Return to Transcripts main page


Schiff Confirms Tentative Agreement For Whistleblower To Testify; Ex-Trump DHS Adviser Tells Trump To Ditch Debunked Conspiracy Theories; WAPO: State Department, Probes 100+ Former Clinton Aides Over E-mails; Source: Former Ukraine Envoy To Appear Before Three House Committees; NYPD Officer Investigating Gang Activity Shot Dead; Police Hunt Four Prisoners Who Overpowered Guard And Escaped Ohio Jail. Aired 3-4p ET

Aired September 29, 2019 - 15:00   ET




UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Happening now in "The Newsroom", the impeachment battle is on.


REP. ADAM SCHIFF (D-CA): We haven't set a timetable except that we want to do this as urgently as possible.

REP. JIM JORDAN (R-OH): I don't have any problem with the call. We've now seen the transcript. The President of Ukraine said that there was not pressure, he was not pushed. Look, if Democrats want to impeach because Rudy Giuliani talked to a couple of Ukrainians, good luck with that. I don't think the American people think that's the appropriate course of action.

RUDY GIULIANI, PERSONAL LAWYER TO PRESIDENT TRUMP: I did not do this on my own. I did it at the request of the State Department. And I have all of the text messages to prove it and I also have a thank you from them for doing a good job.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The President has also been caught red-handed trying to solicit foreign interference in the 2020 election by pressuring a foreign leader to target Joe Biden, an American citizen for political gain.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: "CNN Newsroom" starts now.

FREDRICKA WHITFIELD, CNN HOST: Hello again everyone, thanks so much for joining me this Sunday. I'm Fredricka Whitfield.

We start with a dramatic new development in the impeachment inquiry into President Trump and the pressure mounting. House Intel Chairman Adam Schiff is vowing to act urgently after announcing that there is now a tentative agreement for the anonymous whistleblower to testify before Congress and it could happen as early as this week.


SCHIFF: All that needs to be done at this point is to make sure that the attorneys that represent the whistleblower get the clearances that they need to be able to accompany the whistleblower to testimony. And that we figure out the logistics to make sure that we protect the identity of the whistleblower. That's our paramount concern here. This whistleblower has done obviously a cardinal service to the country by exposing wrongdoing of the most serious kind, a breach of the President's duty to the country that endangers our security and he's got to be worried about his own security right now with the President issuing threats like he did the other day.


WHITFIELD: This comes as sources tell CNN that former U.S. Special Envoy to Ukraine Kurt Volker plans to appear in front of, not one but three congressional committees this week. Let's go straight to CNN Sarah Westwood at the White House. So Sarah, what's the reaction been like from the White House on all of these developments?

SARAH WESTWOOD, CNN WHITE HOUSE REPORTER: Well, Fred, allies of President Trump this morning are continuing to question the motives of this whistleblower White House is still questioning the motives of this whistle-blower as House Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff announces that there is this tentative agreement between the whistleblower and his committee for testimony. Now as we just heard, Schiff saying that whatever agreement goes forward that whistleblower's identity will be protected under what the committee is negotiating right now.

Also, CNN reported earlier this week that the lawyers for the whistleblower are trying to get appropriate security clearances from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence in order to accompany the whistleblower to that testimony and that's something that's being worked out right now between ODNI and the committee. Schiff saying that he's waiting for Acting Intelligence Director Joseph Maguire to authorize those clearances. Now Stephen Miller, a top aide to President Trump today accused the unnamed whistleblower of attempting to undermine President Trump's administration. Take a listen.


STEPHEN MILLER, WHITE HOUSE SENIOR POLICY ADVISER: The President is the whistleblower here. The President of the United States is the whistleblower. And this individual is a saboteur trying to undermine a democratically elected government.

The behavior of this individual is close to a spy. I don't know who the individual is. All I know is, at some point, Chris, we have to focus on the real scandal which is three years of deep state sabotage.

(END VIDEO CLIP) WESTWOOD: Now a source familiar tells CNN the discussions between the whistleblower's team and the committee are still ongoing but that testimony could happen very soon. This comes as House Democrats are ramping up the pressure for the administration to turn over documents to make people available to talk about the Ukraine controversy. On Friday, for example, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo was subpoenaed and House Democrats are also looking for depositions from senior State Department officials including that former envoy to Ukraine, Kurt Volker who is to appear before committees an soon as this week, Fred. So a lot of pressure on the administration right now to divulge more about the President's contacts with Ukrainian leaders.

WHITFIELD: All right, Sarah Westwood, thank you so much.

All right, it wasn't just the White House Senior Policy Adviser Stephen Miller who was sent out to defend President Trump today. His personal attorney Rudy Giuliani once again making the rounds on the Sunday talk shows pushing conspiracy theories about the Bidens, Democrats and Hillary Clinton. But President Trump's former Homeland Security Advisor Tom Bossert contradicted Giuliani on air. He says Giuliani is wrong when he claims Ukraine not Russia hacked DNC computer servers during the 2016 election.



TOM BOSSERT, FORMER TRUMP WHITE HOUSE HOMELAND SECURITY ADVISER: It's not only a conspiracy theory, it is completely debunked. You know, I don't want to be glib about this matter but last year Retired Former Senator Judd Gregg wrote a piece in The Hill magazine saying the three ways or the five ways to impeach oneself and the third way was to hire Rudy Giuliani. And at this point, I am deeply frustrated with what he and the legal team is doing and repeating that debunked theory to the President. It sticks in his mind when he hears it over and over again and for clarity here George, let me just again repeat that it has no validity.


WHITFIELD: With me now is Sarah Isgur, she is a former spokesperson for the Justice Department under President Trump and a CNN Political Analyst. Good to see you. All right, so how stunning, alarming, you know, shocking, staggering is it to hear in your view of Bossert's point of view on this?

SARAH ISGUR, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: Well I think Tom Bossert represents as good chunk of what all Republicans are thinking of the elected Republicans and former administration officials which is there's certainly something concerning here. Where I think the real divide is and set aside the Giulianis of the world is whether that something is illegal at this point, or just improper but not illegal, and when we look at the polls on this, voters themselves are quite divided, although among Republicans we Are starting to see an uptick in that number. Democrats of course not divided, very clear. Independents about 50-50. And so that's where I think this battle is going to be. Was it improper but legal, or will there be more to come out? Will there be, you know, the quote/unquote smoking gun on the quid pro quo with Ukraine and the military aid.

WHITFIELD: So Bossert also said, you know, it's a bad day, you know, for the President and for the country. As they same time, he says it might be rather difficult to prove that the President was abusing his power even though you mention a lot of people think it was improper. You know, many Republicans have said it's curious and, you know, disturbing. But do you agree it will be a difficult one to prove or is the material there to be uncovered?

ISGUR: If you look back at what happened during Watergate, it wasn't really the Senate hearings and the select committee on Watergate that really made the case. It was members of Nixon's own administration. Remember it was John Dean who had been saying that this went to the very top and then it was eventually Mr. Butterfield who exposed the existence of the secret recordings that were happening. So I think Democrats --

WHITFIELD: And now you're going to have the House Speaker who says this is the cover-up of the cover-up underway.

ISGUR: What Democrats need to do is try not to overplay their hand. Find actual evidence. And I think they've done a decent job. I think Nancy Pelosi in particular has been very careful in all of this. And then I think you see things like Adam Schiff where, you know, we had that parity of the phone call which I think is really undermined Democrats and I bet that he's got the call from Nancy Pelosi saying let's play this straight. You know, don't make this a parity.

WHITFIELD: So evidence can come by way of testimony and Giuliani has given contradictory answers today. Just happened today when asked repeatedly if he would testify if subpoenaed by Congress. Take a listen.


GIULIANI: I wouldn't cooperate with Adam Schiff. I think Adam Schiff should be removed. If they remove Adam Schiff, if they put a neutral person in who hasn't pre-judged the case. If they put someone in -- a Democrat who hasn't expressed an opinion yet. If I had a judge in a case and he had already announced I'm going to impeach, if he went ahead and did a whole false episode, wouldn't I move to recuse that judge.

GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS, ABC NEWS ANCHOR: So that's your answer. You're not going to cooperate.

GIULIANI: I didn't say that. I said I will consider it.

STEPHANOPOULOS: You said you wouldn't do it.


STEPHANOPOULOS: You said you will not cooperate with that. GIULIANI: I said I will consider it. I have to be guided by my client, frankly. I'm a lawyer. It's his privilege not mine. If he decides that he wants me to testify, of course, I'll testify.


WHITFIELD: So Sarah, does he sound like he believes his testimony could potentially be incriminating evidence?

ISGUR: I think Rudy Giuliani sounds like he sounded, you know, for the last part of this administration, which is someone who the President probably shouldn't be having on TV representing him. But --

WHITFIELD: But he's a former prosecutor also who is --

ISGUR: Absolutely.

WHITFIELD: -- essentially saying he's not -- without saying it outright, he's essentially saying that he's waiting for permission from the President in order to, you know, whether to comply with any kind of potential subpoena that would come. That would be outrageous, you know, if a witness were to do that as a prosecutor but he seems very comfortable saying that today. So one has to wonder if he's worried that his testimony will, indeed, be incriminating evidence. Is that what you were hearing from him?

ISGUR: Considering that Rudy Giuliani has been, you know, on every TV show and he's the one who originally said that of course the President talked to Ukraine about Joe Biden. No, I would not assume anything.


WHITFIELD: The President himself just said it too this week.

ISGUR: Indeed, but Rudy Giuliani was the one who came out first and said it. So, no, I wouldn't make any assumptions on what you think Rudy Giuliani has or doesn't have evidence of. What I think his bigger misunderstanding is that impeachment is not a legal proceeding. It's not a judge.

The chief justice of the Supreme Court sits in the Senate during the impeachment trial but impeachment fundamentally is a political decision made by the legislature and that's how the system was set up. So, no, it is supposed to be political. The standard is political not legal. And the sooner Rudy Giuliani accepts that, I think it might need to change their strategy a little.

WHITFIELD: All right. Now let's talk about the Attorney General. Democrats, you know, are questioning whether the Attorney General William Barr is fit for the job given that he has -- his name has appeared in that whistleblower complaint. Listen.


REP. NANCY PELOSI (D-CA): I do think the Attorney General has gone rogue he has for a long time now. And since he was mentioned in all of this, it's curious that he would be making decisions about how the complaint would be handled.


WHITFIELD: Do you see that William Barr could ultimately recuse himself from any Department of Justice investigation as it relates to this whistleblower complaint?

ISGUR: I doubt that. And also I'm not sure what he would recuse himself from. There is no, as far as I know, Department of Justice investigation into the President's conversation. Remember initially when the whistleblower complaint was sent to the Department of Justice, the office -- sorry, the criminal division declined to look into campaign finance violations that might have been there. Legally speaking and I've worked a lot of campaign financing, I think that's right. And so you'd have to -- Nancy Pelosi would have to be talking about something more specific that the Department of Justice would need to be doing.

WHITFIELD: He's accused of playing a role in down playing the urgency that was spelled out in the complaint, not allowing at -- being a party to it, not going through the proper channels.

ISGUR: But what would he recuse himself from if there's no investigation. Here you have the office of legal counsel say that it didn't meet the statutory definition of urgent because the President was not considered a member of the Intelligence Community. You can disagree with that decision. But it's been made and it's done. So she will need to point to something that he would recuse himself from.

WHITFIELD: Sarah Isgur, thanks so much for being with us.

ISGUR: Thank you.

WHITFIELD: All right. Next, new reporting that President Trump's State Department has stepped up its investigation of Hillary Clinton's emails. Hear how the administration is defending its actions.

Plus, Hillary Clinton, herself, speaking out to defend Joe Biden. Why she says people should get over the accusations that he's been a little too touchy-feely with women in the past.



WHITFIELD: New reporting today that the Trump administration continues to investigate Hillary Clinton's emails. According to The Washington Post as many as 130 current and former State Department officials who sent e-mails to Clinton have been contacted by State Department investigators.

Let's bring in CNN National Correspondent Kristen Holmes. Kristen, good to see you. The Post says, you know, this according to State Department officials is protocol but that the interest in these e- mails picked up again in August. Why? KRISTEN HOLMES, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes. Well, that's right, Fred. And this is raising a lot of antennas because of that why question. So here's what we know so far. This is, of course, according to The Post that these 130 people, as many as 130 people, was not just senior U.S. officials but it also included some lower level officials as well. They were contacted by the State Department investigators and told that e-mails that they had sent years ago were retroactively classified and, therefore, they were potentially security violations.

Now, given the timing of this, given the fact that this was ramping up in August when this whistleblower report was circulating, of course, this report coming out just days after Democrats launched a formal impeachment inquiry, this has a lot of people saying that this is political. Now, I want to read you a couple of quotes here. This is from a former U.S. official. He called the probe telling The Post that it was an obscene abuse of power and time involving so many people for so many years. This has just sucked up people's lives for years and years.

Another senior U.S. official telling The Post that for Republicans to keep the Clinton e-mail issue alive, this is just an excuse, excuse me, for Republicans to keep the Clinton e-mail issue alive. But as you said, State Department officials telling The Post that they were just following protocol. We have one of their statements up here. We can put it up for you. It says, "This has nothing to do with who is in the White House. This is about the time it took to go through millions of e-mails which is about three and a half years".

But, of course, Fred, this is incredibly polarizing issue. An issue President Trump just brought up again last week when he was sitting next to the Ukrainian President and one that doesn't seem to be going away. We're going to have to see how this one plays out.

WHITFIELD: All right, Kristen Holmes, thank you so much. We're going to talk more about all these. Senior Editor for The Atlantic Ron Brownstein, he is also a CNN Senior Political Analyst back with us.


WHITFIELD: Hey, Ron. Good to see you. So this is a controversy that the Trump administration, you know, can't seem to let go. You know, the President called it a great crime while speaking as recently as last week and then, of course, as Kristen underscored depending who you talk to at the State Department, this is either protocol or an example of abuse of power for political gain. How will this look either way?

BROWNSTEIN: Well, look, I mean, the backdrop I think is critical here. As you noted, you have some say Department officials saying, well look this is just protocol. This is -- It took a long time. But think about the context in which this is coming forward. It is coming forward at a moment precisely when the President is facing an impeachment inquiry over the evidence not only the accusation but the evidence that he deployed the vast power of the federal government to try to pressure a foreign leader to dig up dirt on a political opponent. We have a case in the Justice Department --

WHITFIELD: So this kind of reporting says there -- you know, this is a pattern. This is a trend.

BROWNSTEIN: This is a pattern. Well, right. We have the Andrew McCabe case and the Justice Department. We have Lindsey Graham calling for a special prosecutor on Hunter Biden and Joe Biden even thought you have Ukrainian officials repeatedly saying that there's no evidence that either violated any laws or did anything improper.


And so, yes, that is -- I think that is how this will be widely perceived as part of a pattern of the administration deploying the federal government against their political opponents and adversaries and that is, in many ways, you know, kind of the -- one of the ultimate fears that took office along with Donald Trump in January 2016 (ph) that they would do exactly this sort of thing. And here we are, you know, in the summer, late summer, early fall of 2019 with multiple examples kind of piling up.

WHITFIELD: Wow. Now let's talk about the Democrats in the race to the White House. This new CNN poll showing Joe Biden way ahead in South Carolina. Twenty-one points ahead of Elizabeth Warren and that's largely because of support from black voters. So --


WHITFIELD: -- why aren't the other candidates able to gain traction and how is it Biden continues to maintain that kind of lead there?

BROWNSTEIN: It's a critical question and this poll is an important one for this reason. You know, we have seen some patterns develop already in the Democratic race. People can say it seems early. But some of the grooves are being cut. And one of those grooves is that Elizabeth Warren is running very well with college educated white voters, well educated, usually liberal white voters. She's ahead by double digits among college educated voters in both of these polls. National polls now show her somewhere from 12 to 15 points ahead.

And in states like Iowa and New Hampshire, the predominantly white with a lot of, particularly in New Hampshire, a lot of white college graduates, that's enough to win. These two polls are a reminder that it's not enough to win every where. That you also have to make some inroads among working class, blue collar white workers and especially nonwhite voters. There were some national polls last week that suggested Elizabeth Warren was starting to gain some traction in the African-American community.

This CNN poll in South Carolina is pretty much a cold slap in the face because it shows, all right just 4 percent among black voters there to 45 percent for Joe Biden. And it does, Fredericka, set up the possibility that Warren may, in fact, be able to win Iowa, may, in fact, be able to win New Hampshire. And the critical question in the race would be whether Joe Biden can hold that African-American support and win South Carolina in which case we would have a long grinding struggle for the nomination.

WHITFIELD: And then now, back to Hillary Clinton but actually on the subject of Joe Biden. She actually is defending Biden when she was asked about criticism of his interactions with women. Take a listen to what she had to say.


HILLARY CLINTON (D), FORMER PRESIDENTIAL NOMINEE: People who are putting themselves forward which, believe me, is a really difficult process to undergo, should be judged on the totality of their lives and their service and we can pick apart anybody. I mean, that's a great spectator sport. But this man who is there in the Oval Office right now poses a clear and present danger to the future of the United States. So, get over it. Look at the candidates. Look at what they've accomplished. Look at what they fought for and vote for anybody to get rid of Donald Trump.


WHITFIELD: So Ron, is there any risk that comes, you know, with that point of view, especially in this, you know, day of, you know, a clearer consciousness, you know, of issues as it seems to women. Men's actions against women, et cetera.

BROWNSTEIN: You got to separate it into two kind of categories. In the primary, it is striking. You know, as I've said, some of the grooves are already being cut. We're seeing differences by age, Biden is stronger, older the younger. Sanders is the opposite by ideology, by education levels and by race.

But one thing we have not seen in the Democratic primary so far is much of gender gap. Not really a lot of difference in the support among -- for the leading candidates among men and women. And that's critical because women are now nearly 60 -- will probably be about 60 percent of all the voters in the Democratic primary. And if anyone -- you know, if there is a gender gap, it could be divisive. And so far, it's not emerging.

In the general election, you know, I don't think this will be, if Joe Biden is the nominee, this would be a problem for him. I mean, Donald Trump is looking at historically low -- sorry, high disapproval numbers among African-American women and college educated white women and the best group that he had among women in 2016 were those working class, blue collar white women. He has suffered significant erosion among them. And that, in fact, maybe his single greatest vulnerability in this race that he's not nearly as strong among those women as he was in 2016 particularly in the three Rust Belt states, Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin that tipped the last election.

I'm not sure he can make a case, you know, to them about Joe Biden based on his behavior if he gets there. I mean, the larger question would be whether to me, whether Elizabeth Warren with this very progressive agenda can run as well among those working class white women. Some of whom we saw in 2016 were somewhat resistant to the idea of a woman as president. WHITFIELD: All right. Ron Brownstein, always good to see you. Thank you so much.

BROWNSTEIN: Thanks, Fred.

WHITFIELD: All right. House Democrats say the whistleblower at the center of the Ukraine controversy could testify in front of lawmakers as early as this week. I'll speak live to Congressman Vicente Gonzalez about what he wants answers to.



WHITFIELD: Congress is gearing up for what could be a tumultuous week on Capitol Hill as Intel Chairman Adam Schiff is vowing to urgently with the impeachment inquiry. Schiff now says there is a tentative agreement for the anonymous whistleblower to testify before Congress and that could happen as soon as this week.

Joining me right now is Texas Congressman Vicente Gonzalez who serves on the House Foreign Affairs Committee. Congressman, good to see you. What are you hoping to learn from this whistleblower if, indeed, this person testifies before your committee?

REP. VICENTE GONZALEZ (D-TX): Well, we absolutely need to get to the bottom of it. We can't just make a decision on the redacted information that we got from the administration which I was even shocked that we received that much. But let's begin with the -- I was the last Democratic members to sign on to this impeachment inquiry and I did it more as a lawyer than as a member of Congress of the clear violation of federal law.


You got to remember the law says that if there's a credible and urgent whistleblower report such as this, the Inspector General has a duty to investigate, he has 14 days under the law to investigate and then he must give this report to the Director of Intelligence, which he did and the Director of Intelligence has seven days under the law and then he must turn over this information to the committee of intelligence in the United States Congress and this is not happen. This has been a clear breach of federal law. This is factual. This is not theoretical or this is not somebody's idea. This is what happens.

So we need to get to the bottom of it. We need to learn everything that this whistleblower has the information that he has and maybe others who he's talked to. So we need to get to the bottom of this idea that Donald Trump's own Inspector General was alarmed by it.

WHITFIELD: It's interesting, Congressman, because some of your colleagues namely Congressman Jim Jordan is disputing much of what you just said saying, you know, there are no facts, that the phone call was fine, that there were no laws broken, even going --

GONZALEZ: That's absolutely not true. WHITFIELD: -- as far as to discredit the whistleblower by saying the whistleblower's complaint is based on hearsay. So do you believe that that argument would anyway --

GONZALEZ: Now this whistle-blower --

WHITFIELD: -- you know, undermine the appearance if it comes to that, the appearance of this whistleblower.

GONZALEZ: That's ridiculous.

WHITFIELD: Which one is ridiculous?

GONZALEZ: That is absolutely ridiculous and it's an insult to the Intelligence Committee. The fact that he's trying to debunk a report from a whistleblower who's not some guy off the street. This is an American intelligence officer who has been vetted to no end. This is as credible as you can get of a complaint.

WHITFIELD: Do you know it's an intelligence officer?

GONZALEZ: So -- This is the information that has been reported to us that it was a CIA analyst at the White House. So, he's, you know, a part of the CIA --

WHITFIELD: There have been people who have said that but that hasn't been confirmed. At least CNN has not --

GONZALEZ: Well, we'll have to get to the end of this. But it was somebody who is at the White House. Yes. You know, from all the information that I've gathered, I feel pretty comfortable that it is. I can't wait to have a finality of that but I believe it is.

So, at the very minimum someone in Trump's White House that made this -- filed this complaint. And his own Inspector General gave this high credibility and said, OK, this is classified as urgent and credible. And this is Donald Trump's Inspector General, and he then did went through the process and handed it over to the Director of National Intelligence.

WHITFIELD: What would you ask this whistleblower if indeed this person is to testify this week?

GONZALEZ: Well, I would want to know the complete -- everything that was talked about in this conversation. And I'm sure he knows about it. I want to know what he was told because I hear that some of this information that may be from third parties. We want to know who they are and what they told him and maybe bring them in and have a conversation with them.

This is not a Democratic or Republican issue. This is an American issue. This is something that every red-blooded patriotic American cares about. And trying to attack Joe Biden is just the -- the President knowing that this is the person who's going to unseat him in 2020 and he's the front-runner in the Democratic field and he's the only person that Donald Trump sees as a viable candidate to defeat him November 2020 and that's why he's on the attack.

WHITFIELD: And then, Congressman, potentially this week the former Special Envoy to Ukraine, Kurt Volker, could be testifying before three congressional committees. He resigned a day after, you know, details of this complaint were made.

GONZALEZ: Very interesting.

WHITFIELD: What do you believe he could bring to this investigation, this inquiry?

GONZALEZ: Well, I would be speculating if I told you what I think he would bring. But certainly, his resignation is very telling and clearly he has something to say that I think is very important to the American people and to the United States Congress. So we need to bring him in. We need to talk to others that have information that maybe we don't know about yet. The witnesses who are going to be coming forward will be able to give us other names and more information and we need to have just a very methodical way of getting to the bottom of the entire picture of what's just happened.

WHITFIELD: Do you believe at a minimum -- do you believe he will be able to answer as to whether it was the Secretary of State Mike Pompeo who may have given a directive to the personal attorney Rudy Giuliani to interact with Ukraine, to visit or whether it would be the President of the United States. Do you believe --

GONZALEZ: I believe so.

WHITFIELD: -- Kurt Volker will have that kind of information and divulge?

GONZALEZ: I believe so. And he certainly has a duty as an American to divulge and let the Congress and the American people know all the facts surrounding the issue that we're investigating. And, you know, this is not a vote for impeachment or this is not an impeachment hearing. This is an inquiry, it's an investigation. It's getting to the bottom of it. The American people want to know.


WHITFIELD: All right. Congressman Vicente Gonzalez, thank you so much.

GONZALEZ: Thank you.

WHITFIELD: Next, we'll take you live to Ukraine to see how officials who worked with that State Department official Kurt Volker are reacting to his resignation.


WHITFIELD: All right, this week sources tell CNN that former U.S. Special Envoy for Ukraine is expected to appear before three congressional committees. Kurt Volker is expected to be deposed by Intelligence Oversight and Reform and Foreign Affairs Committee but it remains unclear if his deposition will be made public.

Meantime, we're now getting reaction from Ukraine about Volker's recent departure. CNN's Matthew Chance is in Kiev. So Matthew, what more are you learning?

MATTHEW CHANCE, CNN SENIOR INTERMATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, the Ukrainians say they're pretty unhappy about the fact that Kurt Volker has resigned. He was a key figure, remember in the flow of aid and, you know, military assistance and financial assistance from the United States to Ukraine.


Of course he was the U.S. Special Representative to the country and so there have been various individuals here, particularly a presidential aide who I spoke to yesterday who said he had deep regret about the resignation when he heard about it. There's also been some reaction that's been coming out in the past few minutes actually on national television here. That same presidential aide, Andriy Yermak, basically talking about the political situation in United States, what it means for Ukraine saying that they see the United States as a strategic partner. But what happens there in terms of the political crisis, these are the words of Andriy Yermak, it is their internal political cuisine, at least that's the translation that we've got so far from the Ukrainian embassy that saying, is look, whatever is happening in the United States is the internal affairs of that country and we don't necessarily want to get involved in it.

Because remember, they're sort of overriding sort of national security concern of the Ukrainians is to make sure that they have got a good working relationship with the incumbent U.S. President, with President Trump but also with any upcoming administrations. Very aware of the fact there's an election in 2020 and don't want to poison the relationship with the Democrat, maybe Joe Biden that becomes the next U.S. President. So they're very mindful of that.

So dependent is this country on U.S. strategic backing when it comes to its conflict in the east, the provision of military aid and its battle against pro-Russian rebels but also is diplomatic campaign that Ukraine has been engaged in for several years to try and sort of regain some control, regain some say over the territory of Crimea that was annexed by Russia in 2014. It has strong American diplomatic backing for that method (ph) as well.

And so this political crisis has really sucked Ukraine in and plunged it into a crisis of its own. And there are a lot of concerns particularly around this country now about what impact this is going to have on Ukraine and its relationship with the United States. It feels that is walking a political tight rope between the Democrats and the Republicans in this divisive partisan battle which is unfolding in the U.S.

WHITFIELD: All right, Matthew Chance in Kiev. Thank you.

All right, next, an NYPD officer shot and killed in the Bronx as he investigated gang activity. We'll explain what happened and how he is being remembered.



WHITFIELD: The New York Police Department is mourning the loss of one of their own after an officer was shot and killed on the job last night. Thirty-three year-old Brian Mulkeen died while investigating gang activity in the Bronx. CNN's Natasha Chen is following all of these. What more you know?

NATASHA CHEN, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well Fred, this is really tragic. Around 12:30 this morning, Officer Mulkeen was patrolling an area of the Bronx that has been plagued recently with gang activities and shootings so he and two other officers were in the area, got out of their vehicle to question someone they thought was suspicious. Now, when they got out of their car, this man started running and so they chased him.

That's when NYPD says a violent struggle followed between the Mulkeen and the suspect and shots were fired. Mulkeen being struck three times. Five other police officers fired at the suspect and the suspect died. NYPD says this suspect did have a weapon on him but that weapon did not fire. Here's what the police chief said.


CHIEF TERENCE MONAHAN, NYPD: At this point, it does not appear that the perpetrator's gun was the one that fired. Officer Mulkeen's gun fired five times. At this point, we are not sure who fired Officer Mulkeen's gun.


CHEN: Yes. So Fred, there are a lot of questions that still have to be answered here but still all together extremely sad.

WHITFIELD: Terrible. All right, Natasha Chen, thank you so much.

CHEN: Thank you.

WHITFIELD: All right, still ahead, we hear from voters about what they think of this impeachment inquiry. Plus, Lisa Ling joins me with her fascinating investigation of online pornography. What every parent should know about the risk for kids as young as eight years old?



WHITFIELD: This Sunday, Lisa Ling is back with an all new season of "This is Life". In the first episode, she is taking on another taboo topic. Online porn and how it's affecting an entire generation's perceptions of sex. Here's a preview.


LISA LING, CNN HOST, "THIS IS LIFE WITH LISA LING" (voice-over): Porn addiction isn't a medically recognized disease, but hundreds of thousands of people claim it is real, and are turning to sites like NoFap.

ALEXANDER RHODES, NOFAP FOUNDER: And we have people from every continent across the planet. It impacts Christians, Atheists, Muslims, Republicans, Democrats. If you're a human being and you have access to the internet, you can absolutely get addicted to porn.

LING (voice-over): Though Alex is emphatic that this can happen to anyone, he tells me that 95 percent of NoFap users are men.

RHODES: It does happen to young men more often than any other group I would say. I think the most vulnerable demographic is males between the ages of eight to 14.


WHITFIELD: All right. Joining me now, host of "This is Life", Lisa Ling. Eight to 14, Lisa? I mean, what can parents do, you know, to protect their kids from seeing this in the first place, getting engaged in it and addicted as your guest said could happen?

LING: Well, yes, Fred, that was the reaction that I had when I heard eight to 14. We're talking about very, very young boys. But when you think about it these days, most kids have access to mobile devices. And even a few have very strict filters on your phone, just putting a couple of words into Google will yield some pretty eye opening results. And so what I'm suggesting to parents is to start having conversations with them.

When they are really young, start having conversations about the anatomy and how things work and also communicate to them if they have access to devices, which most of them do, that if they see things that are confusing or disturbing, that they can come and talk to you about it and they should. It's really, really important that, we, as parents play a role in our kid's digital lives because again, even with strict filters, there are things that they can access and there's just such an abundance of graphic material that's available to kids online.

WHITFIELD: So how is it that online porn has become such a problem? I mean, is it an issue of it's being marketed, you know, to young people? They get engaged in it and they don't really know before next thing you know, they're hooked.

LING: I don't know that it's being marketed to kids. In fact, we interview an adult film star who is actually on a mission to try and communicate to people that there's a lot they don't see when they come across pornography. She tells people that there's a whole discussion about consent and comfortability before the cameras even roll. But again, it's just so easily accessible.

And for kids in particular, if they don't really know what they're seeing, right, given how much material is out there, it can have an impact on them. The way they perceive sex, the way they perceive relationships, and the opposite sex or even the same sex forever. Because once you see something, particularly something that's really graphic, it's impossible to erase that, so it can have an impact on them for a very long time. If you talk to pediatricians, they will probably tell you that parents are coming in saying what do we do, our kids have had access to porn.

WHITFIELD: All right. Lisa Ling, thank you so much.


And again, you know, don't miss the premier episode of "This is Life with Lisa Ling" tonight, 10:00 Eastern and Pacific only on CNN.

And this breaking news. A man hunt is now underway for four inmates who escaped in Ohio jail by overpowering two guards with homemade weapons say officials.


SHERIFF MATT CHAMPLIN, GALLIA COUNTY, OHIO: At approximately 12:14 a.m., four male inmates overpowered two female corrections officers with a homemade weapon at the Gallia County Jail. Four inmates were successful in forcing open a secured door and they escaped from our facility.


WHITFIELD: Authorities say the four inmates stole the keys to a jail employee's car and drove about one block away where another car was waiting for them. Investigators believe at least one person aided in their escape and that the four inmates should be considered extremely dangerous.

All right, next, we're live at the White House as President Trump lashes out against the investigation into his dealings with Ukraine. And we have new details about when the whistleblower just might tell the version of the story to lawmakers.


WHITFIELD: Hello again everyone. Thanks so much for being with me this Sunday. I'm Fredricka Whitfield. All right, the pressure is mounting and fast. Intel Chairman Adam Schiff Now says he plans to act urgently in the impeachment inquiry.