Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Protests in Palm Beach, Florida; Trump Takes to Twitter to Criticize Judge's Block of Travel Ban; Justice Department Has Filed Appeal for Emergency Stay of Federal Judge Decision; Beattyville, Kentucky People Bet Their Livelihood On Donald Trump. Aired 7-8p ET

Aired February 04, 2017 - 19:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[19:00:09] POPPY HARLOW, CNN ANCHOR: Good evening. I'm Poppy Harlow, live in New York. Thanks for joining us. It is 7:00 a.m. here on the east coast.

And we begin with protests near President Donald Trump's front door this weekend. People marching in west Palm Beach, Florida. A little bit earlier tonight not far from the president's Mar-a-Lago resort where he is spending the weekend.

Jessica Schneider is there for us and she has the latest on all of this.

Jessica, a lot of tweets from the president tonight, but defiant in the face of this ruling from a federal judge.

JESSICA SCHNEIDER, CNN CORRESPONDENT: That's right, Poppy. You know, really, a flurry of activity around Mar-a-Lago tonight. Also, a flurry of activity on President Trump's Twitter account.

I'll start first with President Trump's Twitter. He has tweeted a total of ten times over the past 24 hours. The majority of those tweets, all but two, in fact, have dealt with his defiance against this federal judge's order. He is maintaining, has maintained for the past week, is now maintaining on Twitter, that his executive action was completely legal, was within constitutional bounds. It's something that the White House said within its statement last night, late last night, when it came out with that, saying that the order was completely outrageous in the first statement. They later took back that word outrageous. And then saying that we should be expecting the justice department to file an emergency stay, something we still haven't seen.

But getting back to the president's tweets throughout the day today, he has ranged from calling the order ridiculous, from really slamming the judge in that case, calling him a so-called judge. Well, in just the past few minutes, President Trump once again taking to Twitter. I will read you his latest tweet, saying this.

Why aren't the lawyers looking at and using the federal court decision in Boston, which is in conflict with ridiculous lift ban decision. So a lot to unpack there. We have been dealing with a lot of legalese

over the past few hours, the past few days. What President Trump is referring to there is a decision that actually got overshadowed last night. It was a case in Boston, in federal court, that happened a few hours before that Seattle case came down. And in that decision, a Boston federal judge refused to extend the temporary restraining order out of Boston. That order did halt President Trump's executive action, but only until late Sunday night.

Now, really, the Seattle case overshadowed that, because it was a more wide-ranging halt to President Trump's executive order. And in addition, numerous agencies immediately came out saying that they would uphold that halt to President Trump's executive order.

So, you know, also not clear what President Trump is talking about, when he says, those lawyers, why aren't these lawyers looking at the Boston decision. Of course, the lawyers might indicate his own lawyers at the justice department, as they work toward filing paperwork in the emergency stay that would need to go through out in Seattle.

So a lot the to unpack in terms of the legal landscape out here at Mar-a-Lago. And one thing I will touch on before sending it back to you, Poppy. Out here at Mar-a-Lago, we are seeing protests. Just behind me, just outside the gates of Mar-a-Lago in this general vicinity, we're seeing a lot of supporters for Trump out here, but just across the inter-coastal waterway, there are a few hundred protesters out here, as well. They are kind of taking on the same vein as we saw with the women's march, and that we saw in those subsequent protests throughout the past two weeks. They aren't allowed to come close enough to Mar-a-Lago, because of space and security concerns. But really, a lot swirling out here, as the president gets ready to host that annual gala, the international Red Cross ball, that is happening at Mar-a-Lago tonight.

A lot going on. The White House responding, and of course, President Trump respondent in responding, as he tends to do, directly on Twitter -- Poppy.

HARLOW: Jessica Schneider, thank you very much for that reporting, as we see the video from some of those protests tonight as well.

The president taking to Twitter multiple times this evening, as you heard from Jessica, criticizing that federal judge who blocked his temporary travel ban.

Here's one of his tweets. The opinion of this so-called judge which essentially takes law enforcement away from our country is ridiculous and will be overturned!

Washington's governor, Jay Inslee, joins me now from Seattle. Thank you for joining me.

GOV. JAY INSLEE (D), WASHINGTON: Thank you.

HARLOW: It has been almost 24 hours since the judge in your state issued this ruling, this federal judge. The department of justice, yet to file an emergency stay, although that is what we are expecting. Have you heard anything from the White House or the DOJ?

INSLEE: No. You know, we have heard tweets, but the president can tweet until the cows come home. But the fact of the matter is, he is bound by this order. It is a legally binding order. And he is going to have to follow it. That's the way our system of checks and balances work.

And he asked this question about lawyers. His lawyers are telling him the facts. They are telling him that this is the way that America works. Because in America, when an executive does something that's unconstitutional, thank goodness we have a federal judicial system that can rein that in. And that's what this judge did. And by the way, this is a judge, this insulted him. This was a judge appointed by conservative Republican George W. Bush. He was confirmed with a 99-0 vote in the Senate. This is the way democracy is meant to work.

[19:05:31] HARLOW: In a Republican-led Senate. Look, I hear your point. At the same time, you argue that this ban is unconstitutional. Here is what constitutional scholar law professor Georgetown University said to me about it earlier tonight.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JONATHAN TURLEY, LAW PROFESSOR, GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY: This trial judge really did go up against a lot of precedent. There are many that believe that he got it wrong. But he made a good faith decision. And that's why we have appellate courts. So, the ninth circuit could very well stay this temporary restraining order, essentially lift the order. What's odd is that the administration didn't move with greater dispatch in seeking an emergency action.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HARLOW: How confident are you, governor, in the legal ground that judge Robart is standing on?

INSLEE: I'm very confident, in part, because of the strength and robustness of this judge. He was very clear, and he was not pleased at all with what the basis of this was. He noted in his discussion that since 9/11, there hasn't been one single, not one, fatality caused by terrorism, in anyone from the seven countries. He noted in a discussion of the clear religious test that has been applied, which is clearly unconstitutional, to have some religious tests, and favor one religion over another.

It was a very strong decision by a court that was appointed by a Republican judge. And I think the thing that's most troublesome to me. Sure, there can be appeals. That's part of our process. But the disrespect that this president has shown for the workings of democracy is very troubling. When he calls this person a, you know, a so-called judge. Look, that didn't work well for him, when he insulted the judge because he was Hispanic, when he was being sued by the victim of --

HARLOW: But actually, governor.

INSLEE: He ended up paying $25 million to those victims. So he needs to sort of recognize, this is the way America works. And we ought to have protection of our constitutional rights and our country.

HARLOW: Look, you are talking about, when he insulted judge Curiel in the Trump University case, saying, basically, he was unfit to do his job because of his Mexican heritage. In fact, the judge was born in Indiana, a U.S. citizen.

However, you say it didn't work out well for him. That was during the campaign. He got elected. So, you know, do you believe this is a president who is operating on the belief that, you know what, I did it then. I insulted a federal judge then. I got elected and I can do it again.

INSLEE: I don't know. But I think many people, we always want to be optimistic in this country. And we have tried to have the hope that this president would grow into his job. And understand that arguments about how many people were on the mall at the inauguration, demeaning people when he loses big-time, and he lost big-time in Seattle, Washington, yesterday. This was a nationwide stop of his unconstitutional order. And, but instead of showing a modest degree of good faith and simply saying he is going to appeal, which is his right, he went at it half-cocked, to try to create disrespect for this judicial system.

Now, here is why it's important. Our democracy has been a powerful one, because it is built on a system of checks and balances. And the judicial system ought to have a president who does not demean it, who does not disrespect it. And by the way, we cannot allow the normalization of Donald Trump. We cannot allow the normalization of deceit and deception --

HARLOW: Governor, I do have some breaking news I want to get you to respond to.

INSLEE: You bet.

ANNOUNCER: This is CNN breaking news.

HARLOW: This just into us here at CNN. The justice department has, indeed, appealed, filed this appeal, what they are hoping will be an emergency stay of this federal judge's decision. The justice department is appealing to the ninth circuit court of appeals on the Friday decision of that federal judge in Washington that stopped the enforcement of the executive order, banning travel to the United States anyone from those seven majority Muslim nations.

Again, this is through the White House and the department of justice, filing that emergency appeal.

Back with me is Governor Jay Inslee of Washington.

So look, it's about 24 hours after the federal judge in your state handed down this ruling. Where do you believe this goes from here? Do you believe this goes all the way up to the Supreme Court?

[19:10:06] INSLEE: I don't know and it could. And I think it's unlikely that this order will be stayed by the appellate court, but this is the way the system works. The appellate actions are understandable.

But I have to tell you that right now, there are thousands of people in the state of Washington that hope this order is maintained. And I'll tell you why. We have got researchers who can't do their job to come in and do HIV research. We have over a thousand people with bookings through Expedia, who are customers, who want to come visit and buy our products from the state of Washington. We sell a lot of high-tech products to the world, from Microsoft, Amazon, Expedia, Boeing. We can't get customers now to buy our products. We have students tonight who don't know what they can do to go back to their home country, even to visit if they have got a sick parent. We have researchers who want to come help build our economy.

This is an economic issue. And that's why we sued, as a state. This is a violation, clearly against the individual rights. And there's been such trauma. I sat next to a woman crying, when her husband flew from Vienna. She's an American citizen, for goodness sakes. And the administration would not let her husband come see her. But the state, as a whole, has been damaged, because our economy has been damaged, our research institutions have been damaged, our college students have been put on hold. So I'm very hopeful that this will remain.

HARLOW: Governor, needless to say, part of the argument from the department of justice will have to do with U.S. code 1182, and that is the immigration status, which reads in part, wherever the president finds the entry of any aliens or any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interest of the U.S., he may, by proclamation, and for such a period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or non-immigrants or impose, as the entry of aliens, any restrictions he may deem appropriate.

That is -- that gives broad and sweeping powers to the president on this front. You are still -- you still believe that you and the federal judge there in Washington stand on the firmest legal ground on this?

INSLEE: Yes. And I think the federal judge's decision is much more important than my opinion on this. And what he found, that this was highly likely to be struck down in the final analysis, for several reasons. One, no president, and I am going to stand on a rock-solid belief on this. No president can favor any religion over any other religion. It is the clear intent of this president to put the folks who are Muslim in my state in the back of the bus. It is clearly the intent in the application of this rule, that it would give priority to people of other religions, other than Muslim, and it is slamming the gate shut on Muslims from these seven countries.

In addition, there is another statute, which you haven't read yet, and maybe I should have brought this one that prohibits, essentially, putting a nation-by-nation ban of those on refugee status coming to this country. And that will be litigated. The court found that we are likely to prevail on this.

But it's also, frankly, and I have just got to say this for a moment, common sense. You know, I have seen fear before. I'm from Bainbridge Island, Washington, where the first Japanese Americans were taken into camps in World War II. And we were driven by fear in this. That's what's operating here. Look, there hasn't been one single fatality caused by a refugee from these seven countries. And we have had 700,000 refugees since September 11th.

So I think this is a case where we should not allow the demagoguery of this president and the deceit, repeatedly, of this president, about the factual basis of what's going on in the world, to allow us to lose mooring of the best traditions of this country.

HARLOW: Governor --

INSLEE: I stand proud on that, on behalf of the state of Washington.

HARLOW: Governor, I thank you for your time tonight. I do have -- sorry to interrupt, but I do need to get to our Sara Sidner who joins me live outside the courthouse in San Francisco.

And Sara, correct me if I'm wrong, but is this where the appeal was filed?

SARA SIDNER, CNN CORRESPONDENT: No. Not necessarily. It is done electronically, so they don't have to come into court. So electronically sent to whomever is on the motions panel. And there are three people that are on the motions panel, each month. One in Hawaii, one in Arizona, and one here in northern California. If they are all available, they will all get called.

I would like to bring in Rory Little, who is with UC Hastings, who can give us a little bit more of an idea of what it is that's going to happen next in this next movement.

As we understand it, the DOJ has filed and is hoping to stay or to stop what the judge did in Washington. Can you tell us how this is going to work, exactly?

RORY LITTLE, PROFESSOR, UC HASTINGS COLLEGE OF THE LAW: Well, the ninth circuit has a whole system of emergency appeals set up. It's really not an appeal, it's a motion, probably, a motion to stay, and maybe a motion from (INAUDIBLE), and it goes electronically to the three judges, wherever they are, on the motions panel. And there's a unit of staff attorneys that are also working on this, with the DOJ lawyers and Washington. Washington will be getting some chance to respond. And they will have to show some irreparable harm from the judge's order, or the judge's order is likely to stay in place.

[19:15:46] SIDNER: Let me ask you how difficult it would be to show. Because you said that's a very important point. It has to show irreparable harm. How likely is it that they can prove this very point, the department of justice?

LITTLE: It's a very high standard. It's very hard to get a TRO vacated on an emergency appeal or motion, because you have to show irreparable harm. Now, they also -Washington will have to show likelihood of success on the merits, but even when there's a plausible case, if there's some irreparable harm in one direction or the other, that's the direction you lean in.

There is also a lot of deference paid to the district court judge, who held a long argument, had a lot of briefs. These judges have only had a few minutes, really, to think about this. So the standard to reverse something like this is pretty high. It only stays in place for, you know, a week or less. So the Trump administration would have though show irreparable harm from just that one week. It seems unlikely in this case.

SIDNER: So it's unlikely that this will be reversed. And that this will go potentially through the court in Washington. What happens next if these judges here say, you know what, we are going to leave it as is?

LITTLE: The Trump administration will have a chance -- let's say these three judges leave the stand or leave TRO in place, they could go to the full court, if they want to, which is apparently 25 judges, but they probably won't. They will probably go emergency motion to the circuit justice, who is Anthony Kennedy, Justice Kennedy, who's from California. And Kennedy will probably have the authority to kick that to the full court, on a matter of this sort of import. And some of it will have to do with how the papers look and whose briefing. And we don't even know right now who the solicitor general is for this administration.

So, it could go very quickly, in a death penalty case, it would go very quickly. But here, it's hard to see that same kind of irreparable harm that you would have in a death penalty case.

SIDNER: The argument that I think the DOJ, if I heard correctly, is making is that the president has the power to do this very thing. What will the courts be looking at, exactly? Is it just irreparable harm, or is there another standard?

LITTLE: Well, they have to look at who is likely to succeed on the merits. And what you have here is the president asserting statutory authority, which he certainly has to sort of regulate immigration rule, particularly in emergency situations or bad guy situations, if you want to say.

On the other hand, you have the state of Washington and other states saying, this looks like an unconstitutional denial of equal protection to people based on religion. This looks like a singling out of ethnicity, if you will, in some cases.

So those arguments are balanced on the other side. And the question is, where does that balance fall? You had a trial judge here say, I think the balance falls at least for a week on the side of the state of Washington. And I'm going to just stay that order, that executive order, until I have a chance to consider this further on the merits. So the appellate judges have to say, well, that's sort of clearly erroneous. That's wrong. And that strikes me as a hard standard for the government to beat in this one.

SIDNER: So if they lose at the appellate level, they can go then to the next court, which is the highest court of the land, the Supreme Court. How long might that take? Because it's only an emergency stay that they can ask for, right?

LITTLE: Yes. Well, I'm certainly -- I'm certain that they have already been in touch with the clerk's office in Washington, D.C., the Supreme Court, and they have alerted Justice Kennedy as the circuit justice, that something could be coming this weekend. I don't know how quickly the motion's panel will act.

The motions panel will have to be persuaded that there's some need for them to act really quickly. A judge can be - who is the senior judge on this panel, he's been a judge for 37 years. He has seen a lot of back and forth. He is not likely to say, this is the end of the world, which means they might wait until Monday or Tuesday. They might give the state of Washington a chance to file some briefs in response. And the circuit justice will not intervene, usually, unless the court here has finished with it. So I would say -- I would be surprised if you saw something, say, happen by tomorrow.

SIDNER: The wheels of justice, not as slow as a lot of people think they are, though, in some of these cases.

Thank you so much, Rory Little, a law professor from UC Berkley.

You heard it there, the likelihood of this happen, of what the judge's decision decided in Washington, actually being reversed, is very low at this point, at least in the next few days - Poppy.

[19:20:00] HARLOW: Sara Sidner, great reporting. Thank you for that.

Let me bring in some legal experts to parse through all of this, as it is just unfolding here for us. CNN justice reporter, Laura Jarrett is with us. CNN legal analyst, Danny Cevallos.

Laura, to you first. Walk me through this because your reporting had it that according to a D.C. ruling, the DOJ had until 8:00 tonight to do this. They have, indeed, appealed. How do you see it?

LAURA JARRETT, CNN JUSTICE REPORTER: Right. And so in the D.C. case, that was a separate complaint brought by a different group of plaintiffs. But in that case, the judge said, look, we know that there is this broad Seattle ruling out there, so I want you to respond by 8:00 and tell me how the Seattle court implements your case. Instead, what we have here right now is a notice of appeal filed in the ninth circuit on the Seattle ruling itself.

Now, this is just the notice of appeal. So we haven't seen what grounds the department of justice is going to appeal. They could do the national security angle. They could do a standing angle and say, the Washington state attorney general was not the right party to bring this lawsuit. We just don't know yet, because we haven't seen the meaty filing. So that's what we have to come. HARLOW: Danny, walk me through here what the -- what the ninth

circuit is going to have to decide. Because on the one hand, as I was talking to the governor of Washington state about the president does have pretty broad discretion when it comes to issue of immigration, especially in what the president might deem an emergency situation.

But at the same time, you know, he has to -- you know, the president has to walk the legal line of, you can't -- it cannot even appear as though you are choosing one religion over another, when it comes to refugees, as Sara's expert guest was just telling her.

DANNY CEVALLOS, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: When the ninth circuit gets this case, the first thing they're going to look at is the judicial opinion that came out just last night from the district court in Washington. And what they are going to look at, and they are going to give due deference to that lower court. But they are going to look at what went into that decision. So it's important to parse out the words in the district court's decisions --

HARLOW: So let me read for our viewers -- Danny, let me read the key part of that for our viewers, so they have it. It reads, the executive order adversely affects the state's residents in the areas of employment, education, business, family relations, and the freedom to travel. The argument here is irreparable harm.

CEVALLOS: Right, exactly. It's really two-fold. You know, when you read that same opinion, the part you read is probably the most substantive, may be a couple of the parts, but it's significant more what it doesn't say.

Yes, it walks us through the well-known standard for granting a temporary restraining order. And yes, there's nothing dramatic there. That law is very well settled. But it doesn't give into the meat of any of the plaintiff's many constitutional and statutory arguments.

Now, on one hand, that's not that surprising. Because after all, a TRO or a preliminary injunction is not a determination on the merits. So the judge may have been thinking, I don't have to go into the meat of the merits of the plaintiff's case. I just have to find substantial likelihood of the merits. But many of us are left wondering, substantial likelihood of success on what issue or issues that the plaintiff raised? And for that, we are going to have to wait and see. When it goes to the ninth circuit, they are going to have a little bit of a difficult time figuring out what the grounds were for the lower court's decision. So, in a way, they are going to be looking at it with fresh eyes.

HARLOW: Laura, to you. Do you agree with the governor of Washington State, who just told me on the air that he believes that they are on very firm, strong, legal ground with this ruling or do you believe Jonathan Turley, a constitutional lawyer who told me earlier tonight, look, the president has a lot of precedent to stand on with his executive order?

JARRETT: Well, like any good lawyer, I'm going to say, both of those things could be true at the same time, right. And so we are going to have to wait and see what the court does here. But professor Little, your previous guest is correct, that the standard here, in order to overrule the Seattle court's ruling, is pretty high. You have to show he abused his discretion in some way. Not just that you disagree with him, but that he really got the law wrong here. So it's a pretty high standard.

Danny Cevallos, Laura Jarrett, guys, stand by. Obviously, this news is just breaking and unfolding. We have a lot more to get to as we watch these live pictures of a march in Palm Beach, just miles from President Trump's Mar-a-Lago estate. We will take you back there in just a moment.

You're live in the CNN NEWSROOM.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[19:28:01] HARLOW: All right. More on our breaking news now.

The justice department just filing an official challenge to the federal judge's ruling last night, staying the president's executive order on that travel ban.

CNN producer Noah Gray joins me on the phone.

Noah, obviously, this is just minutes in, but have the protesters heard about the challenge from the White House.

NOAH GRAY, CNN PRODUCER (on the phone): I couldn't quite hear you, exactly what you said there. But I'm with a large group of protesters here. They have been marching for a little over 90 minutes right now. They have been assembled since 5:00 tonight. They have been marching along the water on Flagler drive here in Palm Beach, Florida. They have just made their way on to southern boulevard, the causeway here on the way to Mar-a-Lago, Trump's property down here.

The protest has been completely peaceful with a lot of positive messages. We are seeing people of all ages, all races. Some people in wheelchairs here. A lot of them holding signs, welcome, refugees. Some holding - you see our live pictures right now.

But right now, it's been completely peaceful. And police are kind of keeping a distance. And it seems like similar to the woman's march in Washington versus any other aggressive riots, nothing like that. Police aren't even in riot gear. So (INAUDIBLE). They are having their voices heard. And we'll see if (INAUDIBLE) the protest organizers were saying they weren't planning on making to it Mar-a- Lago, because police asked them not to.

HARLOW: Noah Gray for us. We are losing you a little bit. The cell phone signal there, but Noah reporting from the protests there in Palm Beach.

We are going to take a quick break and we will be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[19:33:34] HARLOW: All right. Back to our breaking news.

The justice department appealing a decision to the ninth circuit court of appeals, appealing that federal judge's ruling that stayed the president's executive order banning travel to the United States from seven Muslim majority nations.

Betsy Woodruff is with me. She is a political reporter at the daily beast. Also with me, Lanhee Chen, a political commentator, and a former aide to Mitt Romney. Thank you both for being here.

Just your reaction, Betsy, to this news. I mean, now it has taken to the ninth circuit. How do you see this playing out?

BETSY WOODRUFF, POLITICAL REPORTER, THE DAILY BEAST: It remains to be seen, of course. I think what is really important to remember with all of this, the last 24 hours have been uniquely chaotic for folks still trying to travel to the United States. And what the ninth circuit court of appeals decides to do with this will have a very real impact on people who may be in the air, on their way here.

I spoke this morning with Hasan Ahmed. He is an immigration attorney who works in Northern Virginia. And he has been advising his clients as of this morning to get on planes as quickly as possible if they're from one of the seven countries that had travel banned to the United States. So there are folks from these countries who are on their way here, who are hoping to get a last shot at being reunited with their families. And as this legal battle plays out, there is sort of a parallel high level of tension as these folks are hoping to get here before any judge ruling could reverse the reversal of the president's executive order.

HARLOW: And Lanhee, let me read you something that the president tweeted tonight.

What is our country coming to when a judge can halt a homeland security travel ban and anyone, even with bad intentions, can come to the United States?

That is the system that exists in the United States. I mean, that is why we have separate and equal branches of government. Does that show to you a fundamental misunderstanding of the judiciary branch and their powers by the president?

[19:35:25] LANHEE CHEN, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: You know, Poppy, I don't know if it's a misunderstanding. I think the president is communicating directly to his supporters to say, look, this is the way I feel --

HARLOW: But I mean - Lanhee, he is saying what does this say about our country that our legal system can do this, do what our legal system is legally allowed to do?

CHEN: I totally understand that. I think the legal system certainly is the place where this is going to be determined and it should be determined. But my point is simply that I think he is communicating directly to his supporters, so they understand where he is coming from.

Now, obviously, people look at that and they say, well, the courts are doing their jobs. That the courts are considering this case now. But I think what the president's trying to do is, again, he is trying to do -- this has always been part of the Donald Trump strategy, Poppy. It's been to communicate directly to his supporters, things that may make some of us scratch our heads. This is his way of communicating directly to the people who supported him during the campaign to say, look, I am going to continue to fight.

HARLOW: One of the other things he tweeted, apparently, an effort to de-legitimatize this Washington state federal judge, by the way an appointee of president George W. Bush. He said the opinion of the so- called judge which essentially takes law enforcement away from our country is ridiculous and will be overturned. We will see what the courts decide. But here is how the vice president, Mike Pence, responded to George Stephanopoulos asking him about the president's use of the term so-called judge. Listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS, TV HOST: How is he a "so-called judge"?

MIKE PENCE, VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Well, again, we face a dangerous enemy, inspiring people to come into this country, and frankly, inspiring people who are already in this country. And the president is determined to use the authority that he has under the constitution and under the law. But we'll --

STEPHANOPOULOS: But doesn't this judge have the authority to do what he did, as well?

PENCE: He certainly does. And that's why the administration is complying with that order, as we speak. And we will go through the process in the courts to get a stay of that order, so that, again, we can implement this action that is entirely focused on the safety and security of the American people. Look, we have got to do things differently.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HARLOW: Betsy, what do you make of that? I mean, Mike Pence is standing by the president in terms of his language, language I don't think that the vice president would necessarily use to describe a federal judge. What do you make of it?

WOODRUFF: I mean, there's probably -- there probably isn't another -- an odder couple in American politics right now than Donald Trump and Mike Pence. There aren't two men who are more dispositionally and rhetorically different. Of course, Pence's comment defending the fact that Trump referred to this judge is so-called, by pointing to the reality that there is terrorism and that terrorist groups do try to hurt Americans is a bit of a non-sequester.

The fact that ISIS exist, it doesn't mean that the federal judiciary doesn't exist. It is not an answer to the question. And of course, at the end of the day, we have to know, where does the president come down on this very simple question of compliance with these court orders? And thus far, DHS is complying. That's certainly an indicator that the system is working. But when the president talks about the federal judiciary in sort of scare quotes, it's something that absolutely gives a lot of activists pause.

HARLOW: On another note, we just got some clips of the interview that the president sat down with Bill O'Reilly of FOX News to do, that will air, I believe, in its entirety, tomorrow during the super bowl. Here's one part that stood out.

Oh, unfortunately we don't have that. We are going to get that for you a little bit later in the show.

But Lanhee, one of your points on, back to this breaking news, is the fact that you said, all right, the travel ban, the temporary travel ban put forth by the White House needed to be rolled out differently. You believe the intent was, you know, obviously, almost half of America agrees with it, but you say it was a botched rollout that has ultimately cost them. Explain.

CHEN: Well, I think, again, you know, if they had written an executive order that maybe it was a little bit tighter, that maybe had buy-in from other leaders. For example, the secretary of homeland security or other people who are usually part of what we call interagency process, I think that it would have been more defensible in the court of public opinion.

Now, obviously, the legal system is going to play this through, how the legal system will play it. But the public responds, I think, in part, Poppy, a response to the fact that the process through which the executive order was issued was not usually the kind of process you would see for this sort of order.

HARLOW: All right. We now have the sound of the president's interview with FOX News. Let's listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BILL O'REILLY, FOX NEWS HOST: Do you respect Putin?

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I do respect him.

[19:40:01] O'REILLY: Do you? Why?

TRUMP: Well, I respect a lot of people, but that doesn't mean I'm going to get along with them. He is a leader of his country. I say it's better to get along with Russia than not. And if Russia helps us in the fight against ISIS, which is a major fight of Islamic terrorism all over the world, that's a good thing. Will I get along with him, I have no idea.

O'REILLY: Putin's a killer?

TRUMP: A lot of killers. A lot of killers. What, you think our country's so innocent? (END VIDEO CLIP)

HARLOW: Betsy, how do you read that? I mean, do you read that as him putting the United States and Putin's Russia on equal footing?

WOODRUFF: Without a doubt. I think that's the only reasonable understanding of the last couple seconds of that clip. And that's something that's going to be deeply disturbing to many folks, but particularly, to hawkish Republicans in Congress, who have spent years and years and political capital arguing that Vladimir Putin is a uniquely troubling, uniquely dangerous member of the international community, folks like Marco Rubio and John McCain have worked overtime to characterize Putin as a thug, as somebody the United States should not be treating as admirable, or somebody who is even on the same level of us, remotely on the human rights question.

The fact that Trump suggested that the Unites States' foreign policy, that the human rights situation in the U.S. is comparable or similar to that in Russia is something that's going to generate a massive amount of criticism for him over the coming days and weeks.

HARLOW: Betsy Woodruff, Lanhee Chen, thank you, both, as we continue to watch these live pictures of these protests.

We are going to take a quick break.

And when we come back, we head to the heart of the part of America that got this president- elected. We are going to take you to Beattyville, Kentucky, where more than 80 percent of the folks there voted for President Trump. Can this president win the war on poverty that was launched more than 50 years ago, not far from here?

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

HARLOW: Do you think most of America really understands?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No.

HARLOW: What you lived through?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I think most of America is where we are, and that's why the election went the way it did.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[19:45:47] HARLOW: Welcome back.

Beattyville, Kentucky, it's one of the poorest, predominantly white towns in America. Many there have been living without hope not just for years, but for generations. But for the first time in a long time, we found, there is hope oozing out of about every household there. Their hope is President Donald Trump.

So this week, we went to Beattyville to hear directly from the men and women who bet their livelihood on Donald Trump and ask them what they are most hopeful about.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I'm very hopeful that the jobs will come back, because of Trump.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I guess I'm most hopeful for opportunity and job growth.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I'm hopeful that we will have jobs in Kentucky.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Just to keep our young people here, give them a future.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: We have fresh meat in the White House.

HARLOW (voice-over): It's hard to find more natural beauty than the rolling hills surrounding Beattyville, Kentucky.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I just love this area.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It's beautiful here.

HARLOW: To say folks here are proud of their town is an understatement, and they're no fan of the recent headlines about it.

This is Beattyville, Kentucky, one of the poorest, predominantly white towns in the country. More than half of the people here live in poverty and rely on food stamps. Less than a hundred miles from here is where President Lyndon Johnson declared the war on poverty just over 50 years ago.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This administration today, here and now, declares unconditional war on poverty in America.

HARLOW: But for decades, people here have struggled, more and more, as their factories have shuttered and their coal mines have closed. Now, though, there is a sense of hope that you can feel across this town. Something many here have not felt for a long time.

CHUCK CAUDILL, GENERAL MANAGER, BEATTYVILLE NEWSPAPER: A lot of people are happy. I mean, some even ecstatic that we now can say President Trump.

HARLOW: President Trump won more than 80 percent of the vote here.

DONNA COOMER, MANAGER, VALERO GAS STATION: Everybody was excited. Someone told me this morning that in eastern Kentucky that the coal trucks are already out and about.

HARLOW: Donna Coomer has been running this gas station for about a decade and knows just about everybody in town. Do you feel hopeful after the election?

COOMER: Absolutely. He has already done more in a week than Obama did in eight years. HARLOW: President Trump?

COOMER: For the American people.

HARLOW: I'm fascinated by what gives people so much hope. What do you think it is?

COOMER: The change, the fact that they want -- he wants -- I believe he wants to take care of us, the little people. And he understands us better. I think he is going to quit giving money to all these other countries and take care of America.

HARLOW: But for Melissa Allen, hope is hard to find.

Do you make enough to get by?

MELISSA ALLEN, SINGLE MOTHER LIVING ON MINIMUM WAGE: Not without working seven days a week, no. I have lived here my entire life. I have lived in poverty my entire life. So there's really no hope.

HARLOW: You're young, Melissa. None?

ALLEN: Every week, you have got to rob peter to pay Paul. Had my electric shut off. I have had my water shut off.

HARLOW: Do you get a sense that people here are more hopeful now because of the new president?

ALLEN: It seems like people are, but, it's kind of almost like wishing on lost hope. Because it's been this way for so long.

HARLOW: Her livelihood crumbled when one of the town's biggest employers shuttered six years ago.

ALLEN: I worked at lawn apparel. We had a sewing factory.

HARLOW: The big factory?

ALLEN: Yes. As a matter of fact, I worked there for almost ten years.

HARLOW: Were you making a good income there?

ALLEN: I done decent there. (INAUDIBLE) decent paying jobs. And I was actually the highest paid employee on the sewing floor.

[19:50:01] HARLOW: Wow. But when that factory shuttered --

ALLEN: I did, too. I mean, honestly.

HARLOW: Now taking care of her 5-year-old son, Hayden, means two minimum wage jobs working up to 60 hours a week and still relying on about $100 in food stamps each month.

ALLEN: I don't understand why minimum wage here can't be raised. I don't get that. HARLOW: More than 43 million Americans are living at or below the

poverty line. In Beattyville, the economic decline didn't come quickly. It's been a slow, painful drip of job losses for decades. So what happened?

CAUDILL: Our industry went away. We were slow to realize that. We were the number one oil producing candidate east of the Mississippi at one time. Yes.

HARLOW: Plenty of money here at one time.

CAUDILL: At one time, the gem of eastern Kentucky. I don't blame either party. I blame a system that creates -- that creates the situation where everybody says everything's wonderful, and it's not.

HARLOW: Chuck Caudill runs the local paper here. The hope seems palpable.

CAUDILL: Well, it is. Simply because the -- back here, you know, for the last few generations, we have been getting lots of promises and there has been a lot of money thrown at the issues.

HARLOW: Help me understand why so much hope is being placed in President Trump.

CAUDILL: His bluntness, which is very disquieting to people, is refreshing.

HARLOW: But bluntness may be refreshing. It doesn't always equal jobs.

CAUDILL: It does not always equal jobs. But he out and out said I'm going to give you jobs. There's desperation back here.

HARLOW: Susan Lutes isn't convinced, though, President Trump will bring Beattyville what it needs.

SUSAN LUTES, VOTED FOR HILLARY CLINTON: He makes a lot of promises. He says a lot of things that sound great to some people who may not have as much insight into it as they could have or they should have.

HARLOW: Her concern, cutbacks in social programs here.

LUTES: Those are resources that we need more of. We don't need to lose what we have.

PATRICIA COLE, VOTED FOR HILLARY CLINTON: I don't think that Trump has a clue about the little man. You know, when you're born wealthy, and everything's been handed to you, and you have everything that's in your world that's gold plated, come to our world. Come and see how we live.

HARLOW: Regardless of party, one constant you hear, something must be done. So Beattyville doesn't use the next generation.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We lose our young people where have to leave after their graduate high school, graduate college. They have to leave here. We need good paying jobs to keep them here. They don't expect to make a million dollars. This is my American dream. Just to raise my family in a safe environment in a small town. And I think that's what people here want. There's not opportunities here for children, no. That's what I worry about.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: When jobs leave, I said before, it's difficult to bring them back in with the infrastructure we have, roads, internet connections.

HARLOW: How much do you guys trust Donald Trump?

JOHN SMITH, MAYOR, BEATTYVILLE, KENTUCKY: Yes, I don't know yet. I mean, really. You know, I have faith that he is going to work - he is going to work for the people. I have faith in that.

HARLOW: Married 22 years and parents to three daughters, Harold and Leighandra Shouse share a modest home in the hills with seven dogs and a lot of love all around.

Leighandra SHOUSE, VOTED FOR PRESIDENT TRUMP: We were the ones that kind of fill in the crack, you know. In our world, you don't pay your bills this week. You pay a bill. You learn to live humbly.

Leandra's an artist, Harold a mason. He drives two hours each way to and from work because the best paying job he could find close to home only paid $11 an hour. Do you think most of American really understands what you live through?

HAROLD SHOUSE, VOTED FOR PRESIDENT TRUMP: No.

L. SHOUSE: I think most of America is where we are and that's why the election went the way it did.

HARLOW: Can Donald Trump help you?

H. SHOUSE: He bring some jobs in here, like the prison up here is shut down.

HARLOW: Yes, the private prison.

H. SHOUSE: You know, they open it back up, look at the people they laid off, let go, a lot of jobs people lost up there.

HARLOW: What's Trump's promise to you? What can he do for you?

L. SHOUSE: Any change from what we have had. And you know what, I understand that Obama has done great for some people. And I will give him that. It didn't help us. It didn't help us at all.

[19:55:01] HARLOW: Do you feel forgotten?

L. SHOUSE: Sure. Sure. I don't -- I don't know why my kids have to work two jobs each. We don't want free college. We don't want everything free. We want to keep our sense of pride that we take care of ourselves. HARLOW: One day, they would like their American dream and their first

vacation in a decade.

H. SHOUSE: Grand Canyon.

L. SHOUSE: Yes. He said that since we have been married. We will go to the Grand Canyon one day.

HARLOW: The day we landed in Beattyville, the stock market hit a record high. But Dow 20,000 doesn't help many folks here.

CAUDILL: For the majority of the people here, the stock market is something interesting to look at.

HARLOW: Its factories like this one where Melissa and hundreds more made a decent living that President Trump has promised to resurrect. It's a promise so many here are holding on to tightly. What gets you by every day?

ALLEN: Hayden.

HARLOW: Do you believe Hayden can have a different life?

ALLEN: I hope he does. I really do. I don't want him, like I said, I don't want him to struggle like I do.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

HARLOW: We are going to keep in touch with them over the next year. We will bring you more as we have it.

Thanks to my entire team in the field that worked on that story. Jeff Simon with CNN politics and CNN money's Heather Long and (INAUDIBLE). And you can see much more of our reporting from Beattyville this week at CNN money.

Coming up next a lot of breaking news to get to tonight. The president just tweeting that a federal judge quote "opens our country to potential terrorists." This as the White House appeals a federal judge's temporary restraining order on that travel ban. Now it is in the hands of the ninth circuit court of appeals.

And new comments tonight from President Trump about Russian president Vladimir Putin. Hear it all here right now.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[19:59:36] ANNOUNCER: This is CNN breaking news.

HARLOW: 8:00 eastern. I'm Poppy Harlow live in New York. So glad you are with us for this special live edition of CNN NEWSROOM. We are following major breaking news tonight.

The department of justice now formally challenging a federal judge's decision to block President Trump's travel ban. The motion filed just last hour at the same time protesters are taking to the streets across America. A large number of them tonight in Palm Beach, Florida, right near at the president's Mar-a-Lago resort where he is spending the weekend.

CNN is covering this major legal battle from every angle tonight.