Return to Transcripts main page


The Justice Department Stalling, Turning Over Evidence Of President Trump's Wiretapping Claim; The House Intelligence Committee Warning They May Subpoena The Administration If They Don't Get Answers; Cbo Report Just Came Out Estimating That 24 Million More People Would Be Uninsured By 2026 Under The House Republican Health Bill; Top Republicans In Congress Pushing Back On The Congressional Budget Office Report; Unseen Video Of Michael Brown Was Released. Aired 11:00p-12:00mn ET

Aired March 13, 2017 - 23:00   ET



[23:00:36] DON LEMON, CNN HOST: More than one monster storm bearing down on Washington right now.

This is CNN TONIGHT. I'm Don Lemon.

Major snowstorm just beginning to hit the east coast now. But that's not the biggest tempus in the nation's capital. The justice department stalling, turning over evidence of President Trump's wiretapping claim. The house intelligence committee warning they may subpoena the administration if they don't get answers.

Then there is the storm over the GOP health care plan. Congressional budget office saying - by the way that's the capitol. Look at that. Is that crazy? That's the snow coming down. And there's more to come, right? This is going to be nuts. We are going to follow that story. But again, the congressional budget office saying if the plan goes through, a stunning 24 million fewer Americans would have health care coverage 10 years from now. And a lot of them, Trump supporters. So what would the President say to them? We will discuss that.

But let's get right to CNN senior political analyst Mark Preston with more on that.

So Mark, let's talk about this CBO report just came out estimating that 24 million more people would be uninsured by 2026 under the house Republican health bill. How is this going to complicate the Republican's health care plan which was already struggling to find support?

MARK PRESTON, CNN POLITICS EXECUTIVE EDITOR: Well, I mean, they knew it was coming. So it's not a big surprise that these numbers have come out, that don't come down favorably right now for Republicans. But the fact of the matter is, is that I'm not sure that behavior quite prepared though for that - for the blow back. Not only from the conservative side, but also from the most center side of their own party.

LEMON: So walk us through this? What is the good news here and what is the bad news for Paul Ryan and for the president?

PRESTON: Well, they said that they were going to save some money. So, I don't know, $380 billion, over - it is like 10 years?

LEMON: 337.

PRESTON: Yes. Over like 10 years or what have you. So they will say that there's cost savings. The bad news is, what you said at the top. I mean, when you are talking about 24 million people uninsured, going into a midterm election in 2018, and quite frankly going into 2020 when Donald Trump is going to be run again for reelection. That is not good politically for them. And then quite frankly, I mean, we are talking about people who are going to lose their insurance. I mean, that and in of itself is very distressing.

LEMON: Yes. What is interesting to me though is he all in many on this plan? Because he keeps saying, you know, (INAUDIBLE) beautiful, and whatever. And then he says, well, maybe we should let Obama care expire. And that would be the best thing to do. (INAUDIBLE) on this because he wants to let Obamacare collapse.

PRESTON: I think he is all in on a win. I'm not sure he is all in on this specific plan, even though he is right now. He is providing the cover to Paul Ryan that Paul Ryan needs certainly at this point. Because when Donald Trump pulls back and leaves Paul Ryan out there alone in the desert, then you know, because your are Republican leaders that it's going to be problematic.

So I think at some point you are going to see a shift from Donald Trump to a more pragmatic approach to get this done. But in a more pragmatic approach might alienate the conservatives of the Republican caucus.

LEMON: You know how folks are. They say one thing when they got in front of the camera, right? They would allowed makers. What are Republican lawmakers saying behind the scenes? Are they concerned about this?

PRESTON: They absolutely are. I mean, you need to go back to the town halls that Democrats have it faced, right, when you go back to 2009, going into 2010. 2010, when they were trying to fight to get Obamacare done.

Think about this, if 20 million people get thrown off of the roles of health care, what those town halls are going to - looks like we have already seen that so far. You are going to see what is now a deflated democratic base get energized.

I LEMON: Interesting. So if this bill doesn't get passed, because he said one of his first orders of business is repeal and replace Obamacare and he is going to get it done? This hasn't get passed with sweet room (ph).

PRESTON: I think that he moves and goes on to the next big legislative thing that he has talked about. He has talked about tax reform. He has talk about infrastructure. What we have seen this from Donald Trump in the past. Now, if it doesn't go his way, he is willing to cut and move on. The fact of the matter is though that they have to do something because as we talk about last hour. The current state of health care right now is not sustainable. What they are offering right now is not sustainable.

LEMON: Mark Preston, thank you. I appreciate it.

You know, it's going to be tough for the GOP to make the math work. Twenty-four million more Americans uninsured by 2026. Premiums jumping 20 percent by 2019, but then decreasing in the years after that. But the bill reducing the federal budget deficit by $337 billion over ten years.

Joining me now is Senator Joe Manchin, Democrat of West Virginia.

Senator, thank you so much for joining us.

[23:05:02] SEN. JOE MANCHIN (D), WEST VIRGINIA: Thanks for having me, Don.

LEMON: And so, let's talk about this. The CBO, the congressional budget office score of the new health care report is out. We will put it up to these numbers. Look at those numbers. What's your reaction to this?

MANCHIN: Well, basically and sits over, they are saying we are going to have a savings of over $300 million for 10 years. So that is great. We are going to have a savings.

And let me tell you what's not great and what's immorally wrong, is they are going do have a $575 billion tax cut to the wealthiest Americans and insurance companies. That's just not right, Don.

And then on top of that, next year they are saying 14 million people will lose their insurance. I got a triple whammy in my state. I have a poor population. I have an elderly population. And I have a horrible addiction problem with opiates. And with that being said, all three of those categories get just devastated over a period of time. And just -- I just don't think it is right. I have been saying all along if you want to fix something, let's sit down and work in a constructive manner but not mean spirited. Not hurting people. Not throwing people who are the most delicate that need help, not throwing them off.

LEMON: Yes. They have been touting the savings and how much money it's going to save. But we will talk about that. But I want you to listen to what the President said earlier.


DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: The house plan will expand choice law across and ensure health care access for all when negotiating with everybody, it's a big fat beautiful negotiation, and hopefully we will come up with something that's going to be really terrific.


LEMON: So a big fat beautiful negotiation, and you have previously expressed a willingness to negotiate with Republicans on this issue. In fact, you just said it just a moment ago. Are you still willing or do you think that they should scrap this and start all over, Senator?

MANCHIN: Well, first of all, where the problem has been, it's - you know, you have people -- 20 million people who have the expansion. If you are one of the people that have the expansion, if you are not one of the people that got the subsidies and one of the new insured, if you will. If you are one of those people, you are probably paying a higher premium and higher deductible.

I understand the product in the market is not matching up the way it was intended. That's where you need to work it. But Don, just (INAUDIBLE). I have been saying OK. Now we are going to start massage all this and do it differently. That means you are going to do it on the backs of the people who are the most vulnerable. And in my state, you are hitting all categories.

So how anybody in West Virginia can think this is a good idea. I want to help those people that didn't get the expansion and didn't get the subsidies. I want to help them. And we can sit down and work through that with a product in the market working more in conjunction with each other.

No one is taking that approach. Only one person has come to me. That was Senator Bill Cassidy from Louisiana, Republican, and started to sit down with me, and we talked about his piece of legislation. That he had -- was introducing. And I was explaining to him the concerns I had with that legislation. And we were going to talk some more to find if there is any pathway.

Well, I'm understanding that consideration or his bill got no consideration. So that was thrown out immediately. So I can't say that anyone's reached out, wanting to sit and talk to me.


LEMON: But listen. I want to ask you this because as you know, I don't need to tell you, the people who could be most affected by this are Trump voters, right. People who voted for Trump. Your state overwhelmingly voted for President Trump, for Donald Trump to become President. So what are they telling you about this?

MANCHIN: Well, let me just tell you this. I did tell President Trump this. I said, Mr. President, this is a -- there's no way I can vote to repeal. I will not vote to repeal. I know you can repeal it with 51 votes. My Republican friends, my Republican colleagues are going down the wrong path by having nobody buying and trying to fix it. So if you want to just repeal, I can tell you this, Mr. President.

The people in West Virginia who basically benefited by the expansion by the affordable care act or Obamacare, whatever you want to call it. The people that benefited the most, they don't know how they got it. They have no idea how they received this additional health care and basically, some help in their life, if you will.

LEMON: So the talking points about it, the talking point about it have not been accurate in your assessment. Because as I find, some people don't know -- they think Obamacare and the affordable care act are different. They don't like Obamacare but they like the affordable care act.

So you think people have benefits from this, and they don't even - they are not even aware of the benefits they had?

MANCHIN: Not at all, Don. But I told President Trump this. Mr. President, they don't know how they got it. I guarantee you, they will know who took it away from them. Fourteen million people, I guarantee you they are going to know. And that is something we shouldn't have to go through. Why do you have to replay this?

So I think he is fighting with finding a pathway, maybe it sounds like is he thinking that there can be negotiations and we can find a better way of doing it? Well, let's find out and see what they want to do. I'm still here. I'm the most bipartisan person trying to get something accomplished, Don. And that is not the way to do it. How can they justify $575 million in tax cuts to the wealthiest? How can they do that?

[23:10:25] LEMON: Well, they are going to say that they are saving, you know, and whatever, $300 billion over 10 years is going to be their argument. $337 billion over 10 years are going to say that's a lot of savings.

MANCHIN: Well, it might be a lot of savings. Why are you giving away -- you're saving on the backs of what you're taking away. The people that need it the most.

LEMON: I got to ask you this because you mentioned it and I know this is a huge problem for all over the country especially in West Virginia. The effectiveness legislation that it would have on those seeking treatment for the opioid epidemic which has hit your state particularly hard. Why do you concerns about that Senator?

MANCHIN: Look. Don, my state over 700 people died last year of opiate addiction basically, overdose. This is legal prescriptions drugs. And now with all the heroin moving in, fentanyl and everything, it's just unbelievable what's happening. It's devastating to my state and many states around the country.

I have said this. You know, we have no permanent funding at all. So I introduced a bill called life boat. And all it does is this, Don. It says all the manufacturers will pay one penny per milligram for all the opiates as they produce and sell in America, one penny. (INAUDIBLE) that's a new tax. We can't vote for that.

This is a life savings. It is called lifeboat because it will save people if we have treatment centers. We have no permanent funding for treatment centers. And with this new bill the Republicans want to do and replace the affordable care act, takes more treatment centers away and less places for people to get help. With this bill, one penny, Don, just one penny per milligram will

raise $1.5 to $2 billion a year. That goes toward funding for treatment centers and get people clean again. Get them back into the workforce. We are trying everything we can, but this addiction is just killing America. We are losing a whole workforce.

LEMON: Well, considering that, do you think that this bill can get through the Senate, and if not, what would it take?

MANCHIN: Well, the bottom line is, if they are going to go through this bill, how anybody can say, I'm going to take sort -- cut services for the people that got the expansion. That's the poor of the poorest. That's people right above the Medicaid or that basically never qualified to get Medicaid before. I'm going to cut people who got subsidies. That people that making less than a certain amount of dollars that basically we are subsidizing about $388.

And then the seniors, the elderly that were getting basically on the average of $6,000 or $7,000. To cut that down and put a cap of 4500, they are not going to be able to pay. So you know what they are going to do is go back to the old ways. You know what the old ways were? Go to the emergency room.

LEMON: Right.

MANCHIN: They can't refuse you. That's the highest cost of delivery. And what happens is, if you are working person, a working poor person, you will claim workers comp in order to get insurance.

LEMON: And that's not good either.

MANCHIN: That's the highest cost.

LEMON: Do you think this will pass the Senate, though?

MANCHIN: Well, if they pulled - I mean, they are working on I think on budget conciliation, which is a 51 vote threshold. And if they can hold 51 and the 52 Republican senators, I don't think that any Democrat help on this where this bill is coming at us.

So with that being said, if there's three or four of my Republican colleagues they worry them hold up, I can't in good conscience go home and look at the people that got thrown off. I can't go home and tell them, we had to give tax cuts for the wealthiest people and insurance companies. I'm hoping there's three or four of them, Don.

LEMON: Yes. Senator Joe Manchin, thank you, sir. I appreciate your time.

MANCHIN: Thanks, Don. Appreciate it.

LEMON: Don't miss CNN's town hall, Obamacare, what comes next. Tom Price, secretary of health and human services answers your questions. And CNN's Wolf Blitzer and Dana Bash are the moderators. That's Wednesday night at 9:00 eastern.

We will be right back.


[23:17:45] LEMON: We are talking on administration on top Republicans in Congress pushing back on the congressional budget office report, which says millions more Americans will be uninsured if the GOP health care bill becomes law.

Let's discuss now, Grover Norquist is here, the president of the American for tax reform and CNN's senior economic analyst Robert Reich, author of "Saving Capitalism for the many, not the few."

Perfect two guests to discuss this. Gentlemen, thank you so much.

Grover, I'm going to start with you. So the CBO, congressional budget office, analyzed this new GOP health plan and here's what they estimate. Fourteen million more people would be uninsured by next year. And that would rise to 24 million more uninsured by 2026. But there is $337 billion in deficit savings in there, from 2017 to 2026. I know you like the savings part and a tax cut, but what about the amount of uninsured?

GROVER NORQUIST, PRESIDENT, AMERICANS FOR THE TAX REFORM: Well, as you know, they were off by 24 million when the CBO told us how many people Obamacare would cover. They said today there would be 22 million on exchanges and it is hot pot. So the CBO has not a good record on those predictions.

But that doesn't matter. What was big today and what your conversation so far has missed completely is the CBO just scored this plan, the Trump Paul Ryan Obamacare repeal and beginning of reform. They scored this as deficit -- as decreasing the deficit. And that means that it can be passed with 51 votes in the Senate.

The only thing the CBO score, in the whole thing, the only numbers that matter are 1.2 trillion in spending over a decade and $900 billion in lower taxes. $300 billion as you say deficit reduction.

What is that means? That means that this reform package can be passed with 51 votes in the Senate, and by having 300 billion in deficit reduction, it means there's a lot of wiggle room, there's a lot of improvement in there to earn house company concerns and Senate Republican concerns the CBO's numbers.

LEMON: I get your point. We discussed that. We did discuss whether or not it would pass, but you are not saying that the 14 or the 24 million people who may not have health insurance, you know, between now and 2026, you are not saying that number is not important?

[23:20:10] NORQUIST: No, the CBO is saying that number is less important, because they have a track record of being off -- completely off. If you look at their reasoning, they say, there are going to be fewer people getting health care if we allow states to have Medicaid block granted out. There were similar hysterics against Bill Clinton, when they block granted welfare, and they were wrong. So we now actually have a --. LEMON: The CBO was only wrong because they didn't anticipate that 19

states would refuse Medicaid.

NORQUIST: In terms of how many people are on the exchanges, they have it backwards on that. They were wrong there. They were wrong on how many people were going to buy it. They thought that the mandate was going to force everybody into the effort, and getting rid of the mandate, they think will make everyone get out of it.

They're wrong in both directions. The most important thing, they're raiding 1/3 of the Republican plan. This is the reconciliation package. It's a piece of the puzzle. There are 1400 decisions as you know, that Secretary Price makes, all of which can help reform this, and give waivers to states.

LEMON: OK, Grover, let's send --

NORQUIST: Decisions to the states.

LEMON: I want Robert to get in on this had as well.

Because Robert, it says by 2018, the CBO predicts the premiums would go up 20 percent, 20, 25 percent higher from the 64. Those who are 64 years or older. And they say the report is a punch in the gut to Republicans. Explain that.

ROBERT REICH, CNN SENIOR ECONOMIC ANALYST: Of course it's a punch in the gut to Republicans, because 24 million people are predicted to lose their --

LEMON: You said it's a punch in the gut, not the CBO.

REICH: I mean, you can attack the CBO. The problem is, with attacking the CBO, this is the CBO whose head was appointed by the Republican Congress. And this headed by a conservative Republican economist who has expressed in the past real problems with Obamacare. You can't say this is biased one way or the other.

The CBO is nonpartisan. And if anything, the CBO is a Republican run CBO. The fact that it comes out with an estimate saying the 24 million people are going to lose over the next 10 years, their health care. Fourteen million people next year, this is not something to just poo-poo. This is not something you can just wash away. This is a huge problem. And it's not just a political problem. It's a human problem. We have enormous numbers of people in this country who desperately need health insurance.

LEMON: But he is saying the CBO's numbers were off, Robert. How do you respond to that?

REICH: I mean, I don't understand --

NORQUIST: By a lot.

REICH: Wait a minute. Can I just say what I don't understand? I mean, the original CBO estimates of Obamacare was off because there were changes that had to be made in Obamacare, and a lot of states did not express. Did not decide to expand Medicaid coverage. So obviously, there's going to be a change in terms of what the estimate is going to be. That doesn't mean that right now we can disregard the CBO's estimate.

This is serious stuff. There is no other nonpartisan, highly regarded estimate of what's going to happen as a result of this so called replacement. It's not even a replacement. I mean, let's be clear about this. The Republicans said that they were going to repeal and replace. This is not a replacement.

Donald Trump said, I'm going to replace it with something absolutely beautiful, nobody is going to lose coverage. What everybody - a lot of people are going to lose coverage. And what other source do we have of understanding the possible consequences of this, other than the nonpartisan, Republican headed congressional budget office.

LEMON: Grover, so what do you think? Do you think Republicans are willing to put the deficit over ensuring Americans?

NORQUIST: You have it completely backwards. We have a system that was supposed to reduce the cost of health care for Americans. The president ran on a promise that he would reduce it by $2500, OK. And it went up, not down.

This plan didn't work. It didn't do what it said it was going to do. It moved in the opposite direction. And again, both of you understand the CBO scored one piece, OK? They can only look at what they are told to look at.

The original piece that's going to pass through reconciliation. There are 1400 different decisions secretary price gets to make. Because when the Democrats set this up, they thought they would be running the country forever. And they put all this power in the hands HHS secretary. Now they perhaps, wish they hadn't but they did.

And then thirdly, as the President has said, as Paul Ryan has said, as the Republican has made perfectly clear that the CBO doesn't take into account that there are a series of changes that need to be done legislatively as well. We may need to break the filibuster and do it with 51 votes.


[23:25:12] REICH: This makes absolutely no sense. This makes absolutely no sense. Here we have Republicans are saying oh, go in --


LEMON: One at a time.

NORQUIST: You were wrong about Obamacare -- you were wrong about bill Clinton's welfare.

REICH: Don't worry, we are going to fix everything. This is the only solid evidence we have to date about what the consequences of this so called replacement for Obamacare is. And if you say, don't worry -- it's going to get better, and HHS is going to do one thing and Republicans are going to patch this up, and we have no confidence. There's no reason any Republican or Democrat or voter for Trump who's going to be really hurt should tag --

NORQUIST: Robert, you were wrong about Bill Clinton's well fear reform.

REICH: I was right about it, as a matter of fact. I was right about all of that. I look forward to debating you about that.

LEMON: All right. We will have you both back. Thank you very much. I appreciate it.

When we come right back, the Trump administration twisting themselves into pretzels trying to make sense of the President's wiretapping accusations. Can we take President Trump at his word?


[23:30:15] LEMON: The House intelligence committee may subpoena the administration if they don't get answers to their questions about the president's wiretapping claims by next week. But those answers may be hard to come by even for members of the President's inner circle who seem to be having a hard time explaining some of what we have heard from the tweeter in chief.

Here to discuss, CNN contributor Salena Zito, political analyst Carl Bernstein, national security analyst Steve Hall.

Hello, everyone. Salena, you first. Sean Spicer walked back the President's wiretapping claim today. I'm not sure if you saw that. And tried to redefine the President's tweets. That's the second time in a couple of days -- first was whether the unemployment rate was real. That brought this question from ABC's Peter Alexander. Listen to this.


PETER ALEXANDER, ABC: You spoke on behalf of the President, quoting him on the jobs report on Friday. You said they may have been phony in the past, but it's very really real now.


ALEXANDER: They are very real now. The question -- when should Americans trust the President. Should they trust the President, is it phony or real, when he says that President Obama was wiretapping.

SPICER: Well, again, let's get back. I think there's two things that are important about what he said. I think recognizing that it's the -- he doesn't really think that President Obama went up and tapped his phone personally. But I think there's no question that the Obama administration -- there were actions about surveillance and other activities that occur in 2016 election. That is a widely reported activity that occurred back then. The President used the word "wiretap" to mean broadly surveillance and other activities during that.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Can you say affirmatively that whenever the President sends something, we can trust it to be real?

SPICER: If he's not joking, of course. In that case - hold on. No, no, you are asking -- no, no, you're point is, every time that he speaks he's speaking as President of the United States. That it's --

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: More than three million Americans voted illegally. Is he jokes or does he believe that?

SPICER: He does believe it.


LEMON: Salena, where -- seriously, where are we, when reporters have to ask whether they can even trust the President? Trust what he says or writes. What's going on?

SALENA ZITO, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: Well, we are obviously in a brand new world. We have been in a brand new world with the President and when he was a candidate and before he won the nomination. This is how he uses words. We have discussed this, you know, several times over. I'm not saying it is right or wrong. But he uses them much more casually than we as reporters or the typical politicians, you know, use words. And it's going to -- I don't see this changing any time soon.

This is what he's done throughout the entire process. I suspect that this is what he will continue to do. The people that like Donald Trump aren't going to have a problem with it. The people who don't like him or people in the press who have to sort of keep this in account are the ones that are going to have the biggest struggle.

LEMON: Or a journalist words mean a lot. I mean, I'm not saying this for -- I'm not giving you shade but it sound like, when I talk to my little great niece and my little great nephew when, I say, use your words. No, that's not the right word for that. It seems so absurd.

ZITO: It's completely different than anything we are ever used to. And he just never uses words the way we do. He uses off handedly. If you have ever read his book, you know, he uses words in negotiating to get what he wants. He doesn't put the same value on it that we do.

LEMON: But Steve, let me ask you. Let me ask you, Steve. Because it sounds like in those tweets that he was pretty specific about what he said. I don't know if we have one somewhere. But he said, you know, about the wiretapping thing, right, he said this is a sick guy. President Obama wiretapped, and then he goes, sick guy, bad. It sounds specifically, he was speaking about the former President, but yet the folks around him are trying to explain something that never happened.

STEVE HALL, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: You know, Don, I spent a lot on my career in developing countries. And this is what politicians in developing countries do. They try to destroy their opponents. They make stuff up. They just come out with the stuff. And they know it's very distracting and it causes attention to go away from, in this case, what we really ought to be focusing on, you know, the very serious issue, just to whether or not Russia was involved before that, before the elections with the Trump campaign.

I mean, what if tomorrow Donald Trump wakes up and says, I think Bernie Sanders might be a Chinese spy? Are the oversight committee is going to be forced to investigate that too taking more time and more resources which they have already said they have very little of away from that very critical mission?

This is - with the oversight committee investigation, I think this is a real rubber meets the road moment for the Republicans. They can stand up and say look, you know, enough. We are going to focus on what we have to or they are going to continue, you know, along partisan lines to say, OK, what else would you like us to take a look at. And that's why I really think we have to go in the direction of a more independent investigation.

[23:35:39] LEMON: Carl, are we crazy or are they crazy?


LEMON: Spicer.

BERNSTEIN: Spicer has an indefensible job. Which is to say he works for a President of the United States who lies endemically, repeatedly, who has a history in business of stiffing those who he owes money to. There's no question that Donald Trump has been beyond trust of those who works for, and with for many, many years. That's his MO. If Spicer had an ounce of self-respect, I suspect he will be out of that job on his own volition very soon, and he ought to walk away from it.

But there's a more important question here. And that is, what happens when we have Republicans who condone this, who see that because there's an ideological fight by their lights going on in this country a state of civil, civic warfare almost, that they will condone the lying of the leader of their party, the president of the United States.

What happened in Watergate, which is a good example here is that a Republican senator said, what did the President know, and when did he know it? And Republicans were the first to join those principled in both parties who said, we can no longer condone what the President of the United States is doing, the lying from the White House. And not just lying, the lack of responsible response to great problems of the world by this President has got to be concerning Republicans -- it's time for some of them to go down there and talk to this President and quit this charade.

LEMON: Carl, I have something that's new that's just in -- I got to get this in now. We won't get the chance to talk about it.

Salena, has posted new audio tonight of speaker Paul Ryan expressing his concerns about the President to a bunch of fellow Republicans. This is before he was President when he was running because we are talking about words now. This was in the fall when then candidate Donald Trump was struggling with the polls and a number of controversies. Listen to this.


REP. PAUL RYAN (R), HOUSE SPEAKER: His comments are not anywhere in keeping with our party's principles and values. There are basically two things I want to make really clear, as for myself as your speaker. I am not going to defend Donald Trump, not now, not in the future.

As you probably heard, I disinvited him from my first congressional district GOP event this weekend, a thing I do every year. And I'm not going to be campaigning with him over the next 30 days. You guys know I have real concerns about the nominee. I hope you appreciate that I'm doing what I think is best for you, the members, not what is best for me.


LEMON: So that was Paul Ryan. We knew about the phone call and about this phone meeting. But there was no audio. The timing is very interesting. And what's interesting Salena, is that he doesn't specify that he has never going to defend Trump. This is right after the "Access Hollywood" tape. After that. He said he is clearly done with Trump all together. So why put this out now and slam Paul Ryan now?

ZITO: You know, I'm not shocked to hear that. There were many whispers to this. That was the tone and the substance of that call, you know. I don't know who leaked this or how this became available. But I don't think it stuns anybody. At that moment, I think everyone was pretty convinced he wasn't going to win. It was right after "Access Hollywood." It was right after what the establishment are bad debate performances. So this isn't -- to me, this isn't stunning. I don't know. I could be reading that -- wrong.

BERNSTEIN: How about good for Breitbart, whatever its motivations for putting it out there. A good piece of journalism.

LEMON: Steve, again, I have to run here. But I mean, but why support the President, the guy now, just because you saw that he was going to win so you lose your morals and say, OK, now I'm back on board with him?

HALL: You know, it's hard to tell - I mean, I was interesting on that piece for the next 30 days I'm not going to be campaigning with him. I don't understand exactly what the time line or the motivations are, but it must be hard at different times to be behind Donald Trump.

LEMON: Yes. I got to go. Thank you, panel. I appreciate it.

Coming up, new video of Michael Brown surfaces two and a half years after he was shot to death by a police officer in Ferguson, Missouri.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK) [23:43:59] LEMON: It's video the American public has never seen before, Michael Brown in a Ferguson, Missouri story hours before he was shot to death by a police officer what does it tell us about what really happened if anything.

Let's discuss now with CNN legal analyst Mark O'Mara, retired police officer Jeff Hoodra, author of "Ferghanastan, the war on police, the untold story on Ferguson," and CNN legal analyst Areva Martin.

Good evening to all of you.

Mark, you first. You have reviewed this new video. Do you find it significant to this case in anyway? And how so if you do.

MARK O'MARA, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Well, it's really much ado about nothing to be honest with you. Now, I will say that law enforcement has in the past and did in this case, release information that they did not need to, and that was the alleged robbery by Mike Brown in that same store, just before the shooting. And I thought that was it improper when they did it. And Don, you and I we talked about that.

Having said that, on the eve of the release of this documentary, this video really doesn't show anything at all that assists in what really happened on Camp Ville (ph). It may put Mike Brown in a slightly different light if the different light is that he was trying to make a deal for pot and it didn't work. But it has absolutely no relevance to the way he reacted in response to the police officers commands and the shooting that happened Camp Ville.

[23:45:18] LEMON: Areva, Bob McCulloch, the prosecutor who investigated the Michael Brown case, spoke out today strongly rebuked this new video and the film. Let's play some of it.


BOB MCCULLOCH, ST. LOUIS COUNTY PROSECUTOR: Over the weekend there was a pretty pathetic attempt at a video production regarding the fatal shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson. That was released at a fair somewhere in Texas I believe. Contained in that was a very poorly edited snippet of a security videotape from the store in Ferguson. And is very clear there was no transaction between the -- Mr. Brown and the store employees and the suggestion that he is coming back to pick up what he already bartered for is just stupid.


LEMON: So Areva, the prosecutors said authorities had this all along, said there's nothing new about it. Do you think it changed the way the case was decided?

AREVA MARTIN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Well, I think the prosecutor's argument is illogical. He is saying that this videotape that we are seeing now is irrelevant, but yet they released the tape of the so- called robbery. But we heard the police chief six days or so after Mike Brown was killed saying that Darren Wilson didn't stop Mike Brown because of the robbery. He stopped him because of a traffic violation or because he was jay walking.

So, if it wasn't relevant to release this video, it definitely wasn't relevant to release the robbery video since that wasn't the impetus for Darren Wilson having an interaction with Mike Brown.

I think for me, what's important about this video is the issue of trust. What we spent hours and days and months talking about after Mike Brown's murder was the issue of trust and the lack of trust in this Ferguson community. Now to be told that there was this other videotape available, but wasn't released to the public, just deepens the mistrust that residents in the city of Ferguson have toward the police department. And really about this whole police brutality issue. This says we can't trust the police department.

LEMON: Jeff, I mean, both of my guests here, had mentioned the video that was released, you know, just before the shooting in the store, and many people were upset with the Ferguson police department's decision to release that original surveillance video, that altercation. But they said it was released to sort of justify police use of force. So does this video, the new one, should it have been released as well for transparency purposes?

JEFF HOODRA, AUTHOR, FERGHANASTAN, THE WAR ON POLICE, THE UNTOLD STORY: Well, first of all, Don, I don't disagree with them releasing that video of the robbery at the market Michael Brown committed because it went to his motive.

Now, your guest is right that Darren Wilson stopped Brown, because he was talking down on those street. That's the reason for the initial contact. But the reason that the video of the robbery is important, it explains why Brown would have turned that deadly violence toward Darren and having just committed this robbery, it really sort of fills in that blank. It worst the kind of assassinates Michael Brown's character a little bit. And if you believe the filmmakers' interpretation, paints them out to be a drug dealer on top of all the other things he's been accused of.

LEMON: Do you agree with that, Mark O'Mara?

O'MARA: Well, Don. I guess. I mean, I think what the filmmaker is really trying to do was to get some free publicity for his film. Maybe that's OK, in a free enterprise society.

Here's my concern. Look, the Mike Brown event and shooting was looked into very well by McCulloch. It was a good investigation. It was presented to the grand jury. And right after it was presented to the grand jury, we got every snippet of evidence. Because Don, you recall, we spent hours and days and weeks pouring over that information.

I think we need to look at the Mike Brown killing investigation as being one that was done fairly well. And here's what I don't like. To now use that as an example of some races or white supremacists behavior which was stated by filmmaker. I think denigrates the real civil rights cases out there that we have to focus on. If he wants one that he really wasn't to focus on where civil rights

were hardly violated, call me. I have got a number of those clients, and I know Areva does as well. But this was not the case to take this type of a stand, put out an irrelevant video and then try and scream some cover-up or lack of transparency that didn't exist.

[23:50:03] LEMON: That is got to be the last word. Thank you all. Appreciate it. We will be right back.


[23:53:57] LEMON: A monster storm taking aim at the northeast tonight. Thousands of flights canceled. Millions of people hunkering down.

CNN meteorologist Pedram Javaheri joins -- has more. He joins me now.

Pedram, this is a huge storm, closing in on the northeast. Where we are right now. So what's the track of the storm?

PEDRAM JAVAHERI, CNN METEOROLOGIST: Well, Don, it's changed actually in the last couple hours. Latest model runs suggesting it could shift closer to land. And if that is the case, that reduces the snowfall for some of the major cities. And of course, in credible winter, right. You go in from seeing some 9,000 record-high temperatures so far this winter, versus a thousand record-low temperatures, 200-plus tornadoes so far in this winter where 60 is normal for this time of year.

And then in the last couple of days of it, Mother Nature opens the door out of Canada. You get that arctic blast of it that lines up. The storm system itself, one of which comes down from the south, another one that joins from the Midwest. PU this together here and the elements certainly in place to produce significant snow accumulations.

Already seeing some snow come down in Washington, around Philadelphia and New York City. Finally getting a few flurries in place as well. But over 100 million people dealing with the wintry weather. So in another way to look at this, talking one in every three people in the U.S. dealing with some significant snow in the forecast over the next several hours, 30 million of them in which the blizzard warnings that are in place.

But let me show the forecast now going into the early morning hours. (INAUDIBLE), we stop at around 4:00 a.m. from Philly point southward, Baltimore, into Washington, already at that hour, the snow may be done with. It rains and begins to mix, you get some sleet. So accumulations south of Philly don't look all that impressive. But if the track stays put here and hugs the coastline, you see the snowfall really begin intensifies by 6:00 or 7:00 a.m. and then by 8:00, 9:00 a.m., a transition line right across the I-95 corridor, and pink, that sleet against. So that could really be (INAUDIBLE) so far total. Because we think by say 10:00 or 11:00, it's all done with for New York City as far as snow coming down. Here is the forecast accumulation. If we are going for a closer

perspective, notice the Poconos and around Scranton, work a way in to the Cats Ville (ph) just north of New York City. That is going to be a very, very narrow cutoff line. Just a few miles could dictate, Don, and they are getting say between six to eight inches.

I personally think New York City could get around say six to ten inches of snowfall. But just outside of town, just north of town, easily could see over two feet. Same story out of Boston. Could see about eight to 12 inches, just west of town, could easily a significant amount. So these variations with thunderstorm as it wobbles up the coast tonight will make all the difference and how the snow exist tomorrow morning, Don.

LEMON: We were hearing 18 inches possibly in the city tomorrow. And so we hope that doesn't happen.

Thank you, Pedram. Appreciate that.

Everybody, be careful out there.

That's it for us. Thanks for watching us here. I will see you right back here tomorrow.