion of some of our institutions. They've got to explain it in a way that people at home say, they are right.
COOPER: And what is "The Washington Post" says democracy dies in darkness, it doesn't actually dies right in --
KIRSTEN POWERS, FORMER CLINTON ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Right in front of our faces.
COOPER: -- in front of our faces --
POWERS: Yes, I know. And we talk about --
COOPER: -- on television in front of, you know, lights.
POWERS: -- you know, we talk about it almost every single night. And that's why he has intentionally been tearing down the institutions. It's not an accident. And so what happens is what will his voters think of this? I can't completely predict it, but my guess is what they'll say is the deep state of, you know, at the DOJ was after Roger Stone, and so the President is just, you know, rectifying a situation where you have all these liberal weenies, you know, ruining the world.
GRANHOLM: But independents will not say that.
POWERS: And so -- we're going to ask about what his voters are going to do.
And then I think for the broader electorate, I do think people are worn down and that is not by accident. Donald Trump is wearing --
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Right. That's --
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: He benefits.
POWERS: -- no, he is wearing people down. He is making people go feel like I can't take it anymore, I'm not going to watch the news, I'm not going to follow what's happening. I'm going to check out, because it's too chaotic. And so he is just continuing with that and doing this and doing a very -- it's political interference in the DOJ.
CHRIS CILLIZZA, CNN POLITICS EDITOR-AT-LARGE: It is. And it's context matters to Kirsten and Bakari's point, I mean, remember how outraged people we thought would be when he was directing Jeff Sessions, his appointed attorney general, why aren't you investigating this, why aren't you, you know, doing that? When he got rid of James Comey, when he villainized any number of top officials at the FBI, I'll remind people in his Thursday celebration, which was, you know, feels like a month ago but was less than a week ago, he deride at the, his words, top scum, --
[17:05:21]
POWERS: Right.
CILLIZZA: -- at the FBI. I mean, this is clearly on purpose. His entire effort is to destabilize and suck trust from institutions. But I think Bakari is right. How long can you be shocked or outraged? And maybe it will eventually go into the vessel on the Democratic side.
(CROSSTALK)
BAKARI: Go ahead. GRANHOLM: Just this quickly. I do not think that our side in the end will not show up at the polls because they are demoralized. I think they may tune out of T.V., but they realize the power is in their hands.
SELLERS: My only pushback against that --
COOPER: Iowa says something else though.
SELLERS: Thank you for starting (ph) my talking points. I was going to say --
COOPER: Turnout was not --
SELLERS: -- turnout was not what we thought that it would be. And so that -- I hope you're right, but that's my fear.
GRANHOLM: In the Democratic primary.
SELLERS: The person that I supported in the race was Kamala Harris, and she is now either sitting in Washington, D.C., or in California, but she actually came across a tag line at the end that it resonated with a lot of people, a lot of the poor down and oppress, minority groups in this country that justice is on the ballot.
Now, which candidate is able not to distill the talking points, but to give that life that justice is on the ballot? I do have faith, though, uniquely enough that Klobuchar is well position because she's a prosecutor and she can uniquely speak to that. But the question is who can actually move voters, who can tie in that history, make them feel that justice is on the ballot? Make them understand what we mean when we say the word justice, not just say it and then get them to come to the polls.
KASICH: When I think about some of the Trump voters, they feel as though their lives are out of control. Their families become more mobile, they're not around, they don't go to churches much, they don't have church friends at work, things are changing all the time. The person sit next to him this week is not there next week.
And I think Trump represents to them the idea that I'm the leader, I'll fix it, I'm in charge. You take that and you put it next to Klobuchar up at that town hall which was her great moment when she says, I see you. See there's a message in there about I care about you, and I know you, and I can be with you. And it's a softer, and -- but it can penetrate to people out there.
POWERS: But that's Bernie's message, also.
KASICH: Yes, but it's delivered in different way.
POWERS: So, yes, like Bernie whitewashed out of everything. I mean, truly, like that is Bernie's message. Like that is what he has been doing. And I think that -- I agree I think Amy Klobuchar is a terrific candidate, but I'm just saying, let's not forget that Bernie Sanders is a 100 percent about helping the working person, helping the person who is suffering, helping the person who doesn't have health care.
(CROSSTALK)
SELLERS: What I'm trying to challenge the field to do is not reach your glass here. We can't beat Trump at the rate we're going now just reaching that ceiling. We have to shatter that ceiling and go further. So yes, we have to do everything that Bernie Sanders has been doing his entire life, because he's been dedicated himself -- his entire life to the working class.
We have to match that with the prosecutorial strength of Amy Klobuchar, match that with the steadfastness and steady hand of Joe Biden, and the new youthful energy of Pete Buttigieg, who can do all of those things is the question.
CILLIZA: But it's a head versus heart, isn't it Bakari? I know you want both, but it feels like Trump, Governor Kasich talked about it, Trump has a thing where he gets in the people's gut. I think some of that is --
SELLERS: Yes.
CILLIZA: -- is maybe a lot of what he's playing in race, but he gets in their gut. He makes them feel angry, whatever. The heart is very powerful when it comes to voting, and to your point, you need someone who can articulate that heart get some here and so these are the states that justice is on the ballot as supposed to hear the talking points about it.
COOPER: I got to --
(CROSSTALK)
COOPER: -- more reaction to this breaking story ahead of us (ph) are just minutes away from getting early clues about the primary results in New Hampshire from exit poll. Much more of our special coverage ahead.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[17:13:23]
WOLF BLITZER, CNN HOST: Looking at live shots, folks are still voting in New Hampshire. Look at the live pictures from Nashua right now. But let's get our first clues right now as to how this night might unfold. We're getting the first results from our exit polls. David Chalian is looking at those numbers, getting some indication where we all might be heading, David.
DAVID CHALIAN, CNN POLITICAL DIRECTOR: Wolf, we can't stress enough how much this Democratic primary electorate really dislikes Donald Trump, and really wants to find the candidate to defeat him.
Take a look, we've asked this question all election season long, New Hampshire Democratic primary voters in this early exit polls and these numbers will change throughout tonight, but this is what they told us as they were leaving the polls, are you looking for someone who agrees with you on the issues, 34 percent said that, but 62 percent, an overwhelming majority of Democrats said what they are looking for is somebody who can defeat Donald Trump.
Take a look at their feelings about the President. Again, these are Democratic primary voters so you'd expect them not to have great feelings about the President, but look at the number, 81percent of Democratic primary voters today in New Hampshire say they are angry about the Trump administration. Anger is a motivating factor for folks to get to the polls. That is a huge number.
And finally, we asked the folks what about impeachment, do you think that has helped or hurt Donald Trump's chances at re-election, 15 percent say helped those chances, 22 percent say hurt them, but the vast majority of them, 59 percent of these Democratic primary voters today said they didn't think the impeachment matter is going to make any difference in Donald Trump's re-election chances come November, Wolf.
[17:15:00]
BLITZER: It varies significant indications. All right, David, thanks very much.
Let's go back to Jake and Dana. Eighty-one percent of the Democrats who were voting based on our exit polls are angry right now at the Trump administration.
JAKE TAPPER, CNN HOST: Angry and then also 62 percent say the most important factor is whether or not the Democratic candidate can beat Trump as opposed to 34 percent saying the most important factor is agrees with you. And this, Dana, is what we've been hearing from all these candidates is their theory of the case, why they have the best chance to defeat Donald Trump.
DANA BASH, CNN CHIEF POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes.
TAPPER: You have Bernie Sanders saying I can motivate all of these working class voters, young people, this new coalition, get them to the polls and flood the zone. Flood the zone of all these voting booths and have people turn out the defeat Trump.
Pete Buttigieg and Amy Klobuchar with a different message and Joe Biden, too, saying I can bring in the moderate voters. I can bring in independents. So, and this is the debate that they are having.
BASH: And I cannot tell you how many stressed out New Hampshire Democratic voters I met over the past several days, you know, back to when I was there last week, for this very reason, because they are so angry. Because they so desperately want Donald Trump to be replaced, and they understand, I mean, they always understand in New Hampshire how important their vote is, bun like never before in their lifetimes do they feel that they have such a responsibility for helping find the person who can help kind of dissipate the anger and replace Donald Trump. I mean, I've been texting with some of the voters I met who are undecided today, and they're telling me about how frankly emotional it was for them to finally make a decision in the voting booth today --
TAPPER: Yes.
BASH: -- for that reason, because of all of the emotion and anger and frustration that was expressed in these polls that David showed us.
TAPPER: And David has more exit poll results. David?
CHALIAN: That's right, Jake. One of the things as Dana is talking about that stressed out voters, I think that's part of the reason why we say some paralysis at the end among New Hampshire voters as to making up their mind.
Take a look. We asked people when made up their mind, made their decision today. If you looking at these top two just today in the 16 percent, in the last few days of 32 percent, that's nearly half the primary electorate saying they just made up their mind within the last few days. That's an enormous swap of the electorate. Fourteen percent said earlier this month, 6 percent said last month in January, and three in 10 said they made up their ming before that, meaning last year.
Bernie Sanders has very sticky supporters. I'm sure he would like to see that number even more that people went to him, locked him -- with him early.
I also wanted to show you about the last debate that happened on Friday night, you remember that debate, how important of a factor was that in your decision we asked voters today, 48 percent, nearly half of the electorate today says that debate was an important factor in their decision, 44 percent said not important factor. But that 48 percent is a big number. That debate probably mattered quite a bit to the overall outcome that we're going to see tonight.
We also took a look, Jake, at first time voters. We know Bernie Sanders particularly talks about trying to expand the electorate, bring people who have not voted before, specially young people who that haven't voted before.
Only 12 percent according to these early exit polls, and I anticipate these numbers are going to change throughout the evening. As folks were leaving the polling places, 12 percent told us they were a first- time voter, that's a little lower than the 16 percent that said so back in 2016. We'll see if that number changes throughout the night.
And finally, we wanted to look at undeclared voters. That's what they are officially called in New Hampshire if they are not registered with Republicans and Democrats. As you know, they can choose either primary.
Take a look at this, 43 percent of the electorate were registered as undeclared, these independents, these are going to be huge. This is about what it was in 2016, and Bernie Sanders did so well with them, he's going to count on these to have a good night tonight as well. We'll see how they turned out was the vote comes in.
Anderson, back to you.
COOPER: David Chalian, thanks very much.
Back with our panel. Bakari, so interesting that so many of the voters seem to have made up their mind.
SELLERS: Yes, that's kind of fascinating to watch, I think because we all live in this bubble in Washington, D.C., we're like we know what's going to happen and how it is going to happen. But a lot of people are still getting the feeling for the candidate which is why, I mean, you know, the governor said it best and so did Chris, that Iowa mattered coming in, because you have that momentum, you have to think that people making their decisions late that benefits Mayor Pete.
COOPER: But as Governor Kasich said, when you work -- you know, if you're a politician campaigning in New Hampshire, what you were saying, you've met them five times they want to meet you another three times.
KASICH: Yes. And look, I think Anderson, there, I think people -- Jennifer and I were just talking that people make decisions in New Hampshire later, because they're going to these town halls all of the time, and they go to this one and say, that's pretty good, and they go to this one, but then somebody kind of just clicks for them and they finally decided at the end.
[17:20:04]
I love the New Hampshire primary for this reason and people say why New Hampshire, I'll tell you, because it's a microcosm of America except for the minority population there, but they really check you out carefully, they check you out and they analyze you, and you don't get away with anything there. You got to be real and it's a very interesting experience is in place.
GRANHOLM: From the interviews that I heard with these voters today, there was a lot of, too, our previous discussion a lot of people who are saying, you know what, I just want somebody who's going to beat Trump. I'm not sure which one it is, it will work itself out, but they felt a huge responsibility in the mess in Iowa in trying to figure it out. And it will be interesting.
The second thing that's interesting from this exit polling is the number of first-time voters that did not increase.
SELLERS: That is slow, yes. That's like it.
GRANHOLM: I was surprised at that. I was thinking there would be more. But there have been apparently some voter suppression activity inside of New Hampshire that has been adopted since 2016. And I wonder what that is.
SELLERS: If you can tell Democrats are extremely nervous about turnout. GRANHOLM: Yes. We are all --
COOPER: Well, what good reason, I mean Iowa that there was not the --
GRANHOLM: Right.
COOPER: -- hoards of people turning out.
GRANHOLM: Right.
SELLERS: It's not -- you know one of the things that I looked at is, you know, somebody who wants the Democratic party to be successful up and down the ballot is not just who wins this and who comes in first, second, third, fourth or fifth, but also how many people come out, and the number of first-time voters is really low.
The number of independents that are going to play a role, you have -- I mean, and that's one of Bernie Sanders' pitch as why he's the most suitable to beat Donald Trump because Bernie Sanders says and the polling is shows in states like New Hampshire show that he does extremely well with independents. And Joe Biden is going to have to show not only the base of the party, but he has some strength there as well.
COOPER: But that is one of Sanders' arguments which is that this is -- it has to be a revolution, it's going to be from the bottom up, a huge numbers of people, more people, new people have to come out, have to tune in and have to back, you know, the sweeping changes that he wants to make. If people aren't showing up, that potentially hurts him in his argument at least.
POWERS: Yes. I mean, but the turnout isn't just driven by one candidate, but usually, you know, if you have a really amazing candidate, if you have a Barack Obama, we don't have a Barack Obama in this group. Then they can pull out a lot more voters. So I think that it is concerning that you're not seeing more of a turnout. But in the end, Bernie Sanders just needs to win the primary, right?
So regardless of how many people turnout, I do think if, you know, for people who -- so, of those people, around 50 percent they're making up their mind last-minute, most of the Bernie Sanders', people that already knew they were voting for Bernie Sanders.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: That's right.
POWERS: So those votes are probably going to someone else. And you know, we don't know, we don't know, it could be Pete, but it could be Amy Klobuchar.
CILLIZZA: Yes. Yes.
POWERS: And if you're in New Hampshire, also, I assume you probably wait to kind of see what happens in Iowa, right, and you factor that in as well.
CILLIZZA: I want to flag one other number that David Chalian mentioned, yes, the question of do you prefer a candidate who can beat Trump or agrees with you on the issues, 62 percent, obviously early exit polling, but 62 percent can beat Trump. If you had told me that, not a week ago, but two weeks ago, I'd say, woo, Joe Biden is going to be happy with that, because his message has from the start been, you may not agree with me on everything, but I'm the guy who can beat Trump and we agree that's the common enemy, right?
The fact that you have six in 10 people prioritizing electability over issue agreement and you have Joe Biden wither on a plane or already in South Carolina with, you know, three or 2 1/2 more hours left in New Hampshire, I'm with Bakari, that I learned the don't declare people politically dead before they are, because this is two votes, so I'm with them now. I don't think Joe Biden this end of the road, no matter what happens I will tell you though I think that would be a concerning fact for if I was Joe Biden and looking at that electorate.
COOPER: We're going to take a break. Coming up, we're going to dig deeper into the exit polls, what issues matter most in New Hampshire. Voters, we'll find out.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[17:28:53]
BLITZER: Looking at the live pictures, they're still voting in Dover, New Hampshire right now. As they're voting, let's go back to David Chalian. David, more exit poll results coming in.
CHALIAN: That's right, Wolf. We asked the voters as they were leaving the polls today, what is the most important issue to you as you were voting in the New Hampshire primary. Once again like we saw in Iowa last week, health care is the big winner here, 37 percent of this New Hampshire Democratic primary voters tell us that was the issue that mattered the most to their vote. Climate change followed at 28 percent. Income inequality at 19 percent. And foreign policy at 11 percent.
As you know, the battle over Medicare for all has been one of the defining policy battles in this campaign. And we're seeing again that a majority in this electorate support the idea. Fifty-eight percent of these New Hampshire Democratic primary voters support the idea of getting rid of private insurance in favor of a government-run plan. But I should note liberals are driving this, the moderate conservative voters are actually opposed to it, but the liberals are sort of winning out on this policy debate here.
[17:30:00]
The same thing we saw with free college tuition at public universities. Another key policy debate inside of this field, 67 percent more so than for Medicare for All support free tuition at public colleges, 29 percent say they do not. And about that ideological makeup of this electorate, I think this is really important and telling just the shape of the electorate, what it looks like. 21 percent called themselves very liberal. 40 percent say somewhat liberal. So that's 61 percent of the electorate on the liberal side, whereas you have 36 percent moderate, 3 percent call themselves conservatives. You might expect that it's a Democratic primary, but that's about 39 percent. On the moderate conservative side of the equation, that's a 60-40 split of what this electorate tonight looks like ideologically in these early exit polls, Wolf.
BLITZER. Very interesting. You know, Jake and Dana, 61 percent described themselves as either somewhat liberal or very liberal.
TAPPER: Yes, but the number that's interesting here to me is the very liberal is 21 percent and moderate is 36 percent. And something to keep in mind comparing this New Hampshire primary vote versus the last time when Bernie Sanders won, so overwhelmingly as, first of all, it's not just essentially a two candidate race, right? He's competing against many candidates.
Second of all, the Sanders coalition today, if you talk to his advisors is different than the Sanders coalition of 2016. The Sanders coalition today is more emphasis. There's more emphasis on voters of color and working class voters, not necessarily New Hampshire, which is not to say that he's not going to win New Hampshire. I have no idea what's going to happen.
But his new coalition looks more like Nevada or South Carolina, then this one does because New Hampshire, when -- there are a lot of working class voters in New Hampshire. Obviously there's poverty in New Hampshire, but New Hampshire has a higher median income than most every state in the nation. I mean, it's like in the top five. In addition, it's obviously a very white state, 94 percent white. So the question about whether or not New Hampshire is the place for Bernie Sanders like it was four years ago, I don't know. Well, I guess we'll see.
BASH: Right. If you look at the numbers and just kind of at a glance, these numbers do look good for Bernie Sanders in theory because the electorate is considers themselves liberal.
TAPPER: Not to mention he's from right across the --
BASH: Well there's that but just exactly, but just on these exit poll numbers, and on the issue of replacing private insurance with a government plan, almost six and 10 say yes, and so forth. But --
TAPPER: But that's fewer than said it in 2016.
BASH: It's fewer than 2016. But more importantly, just anecdotally, again, I can't tell you how many voters I met who were self-described liberals, but they were at an Amy Klobuchar event. So it doesn't necessarily translate into the kind of candidate we think that this kind of --
TAPPER: Right. Plus the electability argument.
BASH: Right.
TAPPER: Wolf?
BLITZER: Guys, we're getting more reaction to the breaking news. Also in the resignation of not one, not two, but three federal prosecutors in the Roger Stone case, that straight ahead.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[17:37:38]
BLITZER: We're going to have much more of our special coverage of the New Hampshire primary in just a moment. But right now we have more on a major breaking story that's unfolding right now. All for federal prosecutors have now resigned from the case against longtime Trump confidant, Roger Stone. This after the Justice Department reduced its original sentencing recommendation for Stone following public criticism by the President.
Let's go to our White House Correspondent Kaitlan Collins. She is watching this for us. Kaitlan, this is an extraordinary development.
KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Wolf, it's really hard to just explain just how remarkable what we are seeing are -- what we are seeing and just how laying out this is. These are the four prosecutors who were signed their names onto that sentence recommendation on Monday night saying that Roger Stone should get seven to nine years in prison for the crimes he committed, the crimes he's been indicted on and charged with, of course, and now all four of them have resigned from the case. This is really significant. They're withdrawing their names from this. And of course, this comes after the day after they recommended that the President was lashing out calling it disgraceful.
And then of course, we saw something really stunning, the Justice Department saying they were going to overrule these prosecutors and that sentence recommendation that they had about the seven to nine years. And of course, Wolf, these are the prosecutors who worked on this case for much.
They were the ones who made those passionate, closing arguments about how telling the truth matters, saying that these trials matter and talking about what Roger Stone did, and of course, the gravity of him lying to Congress and those other acts that he committed. And now they are all withdrawing their names from the case over this.
And it's a really stunning turn of events and the questions going forward are going to be the Attorney General Bill Barr's involvement in all of this because you do not -- it is not every day that you see the Justice Department overrule its own prosecutors. Now, of course, Wolf, that tweet from the President saying this was disgraceful, raised a lot of questions about whether or not he was involved.
Well, reporters had the chance a few minutes ago to ask him whether or not he had spoken with the Justice Department about this. And I want you to listen to what he said.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Yes, I thought it was ridiculous that -- no, I didn't speak to the judge, I'd be able to do it if I wanted. I have the absolute right to do it. I stay out of things, to a degree that people wouldn't believe. What I didn't speak to him, I thought the recommendation was ridiculous. I thought the whole prosecution was ridiculous. And I look at others that haven't been prosecuted or I don't know where it is now. But when you see that I thought it was an insult to our country, and it shouldn't happen and --
(END VIDEO CLIP)
[17:40:09]
COLLINS: So the President, they are saying he stays out of things like you wouldn't believe. But, Wolf, it's really hard for the President to make that case, given the fact that he's tweeted about this multiple times. He's retweeted other people. And we know privately, the President has been fuming about that sentencing recommendation for Roger Stone, his longtime friend of at least three decades, who was one of the first people to encourage him to run for president.
So there are going to be questions going forward about whether or not the President's tweets had an influence over this. He is denying directly being involved. But, Wolf, a lot of people follow the President on Twitter, you can see those tweets and surely the Justice Department can read them.
BLITZER: Yes. The President says the whole prosecution was ridiculous. The President saying that publicly. We just heard him say that, and now all four federal prosecutors have resigned.
Jake, this is an amazing development that raises questions about the Justice Department's independence.
TAPPER: It sure does. I mean, the reason Lady Justice has a blindfold over is because she's not supposed to be able to see whether or not it's one of the President's friends and cronies who's being prosecuted or not. That's obviously not what's going on.
And if you look at legal documents, the four prosecutors, Wolf, are Jonathan Kravis, Michael Marando, Aaron Zelinsky, and Adam C. Jed. And Dana, all four of them are now gone, all four of them resigning in protest.
BASH: That's right. There's nobody left from the Justice Department who went to trial and took Roger Stone to trial who was still working at the Justice Department. Wait until we learn what the backstory is here. I mean, it's got to be something the fact that this happened.
And just one more thing, just to add to what Kaitlan was saying. The President saying, I don't get involved. I mean, on its face, given what he said in a tweet publicly. We need to say that over and over again, that was getting involved.
TAPPER: Yes. No, it's laughable on its face. Let's bring in James Baker, former General Counsel for the FBI. And well first of all --
JAMES BAKER, FORMER FBI GENERAL COUNSEL: And federal prosecutor --
TAPPER: And former federal prosecutor. First of all, what's your reaction to the resignation? Second, what's your reaction to what the President did?
BAKER: The prosecutors did the right thing. I'm extremely proud of them. They held up the institution of the Department of Justice, the standards and traditions of Department of Justice, this kind of meddling, while the President has this power under the Constitution, while the Attorney General and main justice have this power, to do it in this way. And to meddle in a case like this is way outside the normal bounds of what should be done, especially in a case like this that has such political overtone. So I think they absolutely did the right thing.
And this is what people need to do if they are not -- if they find the President's conduct unacceptable. People need to not go along with it. They should not enable this kind of behavior because he's destroying the norms of one of the -- what should be the one of the most revered institutions of the federal government of the United States, the Department of Justice.
TAPPER: And Carrie Cordero, let me bring you in here. Michael Marando -- remember in the closing, I believe it was in the closing, he made this impassioned argument to jurors and Roger Stone's trial, quote, truth matters. Truth still matters, OK. His voice was almost wavering in our institutions of self-governance, committee hearings, courts of law, truth still matters. You don't look at it and you don't say, so what? That's Marando talking about Roger Stone lying to Congress.
CARRIE CORDERO, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Here's what I fear. What I fear is that the damage to the institution, to the Justice Department has been done. Because if we look at what the President said today, when he was asked that question, he said, the whole prosecution is ridiculous. And that's his quote.
And what he's saying is that he is not supporting the rule of law. The person who's supposed to be the chief law enforcement, chief enforcer of law, the person who is supposed to take an oath to uphold the constitution and take care that the laws be faithfully executed. That individual thinks that the prosecution shouldn't have taken place at all, that the sentencing recommendation of impartial prosecutors should not have been made. And now that decision has been undone.
And whether or not it was the tweet, the President's public statement that caused that decision to change, or whether it was simply that his political allies in the Justice Department, the Attorney General, and then the new U.S. attorney that the A.G. just put in place to preside over the D.C. U.S. Attorney's Office, saw that prosecution recommendation, the sentencing recommendation and changed it and undid it. Either way, they have undermined the public's confidence that the Justice Department is doing its work in an apolitical way. BASH: And now the question is, what is the judge going to do, right?
BAKER: Yes, exactly.
BASH: I mean, because this is a recommendation. This isn't --
TAPPER: Right.
BASH: -- this doesn't mean that this is what the sentencing will be. And we just saw, you know, one branch of government, the legislative branch tried to pull back on the President. Not successfully, because obviously he was acquitted, but you still have the judicial branch here.
[17:45:08]
BAKER: You still have the judicial branch. There are mechanisms to hold the Justice Department accountable to conduct oversight. So the court obviously is going to have a lot of questions about this because prosecutors obviously do not resign every day especially in circumstances like this. So I think the judge is entitled to really ask some probing questions about what the heck happened here.
The Inspector General, I would expect to take a look at this. And Congress, I mean, I think the Attorney General really has an obligation to go up in front of the judiciary committees of the Senate and the House and explain what the heck happened here. I could just interject.
Look, I agree completely with Carrie. While I'm proud of the prosecutors, and I think that did the right thing, this is a bad day for the Justice Department. And part of me, look -- I mean, I think everybody knows the President is going to pardon Roger Stone. Just do it. Like just do it now. Don't wait until the day after the election when you're probably going to do it.
It's better to, you know, frankly, abuse that power, the pardon power than trash the Department of Justice. So I would say just -- Mr. President, just go ahead and pardon. I'm just -- just jump to what we all know is going to happen.
TAPPER: I want to bring in Elie Honig. Elie, I guess one of the questions right now there's going to be a lot of people on Capitol Hill, I guess Democrats in the House mainly who are use their power to try to find out about what went on behind the scenes at the Department of Justice after President Trump sent out this tweet, and then senior justice officials undermined their own prosecutors by undermining their sentencing recommendation. They had said that Stone should receive seven to nine years. Maybe that's on the stiff and maybe that's a little bit harsh. It was going to be left up to the judge.
But in any case, all four prosecutors have now resigned. Do you think that they're going to haul the Attorney General before the House of Representatives and make him swear an affidavit to explain what exactly he knew and what happened behind the scenes? ELIE HONIG, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Jake, I really hope so and they really need to. As Carrie said, as Jim Baker said, the Department of Justice has been undermined and damaged today, I think to an incalculable extent. And who's going to fix it? I have no faith that Attorney General William Barr will do anything to stand up for the independence of the Department of Justice. He has not done that throughout his year in office.
So who's going to do anything about it? I think it's going to fall to the House of Representatives to do its job here to do its oversight, and to get answers. There needs to be answers given the Justice Department has been harmed today, we need to know how this went down so that DOJ can at least begin the process of recovering it's good name and its independence.
TAPPER: All right, stand by everybody, because I want you to see something that just happened also that comes into the same idea of the President. Disrupting norms is the nicest way to put it. And it also comes on his vengeance tour, as he fired U.S. Ambassador to the E.U. Gordon Sondland, who testified that there was a quid pro quo as he fired from the White House National Security Council. Not just Lieutenant Colonel Alexander Vindman, but also his twin brother who was not involved in the impeachment proceeding at all, and somebody else who testified against him as he's attacked Mitt Romney, as he's attacked Nancy Pelosi, as he's attacked Joe Manchin, anyone who crossed him.
I want you to take a listen to something he said today about Lieutenant Colonel Vindman, who has now been reassigned and is back at the Pentagon.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: That's going to be up to the military will have to say, but if you look at what happened, I mean, they're going to certainly, I would imagine, take a look at that. But no, I think what he did was just reported a false call.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
TAPPER: Said reported a false call and he went on to talk about how he thinks that there should be potentially disciplinary action taken against Lieutenant Colonel Vindman. And as far as I know, he did nothing wrong except was subpoenaed came before Congress and told the truth. By the way, I remember a different time when somebody was subpoenaed and did not tell the truth and Republicans in Congress took a different attitude towards him. They impeach them that was built into that for us. But, anyway, what do you make of this all?
BAKER: Well, it's just -- it's contrary to the facts that all of us have in front of us. We read the transcript or the gist of the transcript, just of the conversation, and we listened to the testimony. We know what the answer is. He didn't lie. The Lieutenant Colonel didn't lie or say anything inappropriate, didn't go out of his way to abuse his office or anything of that, it's just preposterous. And so I don't even understand what the President is saying. It makes no sense.
TAPPER: And, again, Carrie, just again to repeat, there is no evidence that Lieutenant Colonel Vindman, who by the way, still has shrapnel in his body from when he was in Iraq and earned a Purple Heart because he is a Humvee, was hit by an IED. There's no evidence he did anything to violate the Uniform Code of Military Justice, nothing.
CORDERO: And so this is where this becomes the test for the people who are in the leadership positions of these institutions. So, is the Secretary of Defense are the individuals who are beneath him in the leadership ranks? What are they going to do to protect Lieutenant Colonel Vindman and his brother who was dismissed -- had his detail ended from the National Security Council for reasons of just, I guess, being a family member.
[17:50:09]
We haven't heard any other public explanation of why his detail was ended abruptly. And so the question is, is whether these individuals are going to be protected. What we know is that the President seeks retribution. And he's trying to use the instruments of government to implement it. And we see it across various departments. There was a story about using the Secret Service to disrupt what was going on in New Hampshire this week.
TAPPER: That's right. An Associated Press story saying that President Trump was going up to New Hampshire for that rally, and they were hoping that Secret Service keeping protection of him would disrupt the Democrats up there.
CORDERO: Would disrupt the Democratic process. We've seen the entire gutting of the leadership of -- the political leadership of the Department of Homeland Security. So we've seen obviously the political pressure that the President places on the Justice Department. So the question now is we're going to be looking back at the Defense Department. And whether or not the President's expressed, his publicly expressed desire for retribution against this individual who did his duty by appearing before a separate branch of government is going to be retaliated against.
TAPPER: OK. Everyone, stick around. We're staying on these two big stories, the resignation of four prosecutors now from the Roger Stone case, as well as the primary results out of New Hampshire. We're getting closer to the first votes of the night being released. Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[17:56:28]
TAPPER: We have some breaking news now. We'll have more of our special coverage of the New Hampshire primary in a moment but there's this other breaking story we're following. All four federal prosecutors have now resigned from the case against Trump confidant Roger Stone. This after the Justice Department reduced their original sentencing recommendation for Stone following President Trump criticizing their recommendation.
Let's bring in CNN Senior Justice Correspondent, Evan Perez. And Evan, it must -- I mean, we -- I have never seen anything like it. This is pretty shocking.
EVAN PEREZ, CNN SENIOR JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: It is shocking, Jake. And we just had a briefing with a senior Justice Department official, somebody who is supposed to be helping overseeing this issue, and they expressed surprise at the four resignations. They said that what the Justice Department did today was not that big of a deal.
They're saying that essentially the interests of justice are served by the new memorandum that was issued, that that was filed today with the judge, which basically says that it's up to the court, that seven to nine years is way too harsh a sentence, something less than that.
But what appears to be the case, Jake, is that behind the scenes, there was certainly a lot of wrangling going on behind the scenes between the prosecutors, some of whom have resigned and some of the leaders here at the Justice Department it appears that they were expecting a different type of recommendation. And they were surprised when they saw the filing made in court last night.
TAPPER: All right, Evan Perez, thanks so much. Let's bring in Senator Richard Blumenthal right now. He's a Democrat from Connecticut. He serves on the Senate Judiciary Committee. He was also the former Attorney General of Connecticut.
Senator, thanks for joining us. You call this move from DOJ to undermine their own prosecutors, quote, absolutely abhorrent and stomach-churning. But you're in the minority in the Senate. Is there anything you can do?
SEN. RICHARD BLUMENTHAL (D), JUDICIARY COMMITTEE: Absolutely, Jake. And first of all, thanks for covering this story on a night when so much else is going on. It is the equivalent of a Saturday night massacre and obviously timed so that it would be overlooked on the night of the New Hampshire primary. And yes, I am going to be calling. I have called for an investigation by the Office of Inspector General in the Department of Justice. I'm also going to call for hearings by Senator Graham as the Chairman of the Judiciary Committee where I serve. He owes it to the committee to have hearings immediately.
And let me just emphasize, Jake, this political interference by the President of the United States using the Attorney General as his henchman is not only an insult to the career, dedicated prosecutors, but also to the jurors, ordinary Americans who served on that jury and convicted Roger Stone of nine serious felonies. It is absolutely unprecedented in recent history.
TAPPER: I don't want to defend Roger Stone, but what do you say to people out there who think seven to nine years I'm hearing that even from legal experts who are unsympathetic to Stone that's a little bit on the harsh end of things. What do you say to that?
BLUMENTHAL: If that sentence is too hard, the judge is the one to make that decision. That's the way our judicial system works. The prosecutors make recommendations about the seriousness of the crime. And the judge can show mercy if there are mitigating circumstances. If his age or the circumstances of crime argue for a lesser sentence, but the President of the United States saying the crime was on the other side, meaning it was not Roger Stone, it was the Department of Justice that committed the crime, absolutely abhorrent and stomach-churning.
And today, if he needed any other signal, the Attorney General got it from the President when he called that prosecution ridiculous.
