Return to Transcripts main page

CNN NEWSROOM

Trump Accuses "The New York Times" Treason; Impeachment Support Up In New Poll; U.S. Allies Disagree On Iran's Role Over Tanker Attacks; A Fox News Poll Has Trump Behind Biden; Excessive Force Over Shoplifting Incident In Phoenix, Arizona; Court Martial For A Navy SEAL; Hope Hicks To Testify In Congress; Elie Honig Answers Legal Questions On "Cross-Exam;" Nursing Mother Ordered To Leave Public Pool; U.S. Women's Soccer Team Advance In The World Cup. Aired 5-6p ET

Aired June 16, 2019 - 17:00   ET

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


[17:00:00]

ANA CABRERA, CNN HOST: You're live in the CNN NEWSROOM. I'm Ana Cabrera in New York. Thank you for being with us on this Father's Day. President Trump spent the early part of Father's Day golfing with Senator Lindsey Graham but not before laying down a barrage of fiery tweets.

In one, he openly considers staying past a second term. Just pause for a moment. Let that sink in and remember that this is not the first time he's made such a remark. But most of his morning rage was directed at the media especially "The New York Times."

He called their reports about the U.S. targeting Russia's electrical power grid a virtual act of treason. This is coming after a "Times" story this weekend detailing the placement of potentially crippling malware in Russian systems.

The malware has been placed as a depth that has never been attempted before, and it was reportedly done without President Trump being briefed about it in detail out of concern that the president might end the operation or discuss it with other foreign officials including Russian president Vladimir Putin.

I spoke with "The New York Times" David Sanger who broke this story.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DAVID SANGER, NATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT, NEW YORK TIMES: What makes this particularly interesting though is we know from other reporting in other cases that the chairman of the Joint Chiefs, the intelligence officials and others are reluctant to give very in-depth briefings to the president on issues related to Russia for the uncertainty about how he'll react.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CABRERA: CNN's Boris Sanchez joins us from the White House. Boris, why is the president reacting so strongly to this "New York

Times" report calling it treasonous even though top officials knew about the plan before the story hit?

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Yes, that's a great question, Ana. Look, President Trump has repeatedly said that he wants the United States to have a good relationship with Russia. That he wants a good relationship with Vladimir Putin.

That you have to imagine is part of the reason he hasn't publicly condemned or confronted Vladimir Putin, though he's had many chances to over Russia's election meddling in 2016.

Really, one of the most important key aspects, key details of this reporting is that for years, going back to 2015, U.S. officials have warned that Russia has been trying to infiltrate the United States power grid, hacking into power plants and pipelines trying to install the same kind of crippling implants that could devastate the American power grid that the United States is now attempting to install in Russia.

So, this isn't really an unforced sort of aggression by the United States. It's the United States responding in kind to Russian aggression. Why that would anger the president, still unclear, Ana.

CABRERA: OK, Boris Sanchez at the White House for us, thank you.

Cyber warfare is nothing new, just one more arena for espionage as nations compete for global supremacy. Objectives can range from low level propaganda efforts to spying on military or political secrets. We've also seen aggressive attempts to disrupt power grids or economic systems. It is no secret that America has been involved in these kinds of activities for years.

CNN Senior National Security Analyst, Lisa Monaco, joins us now. She knows the world well. During the Obama administration, she was assistant to the president for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism.

Lisa, there's back and forth, each country sort of counter-maneuvering with cyber attacks. So what's the point of an attack like this if Russia really already knows what the U.S. is up to?

LISA MONACO, CNN SENIOR NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: Well, good to be with you, Ana. Look, it's true that we have been engaged for some time now in low intensity conflict really, nation states making move and counter-move in cyberspace. And so in one sense, the reporting that we're talking about today from "The New York Times" is in line with that and is emblematic of that low intensity conflict.

But what I think is notable here and what I took note of in this reporting is, if it is indeed true and we should caveat things here for the audience, which is to say "The New York Times" report itself was careful to say that many classified details were not part of its reporting. They did not know classified details which is I think, from a national security perspective, a good thing. But if it is an escalation in terms of the U.S. capabilities and

operations offensively into the Russian systems, it is significant because what we're talking about here is the power grid. Civilian infrastructure and what we in the United States have termed our own power grid as critical infrastructure.

And for many, many years, the United States has been of the view that an attack on civilian critical infrastructure that could result in kinetic effect, physical effect, would be against the types of norms that we've been trying to create internationally.

[17:05:00] CABRERA: So now that this information is out there for the public to learn and Russia obviously, probably already aware of some of it, but now very much aware of what's going on, what kind of retaliation would you expect from Russia?

MONACO: Well, look, this is always the concern here. In one sense, I think it is very good to be able to demonstrate that we have capability to do the kind of signaling, which is what I think you're seeing with this story here and with the fact that it seems the National Security Council was of the view that it was OK for this story to go forward. That's what the story itself said.

So, it clearly seems to be an effort to signal to the Russians that we have this capability. But you always have to calibrate that type of signaling and showing that ability to impose cost with the danger of what we used to refer to in the Situation Room as an escalatory cycle.

The danger here is that Russia either misinterprets or believes that we are going to take an action and then escalates to a greater, potentially more destructive action on its part, and so that is the concern, calibration while also signaling.

CABRERA: Is that why this type of action wasn't taken during the Obama years?

MONACO: Well look, I'm not going to comment on specific operations, but I will say is that it was always the view when I was in the Obama administration and when I was part of national security meetings on these types of topics, that we wanted to be able to use all instruments of national power.

We wanted to be able to hold cyber -- malicious cyber actors to account. And to do so, however, consistent with international law, consistent with calibrating the danger of an escalatory cycle because you have to remember, the United States itself is particularly vulnerable because we are the most connected nation on earth.

CABRERA: What's your take that the president hasn't been informed of these types of moves?

MONACO: Look, I think we have to separate two things here, Ana. One is whether or not the particular operation required as a matter of law or authority the president to sign off. And the other is a matter of policy. And whenever you have such a significant, if it is unprecedented move like this, and if there is a danger as there may be here of escalation, then what you want to do is make sure that there is a coordinated strategy.

That all the elements of the government that need to be in the room discussing this and witting and planning for potential responses that they're all marching in the same direction. And that's part of having a unified approach and a careful strategy that's dictated from the top. And what it says to me is that that strategy may not be in place.

CABRERA: Lisa Monaco, really good to have you with us. Thank you very much.

MONACO: Thank you.

CABRERA: I want to bring in a reporter and co-author of "Politico's Playbook," Daniel Lippman and Washington bureau chief for the "Chicago Sun Times" Lynn Sweet.

Lynn, I want to go back to the president's reaction to this reporting. He's calling it treason while also saying there's no operation, that this reporting is false. Does the president's reaction reaffirm why perhaps these officials didn't want the president to know necessarily exactly what they were up to?

LYNN SWEET, WASHINGTON BUREAU CHIEF, CHICAGO SUN TIMES: Well, of course it does because Trump doesn't take into account in his tweet that the story made very careful to make the point that they did go to Trump administration national security advisers to run the information they had by them.

So if President Trump thought that there was something not true and it's fake, the reporting shows he may not be in a position to know if it's true or not, which is another important point that we should make here.

CABRERA: Daniel, take a look at just how many acting positions there are right now in this administration. There is an acting Chief of Staff, acting Defense Secretary, acting Department of Homeland Security Secretary, among others. Meanwhile, we have tensions with Iran escalating. We are ramping up cyber attacks against Russia. Who is overseeing running all of this?

DANIEL LIPPMAN, REPORTER& CO-AUTHOR OF POLITICO'S PLAYBOOK: So it looks like John Bolton is the most powerful mass security official in the U.S. government. I had a story a couple of days ago about how he's running circles around acting defense secretary Pat Shanahan where he and the National Security Council staff, they are actually calling into lower level Pentagon officials asking for information, telling them what to do.

And that's a total violation of the command structure where those military officials are supposed to answer to their bosses at the Pentagon, not to the White House. And so, you know, John Bolton actually talked about these types of operations in a speech on Tuesday, which was referenced in "The New York Times" piece. And so they've been sending hints that they are on the offense.

[17:09:59] And they want to brag to the American public that they are more tougher on Russia than the Obama administration because they know the optics that Trump received Russian help during the campaign and has been publicly pretty, you know, soft on Putin.

CABRERA: There's some interesting polling out. We're going to dive into it deeper, but I want to at least hit in this segment this polling out today that shows support for impeachment may be growing. Lynn, 10 percent -- up 10 percent in the last month, in this particular poll, now at 17 percent. In May it was -- it is 27 percent now, in May it was 17 percent in the same poll. Is this what Pelosi has been waiting for?

SWEET: Well, yes or no. I don't think Nancy Pelosi is waiting for a poll to let her know what to do since you do have the immovable Senate. There's not going to be a conviction and a senate trial. And again, people forget that it's a two-step process. The House has impeachment. It does not mean removal from office.

Now when I look at that poll, it also -- yes, there's a trend that more people, mostly all Democrats. White men over the age of 50 are almost all -- who are Republican, are almost all against it. You still have 48 percent of the nation then who is not on board.

What speaker Pelosi is looking for is an obvious path forward to do the best job possible to make sure that Democrats retain the house in 2020. And she is not convinced that impeachment is the road to go. And I don't think, if she changes her mind it will be because of a poll. It will be because that there might be more information out there and more public education, which could translate into polling.

CABRERA: And we know based on the Mueller report, of course, that President Trump tried to fire Mueller. We know that firmer White House Counsel Don McGahn, was ordered or asked to do that. But the president says that's a lie, and here's why.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I wasn't going to fire. You know why? Because I watched Richard Nixon go around firing everybody and that didn't work out too well.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CABRERA: Daniel, what do you make of that defense?

LIPPMAN: It's a defense that kind of, you know, is not representative of reality because he talked many times internally about trying to remove Jeff Sessions. He wanted Rod Rosenstein gone. He wanted to basically amputate the investigation before it got to him. And so he, you know, skated off, you know, scot-free from this investigation.

But the facts do not match with what he's actually saying, which is that he didn't tell Don McGahn that. Don McGahn is a Republican lawyer through and through, very conservative. He says, you know, Trump says he wants to, you know, McGahn is trying to make himself look good.

But McGahn is only trying to tell the truth because he knew that if you don't tell the truth to Mueller, then they can get you on perjury. And so -- and Trump didn't even agree to a sit-down interview and didn't answer questions on obstruction. And so he tells -- he told Stephanopoulos that he did, but that's not reflective in the report.

CABRERA: All right. Stay with me. We have much more to discuss. Lynn and Daniel, we appreciate you being here.

We're also continuing to follow the attacks on two tankers in the Gulf of Oman. The U.S. has pointed the finger squarely at Iran, even releasing this video allegedly showing Iranian forces removing an unexploded mine from one of the ships. While some U.S. allies, including Britain agree that Iran is to blame. Others, including Germany, say more evidence is needed.

Today, however, the Trump administration says it's weighing a full- range of options. Here's Secretary of State Mike Pompeo.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MIKE POMPEO, U.S. SECRETARY OF STATE: The last 40 days we've seen a number of activities, not just these past two, but four other commercial ships which challenged the international norms of Freedom of Navigation. The United States is considering full range of options.

We have briefed the president a couple of times. We'll continue to keep him updated. We are confident we can take a set of actions that can restore deterrence which is our mission set.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CABRERA: Republican Senator Tom Cotton, went even further saying the attacks against Norwegian and Japanese ships warrant a military response.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. TOM COTTON (R-AR): These unprovoked attacks warrant to retaliatory military strike.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Are you -- you're comparing the tanker we're in the 80's to now and saying that that's the kind of military response you want to see?

COTTON: We can make a military response in a time and a manner of our choosing but, yes, unprovoked attacks on commercial shipping warrant a military strike against the Islamic Republic of Iran.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CABRERA: So that's the backdrop as President Trump gets ready to officially kick off his 2020 re-election bid this weekend in Florida. We've got a new poll showing head-to-head match-ups with Trump. Should the president be worried about Sanders, Biden or other contenders?

[17:15:00] And we'll tell you how the Trump campaign is now responding to the leak of less than stellar internal polling. Details ahead. (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CABRERA: President Trump is now just two days away from the official kickoff of his 2020 re-election campaign. And a new Fox News poll finds the 73-year-old president is falling behind a couple of other candidates also in their 70s, Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders.

Take a look. This is a potential Biden-Trump match-up. The former vice president has a 10-point lead, Biden 49 percent to Trump's 39 percent. Also, and a potential Trump-Sanders matchup, Sanders leads, 49 percent to Trump's 40 percent.

In that same poll, it's a much closer race between Trump and other 2020 contenders like Elizabeth Warren, Pete Buttigieg and Kamala Harris. Lynn Sweet and Daniel Lippman are back with us now. Daniel, at this stage of the game, how much do poll numbers like these influence strategy?

LIPPMAN: Well, in terms of influencing strategy, the Trump campaign has been -- they have had their plan for the last 2.5 years since he was first elected, which means raising a ton of money, running in a more conventional campaign than they did last time around.

Their HQ is in Arlington, Virginia, with tons of people that they've been hiring up compared to their ramshackle campaign last time around.

[17:19:55] I would say about those poll numbers, they do show that those leads for Democrats but there are still a lot of Americans who support Trump and won't admit it to pollsters because they're embarrassed.

They look at the last couple of years and they don't want -- they can't tell people they support him but in the privacy of their voting booth than they may vote for him.

CABRERA: So do those numbers mean bad news for Trump or should he be worried, Lynn?

SWEET: Well, he should be worried for a lot of other reasons, and that is if the economy changes, if the -- the things that undermine his candidacy are more -- the poll reflects what is happening out there. So, I think if other factors happen, especially in the economy, then he should be even more worried.

What he has as a strength is that he has no Republican primary component of note. There might be somebody who puts a name on a ballot here or there but --

CABRERA: We know Bill Weld is throwing his hat in the ring, but.

SWEET: Right. And you have, you know, people know the name Bernie Sanders and Joe Biden. I am not convinced that is any long-term meaning to it as this election goes on. We're talking a little more than a week before the first two-night Democratic debate.

What this shows is that Trump has not grown since he's been sworn into office. His base hasn't expanded. So, that is what I think his campaign should worry about, that they can't -- they need massive turnout within their own -- within their supporters.

What campaigns usually like to do are find swing voters that they can convince to come on their side. And that's what they're going to have a hard time finding given how President Trump has conducted himself since coming to office.

CABRERA: There's some new reporting we have here at CNN about the Trump campaign planning to fire some of their pollsters after leaks to the media of their internal polling that weren't good numbers for the president. I think about this, Daniel, and it's like, OK, you can fire these people for the leaks but that doesn't change the numbers.

LIPPMAN: Yes. They're shooting the messenger here. And the most striking number that I've seen in recent polls is the percentage of women who support President Trump or their, you know, their approval numbers, 36 percent, which is just terrible numbers for an incumbent.

CABRERA: Especially when we know female voters are more likely to turn out than male voters.

LIPPMAN: They will vote.

SWEET: Especially in the suburbs. That's always where the Republicans need extra votes, in suburban women crossovers.

LIPPMAN: And you saw so many female candidates win last year. And so, by firing these pollsters, that doesn't address the real issues. And you have a president who is not very curious about how his re-election campaign is going. He hasn't asked to look at his campaign re-election budget.

He, you know, approves the songs that are played at the campaign rallies so, but besides that, you know, this is a guy who actually -- he loves doing rallies and so that's why he cares about those details but what about those digital advertising numbers? They're spending tons of money on that.

But there is, I will say, that there is some concern among Democrats that if you have this huge Democratic primary that everyone is fighting each other, who is going to attack President Trump. And so you have some big donors who are trying to get in some ads against him.

SWEET: Could I make another point here? There's really two -- it's a tale two of Trump campaigns. There's the conventional campaign in Arlington, Virginia, in an office building. They've got a great deal on the rent. President Trump should like that.

LIPPMNA: He's a good negotiator.

SWEET: Well, they got a great deal so yes. I'm not sure if he knows it, but I think --

CABRERA: He'd be happy to learn that. SWEET: -- but I happen to know that, but it is conventional. You walk

around there, you see, here's the fund-raising part of the room, here's the constituency. It could be a turn key for any conventional candidate. But then you have Trump running his own asymmetric campaign by twitter and rally.

So, the challenge is to meld those campaigns into a force where he can be re-elected to a second term. The campaign is doing conventional things, taking names, building databases, looking at voter rolls. That's conventional. Trump doesn't do conventional.

CABRERA: Right.

SWEET: We know that. But it means that there's little room for error. Little room for -- if Trump still is the leader and if he's doing messaging by tweet and if every negative thing by him he always says is a lie, this is what I'm looking at.

At what point does it soak into people who bring their common sense to the table. If you're always -- if your defense always is, it's not true, he lied, you didn't understand, fake news, maybe at some point now that the total picture of when Trump talks about things will show more of a spotlight to the man behind it.

[17:24:58] But forgetting the polling, it's the policies too that we're going to have a big impact especially with women voters, especially in a attacks on abortion rights.

CABRERA: All right, Lynn Sweet and Daniel Lippman, we'll leave it there. Thank you both for being in here and great to see you in studio --

SWEET: Yes.

LIPPMAN: Thanks, Ana.

CABRERA: -- since we're always talking through the telly.

SWEET: Here we are.

CABRERA: All right, thanks guys.

In Arizona, I want to show you some new video that has a horrifying moment captured involving one family as police aim their weapons at a pregnant woman and her children. And get this, all over a doll that was allegedly shoplifted. Now, the city of Phoenix is taking action. Details next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CABRERA: Phoenix's mayor is now apologizing after a video has surfaced that's raising a lot of questions about how police treated a Phoenix family and what sparked the confrontation. The cellphone footage shows an officer handcuffing and kicking a man after his 4- year-old daughter allegedly took a doll from a dollar store. The man and his pregnant fiance say they were in the car with their

two young children when an officer confronted them, yelling profanities and threatening to kill them. In the video, you can also see a police officer brandishing a gun as the pregnant woman and her two young daughters get out of the vehicle.

The couple is planning to sue the city for $10 million. CNN's Stephanie Elam joins us now. Stephanie, what else can you tell us about this incident and how police are now responding?

[17:30:00] STEPHANIE ELAM, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Right. Well, Ana, this happened at the end of May. This video just came to light for the Phoenix Police Department on June 11th so that is why we're now seeing this response here.

What we do know happened is that, according to the police report that they have put out, there was a shoplifting incident going on because the store manager called. While that was happening, the store manager then pointed out this car with this family saying that they had taken a doll.

And then they followed them and they are saying that when they did get them and they did stop this family, that the man in the car -- this couple, they are in their early 20s -- said that he had also shoplifted some underwear and tossed it out the window and there was that doll.

The store manager did not prosecute. They were let go at the scene. However, we're still talking about shoplifting and the response involved a gun being drawn against a woman who was five months pregnant at the time as well as her child, their daughter that was in her arms and the other daughter who was walking next to her.

She said -- she actually told CNN -- here name is Iesha Harper. She said, "I really thought he was going to shoot me in front of the kids." So, what she ends up doing and you can see it in the video when you watch the full video.

She gives her children to a stranger, a woman who came out from the apartment complex where this happened, to hold her daughters while they proceeded to handcuff her and put her in the back of a police vehicle. So, all of this, this response is what has people so upset. That if this was about shoplifting, which they knew from the beginning, why was the response so hard?

Now we know that the mayor is saying that they will have body cameras on all of their police officers by August, speeding up that process, and then also having a bit of a town hall on Tuesday, Ana, so that the community can talk about this.

CABRERA: OK, Stephanie Elam, we know you'll stay on top of it. Thanks.

The trial for a Navy SEAL charged with war crimes begins tomorrow as the president has reportedly considered pardoning the man for his crimes. We have a preview of that trial and what to expect, next. [17:35:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CABRERA: It's a case that has divided people in the military and gotten attention from President Trump. The court martial of Navy SEAL Eddie Gallagher begins tomorrow. Gallagher is accused of shooting at civilians and fatally stabbing a wounded ISIS fighter while he was stationed in Iraq. CNN's Nick Watt has details on this controversial case that's been making headlines from the start.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

EDDIE GALLAGHER, U.S. NAVY SEAL: I'm innocent. I love you.

NICK WATT, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): War hero or premeditated murderer? Monday morning Special Operations SEAL Chief, Eddie Gallagher, faces court martial.

TIM PARLATORE, GALLAGHER'S DEFENSE ATTORNEY: This case should terrify every sailor out there on the waterfront right now as to whether they're going to get a fair trial.

WATT (voice-over): Prosecutors say that in 2017, while stationed in Mosul, Gallagher shot civilians, a young girl and an old man and stabbed a wounded ISIS fighter to death, took a photo with the corpse, sent it to friends.

WATT (on camera): So how do you explain the texts that he sent -- the messages sent to people like, I got this one with my hunting knife. I got my knife skills on? How do you explain that?

PARLATORE: That's a joke.

WATT (on camera): What do you mean?

PARLATORE: It's a joke.

WATT (on camera): Like a funny joke?

PARLATORE: To guys in the SEAL teams, yes, it's dark humor.

WATT (voice-over): Gallagher denies all charges on May 30th in a move that reportedly drew gasps in court, was released from pretrial confinement.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: In the case of U.S. v. Gallagher, the only thing you can expect is the unexpected.

WATT (voice-over): he's right. First in an almost unheard of move, Gallagher's comrades turned him in.

ANDREA GALLAGHER, EDDIE GALLAGHER'S WIFE: What is happening here isn't right. And we need help.

WATT (voice-over): Gallagher's wife and brother launched a loud media campaign. SEAN GALLAGHER, EDDIE GALLAGHER'S BROTHER: For something like this to

have been perpetrated against him and his family is nothing less than disgusting.

WATT (voice-over): Fox News host, Pete Hegsith, is vocal on the air --

PETE HEGSITH, FOX NEWS HOST: ISIS, dirt bag.

WATT (voice-over): And according to one source, also privately in the president's ear. Trump has even hinted at a pardon.

TRUMP: We teach them how to be great fighters and then when they fight, sometimes they get really treated very unfairly.

WATT (voice-over): There's a one-minute cell phone video still under seal that the defense claims will prove crucial.

PARLATORE: It's the Iraqi's dragging the half-dead kid around and Chief Gallagher stepping in, clearing everybody out and beginning to assess his injuries to provide treatment. And then it shuts off.

WATT (voice-over): What happened next in Mosul is the crux of this increasingly controversial case. The defense has petitioned for prosecutors and even the judge to be dismissed and the case thrown out after prosecutors were involved in e-mailing tracking software to defense attorneys as part of a leak investigation.

PARLETORE: You can't put this thing back together and have a fair trial.

WATT (voice-over): The lead prosecutor was removed, but for now, Eddie Gallagher's court martial starts Monday.

E. GALLAGHER: See you guys.

WATT (voice-over): Nick Watt, CNN, Los Angeles.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

CABRERA: Now, another member of President Trump's inner circle is headed to Capitol Hill to testify in front of the House Judiciary Committee this week. So what could Hope Hicks' testimony mean for her former boss? "Cross-Exam" is next.

[17:40:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CABRERA: Another week, another member of the president's inner circle testifying on Capitol Hill. The House Judiciary Committee says former White House communications director, Hope Hicks, will give closed door testimony to the panel on Wednesday.

And it will come exactly one week after the president's son, Donald Trump Jr., met privately with the Senate Intelligence Committee. That brings us to our weekly segment, "Cross-Exam" with Elie Honig. He's here to answer your questions about legal news. Elie is a former federal and state prosecutor and now a CNN legal analyst.

Elie, while the testimony on Capitol Hill continues. One viewer points out that House Democrats seem to be hesitant to start impeachment proceedings in part because the Senate is controlled by Republicans. So this viewer asks, could the House start an impeachment investigation and then censure the president?

ELIE HONIG, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: It's a great question, Anan, because just this week, Laurence Tribe, who is one of the leading constitutional scholars in the country, he literately wrote the textbook that every law student uses on (inaudible) law, came out with a proposal along these lines. I call it sort of super censure or censure plus.

So Tribe's proposal is the House should hold a full trial-like proceeding -- evidence, witnesses, the president can be represented. He can defend himself through counsel if he wants. And then the House will vote on a resolution that will declare either the president did or did not commit criminal or impeachable conduct.

No Senate, though. IT ends there because Tribe's idea is the Senate is sort of a foregone conclusion at this point that they would acquit. So, there are pros and cons at this approach. The pros are you'd have a trial-like procedure. We'd get to see the evidence. The public would be informed and it would create an important historical record.

But there are arguments against it too. First of all, it's kind of an end run around the Constitution itself, which says the House impeaches and then the Senate votes to remove. And also the other argument against this, there's no real penalty. It's just words.

CABRERA: So it's more symbolic stuff.

HONIG: Yes, exactly. It's symbolic. It's all sizzle, no steak. All that would end up happening would be a sort of sternly worded, damaging resolution but no removal from office. So, that's one of the arguments against it, but good question by the viewer there. She was one step ahead of the leading constitutional scholar in the country.

CABRERA: We have another question from a viewer because they pay attention to the news and we know the president's taxes were back in the news at the end of the week here. This viewer asks, what legal hurdles do House Democrats have to clear now to get the president's tax returns?

HONIG: So this one should be simple, should be, because the law is very clear. It says, upon request by the House Ways and Means Committee, the IRS shall furnish tax returns, shall furnish.

[17:45:03] That is mandatory. That is not optional. But the IRS when they got this request said no. And then late last week, DOJ came out with opinion with, which surprise, surprise, William Barr's Department of Justice came out exactly how Donald Trump would want.

And they came up with this sort of tortured illogical reasoning saying, well, but there's no legitimate legislative purpose. First of all, th0e law says nothing about legislative purpose. Second of all, Congress gave a legislative purpose and DOJ just said we don't believe you.

Well, it's not up to DOJ. Congress legislates. Congress gets to make up its mind. I think this is headed to court and I think Congress will prevail and get those returns.

CABRERA: OK, let me pivot to the Supreme Court because we're watching for a number of important rulings on everything from gerrymandering to the 2020 census. One viewer asked, will Chief Justice John Roberts feel an obligation to make sure the court is above partisanship?

HONIG: I think he will. So Chief Justice Roberts is now the swing vote on a really pretty sharply divided court. We have a liberal block, four justices all appointed by Democratic presidents -- Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor and Kagan.

And then we have a conservative block all appointed by Republican presidents -- Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch and Kavanaugh -- the last two of course by Donald Trump. So, Chief Justice Roberts is going to be sort of the swing voted.

Now, he's a conservative. There is no question about it. He worked for George H.W. Bush. He was put on the Supreme Court by George W. Bush. He has a long record of voting primarily conservative, but he's unpredictable most notably when Obamacare, Affordable Care Act, came up in 2012.

He shocked everybody by swinging over and voting with the liberal bloc which upheld the law, 5-4. And if you look at the trend, he's been trending a little more to the left. He's clearly very aware of his legacy.

I think the chief justice does not want to be known as the chief justice who presided over the split of the court into strict ideological factions. Some very important decisions coming up, the citizenship question on the census is coming up soon.

We could have Supreme Court weighing in on congressional subpoenas on the Trump investigation and the Obamacare decision could be coming back up again. It's making its way back through the federal courts.

CABRERA: OK, quickly your top questions this week.

HONIG: So first of all, will the Supreme Court issue that ruling on the census case? The stakes are so high because if that citizenship question gets included on the census, it will really suppress many believe the turnout and numbers that we get which would lead to some questions about the accuracy of the census, which impacts the way our congressional districts are drawn up and the way federal funding comes up.

Number two, will candidates for office in 2020 follow Donald Trump's lead last week on accepting foreign election aid? He was all over the map. First he said he'd take it, then tried to walk it back and said it depends if it's good or bad info. Here's my advice. Just don't. Don't go anywhere near it. It's

potentially a federal crime. And then third, will Jerry Nadler go to the House to force Don McGahn to testify? He already has subpoenaed McGahn. McGahn already has defied it on the White House's instruction.

Now, I think the stakes are raised even higher because on Friday we heard the president openly calling out McGahn saying McGahn lied. I think that really underscores the need. We all need to hear from Don McGahn. He needs to get a chance to defend himself. We need to decide what is the truth.

CABRERA: All right, Elie Honig, as always, thank you. And extra special thank you for being here on Father's day. Happy Father's Day again.

CABRERA: Thank you. Same to you and your family.

CABRERA: I appreciate it. Hope you feel extra loved today.

All right, quick program ing note. See what happens when victims and offenders of violent crimes meet face-to-face on the CNN Original Series, "The Redemption Project" with Van Jones. That's tonight at 9:00 Eastern followed by "United Shades of America" with W. Kamau Bell at 10:00.

Coming up here in the NEWSROOM, controversy in Texas after the cops are called on a mother who was breastfeeding at a public pool. We'll talk to that mom about the moment she was kicked out. Plus, how women in the community are rallying to her side.

[17:50:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CABRERA: There are a lot of reasons someone might call the police. Most are legitimate, but some I got to be honest will leave you shaking your head. Consider this scenario. Misty Daugereaux was at a public pool last weekend in Texas City, Texas that's near Galveston.

Now, she says she was discreetly nursing her 10-month old son when a lifeguard and a manager approached and told her breast-feeding was against pool rules. When she argued with them about it, she says the cops were called and they ordered her to leave.

That mom, Misty Daugereaux, is with us now. Wow, let's start with the tact that Texas law says a mother is entitled to breast-feed her baby in any location in which the mother is authorized to be. So I know you initially pushed back when they told you to leave. What happened when you asked them to show you which policy or law you were violating?

MISTY DAUGEREAUX, BOOTED FROM PUBLIC SCHOOL FOR BREASTFEEDING HER BABY: They didn't give me a policy. She just gave me the ultimatum. She stated that if I didn't want to follow the pool rules, then I could leave the park.

CABRERA: I will say that the city issued a public apology. They say they will review policies and procedures with employees, but you were still publicly shamed and ended up leaving. Just walk me through exactly what happened and what was going through your mind.

DAUGEREAUX: Yes. Well, when the officer arrived and, you know, I thought initially that he came in to, you know, like diffuse the situation. And so when he asked me to leave, I just -- I mean, I was shaking so badly, you know, in tears.

And I was just thinking like, oh, my god, don't argue with a cop, you know, you might get arrested in front of your kids. And I was just afraid. So, you know, and he asked me to leave. I said, yes, ma'am and I left.

But then, you know, as I left the park and my son asked me how come, you know, that man won't let you feed Max? It is when I totally just lost it. And I get home and my mother-in-law, you know, asked what happened and, you know, my husband was asking what happened and I told him.

And he was like that's not acceptable. You need to call the city hall in the morning or maybe, you know, he was the one who originally suggested that I post on a small moms group that I'm with and said get their input, see what they think. And that's what I did.

CABRERA: And now you have received a lot of support on social media. I know one group of moms was so outraged they actually showed up at the pool to hold a nurse-in protest. How did you feel to have so many people come to your defense?

DAUGEREAUX: You know, I didn't even know one single mom that was at that protest. I didn't know any of them. And so it was so invigorating to have that many people support you. I mean, I knew, you know, motherhood is a job in itself, you know, and it's taskful, you know. And just to have that so much support, you know, especially behind breast-feeding was amazing.

[17:55:08] CABRERA: What's your message to other moms who experience this?

DAUGEREAUX: I would just say, you know, hold your head up high, you know, and speak with respect, you know, and demand, you know, that you get the respect that you deserve, you know. It's definitely I would like to just, you know, be a force to reckon with. Absolutely, you know.

CABRERA: I like that. Misty Daugereaux, thank you so much for being with us and for sharing your story and that beautiful little boy who is with us as well, and Happy Father's Day to --

DAUGEREAUX: Thank you so much.

CABRERA: -- to the men in your family.

DAUGEREAUX: Yes, thank you so kindly.

CABRERA: Thank you.

Well, tomorrow marks the 25th anniversary of a famous -- infamous we should say, car chase. And now O.J. Simpson says he wants to set the record straight on twitter. Details, just ahead, live in the "CNN Newsroom."

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CABRERA: Congrats to Team USA. The U.S. women's soccer team has punched their ticket to the World Cup round of 16. After a blowout over Thailand, the Americans faced off against Chile today. The U.S. won 3-0. Carli Lloyd scored two of the team's goals and became the first player in history to score in six consecutive World Cup matches. The

[17:59:54] U.S. takes on Sweden Thursday and whoever wins that game will be the overall winner of Group F.

You are live in the CNN NEWSROOM. I'm Ana Cabrera in New York. Thanks for joining us.