White House Whistleblower Reveals 25 People Received Security Clearances Despite Objections from Security Professionals; President Trump Announces Republican Health Care Plan Will Be Ready after 2020 Elections; Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R) Illinois is Interviewed About Trump's Immigration Policies and Health Care
ALISYN CAMEROTA, CNN ANCHOR: Now he says the Republican plan to replace Obamacare will not be announced until after the 2020 election. Just last week the administration agreed with the judge's ruling that called for the entire Affordable Care Act to be struck down. The White House and congressional supporters have been scrambling to try to figure out what they could replace it with, but overnight the president tweeted that a vote will be taken right after the 2020 election when he believes the GOP will win back the House.</s>JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: Not so fast on healthcare reform. Also new this morning, White House whistleblower, a rare and threatening occurrence for this administration. A current official on the record raising new concerns about security clearances. Initially some 25 people had their clearances denied because of a range of fears and disqualifying issues, but these concerns were overruled. This morning House Democrats will vote on at least one subpoena to dig deeper, including on the top secret clearances for the president's son-in-law, Jared Kushner, and daughter Ivanka Trump. Now, the chair of the Oversight Committee calls this issue here a million times more serious than questions about Hillary Clinton's emails. Joining us now is Jeffrey Toobin, CNN chief legal analyst and former federal prosecutor, Abby Phillip, CNN White House correspondent, and Van Jones, CNN political commentator and host of "The Van Jones Show." Abby, I want to start with you. You cover the White House. The president has been telling us he wanted Republicans to be the part of healthcare. Marc Short, who works in the administration, told us there would be a healthcare plan this year, and then overnight the president with an announcement that cuts Marc Short's legs out from under him, said that there not be a plan that will be voted on until after the 2020 election. Explain.</s>ABBY PHILLIP, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Well, he's being maybe brutally honest here about what this is all about, which is that the president and some people close to him believe that having healthcare as an issue, basically promising voters that they are going to solve this issue the day after the election, is something that is advantageous to him. There is no intention on the part of the White House to deal with healthcare before that point, to deal with healthcare anytime this year or really anytime next year, as long as there is an election being fought. So the president is trying to signal here, but he's also making it very clear that they are not actually going to put forward a plan, that there is, according to our reporting, no working group. He named a handful of senators last week that he said were going to be working on this issue. None of those senators knew what he was talking about because there is no plan, there never was a plan. And that's why there was so much disagreement within the White House, because a lot of officials were essentially saying we're playing with fire here. If we successfully invalidate this law, people will be left with absolutely nothing. And President Trump is saying, well, that's fine, as long as we do it or deal with this issue after November, 2020. The problem for him is that I think Democrats are going to take that and they are going to say, game on. This is a good way for them to fight over the issue of healthcare. They think that that is -- that is high ground for them and that they can make a better argument to the voters. I think we'll see, but I think Trump is coming to this fight holding literally nothing in his hands. And Democrats are saying here are all these various things that we want to do instead to make healthcare better. And I think that's why Republicans are so worried on the Hill.</s>CAMEROTA: Abby, very quickly, before I get to the guys, do you know who waved him off this idea? Because just a few days ago -- this is such a stark reversal from a few days ago when Mick Mulvaney, his acting chief of staff, really wanted to announce it before the end of the year, and now it's so different. Who got to the president?</s>PHILLIP: I think, Alisyn, this is just the reality, that Mick Mulvaney and Marc Short were saying that there was going to be a plan by the end of this year, and that was never really true. There was never any infrastructure there for them to come up with something by the end of this year. So what the president is basically saying is we don't have a plan and we are not going to for a long time, and that's honestly the truth. And I think that it's just a case of the president's advisers trying to put a positive face on this kind of bad situation, and the president just saying, well, I'm going to make the best out of it and say we're just going to deal with it after the election, kicking the can down the road to a future point. So I don't think that there was ever really a plan to do something by the end of the year, despite what Mulvaney and what Marc Short said.</s>BERMAN: Imagine that.</s>CAMEROTA: Sometimes it's stunning when you hear the truth. It's disorienting.</s>BERMAN: So when they said there was a plan, there wasn't a plan.</s>CAMEROTA: I guess not.</s>BERMAN: OK. Jeffrey Toobin --</s>JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN CHIEF LEGAL ANALYST: Can we just wait one second. Healthcare is not just like this political issue. There are people who die because they don't have health insurance, there are people who declare bankruptcy all the time because they don't have health insurance. If this lawsuit succeeds, as the administration wants it to succeed, insurers will no longer have to cover people with preexisting conditions, young people will not be able to stay on their parents' healthcare until they're 26 years old. This has real impacts on people's lives. And Donald Trump can say, well, pay no attention until 2020. We will deal with that like at some point. This is like people's lives, healthcare. And the idea that you can somehow say, well, just never mind for two plus years, how stupid do they think people are?</s>BERMAN: And the court could decide this, it's not going to happen tomorrow, but the timeframe is before 2020.</s>TOOBIN: Well, before 2020. You know, this is like -- this is people's lives. That's the thing that -- this is not Russia and collusion. This is people's immediate concerns. And I just don't understand how you can even pretend that you can put it off for two years.</s>CAMEROTA: Van, people will be able to make their voices heard at the ballot box, I suppose.</s>VAN JONES, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: This is one of those things that's baffling. In some ways, Trump kind of stepped on his own victory lap. He was doing a victory lap about the Mueller report, et cetera, and then in the middle of it he throws this gauntlet down around healthcare. In a way at least right now it seems like a gift to Democrats. I don't know if he thinks that because Democrats have gone so far left on Medicare for all or Medicare for all who want it, that that creates some opportunities for him. I'm not quite sure what the rationale here is. But I do know that for the 20 million people who have the ability to see a doctor or take their kid to see a doctor because of Obamacare, who did not have that ability before, it's a gun to their head to say we're going to do something, but we don't know what. And I think we saw in the 2016 election. We were talking about everything from the Mueller report, we were talking about North Korea, we were talking about everything in the world. When people went to pull the lever in those voting booths across the country, healthcare was the number one issue on their mind. And so this is an issue -- and they elected Democrats. So I'm not quite sure why Republicans want to talk about it, but I'm glad they do.</s>BERMAN: We had Senator Tim Kaine from Virginia on last hour. He was eager to talk about it as much as he possibly could.</s>CAMEROTA: And he spelled out his plan, I thought, in layman's terms so that people could understand that he does not want Medicare for all. Many candidates do. But he spelled out what his alternative would be.</s>BERMAN: It was the public option from Obamacare that was discussed years ago and was considered too liberal at the time. It's fascinating now that the public option, which was so threatening to so many people, is now seen as the middle ground.</s>JONES: That's the moderate point of view. I think when they say Medicare for all who want it is another way of saying a public objection but still sounding cool.</s>BERMAN: Jeffrey Toobin, I want to talk about security clearances, because this was interesting yesterday. Twenty-five people initially had security clearances designed but were overruled, and that's according to a whistleblower, a named on the record human being, Tricia Newbold, who works in the office that does oversee them. They were overturned for a number of issues. Sorry, they were denied initially for a range of issues, including financial issues, possible foreign influence, a number of things, but overruled by someone else in the administration. How do you see this issue?</s>TOOBIN: Well, it's important to say that the president of the United States does have the legal authority to overrule the recommendations of the people who do the screening. That is legal. It is customarily not done. It is a norm that the president does not do this because these are serious issues. This just underlines, again, the problems with nepotism, that the reason people don't have their close relatives, their son-in-law, their daughters in close business relationships, especially in the White House, is that you don't know that decisions are being made on the merits, as opposed to because of family considerations. Why does Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump have security clearances if they are said not to be deserving of them? This is why we have congressional investigations. I guess we will find out, perhaps.</s>CAMEROTA: Abby, thanks to this whistleblower it's beyond Jared and Ivanka. We have heard -- we've heard them deny, and we've heard the president deny that this happened, but we know this to be true, that they did get security clearances over the objections of the professionals. But there's 25 people, and Congressman Elijah Cummings says that all of this -- the amount of people that have access to secrets and to classified information he says is a million times worse than anything Hillary Clinton ever talked about on her emails.</s>PHILLIP: Well, it's interesting to see this come out and confirm a lot of the reporting that had happened at the time where about a year -- a year and plus into this administration there were dozens of White House staffers operating with interim security clearances, meaning they hadn't actually gotten their security clearance but were gaining access to classified information on an interim basis. And the White House could never really explain why that was the case. Why were so many people unable to finish the process of getting their security clearances, and why were -- why was that process being held up for so many people? And it seems that this is the missing piece of this, which is that the career officials were raising red flags about a lot of these people. It was slowing down the process. And then at some point they were waved through despite the objections of those career officials. And I think that's the underlying problem for this White House, they never had a great system to deal with this. There were a lot of people who weren't vetted before they were offered jobs to come into this administration. There were a lot of people who had problems in their backgrounds, who had potential conflicts, who had potential ties to -- or connections with foreign governments that maybe they didn't disclose in their forms, which would have been disqualifying to people in previous administrations who were just allowed to come in because there was such a desperate need for people to work in this administration at the beginning. And I think that that's a really serious question for this administration about access to classified information. In the case of Hillary Clinton's emails, there was a suspicion that maybe she had left it open to foreign governments. In this case it's known that there were people who career national security officials and career clearance officials believed should not have access to this information, were given access anyway, in some cases on an interim basis. Some of these people didn't get clearances, but some of them eventually did over those people's objections.</s>BERMAN: Van, you are a guy who wants to focus on policy, would like to see Democrats really laser-focused on policy like healthcare, like criminal justice reform. What's the right amount of oversight on this? House Oversight Chair Elijah Cummings is going to issue a subpoena, they are going to vote on it today, but he wants to get people to come and testify. How much focus should there be on the security clearance issue?</s>JONES: Democrats have to walk and chew gum at the same time in that on the one hand they have got to be focused on 2020 and issues that voters care about, which I don't think is going to be a big voting issue. It may add to intensity for Democrats who are already committed, I don't think it's going to be a big voting issue. That said, there is a Constitutional responsibility for oversight. And I think in the administration behaving in this way would get oversight from the opposing party. I think that's appropriate. I do think we have to always remember how disruptive the entire political system both the Trump rebellion on the right and the Sanders rebellion on the left were in 2016. And so you literally had norms being upset throughout the entire process, and the Trump administration arrives in Washington, D.C., frankly without the full support of the Republican establishment. Many of them had been running for the hills even weeks before the election. And so there was a kind of a catch as catch can feel about how the transition team was put together. They threw out Chris Christie and started over from scratch. And so we are still kind of in the aftershocks I think of the 2016 election and the disruption of Donald Trump in ways that we sometimes forget. And so now I think Congress can catch up to some of this stuff, figure out what was going on. That 25 number seems like a very large number, but we don't know what it's compared to because in the past there really has not been as much focus I think on this particular issue. I think having family members in the White House brings more attention than it might otherwise.</s>BERMAN: Van, Abby, Jeffrey, thank you very much. At this hour it is unclear if President Trump will follow through on his threat to shut down the southern border with Mexico. What do his fellow Republicans want him to do? We will ask next.</s>CAMEROTA: And a manhunt is under way for a hit and run driver who slammed into this nine-year-old girl who was just playing in her yard. The video is incredible. We can tell you the girl survived, incredibly. We're going to speak with her mother ahead.