Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Republicans On Capitol Hill Divided On The President's National Emergency; Eyes Are On "Empire" Star Jussie Smollett; President Trump Is Delivering An Ultimatum To European Allies; Democratic Presidential Hopefuls Are Forced To Answer Questions About Their Race And Gender; More Than A Week Of Violent Protests In Haiti Before The Country's Prime Minister Finally Broke His Silence; Former U.S. Congressman Anthony Wiener Has Just Been Transferred From Prison To A Halfway House. Aired 2-3p ET

Aired February 17, 2019 - 14:00   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:00:20] FREDRICKA WHITFIELD, CNN HOST: Hello, everyone. Thank you so much for joining me this Sunday. I'm Fredricka Whitfield.

The legal battle lines are being drawn following the President's declaration of a national emergency at the southern border. Democrats are vowing to fight the declaration in Congress and in court. Republicans remaining divided on the President's move to bypass Congress to fund his border wall.

Today, the President's supporters are arguing the declaration is needed to deal with the border crisis but Democrats say the President's national emergency is unconstitutional.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. ADAM SCHIFF (R), CALIFORNIA: This is the first time a President has tried to declare an emergency when Congress explicitly rejected funding for the particular project that the President is advocating. And in saying just the other day that he didn't really need to do this. He just wanted to do it because it would help things go faster, he's pretty much daring the court to strike this down.

REP. JIM JORDAN (R), OHIO: All I know is this is a serious situation. This is crisis. Look at the drug problem, the human trafficking problem, the gang violence problem. That's why we need to the border security wall, and that's what the President is committed to making sure happens.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WHITFIELD: CNN White House reporter Sarah Westwood in West Palm Beach, Florida, not far from where the President is spending the weekends.

So Sarah, what exactly is the White House saying about all these challenges in court and in Congress? SARAH WESTWOOD, CNN WHITE HOUSE REPORTER: Well, Fred, the White House

is saying that they are prepared to fight legal battles against these expected challengers from Capitol Hill and courts of law. White House aides knew these battles would be almost inevitable since they started focusing on the national emergency declaration as a potential strategy. There's still resistance among some Republicans who don't like the legal precedent that a national emergency might set and some Democrats who have been opposed to the border wall since day one.

House Democrats are preparing what is known as a resolution of disapproval, a way to try to block this emergency declaration from moving forward. And that bill could have enough support in the Senate to pass. So top Trump advisor Stephen Miller saying today, hinting that the President might be willing to use his veto power to try to stop that resolution from moving forward. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CHRIS WALLACE, FOX NEWS ANCHOR: Will the President veto that, which would be the first veto of his presidency?

STEPHEN MILLER, TRUMP SENIOR POLICY ADVISOR: Well, obviously the President is going to protect his national emergency declaration, Chris. And I know that we are out of time but again, I want to make this point. There is no threat --.

WALLACE: So yes, he will veto?

MILLER: He is going to protect his national emergency declaration guaranteed. But the fact that they are even talking about resolution disapproval shows you this is statutory issue and statutory delegation that Congress made.

But again I want to make this point. This is a deep intellectual problem that is plaguing this city. We just that - we have had thousands of Americans die year after year after year because of threats crossing our southern border. We have families and communities that are left unprotected and undefended. We have international narco-terrorist organizations.

This is threat in our country. Not overseas, not in Belarus, not in Zimbabwe, not in Afghanistan or Syria or Iraq, but right here. And if the President can't defend this country, then he cannot fulfill his constitutional oath of office.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WESTWOOD: Now, Stephen Miller in that same FOX News interview saying that the President while he made the remarks that he didn't need to do the national emergency declaration was simply saying that he could have chosen to ignore the emergency but didn't, chose to declare the national emergency. There had been some critics wondering whether the President undercut his own argument by saying he didn't need to declare that national emergency.

Now the Trump administration also set to face a number of other roadblocks in court from groups challenging the constitutionality of that order. From landowners who don't want the government to seize their land to build this wall.

So Fred, a lot of roadblocks facing the Trump administration before they ever see a penny of the $6 billion they are trying to unlock with this national emergency declaration.

WHITFIELD: All right. Sarah Westwood, thanks so much.

So with so many Republicans on Capitol Hill divided on the President's national emergency, the White House is pushing its case about why the President has the constitutional power to make that declaration.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MILLER: I guarantee you this, if Donald Trump had said he is invoking the national emergency military construction authority to build a security perimeter in Iraq or Afghanistan or around a military installation in Syria there would not have been one word of objection from Congress. This is defending our own country.

WALLACE: OK. Here's article one, section nine, clause seven of the constitution as written. No money shall be drawn from the treasury but in consequence of appropriations made by law. Isn't what President Trump wants to do a clear violation of what the founders, of what James Madison talked about as giving Congress the power of the purse?

[14:05:07] MILLER: No because Congress in 1976 passed a national emergencies act and gave the President the authority as a result of that to invoke a national emergency in many different circumstances but among them for use of military construction funds. And that was the point I was making earlier is that if the President were to say we are going to use military construction funds to say increase the perimeter around a base in (INAUDIBLE), around the base in Syria, nobody would even say anything about it. We have 4,000 troops on the border right now. And as a result of that mission, they need to secure those areas where they are patrolling.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WHITFIELD: All right. With me now is Lynn Sweet, Washington bureau chief for the "Chicago Sun Times," Sabrina Siddiqui is the politics reporter for "the Guardian" and Michael Zeldin, a former federal prosecutor and a CNN legal analyst. Good to see all you.

All right. So Michael, you heard, you know, Stephen Miller's argument there talking about the ways in which the, you know, emergency declaration should be used and has been since 1976. So there have been 58 used in all, most of them pertaining to foreign countries from Yemen, you know, to Sudan and even Russia and domestic including 9/11.

But how does this securing of the border, which is the argument of the White House right now, how does that fall into these arguments?

MICHAEL ZELDIN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: It depends on your political perspective. The reality is, I think, that the President under the national emergency act has the power to make this declaration. That's within his authority. Congress then has 15 days to respond. They can issue a resolution of disapproval if it has to pass both houses for it to then go to the President for a veto or signature. If it's vetoed then Congress can override it. If they don't override it, then it will go to the courts and in all likelihood to challenge the question that was raised by Mr. Wallace on the Sunday morning show about whether this violates the appropriation clauses under article I of the constitution.

WHITFIELD: By going around Congress after they have already voted on whether money should be allocated or not.

So, you know, Democrats have been threatening, you know, to file these lawsuits. And today California's attorney general guaranteed a court filing. Listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Mr. Attorney general, let me ask you, can you say definitely California will be filing a lawsuit? And when that will happen?

XAVIER BECERRA (D), CALIFORNIA ATTORNEY GENERAL: Martha, definitely and imminently.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: And imminently Monday nothing will stop you?

BECERRA: No reason. We are prepared. We knew something like this might happen. And with our sister state partners we are ready to go.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WHITFIELD: So Lynn, you know, this is one of many lawsuits the President is likely to face. And, you know, the President has already said that he is expecting, you know, the lowercases -- courts rather to rule on it, and it possibly going all the way up to the Supreme Court. It seems as though the President is banking on hoping that the Supreme Court might see things in his favor.

LYNN SWEET, WASHINGTON BUREAU, CHICAGO SUN-TIMES: That's true. And no matter how many lawsuits are filed, they will end up being consolidated in one case before the Supreme Court. It will be interesting to see if the Supreme Court considers this emergency issue an emergency for them to handle.

But this is in coming in the context then of not one but two places where Congress can react. One by being supportive in some way or the other or not criticizing outright the lawsuits that have been and will be turned, and also to get this issue of this resolution of disapproval I think it will come first, it will be dramatic. And it will give Trump a choice of whether or not he will veto it. Because if the House passes it, it will go first and then I believe the Senate has to take it up. It's not one of these measures that McConnell can bury I believe. And if that's the case then it will be interesting to see if there's a vote to send it to the White House because then Trump will have to -- we know how the story ends, right? Everyone -- he will declare victory no matter what, but maybe just maybe it will take some Republicans to say, you know, Mr. President let's let Congress do its job and you do your job, and, you know, we'll get this thing built just not under an emergency declaration.

WHITFIELD: So Sabrina, how would it look if it makes it as far as the Senate?

SABRINA SIDDIQUI, POLITICS REPORTER, THE GUARDIAN: Well, that's a big question. Because you have had Republicans express skepticism over the President declaring a national emergency for some time now. They have spoken publicly how they believe this sets a dangerous precedent. Where what's to now stop a future Democratic President from declaring, for example, a national emergency on climate change to pursue environmental policy or on gun violence to enforce stricter gun laws. But the question is whether or not they are going to follow up those words with concrete action.

So that's why this issue will certainly be put out in the courts, but Democrats also in tandem want to move forward this resolution of disapproval. Because that would really force Republicans to go On the Record with actual action that could curtail the President's authority.

And it's also worth noting the President himself has said that he could have built this wall over time. He has openly suggested that it's a political move because he didn't get what he wanted out of his funding fight. So it's also an open ended question as to whether that's going to undermine his authority as the courts weigh the legally of his decision.

[14:10:38] WHITFIELD: Well, you have to wonder what kind of signals are already being sent immediately after the President's announcement. At least six Republicans including, you know, high profile ones, including Senator Collins who said, you know, this is regrettable, not a good idea that he has done that. It is regrettable.

So I wonder, you know, Lynn, if that's kind of given a green light or an indicator that there just might be more Republicans particularly in the Senate who are willing to show their disapproval.

SWEET: Well, there's two ways of showing it. One, if there's just a lack of a majority to embrace -- you need a super majority just to approve it and I believe two thirds to override veto. I might be a little rusty on this, forgive me, everyone.

But the point being, you will probably need more Republicans onboard to really send a message to the President because the names you have so far are what I think President Trump would consider the usual suspects. So they could vote in the way they do, but I don't know if it will have the impact that you might have politically if other Republican senators got onboard. Because we do know that the President was able to pressure the Senate leader Mitch McConnell into saying that he approved, and he backed Trump on this emergency declaration. WHITFIELD: So Michael, do you see it's likely to make it all the way

to the Supreme Court? Because it certainly sound like it there, from the President in the rose garden, he is hoping that will be the case.

ZELDIN: Well, I'm not sure what the politics of that desire is on his part. I know this, that there are two sort of challenges here that will be available or multiple parties have various cases they could bring. The first is, is the President within his legal right to declare a national emergency? And then secondly, if he is in his rights to do so, when they start appropriating money or moving money previously appropriated for other things to fund the wall, which is the need that he assesses for this emergency, whether those uses of funds will be lawful.

So you have got the two parts to this thing, the declaration and then the funding. And I think it will be in the courts for a long time. And if we see this following the, you know, sort of path of the Muslim ban, you get a stay of the court of any proceedings until it's resolved. So this could take a while before it gets resolved fillings. The Supreme Court hit the Muslim ban about a year or more to get finally resolved.

So, I mean, in some sense there's an exercise in sort of showmanship here but not reality. If this thing is really not going to go forward at least for the next 18 months, so we'll see.

WHITFIELD: And Sabrina, how concerned might Republicans be about how all of this spills over into 2020?

SIDDIQUI: Well, I think there's a great deal of concern particularly because they for the longest time have warned about overreach, and that was a big criticism they made of President Obama when he took executive action on immigration. But at the same time they have been very reticent to take on this President, and for the most part they have lined up behind him as he pursues what is very draconian agenda on immigration.

I think the bottom line, thought, as the battle plays out in the courts and is also plays out in the eyes of the public is that the President has not successfully built the case that there is in fact the true emergency at the border. The rate of illegal immigration has fallen dramatically over the course of a decade. In fact, last year the number of undocumented immigrants in the U.S. hit a 12-year low. There are numerous studies that also show that immigrants are actually less likely to commit violent crime than the native born population. But a lot this really has to do with the politics around immigration, which is one of the most polarizing issues facing this country. So I think both sides are going to try and use it to their advantage, and we don't yet know how that's going be resolved in the 2020 election.

WHITFIELD: All right. We will leave it there for now.

Sabrina Siddiqui, Lynn Sweet, Michael Zeldin, thanks so much.

SWEET: Thank you.

ZELDIN: Thanks, Fred.

WHITFIELD: All right. Still ahead, all eyes are on "Empire" star Jussie Smollett as police uncover new evidence they say shows the actor orchestrated his own racist homophobic attack.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:19:06] WHITFIELD: Welcome back.

Authorities say they have new evidence suggesting actor Jussie Smollett staged a hate crime assault against himself. The star of FOX's "Empire" is denying the allegations, but law enforcement sources tell CNN that Chicago police believe Smollett paid two men to orchestrate the attack. Smollett initially told authorities the men yelled out racial and homophobic slurs and put a rope around his neck. The men are now cooperating with the investigation.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GLORIA SCHMIDT, ATTORNEY FOR MEN ARRESTED AND RELEASED IN SMOLLETT CASE: At the end of the day as I said before innocence prevails, right? My guys are walking home. They are not charged. They are not suspects in this case.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WHITFIELD: Chicago police want to speak with Smollett again as soon as possible.

CNN's Ryan Young is in Chicago. So what more is being learned here?

RYAN YOUNG, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: So much this, Fred. Two law enforcement sources with knowledge of the investigation tells CNN that Chicago police believe Jussie Smollett paid two men to orchestrate the assault late last month.

The men who were brothers were taken into custody Wednesday night and released without charges Friday after police cited discovery of new evidence. Sources tell CNN that the two men are now cooperating fully with law enforcement and Smollett told authorities he was attacked early January 29th by two men who were yelling out racial and homophobic slurs. He said one attacker put a rope around his neck and poured an unknown chemical substance on him.

Smollett also told authorities that one of the attackers shouted out this is Maga country during the assault. The sources told CNN there are records that show the two brothers purchased the rope found around Smollett's neck at a hardware store in Chicago. Now police tell us that one of the brothers has appeared on the show in "Empire."

And in a statement to CNN last night, Smollett's attorney wrote in part, as the victim of a hate crime who has cooperated fully with police investigation Jussie Smollett is angered and devastated by recent reports that perpetrators and the individuals he is familiar with that he has now been further victimized by the claims to these alleged perpetrators that Jussie played a role in his own attack. Nothing is further from the truth and anyone claiming otherwise is lying.

Smollett gave his first detailed account of what he says was a hate crime against him in an interview with Good Morning America that aired Thursday. And in that interview, Smollett identified the person of interest as the attackers, the men that we now know are cooperating with police. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

[14:21:37] UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Have you seen that image and do you believe they could possibly be the attackers?

JUSSIE SMOLLETT, ACTOR/SINGER: I do.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: What is it about their size or what do you feel it could possibly be?

SMOLLETT: Because I was there. For me when it was released I was like, OK, we are getting somewhere. I don't have any doubt in my mind that that's them. Never did.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

YOUNG: There are so many twist and turns. Late last night Chicago police did confirm to us the information received from the brothers has in fact quote "shifted the trajectory of the investigation," adding they have reached out to the actor's attorney to request a follow-up interview. So at this point they are not talking about whether or not he is a victim or not, but they do want to talk to him again, Fred. They have to see how this plays out for the rest of the week.

WHITFIELD: All right. Ryan, and really quickly. If the tables have turned and if it appears that Chicago police are going on their instinct that indeed Smollett would have orchestrated, does that mean that he could potentially be facing charges? If it gets to that --

YOUNG: There's so many questions in that. With 12 detectives working on it, he hasn't really signed the complaint against the two men. So, so many legal questions in how they would play for with this. You have to think with all the man power they used on this one, he would probably face something. But we don't know what that is right now because we don't know what his part is. So you have to see how this plays out, what they can prove and what they could take the court. So, so many more questions in terms of what could happen next.

WHITFIELD: All right. Ryan Young, thank you so much.

All right. Still to come, President Trump presents America's allies with a bold ultimatum for the ISIS fighters the U.S. captured in Syria on trial or the U.S. will release them.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:27:53] WHITFIELD: President Trump is delivering an ultimatum to European allies. Telling them to take back more than 800 ISIS fighters captured by the U.S. in Syria and put them on trial or else the U.S. will be forced to release them. Trump also adding the U.S. is pulling out after 100 percent caliphate victory, his words. Trump has said U.S. forces could be redeployed in Syria if ISIS or another terror group regains strength.

CNN's senior international correspondent Ben Wedeman is live for us in eastern Syria.

So, Ben, is ISIS still very much a force in Syria? Is the caliphate 100 percent gone?

BEN WEDEMAN, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: No, it's not. In fact, the caliphate or rather ISIS as a terrorist insurgency is very much alive. Yesterday morning at 10:00 local time very near to here there was an attack it's believed by an ISIS sleeper cell that left two soldiers with the U.S. backed Syrian democratic forces dead. And that's just the latest in a series of such attacks that have been going in north eastern Syria now for well over six months.

And as far as that last enclave of land still held by ISIS, it's now down to just one half square mile with about 1,000 people inside. Some fighters but most of them civilians being held as human shields. But nonetheless even though they control such a small area, the battle isn't over yet.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

WEDEMAN (voice-over): In its dying days ISIS fights to the bitter end. The small remote, otherwise unremarkable Syrian town on the (INAUDIBLE) on the banks of the (INAUDIBLE) river where it is now finally cornered, reduced to a pinprick shadow of its former self.

By a combination of Kurdish and Arab soldiers, backed by U.S., British, and French Special Forces. And unrelenting coalition airstrikes captured in this exclusive video shot by freelance camera men Gabriel Shaeen (ph). It has been hard going with repeated ISIS counter attacks using their usual tactics, booby traps, suicide car bombs and human shields.

And now at the end after years of war ISIS' foes have scores to settle. Syrian democratic forces commander Habad Simco (ph) has fought ISIS known here as Daj across northern Syria.

Daj is finished, he says. We are avenging our martyrs. It's black banner now in his hands.

The battle like the bombing continues around the clock. These Arab tribal fighters preparing to take open ground on the edge of town.

[14:00:59] UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (SPEAKING FOREIGN LANGUAGE)

WEDEMAN: The commander gives the final orders before they move out. An armored bulldozer designed to take the impact of improvised explosive devices leads the way and the troops follow.

Flares illuminate the skies over (INAUDIBLE). The sounds of battle echo in the distance. The final battle is in its final days.

Ben Wedeman, CNN, eastern Syria.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

WEDEMAN: And commanders say that they will be able to declare victory in this battle in the next few days. But it's just a battle and this is a war - Fredricka.

WHITFIELD: All right. Ben Wedeman, thank you so much in Syria.

All right, next, race in America. Democratic Presidential hopefuls are forced to answer questions about their race and gender. Is there a different standard for some candidates?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:36:13] WHITFIELD: Welcome back.

Five women and people of color are in the 2020 Democratic Presidential field, making it the most diverse in history. And sadly it also means it's attracting age-old criticisms based on sex and race. We have been discussing how the five women are already being held to a different standard than men, having to field comments on their appearance, how they sound or if they are too mean.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: One of the (INAUDIBLE) in using your tough boss as you know there are several stories have come out in the last week, high staff turnover in the Senate. What do you think is fair about that criticism, and what have you learned from it in.

SEN. AMY KLOBUCHAR (D), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Well, first of all, I love my staff. I wouldn't be where I am and we wouldn't be able to pass all those bills and do all that work if we didn't have great staff. I am tough. I push people. That is true. But my point is that I have high expectations for myself. I have high expectations for the people that work for me and I have high expectations for this country.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WHITFIELD: And this week we are examining how candidates are managing questions about race.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

REP. JOHN DELANEY (D), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: I don't have any advantage running for President as a white man, which I would have across history, right. So the way I look at it right now is I think the Democratic Party voters are going to elect the person who they think is the best leader and they are not going to think about all this other stuff.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Another meme is Kamala Harris is not African- American, her parents were immigrants from India and Jamaica, and she was raised in Canada, not the United States. And it's a fact, that's what the meme said.

SEN. KAMALA HARRIS (D), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: So I was born in Oakland and raised in the United States except for the years that I was in high school in Montreal, Canada. And look, this is the same thing they did to Barack.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes.

HARRIS: This is not new to us. And so I think that we know what they are trying to do. They are trying to do what we know has been happening over the last two years which is powerful voices trying to sow hate and division among us. And so we need to recognize when we are being played.

HOWARD SCHULTZ, FORMER STARBUCKS CEO: As somebody who grew up in a very diverse background as a young boy in the projects, I didn't see color as a young boy and I honestly don't see color now.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

WHITFIELD: OK. So all very different examples with a common denominator, race.

Joining me now, Cornell William Brooks, former president and CEO of the NAACP.

Good to see you, Cornell.

CORNELL WILLIAM BROOKS, FORMER PRESIDENT/CEO, NAACP: It is good to see you.

WHITFIELD: All right. So let's just try and go down some of the list here, you know. What is Delaney getting at here? Does he, you know, does this sort of anxiety among voters, you know, that instills, you know, some resentment?

CORNELL: Well, I think we need to be clear about this. The any predictions about the death and demise of male or race privilege in the presidential election are premature and greatly exaggerated. There are approximately 20 or so would-be presidential candidates in the wings. Most of them are white and male. So there's still some advantage to being male and probably some advantage -- not probably. There is an advantage to being white.

But what's important here is we are fielding the most diverse field, if you will, in American history in terms of African-Americans, in terms of one Hindu running, in terms of women running. That is in fact a good thing. And it allows people to focus on the character, the competence, the abilities and track record of those who are stepping forward to assume the highest office in the land. That's in fact a good thing. But make no mistake our race is always both text and subtext particularly in this campaign.

WHITFIELD: And then you have got, you know, Kamala Harris, Julian Castro. They are going through something, you know, collectively similar. Having to justify their experiences of being either black enough or Latino enough. You heard Harris, you know, on this week's breakfast club, you know, radio show. And then it was last October actually before declaring his candidacy that Julian Castro addressed how often it does come up. Listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

[14:40:22] JULIAN CASTRO (D), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: There's no one way to categorize like whether you are Latino or Latina. It's not just do you fluently speak Spanish or, you know, or do you have brown skin, you know. People come in all different colors from different countries and their national origins and ability to speak Spanish. And I think the problem with a lot of even the political mainstream media is that they tried to -- they tend to reduce it to that.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WHITFIELD: So this, you know, this criticism of not being Latino enough, not being black enough, who is this helping?

BROOKS: I'm not sure who is it helping. I can tell you who it's hurting. It hurts Americans when we reduce our race ethnicity to two dimensions. The fact of the matter is people of color are as diverse as people who are white. There's no such thing as racial or ethnic street cred. So Julian Castro or senator Kamala Harris or Cory Booker, whatever the case may be, these people bring to the electorate diverse experiences, life experiences. And so, this whole idea of trying to establish some -- a racial or ethnic street cred is frankly beside the moment. Particularly at a moment in which this country is deeply divided based on race and ethnicity. And at a moment in this country where we have so much hate, so much division, and we need real leaders.

WHITFIELD: Yes, it's troubling because it only makes the divide that much greater because, you know, the kind of criticism that we are talking about presumes there's only one black experience, there's only one African-American experience, one Latino, you know, experience. It doesn't necessarily offer any clarity here. It just seems an opportunity to further divide. Diminishing though.

BROOKS: That's right. And the fact that Kamala Harris is a woman with a record as a prosecutor who has run and won a statewide elected office in California, who is a senator. The fact Cory Booker led a major American city, he is a senator, a road scholar. Julian Castro is a member of the cabinet. These people bring real leadership skills and a real track record.

WHITFIELD: And they probably welcome. If you are going to evaluate me, evaluate me on my character on my track record, but you know, the lowest common denominator here just on, you know, what you see? Race?

BROOKS: That's exactly it. Particular a week in which the President has declared a national state of emergency that's really an emergency declaration with respect to race and ethnicity, in terms of division between those who subscribe to xenophobia and those who have a vision of America that is inclusive. These candidates are trying to speak over that divide, over the discord to where the country needs to go, and that's what we need to focus on.

WHITFIELD: Yes. I guess it's really the easy common denominator.

So, you know, Howard Schultz, and then, you know, it may not have been his intention, but what is the interpretation when somebody says, you know, I don't see color. I'm color-blind. How is that received?

BROOKS: It suggests a kind of racial naivety and naivety with respect to American history. I'm not sure which projects that Mr. Schultz grew up in, but there is no corner of America where people don't see color in terms of our history, the challenges that we faced, the division we face, but also the moral possibilities that lie before us. So to not see color is to not see the richness, the diversity, the heritage of this country. And so I think I have a sense of what he was trying to say. But to look at America fully and well and perceptively means to see all that we represent in terms of race and ethnicity and the heritage of this country.

WHITFIELD: Yes. Or to even recognize or understand the experience that comes with the diversity of our ethnicities.

BROOKS: Yes, that's exactly it. And the fact of the matter is, the person who succeeds President Trump and President Obama needs to come to grip with the fact that this country is deeply divided when we have hate crimes having risen three years in a row, in the wake of Charlottesville, in the wake of the tree of life synagogue massacre, in the wake of all the divisions that divide this country, we need a President who understands that race and ethnicity are something that we should be proud of and lay claim to. But those are also sources of division that we need to bridge.

[14:45:17] WHITFIELD: All right. Thank you so much Cornell William Brooks. Thanks for being with us.

BROOKS: Thank you.

WHITFIELD: And of course you want to stay with CNN for all things 2020. Senator Amy Klobuchar holding a town hall event in New Hampshire tomorrow, and CNN's Don Lemon moderates and airs tomorrow night 10:00 eastern only on CNN.

Still ahead, crisis in Haiti. CNN is on the ground as hospitals are crippled from a shortage of medicine and doctors amid violent protests. We will take you there live, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:50:14] WHITFIELD: Welcome back.

It took more than a week of violent protests in Haiti before the country's prime minister finally broke his silence. In a televised address last night Haiti's prime minister called for calm and promised to root out the corruption that many claim is at the heart of the unrest. More than 100 Canadian tourists stranded by the violence arrived back in Montreal last night after being rescued by a Canadian airline.

Meantime in the capital Port-au-Prince people are growing more desperate as basic supplies run out and hospitals are unable to provide basic care to patients.

I want to bring in CNN's Sam Kiley. He visited one of the hospitals and he is joining us right now from Port-au-Prince.

So Sam, describe the conditions. What's going on?

SAM KILEY, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, Fred, the nearly ten days of rioting have really crippled an already shattered economy here in Haiti. And I think lot of energy has gone out of those riots. There have been attempts to get demonstrations off the ground today that so far if you excuse the pun haven't caught fire as people go out to get cooking gas and water.

But there is still a sense of siege, particularly in the biggest hospital here in Haiti that has begun to lose patients because it simply can't get access to medical supplies. This is what we found on the ground.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

KILEY (voice-over): This is the road to the capital's biggest hospital. More than a week of rioting has left it desolate. Its grounds are home to livestock. Protests mark the second anniversary of Jovenel Moise's presidency with demands across Haiti that he step down.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (SPEAKING FOREIGN LANGUAGE)

KILEY: Dr. Joseph tells me that most of the patients, hundreds of them, have fled. It's easy to see why. This is your intensive care unit?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes. We have got nothing.

KILEY: You really have nothing. There's no machinery. One oxygen.

The doctor tells me that the hospital was crippled by shortages before the riot. Now it's also short of patients. This is the State University hospital of Haiti, and it's been cut off from the city by riots.

There's no food here or water. No medicines either.

This is Gillen. He was getting drugs. Now he is just stuck here, the doctor says.

Next to him is madam sandy (ph), her catheter drains into a washbowl.

DR. WISLET ANDRE, STATE UNIVERSITY OF HAITI HOSPITAL: We are blocked. We don't have drugs because all the area is blocked. This is why we exist. And it is the reason why you can do what you have to do. It is like you don't exist. KILEY: And when already poor people feel their very existence is

doubted by their leaders they are likely to try to prove otherwise.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

KILEY: Now, Fred, in order to avoid that backlash, the sources in the President's office say they are trying to unblock some of the supplies that have been stuck in the port. And they have spread police around the country to try to bring a level of stability. But whether or not that really holds over the longer term is going to be very difficult to see because there are increasing tensions now inside the executive between the President and the prime minister who as we heard at the top of the program is threatening to root out corruption. And who knows where that will lead, Fred.

WHITFIELD: Sam Kiley, in Port-au-Prince, thank you so much.

All right. Next, disgraced former U.S. congressman Anthony Wiener has just been transferred from prison to a halfway house. Details straight ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:58:21] WHITFIELD: We are learning today the disgraced former congressman Anthony Wiener is now serving time in a so-called transitional facility after being moved from federal prison. You may remember the 54-year-old former congressman had been sentenced to 21 months in jail for sending sexual text messages to an underage girl who was 15 at the time. He is not due to be released until May.

I want to bring in CNN's Alison Kosik.

So Alison, what do we know about this transitional facility?

ALISON KOSIK, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Fredricka, we have learned that this has happened in the past day or so. That Anthony wiener has been moved to a halfway house in Brooklyn, but he is still in federal custody. So this isn't really something that's too uncommon when someone is scheduled to be released soon. And as you said he is scheduled to be released on May 14th.

So the big question, how much movement will he have in this transitional facility? According to the bureau of prisons, he is considered an inmate and would have to have an authorized to leave and there are sign out procedures for approved activities like seeking employment, working, counselling, visiting or taking part in recreational programs.

Now, during this time the inmate's location and movements are constantly monitored. So what this essentially is, Fredricka, is it supervised environment where inmates can gradually rebuild their ties to the community.

Now Wiener is also required to register as a sex offender and participate an outpatient sexual offender treatment program. Those orders were given by the judge when his sentence was handed down -- Fredricka.

WHITFIELD: All right. Alison Kosik, thank you so much.

We have got so much more straight ahead in the NEWSROOM. And it all starts right now.

All right. Thank you again for joining me this Sunday. I'm Fredricka Whitfield.

New legal battle lines being drawn following the President's declaration of a national emergency at the southern border.