Latest / DEEP INSIGHT / 'Temper tantrum' - Sen. Reed says Trump doesn't have policy knowledge after scraping bill signing

Transcript

'Temper tantrum' - Sen. Reed says Trump doesn't have policy knowledge after scraping bill signing · DEEP INSIGHT

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: Right now, President Trump is meeting with Senate Republicans on
• 0:03
  Speaker 1: the Hill, just hours after he abruptly canceled the signing
• 0:06
  Speaker 1: of a major piece of bipartisan housing legislation, Trump warning
• 0:11
  Speaker 1: he will not sign it a little less Republicans pass
• 0:14
  Speaker 1: his restrictive voting bill, the Save Act. Democratic Senator Jack
• 0:17
  Speaker 1: Reida Rhode Island, joins me now. He sits on the Banking, Housing,
• 0:20
  Speaker 1: and Urban Affairs Committees and is the ranking member of
• 0:23
  Speaker 1: the Senate Armed Services Committee. Senator, thank you so much
• 0:26
  Speaker 1: for being with us. Your reaction to what the President
• 0:29
  Speaker 1: did this morning.
• 0:33
  Speaker 2: Astounding. The President was supporting this bail vigorously. That's one
• 0:38
  Speaker 2: of the reasons that passed the House. And also it
• 0:42
  Speaker 2: was such a bipartisan measure, it was obviously it should
• 0:45
  Speaker 2: be signed. To suddenly announce that he's not signing it
• 0:49
  Speaker 2: is it reflects, I think, a just tepo tantrum by
• 0:54
  Speaker 2: the President, which is often the case, and it signifies
• 0:59
  Speaker 2: also that he does not, I think, have a conscious
• 1:03
  Speaker 2: and thorough knowledge or policy and the Republican Party in
• 1:08
  Speaker 2: the Congress.
• 1:09
  Speaker 1: So one of the reasons I wanted to make sure
• 1:11
  Speaker 1: we spoke with you today is that some of your
• 1:13
  Speaker 1: Republican colleagues actually crossed the aisle to check Trump's war powers.
• 1:16
  Speaker 1: This has been an ongoing, evolving conversation and effort. Your
• 1:20
  Speaker 1: sense of what has finally moved Republicans in this direction.
• 1:25
  Speaker 2: Well, I think what they've seen is that all of
• 1:28
  Speaker 2: the assumptions that the President made about this war were
• 1:34
  Speaker 2: entirely incorrect. The regime did not fall. In fact, what
• 1:39
  Speaker 2: happened is that the new regime is more ardent and
• 1:43
  Speaker 2: more fanatical, and they've seized upon an asset, the straight
• 1:47
  Speaker 2: up amuse, which imperils the entire world economy. And also
• 1:51
  Speaker 2: they've just seen the lack of not only cooperation, but
• 1:55
  Speaker 2: of constitutional responsibility by the President. This was a war
• 2:01
  Speaker 2: which he sought no authority from the Congress, which is
• 2:05
  Speaker 2: required on the Constitution. And then I think the other
• 2:08
  Speaker 2: factors weighing in is the fact that this directly contributes
• 2:12
  Speaker 2: to inflation in the United States and practically everything, and
• 2:18
  Speaker 2: he seems to be at this point without any thoughtful
• 2:22
  Speaker 2: or practical ideas how to successfully end this other than
• 2:27
  Speaker 2: trying to pay off the iranium.
• 2:29
  Speaker 1: Senator, the Pentagon is asking Congress for eighty billion dollars
• 2:33
  Speaker 1: to fund Donald Trump's war with iron So that number
• 2:37
  Speaker 1: eighty billion, it's far higher than the number we heard
• 2:41
  Speaker 1: from Hegsat's twenty nine billion. That was the estimate for
• 2:43
  Speaker 1: the cost of the war. Your sense of what the
• 2:46
  Speaker 1: actual number is, how much money does the administration really need.
• 2:51
  Speaker 2: Well, eighty billion is a low estimate. It in my view,
• 2:56
  Speaker 2: it's anywhere from one hundred to one hundred and fifty billion.
• 3:00
  Speaker 2: I don't think they're counting any of the destroyed infrastructure
• 3:05
  Speaker 2: of our bases in the area. I think they're just
• 3:09
  Speaker 2: trying to to get in as much money as they
• 3:11
  Speaker 2: think will be politically possible. But this is in the
• 3:16
  Speaker 2: context too of the president asking for over a one
• 3:19
  Speaker 2: trillion dollar defense budget and in addition a three hundred
• 3:22
  Speaker 2: and fifty billion dollar reconciliation bill for defense. So this
• 3:27
  Speaker 2: is a point at which the spending is absolutely out
• 3:31
  Speaker 2: of control. And also flighting our domestic programs was a
• 3:36
  Speaker 2: critical to the country. So and I think this is
• 3:40
  Speaker 2: simply the eighty billion or down payment, not a full payment.
• 3:45
  Speaker 1: So I want to stay on this point. And this
• 3:47
  Speaker 1: is a little processing, but I actually think it matters
• 3:49
  Speaker 1: because you have said that funding that the number we're
• 3:51
  Speaker 1: just talking about for the iron supplemental It can't be
• 3:54
  Speaker 1: done in isolation. It has to be done after lawmakers
• 3:57
  Speaker 1: agree to a total spending amount for both defense and
• 4:00
  Speaker 1: defense programs. Help me understand what kind of timeline that
• 4:03
  Speaker 1: puts us on.
• 4:05
  Speaker 2: Well, what is happening is there was an attempt this
• 4:09
  Speaker 2: week tomorrow to have another appropriations markup, and I serve
• 4:13
  Speaker 2: on the Appropriations Committee, but because of the absence of
• 4:16
  Speaker 2: Senator McConnell, they've called it off. They don't have the
• 4:21
  Speaker 2: votes to pass the bills they want to pass. But
• 4:25
  Speaker 2: we're still in the situation and you've, Alicia pointed it out.
• 4:29
  Speaker 2: We need, as we've always had in the past, a
• 4:32
  Speaker 2: top line, how much we're going to spend on defense,
• 4:35
  Speaker 2: how much we're spending on domestic program and there we
• 4:38
  Speaker 2: can go forth and create and categorize, prioritize defense spending
• 4:44
  Speaker 2: and domestic spending. Until we get that top line, we're
• 4:48
  Speaker 2: just sort of wandering around talking past each other. Senator.
• 4:51
  Speaker 1: In the last hour, we talked about the latest senior
• 4:54
  Speaker 1: military departure, of course, forced our General Chris Dannau decorated officer.
• 4:59
  Speaker 1: He was the last soldier to leave Afghanistan. Can you
• 5:02
  Speaker 1: just make it clear for folks who are watching, what
• 5:08
  Speaker 1: the cost, what the danger is to the homeland of
• 5:11
  Speaker 1: someone like CD Donniue departing the Pentagon.
• 5:16
  Speaker 2: Well, fir Us General Doniu is the exemplar of the
• 5:20
  Speaker 2: military officer. He took his days at West Point duty,
• 5:26
  Speaker 2: honor and country and turned it into a career of
• 5:28
  Speaker 2: sacrifice and courage and service. And anyone who served with
• 5:34
  Speaker 2: him is very proud that he served with him. And
• 5:36
  Speaker 2: I think what this sends as a signal is that merit, quality, courage,
• 5:44
  Speaker 2: soldierly characteristics are not as important as political associations with
• 5:51
  Speaker 2: the president. The danger we have right now is that
• 5:55
  Speaker 2: the President and Hagstath are trying to politicize the military.
• 6:00
  Speaker 2: And one of the great strengths of our military over
• 6:02
  Speaker 2: a centuries is that it was not a political institution.
• 6:05
  Speaker 2: It was an institution dedicated to the Constitution. And that
• 6:09
  Speaker 2: is concerning many many people, particularly the men and women
• 6:13
  Speaker 2: in uniform.
• 6:15
  Speaker 1: Senator Jack read the great state of Rhode Island. Senator,
• 6:18
  Speaker 1: thank you so much for your time today.
• 6:19
  Speaker 2: Thank you, Elisha