Transcripts For KGO This Week With George Stephanopoulos 201

KGO This Week With George Stephanopoulos July 23, 2017

And what about the democrats . Everyone knows they dont like trump. Are they offering an agenda for all of you . Were not going to stand idly by and shrug our shoulders when america is suffering. Chuck schumer says he has answers. What went wrong . What democrats need to get right . And the reporter whose interview are President Trump rocked washington this week. Maggie haberman joins our roundtable. Everything you need to know. Well break down the politics. Well smoke out the spin. The facts that matter this week. Good morning. Six months ago this week, President Trump took the oath of office vowing to make America Great again. He promised a border wall paid for by mexico. The end of obamacare. Tax cuts for everyone. He claim to have signed more bills at this point than any president ever. That is not true. Three signature promises unkept. Unclear if they ever will. His Approval Rating is the lowest of any president ever at this point. Though trump has kept a strong hold on his core voters. He can take comfort in a strong economy, with low unemployment. The stock market at record highs. One big promise the president surely has made good on, the promise to shake up washington. The question now, can his presidency survive the aftershocks . As the russia investigations by congress and the special counsel intensify this week, the president responded as he did when faced with crises in his private life. By hunkering down, lashing out, shaking up his team. Attacking his investigators. Trump is braced for battle. A battle unlike any hes ever seen before. Safe to say our country has never seen anything quite like it either. And its just beginning. We begin with the president s team. Attorney jay sekulow and brandnew press secretary Sarah Sanders. And mr. S rks k sekulow, i want to start with you. Let start with this tweet that President Trump sent out yesterday morning. While all agree that the u. S. President has the complete power to pardon, why think of it when the only crime so far is leaks against us. Fake news. I wonder if you can explain what the president means by that, complete power to pardon. Does he believe he has the right to pardon himself . The president in that tweet, stated something rather unremarkable. And that is that under the constitution, article 2, section 2, the president has the authority to pardon. I want to be clear on this, george. We have not, and continue to not have conversations with the president of the United States regarding pardons. Pardons have not been discussed. And pardons are not on the table. With regard to the issue of a president pardoning himself, theres a big academic discussion going on. An academic debate. You have professor tribe arguing one point. Professor turley arguing another point. And while it makes for interesting academic discussions, let me tell you what the legal team is not doing. Were not researching the issue because the issue of pardons is not on the table. Theres nothing to pardon from. As you know, the Washington Post reported that you were discussing it this week. I take it youre denying that article. I want to put up something from 1974. The office of Legal Counsel under richard nixon. They said under the fundamental rule that no one may be the judge in his own case, the president cannot pardon himself. Youre a constitutional lawyer. Do you believe the president can pardon himself . I dont think that first of all, its never been adjudicated on whether a president could pardon himself because its not happened. Clearly, the constitution does vest a plenary pardon power within the presidency. Whether it would apply to the president himself, i think would be matter for a court to decide. If it were ever to come into an existence. Like i said, its not something were discussing. From a constitutional, legal perspective, you cant dismiss it one way or the other. Its a question. If put in place, would have to be adjudicated by the Supreme Court to determine constitutionality. The document its, we talk about the document, the constitution, article 2, is very clear. The president has the power to pardon. Academics are arguing both sides. Were not researching it. I havent researched it. Because its not an issue were concerned with or dealing with. You think its an open question. Let me move on to special counsel mueller. The president complained to the New York Times this week that Robert Mueller has an inherent conflict of interest. Because he interviewed for the fbi directors job before he was appointed. I want everyone to listen. The day before. Yes, he was up here. Mueller wanted the job. I said, what the hell is this all about . Talk about conflicts. He was interviewing for the job. He went on to say there were many other conflicts that i havent said but i will at some point. What did he mean by that . What other conflicts of Robert Mueller does he have in mind . Well, george, you know, any lawyer that is involved in a matter, one like this, a court matter. Youre always looking at the issue of potential conflicts or conflicts as they arise. If a conflict arises, you raise that conflict with, in this particular case, with the special counsel. If it was a serious enough conflict that you thought was not being rectified, you go to the Deputy Attorney general who appoints the special counsel here that is set up after the recusal of Jeff Sessions. What the president is talking about, in due time, if there is in fact, a conflict that the legal team deems is significant enough to be raised, we would raise the conflict with the special counsel. He says mueller has an inherent conflict. He already said mueller has a conflict. Has that been raised with the Deputy Attorney general . We have not raised it with the Deputy Attorney general yet. Ill tell you this. The special counsels situation, which is a bit unique in the way its structured. Its not an independent counsel. Its a special counsel. You have to be evaluating conflicts as they as a matter moves forward. Remember, were not at an investigative stage yet. Im not going to Start Talking about individual and particular conflicts that could exist that would render or put us in a position where we would, in fact, raise that issue. As the lawyers for the president , were going to be constantly evaluating that situation. If an investigation were to arise and we thought the conflict were relevant. We would raise it. Without question. The president has already raised it. He doesnt seem to be on the same page as his lead attorney, john dowd, who with an interview with the wall street journal dismissed the the idea that mueller has conflicts. I want to show you that. We all know him and were not interested in that kind of collateral nonsense. Hes an honest guy and hes done a good job. I wonder how you reconcile the statements of mr. Dowd and the president. Does the president agree that mueller is an honest guy who as done a good job . Those are not inconsistent statements. What youre talking about. The president was talking about conflicts that exist within the special counsels office. Or that may rise to a level that we have to address. Not every conflict do we have to address. When they get to certain levels, you do address them. He was talking about mr. Muellers personal conflict. John dowd was responding to the fact that we have had an ongoing professional dialogue with the special counsels office and havent yet raised the issues of conflict. The president s concerns, our concern as well, if there is and were concerned about the conflicts, as conflicts mature, and thats how it works in a proceeding. If the conflicts mature and we have an investigation, which we dont right now, those would be raised in an inappropriate venue. No question. I dont think what john dowd said is inconsistent with the president at all. John is addressing let me finish. John dowd who is a brilliant criminal defense lawyer here in washington, john is raising the scenario as it exists with regard to the special counsels office as he sees something possibly moving forward. The president is concerned about apparent conflicts that have already kind of bubbled to the surface. And look, any lawyer thats handling a matter like this would look at those seriously and take the appropriate action. I want to awe assure you and assure the president that were doing it. Mr. Dowd calls the idea of conflicts collateral nonsense. Mr. Trump is raising the conflict. He says the Deputy Attorney general is conflicted in the New York Times piece. The acting fbi director is conflicted as well. He seems to be raising questions about everybody who is involved in this investigation. Are you concerned at all that this is going to bolster the case of obstruction of justice, that the president appears to be questioning everyone involved in this investigation . No, he has the right to raise concerns. You have the situation with the acting fbi director whose wife received i think 500,000 or 700,000 from terrys p. A. C. While she was running for a state senate seat in virginia. Thats an i mean, you cant ignore that as an issue. That would be naive by any lawyer to glance over that. And say thats not a big deal. The president seemed to say it was a problem that the Deputy Attorney general was from baltimore. Hes concerned about the appointment of the Deputy Attorney general from baltimore. As hes concerned he raised it in the article. This is no secret what youre saying. A democratic state. Democratic appointment here. And does that in and of itself . Look, you have to look at a conflict in the totality of circumstances. Ive been practicing law for 38 years. In every case im involved in. Ive been involved at the Supreme Court of the United States. Ive argued cases in international tribunals. Ive handled congressional investigations before the house and senate. Heres what happens. You look at these issues, and you make a determination based on looking at those issues, whether it is something that has to be raised within the appropriate venue. So again. What is happening here is the president is recognizing apparent conflicts as a nonlawyer right off the just evaluating the situation. And you dont ignore those. Anything like this has to be evaluated. And well do that. I dont understand how being from baltimore, serving from baltimore, hes from pennsylvania, is a conflict. But i want to bring up one final tweet from the president. This was yesterday, as well. He said so many people are asking why isnt the ag or special council, he didnt spell it correctly there, looking at the many Hillary Clinton or comey crimes, 33,000 emails deleted. Which comey crimes does the president believe the Justice Department or mueller should be investigating . Well, i think theres a really serious one, george. And that is, the president of the United States is concerned, as i am as his lawyer, that james comey to have notes of the conversations with the president of the United States, he put them on the government computer. Put them in his government desk. He took what he called his private notes. Investigators and the special counsel and the government have concluded that this is, in fact, government property. He took government property, his private notes on the conversations with the president , and leaked them to the press for what purpose . He said this under oath, for the sole purpose of obtaining a special counsel. Who happened to be appointed the day after the special counsel, bob mueller, interviewed for the fbi job. I think, look this is the reality of what happened. The special counsel comes out of this illegally leaked information by james comey. Because let me tell you, what an fbi director or fbi agent can do is leak government property. Thats what happened here. If it was an fbi agent that did it, they would be investigated by the fbi. Maybe they are. I dont know. We cant make that determination. Certainly not public. I think it has to be done. An illegally leaked memo of conversations he had with the president of the United States was the basis for which a special counsel was put in place. And let me also say this. That conversation would have been covered by executive privilege. James comey ignored that. Did not give the president or anyone else at that point, when he leaked the information, the opportunity to assert the privilege. I think that was not only a dare lix of his duties, but a violation of his couldnt constitutional oath. Thats all we have time for today. Its an open question whether it was illegal. He says its not classified. The president did not claim privilege over comeys testimony. Thank you for your time this morning. Four of those documents have been deemed classified, george. It doesnt have to be classified to be illegally leaked. Under section 641 of the criminal code. Government property. Jay sekulow, thank you for your time. Lets move on to the newly appointed press secretary Sarah Sanders. Joins us from the white house lawn this morning. Congratulations on the new job. Thank you. When you came to work on friday, is it fair to say you had no idea you would be press secretary at the end of the day . I certainly dont think that was part of the original plan waking up and getting to work on friday. But im honored to be here and excited to continue being part of the president s team and helping continue to get his message out there and honored to do it. I wonder how you see your role. Sean spicer, your predecessor, seemed to get hammered from both sides. The president complained he wasnt tough enough. The press complained he wasnt transparent or truthful enough. How will you strike a balance . I think any time, usually if the press is attacking you in the situation, youre probably doing something right. I think sean did a great job. Very loyal. Served the president admirably. Im looking forward to being part of the president s team to continue pushing out his message. We want to talk about jobs and health care. How we can make America Great again. Thats our focus. Thats what were going to come to work every day and try to do. I want to ask you the same question jon karl asked sean spicer on his first day. Do you promise to try the always tell the truth from that podium . Absolutely. Not just to you. I think that is our duty. Certainly, i have three young kids. I want to go home and be able to look them in the eye every day. Thats far more important to me to be able to do that and have that highest level of honesty and integrity. I want to do that in every single thing i do. Not just my job. This is an extension of me being able to do that. Im excited and honored to do it. Lets move on to the big issue. The house and senate seemed to come the agreement on a bill with tough sanctions for russia. It restricts the president s ability to lift those sanctions and add sanctions for iran and north korea. Will the president sign that bill . The administration is supportive of being tough on russia. Particularly in putting these sanctions in place. The original piece of legislation was poorly written. We were able to work with the house and senate. The administration is happy with the ability to do that and make those changes that were necessary. We support where the legislation is now and will continue to work with the house and senate to put those tough sanctions in place on russia. Until the situation in ukraine is fully resolved. And it certainly isnt right now. So the president will sign that bill. Thats a little news right there. I want to move on to the attorney general, Jeff Sessions. The president , the New York Times interview was very tough on the attorney general this week. Said he never would have appointed him has he known he was going the recuse himself from the russia investigation. Said it was unfair to the president. A new issue in the Washington Post over the weekend. An intelligence intercept shows the attorney general did talk to the Russian Ambassador about the campaign. The president responded in a tweet. A new intelligence leak from the amazon Washington Post. This time against Jeff Sessions. These illegal leaks, like comeys, must stop. That appears to be a confirmation that the attorney general was talking to the Russian Ambassador about the campaign. I disagree. The president s point is theres a real problem with leaks. Whether they are actual leaks or not. Theres an issue that there are constant stories, sometimes true, sometimes not, that are being leaked out of the Intelligence Community. We have had over 60 leaks in the First Six Months from the Intelligence Community. When the other administrations previous to us were in the Single Digits after the entire time. This is a real problem. There are people that are putting our National Security at risk. I think that is one of the most undertold stories so far in the First Six Months of this administration. Theres a ton of focus on what i like to call russia fever. Which is a total madeup story about the president trying to take away the legitimacy of his victory in november. And we need to focus on these leaks. This is the only illegal thing taking place. Its a serious problem. As you know, part of what feeds the fever is the fact that the president and his associates have not been straight about exactly what happened. In fact, the attorney general first said he never had a meeting with russians. He revised that. Then he said he never talked about the

© 2025 Vimarsana