SUZANNE MALVEAUX: Hello.
I'm Suzanne Malveaux, and this is the Washington Week Extra,
where we pick up online where we left off on the broadcast.
One of the more unusual moments during President Trump's extraordinary news conference
this week was when he asked a reporter if she would arrange for him to meet with the
Congressional Black Caucus.
Here's that exchange.
APRIL RYAN (American Urban Radio Networks): (From video.)
Are you going to include the
Congressional Black Caucus and the Congressional Hispanic Caucus as well -
PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: (From video.)
Well, I would.
I tell you what, do you want to set up the meeting?
Do you want to set up the meeting?
APRIL RYAN: (From video.)
No, no, no.
PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: (From video.)
Are they friends of yours?
APRIL RYAN: (From video.)
I'm just a reporter.
PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: (From video.)
No, get - set up the meeting.
APRIL RYAN: (From video.)
I know some of them, but I'm sure they're watching right now.
PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: (From video.)
Let's go set up a meeting.
I would love to meet with
the Black Caucus.
I think it's great, the Congressional Black Caucus.
I think it's great.
SUZANNE MALVEAUX: Alexis, let's start off with you here.
All of us know April Ryan.
She's been covering the White House for many, many years.
ALEXIS SIMENDINGER: Many years.
SUZANNE MALVEAUX: It was a rather bizarre moment in that press conference, and there are
a number of questions.
Well, first of all, the CBC came out, said, look, we gave you
this letter, we've reached out to you; we haven't heard anything back.
They tweeted him as such.
And we've also heard from Congressman Cummings, who said,
look, you know, I'm ready for this meeting.
But they're waiting for the Trump
officials, the administration, to make a move.
Why do you suppose he did this?
What was that about?
ALEXIS SIMENDINGER: Well, one of the things that he started off talking about was her
question, and her question was about urban policy.
And this is a - you know, a
theme that the president's been hitting, talking about Chicago.
And remember, April is a radio reporter for American Urban Radio Networks, so her
question made a lot of sense for her audience.
But he pivoted - you know, tried to get out of that question about his urban policy by
just using the same kind of rhetoric that he's used, and then she followed up by asking -
you know, part of her question was would he utilize the expertise of the Congressional
Black Caucus.
And at first she said CBC and we weren't actually sure that he
understood what she was saying, and then she said - she added Congressional Black Caucus.
But what was so strange about it was why would he even imagine in his brain that a
reporter who happens to be African-American would set up an appointment with the
Congressional Black Caucus as if they're all in league together.
It was a very odd
thing, and it was perceived as being both sexist in terms of gender and also really
strange in terms of the racial connotation and his sort of argumentative way with her.
And to April's great credit - and she's a friend of mine, I've worked with her a long
time - she did what all reporters do, she stuck to her guns and she tried to explain her
question and get an answer out of him and not make it about herself.
SUZANNE MALVEAUX: And the Congressional Black Caucus, I heard from several members who
were insulted because they felt, first of all, that it was - it was disrespectful, but
also they felt like they weren't being taken seriously - that this is an organization
that has existed for some 40 years, they go back, and they've met presidents since
Richard Nixon.
So to be treated in this manner, kind of in an offhand way,
was something that they did not take lightly.
ALEXIS SIMENDINGER: They didn't and, you know, there has been an effort to meet
together.
But there are factions inside of the White House and inside of President
Trump's world that believe that the caucuses should be disbanded.
Their belief is
that it's a little too PC, right?
Why would these groups segregate themselves?
And they've talked about that publicly.
And I don't know whether the president has that same belief, that somehow the
Congressional Hispanic Caucus or the Congressional Black Caucus are not useful to
Congress, but he doesn't - he didn't seem to express an interest in understanding until
she was kind of moving him along, and then he was very dismissive.
SUZANNE MALVEAUX: Do you think that makes it difficult - more difficult for outreach
when they have to - they actually do have to talk to different communities, and that's the job of -
ALEXIS SIMENDINGER: Well, the irony is the president did hire - he has hired people to
work for him whose sole job is to reach out to these particular communities.
And when I say communities, they're talking about tribal communities, they're talking
about women, they're talking about children, they're talking about obviously
African-American voters.
The president is understanding that he has a very low
approval among Latinos and that a lot of his policies are perceived as anti-Latino.
And I think you've pointed out, Ed, that the word they use is aliens, right?
ED O'KEEFE: Yeah.
ALEXIS SIMENDINGER: Which is a very derisive term.
So the president should not be unsensitive to this, and it was very odd.
SUZANNE MALVEAUX: Dan, let's talk about the role of the vice president here, because
when you looked at what happened with Admiral (sic; General) Mike Flynn and the fact that
he was not truthful - he was not truthful to the FBI about his conversations with the
Russian ambassador regarding sanctions, he was not truthful with the vice president.
And President Trump knew, and allowed him to go out in public and to say these untruths,
to speak these untruths, unbeknownst to him.
What does that say about Pence's role and how he is regarded by the president?
DAN BALZ: You know, it's a very important question and one that I and others have been
trying to get an answer to this week.
On the one hand, it appears that they do
have a pretty free-flowing and trusting relationship.
The vice president is involved in lots of meetings.
Their staffs are integrated.
He has, as all modern vice presidents have had, a weekly lunch or private meeting with
the president, one on one.
All of that suggests he is in the mold of all of the
modern vice presidents.
But this is so strange.
The White House - he's misled by General Flynn, he goes out on national television - he,
the vice president - and backs up General Flynn in what turns out not to be correct.
The White House is told that Flynn had, in fact, talked about the sanctions in his call
with the Russian ambassador, and they don't tell Pence that they were informed by the
Justice Department that this had happened.
The vice president learned that Flynn had lied to him from a story in The Washington Post
on the night of February 9th, and that was the first anybody - anything registered on him
that he'd been hung out to dry by General Flynn.
He went to General Flynn to try to
get some explanation on Friday morning.
Through the weekend, of course, you know, the
president was down in Mar-a-Lago and things were kind of swirling.
On Monday it all came to a head.
The first indication we got on the night of the resignation was that the president had
been somewhat reluctant, had kind of hoped that they could play it out a little longer.
The next day Sean Spicer, the press secretary, went out to the Briefing Room and said
what happened was the president lost trust in him and therefore he had to resign.
The president went out the next day and gave Flynn praise.
Now, I was told Flynn was very unhappy with what Spicer had said at the briefing and had
conveyed that to people, so maybe that was why the president said what he did.
And then, at the press conference, he was back on the same page with Sean Spicer.
The vice president landed Friday night in Germany for a weekend of the Munich Security
Conference, and then he's going on to Brussels.
He arrives there with this question over his head: To what extent is he in the loop?
To what extent are they really sharing all information with him?
Those around him say he's in good standing, they are not even worried about this.
SUZANNE MALVEAUX: But, Dan, he's also the person who really is carrying a lot of the
water when it comes to dealing with members of Congress.
He is the one who is really comforting them, letting them know that, look, there's a
steady ship here, there's someone who understands and will go ahead and convey the policy
wishes of the president, but also the policy wishes of Congress to the president, that
liaison if you will.
Has that role been weakened?
DAN BALZ: I'm not sure that that has been at this point.
Senator McConnell, the
majority leader, was asked about this today.
He described Pence as indispensable.
I think for congressional Republicans, they still believe he is the go-to person.
He is the one person who understands them.
He can convey messages back to the president.
So I think that relationship is still solid.
But to some extent, it depends on how
he's treated by the president.
So if there are more episodes like this - this was
a big one, I think.
But if there are smaller ones there will be a problem.
SUZANNE MALVEAUX: Ed, do you want to weigh in on this?
ED O'KEEFE: Well, McConnell's correct in saying that the vice president's indispensable.
I've had a few different Republican lawmakers this week suggest as much, that, you know,
there are very few avenues into the White House, and he is one of them.
And he has spent - in the first four weeks, he's up there at least twice a week in
meetings with both House and Senate lawmakers.
He's a regular presence now when
Senate Republicans have lunch on Tuesdays, which is their big sort of planning
lunch of the week.
He's going to be there every Tuesday, they say.
And they want him there because it's a chance for them to sort of convey to the White
House, through him, what it is they want to do, and for him, potentially, to bring back
information from the White House.
But one wonders, if he's spending so much time
at the Capitol, is that because there's nothing for him to do at the West Wing?
DAN BALZ: You know, I think there's one other aspect to this, and that is that it's -
and it's beyond what happened with Vice President Pence.
But in so many ways, congressional Republicans kind of want to look the other way about
the Russia aspect and some of those questions because they want the president's backing
on all their legislative things, and so they want to compartmentalize.
So Vice
President Pence is crucial to their agenda and to getting the president on board
with that.
And they want the other stuff to kind of go away.
SUZANNE MALVEAUX: And while the vice president was headed off - (laughs) - overseas, you
had FBI Director Comey there on the Hill, meeting with senators, and clearly because
there's so many investigations that are unfolding.
What do we know about what he was able to convey, and where does that go?
ED O'KEEFE: We don't know much at all.
In fact, it wasn't even an officially
announced meeting.
It just so happened that reporters spotted him coming into the
building, and figured out that he had about a two-hour meeting this afternoon -
Friday afternoon with members of the Senate Intelligence Committee, which, of
course, is investigating Russian interference in the election.
The FBI director clearly had a role to play during the election.
He weighed in
a few times in ways that many believe affected the race in one way or another.
And of course, it was the FBI that's been investigating whatever Russia has been doing.
So senators emerging from that, based on the reporting of colleagues who were there - I
wasn't in the hallways - but they said, look, senators came out and didn't say anything.
Except - I'll read this to you - Marco Rubio, in a tweet: "I am now very confident Senate
Intel Committee I serve on will conduct thorough bipartisan investigation of Putin
interference and influence."
That suggests he heard something behind closed doors this afternoon -
SUZANNE MALVEAUX: That he liked.
ED O'KEEFE: - that he liked.
And it's a signal that Republicans increasingly are
taking this much more seriously.
When this was first proposed it was proposed by
Democrats and John McCain and Lindsey Graham.
Well, most days of the week John McCain, Lindsey Graham and a few Democrats are in
agreement on just about everything, so it's not news up there.
But when the rest of the Intelligence Committee has to have an ad hoc meeting on the
floor of the Senate the morning after Mike Flynn resigns because they suddenly realize
the severity of the situation and the need to dive into this in a much more serious way,
and then have the FBI director show up by the end of the week, it shows you they're
starting to take it very seriously.
ALEXIS SIMENDINGER: Can I just add, one of the things about the vice president is that
the desire of the Justice Department and the persuasion of the FBI director to come and
brief the White House was in part to protect the vice president, which was an interesting
element of this.
So when you ask, is the vice president in good standing with Congress,
I think their understanding is in some ways there was another arm of the government
trying to protect him, that he had been left out of the loop and allowed to go on TV,
and that there was a desire to come and brief the White House about what had happened.
So it makes the whole question even more inexplicable about why the president left that gap.
NANCY YOUSSEF: Well, it was also that, but also to stop any potential blackmail, because
now you had publicly the vice president saying they didn't talk about sanctions - Flynn
and the ambassador - and in fact they did.
And that public discourse seemed to open an opportunity for blackmail, which I think was
an additional reason that you had Justice Department officials and law enforcement
officials going forward to the White House and saying: We might have a problem here.
SUZANNE MALVEAUX: There were other tests, too, of Trump this week.
And people saw various things, and they've interpreted different ways, whether or not it
was the North Korean missile test, whether or not it was Iran, and then this Russian spy
vessel that was very close off the East Coast.
Some people saw that - and we saw that
in the - actually in the press conference when they talked about that and he said -
NANCY YOUSSEF: Not good.
SUZANNE MALVEAUX: - not good, not good, not good.
(Laughs.)
Three of them.
What was that about?
Was that a real provocation?
NANCY YOUSSEF: Well, the fascinating thing is because there is so much ambiguity about
Trump's relationship with Russia that any sort of military action is sort of being seen
in a way that maybe it wouldn't have been seen just a few months ago.
The missile test
that you talked about, that started two and a half years ago.
And yet, some interpreted
that as a test of Trump.
The provocation or the harassment in the Black Sea, again,
that happens all the time.
Seen, though, by some as a test of Trump.
And then this vessel about 30 miles offshore.
It's an intelligence vessel that
sort of basically spies on a submarine base in Connecticut and it goes to Norfolk.
And it's been there several times in the past.
It was there in '98, in 2012, 2014,
2015.
This is according to the Pentagon.
Again, seen as a test of Trump.
And I think because there's so much questions about the U.S.
relationship with Russia, and Trump's desire to change it, people are seeing this as
tests rather than sort of things that have happened militarily in the past.
And it's made it harder, frankly, for the Pentagon to talk about this because suddenly
military actions are being looked at in a political light, and their answers could be
interpreted as a political response when, in fact, from their perspective it's not a
provocation or a test of Trump, but sort of the normal back and forth that happens
between the U.S. and Russia, things that they've seen in the past.
So it was very
interesting this week to try to see the Pentagon try to maneuver in the sort of political
waters now when we talk about Russian actions vis-a-vis the United States military.
SUZANNE MALVEAUX: And did you understand Trump's explanation during his press conference
when he was talking about now Putin cannot be aggressive or he cannot be friendly because
of the relationship with the media or because there's the suggestion of coziness, that
now Putin has to be aggressive in some way?
NANCY YOUSSEF: No, I was perplexed by two things - one, that he didn't say, look, this
is not a test of my presidency.
There are ways to argue it.
And, two, when he says there's no way to make a deal, you have the secretary of defense
and the secretary of state and we're told the vice president tomorrow coming out and
saying we don't want to work with Russia unless they step up to the plate.
So they're not talking about negotiating or making a deal, and it's not because of what
Putin wants to do.
It's because what they see is a Russia that hasn't proven
itself as a reliable partner.
So there's what Trump's saying and the key members
of his national security team are telling their NATO partners publicly.
And that's what makes it so confusing, this idea that Putin is the deciding factor.
It seems that there's a real division within the administration about how to approach
Russia, more than a Russia that's closed off because of the public criticism of the
president of the United States.
SUZANNE MALVEAUX: All right.
It's only been four weeks.
(Laughter.)
Good luck.
Thank you all very much for your insights.
Really appreciate it.
That's it for this edition of Washington Week Extra.
While you're online,
check out a Washington Week behind-the-scenes love story that's 50 years old.
I'm Suzanne Malveaux.
Till next time.
Have a great weekend.
