Return to Transcripts main page

S.E. Cupp Unfiltered

White House Officials Testify Quid Pro Quo Was Coordinated By Mulvaney; On Friday, Bloomberg Filed For Alabama Primary Minutes Before The Deadline,; Sessions Announces Bid For Alabama Senate Seat, Praises Trump In Ad; Sessions Primary Opponent Attends Alabama-LSU Game With Trump; Several GOP Lawmakers Exchange Dignity For Trump Support; 2016: President Trump Insulted Ted Cruz's Wife On Twitter, That Tweet Hasn't Been Deleted; GOP Requests Testimony From Whistleblower & Hunter Biden; Rep. Dan Kildee (D-MI) Discusses The Democrats' Strategy In The Impeachment Inquiry; Sen. Rand Paul, Who Previously Pushed For Whistleblower Protections, Demands Media Reveal Whistleblower's Identity; Trump Continues To Demand Whistleblower's Identity. Aired 6-7p ET

Aired November 09, 2019 - 18:00   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:00:00]

S.E. CUPP, CNN HOST: Welcome to UNFILTERED.

Here's tonight's headline, collision course. If you're going to imagine it this way, two giant freight trains were bearing down on President Trump all week.

First, you had the fast-moving impeachment inquiry, eight transcripts of closed-door testimony, totaling 2677 pages have been released, all of them to varying degrees blowing up Republican talking points, and all of them supporting the underlying thrust of the whole thing, that the president tried to shakedown a foreign leader to publicly announce an investigation into his 2020 rival, or in the parlance of our time, quid pro quo.

The testimony from two officials, Fiona Hill and Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman both alleged that effort was coordinated by acting chief of staff Mick Mulvaney, bringing the conspiracy one degree closer to the president himself.

And next week, the public will hear some of the damning testimony with their own ears. And with each passing day, Republicans are shifting their defense of Trump, contorting themselves into logic pretzels to explain it all away.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM (R-SC): If you could show me that Trump actually was engaging in a quid pro quo outside of the phone call, that would be very disturbing.

REPORTER: Did you plan on reading the transcripts that were released? GRAHAM: No.

I'm not even interested in the whole concept here.

What I can tell you about the Trump policy toward Ukraine, it was incoherent. It depends on who you talk to. They seem to be incapable of forming a quid pro quo. So, no, I find the whole process to be a sham.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CUPP: Well, listen, that train doesn't appear to be stopping before it hits impeachment station.

Then on a separate but parallel track, you have another freight train barreling down on Republicans, elections. Tuesday's election results continue to trend to what we saw in the midterms last year. Republicans lost in places they shouldn't have. Democrats won in places they shouldn't have. That train appears to be headed for a blue wave junction in 2020.

In both scenarios, this is bad for Republicans. The commander in chief may well be impeached and seriously bruised in the process and the party may lose huge in state Houses Congress down the ballot on 2020.

But a word of warning for Democrats, this does not mean they can coast. The president may very well walk away from impeachment unscathed, impeached in all likelihood but just as more popular, if not, more so among his base. He won't likely be removed from office unless Senate Republicans grow some serious testicular fortitude in the near future and he'll use to his advantage in his re-election bid.

Moreover, this week's elections showed not just any Democrat can win in Trump territory. Look at Kentucky, a reliably red state, where Democrat Andy Beshear beat Republican Matt Bevin. As Trump's own campaign manager said, the Democrats nominated a moderate whose dad was a moderate, who who didn't talk about the impeachment and acts like a Republican. Were any of the Democratic contenders for president listening to that or do they only listen to the ghosts?

Are they reading the polls? This week's New York Times/Siena poll of Democrats in six battleground states found that 55 percent prefer a moderate candidate. 62 percent want someone who could Compromise with Republicans. The data and the recent election results make a case for a moderate to beat Trump.

Well, there happen to be a couple running. Joe Biden, Amy Klobuchar and Pete Buttigieg all convincingly fill that bill to varying degrees.

But for Michael Bloomberg, you never saw it probably, you couldn't solve better than anyone else in his own mind, none of the Democrats running against Donald Trump are good enough. On Friday Bloomberg filed for the Alabama primary minutes before the deadline, laying a groundwork for a run. The reasoning, according to his adviser, we now need to finish the job and ensure that Trump is defeated. But Mike is increasingly concerned that the current field of candidates is not well-positioned to do that.

Well, sorry, Democrats who have been running for two years, visiting all 99 Iowa counties, eating fried butter at state fairs, sending poorly-paid staffers to burrow down in places like New Hampshire and South Carolina and everywhere in between. Sorry, Democrats who have been debating, fundraising, answering reporter's questions, voters' questions, Twitter questions, who have released plan after plan and explained over and over how you'd fix healthcare. Sorry, you guys just haven't performed up to Michael Bloomberg's standards, so here he comes to save the day.

[18:05:01]

Here is the deal. Bloomberg is not the answer. Not now, probably not ever. He has no natural constituency. And parachuting in three months before the first caucus with a boatload of cash will not endear him to voters.

If you can believe it, despite the dozens of candidates vying for the Democratic nomination, others are still considering jumping in this late in the game. Some names being floated include former Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick, former A.G. Eric Holder, former Secretary of State John Kerry, and even Hillary Clinton.

Okay. I just -- I have one question. Have you guys lost your minds? Iowa is less than three months away. Democrats have spent the last year introducing us to their candidates, all 200 of them. And the field is finally consolidating behind a handful of candidates, qualified candidates with voter bases, that anyone would think getting in now would help Democrats instead of hurting them blows my mind. Except Oprah. Oprah can still get in.

Okay. Here to discuss is former New Orleans Mayor, CNN Political Commentator Mitch Landrieu. Mr. Mayor, I hope you enjoyed that.

MITCH LANDRIEU, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Hey.

CUPP: What is going on in your party.

LANDRIEU: How are you doing?

CUPP: Are you worried that Mike Bloomberg thinks the field is insufficiently capable of beating Trump?

LANDRIEU: Well, first of all, two things. I'm definitely for Oprah and I'm really excited that LSU is cleaning Alabama's clock right now on national T.V., so getting those two important things out of mind.

Listen, there is a lot going on right now. We are in an unprecedented time. Things change from day-to-day. You mentioned in your opening, we have the impeachment thing moving forward that Congress is working on. And it appears that there is a lot of evidence from people inside the Trump administration, many of whom were appointed by Trump, that the president abused his power to hurt our country.

That's not a big surprise. But I think the depth and the breadth of it is will surprise the American public and, of course, Congress has to do its job and they're going to do that.

While that's happening, you have these elections that took place that are pretty compelling. In Virginia, I think Virginia spoke very, very loudly and clearly about what direction they want the country to go in and independents sided with the Democratic view of the world, at least in that state election.

In Kentucky, which is a -- I mean, really, a bellwether for the Republican Party, you had a Democrat beat an incumbent in a red state. And then, of course, next week, we have Louisiana, where we have an incumbent Democrat that's running, his name John Dale Edwards. And my guess is --

CUPP: I understand why you don't want to answer my question, but my question, Mr. Mayor, was what's happening in your party and are you worried that Mike Bloomberg doesn't think you have your acts together in the primary?

LANDRIEU: I'm coming to your question. And then John Dale Edwards is likely to win it. So you have a lot of stuff going on.

I don't share the view that Mayor Bloomberg has that our party is upside down and that we don't have candidates that can win. Joe Biden, I think, has been doing very, very well and you have a lot of other people that can. But be that as it may, he has decided to get into the race.

And the question that is -- what impact is it going to have on the race. He's obviously well-qualified to be president. He's got more money than anybody else in the country. He's got a record to run on. And because elections are like roller skating derbies, it's going to have an impact that we don't really understand at this point. So we'll see. But it's hard to predict at the moment.

CUPP: So Monmouth polling found this week, brand new poll, 74 percent of voters are satisfied with the current field. That's among Democrats. Shouldn't that be definitive enough for anybody considering getting in this late?

LANDRIEU: Well, I think that's probably true. That's the way I read the polls. I think the people are happy with the candidates that we have. I think we have 21 good candidates that have been through the gill. But be that as it may, Mike Bloomberg has every right to run.

I don't necessarily think it's good for the moderates. He would take up a fairly significant space in those lanes, and now he's going to have to go perform, so we'll see. I don't think we know. It's very hard to predict given howl volatile the political world is, what the heck is going to happen in the next three months. You've never seen anything like this, right?

CUPP: No, for sure, not.

LANDRIEU: Not on the Republican or the Democratic side.

CUPP: No, you're absolutely right. That's true.

Let's talk more about Joe Biden. He spent much of the week sparring with Elizabeth Warren about Medicare-for-all and what he called an elitism. Warren returned fire basically accusing Joe Biden of sexism for not allowing women to be angry. I'm a woman. I didn't hear his comments that way, but that's just me.

Anyway, here was Biden's response yesterday to that.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOE BIDEN (D), FORMER U.S. VICE PRESIDENT, PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: It is not anything that I did or was intending to do. It had nothing to do with that. It had to do with the fact that it started off when she said Biden is running on the wrong primary, because I disagreed with her Medicare-for-all proposal that cost trillions of dollars to pay for. And there is no way to pay for it without raising the taxes on middle class people.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CUPP: Yes. I mean, Mr. Mayor, I thought it was a really low blow for Elizabeth Warren to say that that was sexist, to say what Joe Biden said, which was look, it's either her way or the highway. And if you dare question her plan, you're somehow either a coward or insufficiently Democratic. What did you think?

LANDRIEU: Well, the person who made that charge most eloquently was Senator Amy Klobuchar in the last debate, as you may recall. So, obviously, it's not a sexist comment. It's so very okay for Senator Warren to be angry and/or passionate, it's not okay for her to be wrong.

And think what she's trying to do is Evel Knievel the Grand Canyon on the Medicare-for-all plan. And I think that what Vice President Biden was saying and Senator Klobuchar and, of course, Mayor Pete is that, listen, there is a way to get to universal healthcare without taking private insurance away from 160 million Americans and raising taxes on the middle class.

The Democrats are the ones that are in favor of giving people healthcare, not taking it away. And I think what the realistic wing of the Democratic Party is saying is don't give the Republicans the healthcare issue back again.

CUPP: Right.

LANDRIEU: You have to be really thoughtful and smart about how you propose something that actually works that you can pay for that doesn't raise taxes on the middle class and actually gives people healthcare. And I think people have legitimately said to Senator Warren, just because we don't agree with you doesn't make us weak or doesn't make us not ambitious, we're just really thoughtful about actually building a bridge that will get you to the other side.

CUPP: Yes.

LANDRIEU: And so, listen, this is all primary stuff. It's to be expected. They're big boys and girls. They can take it. They're throwing elbows at each other and that's just the way primaries go.

CUPP: And more to come. We'll have to have you back, former New Orleans Mayor Mitch Landrieu. Thanks for --

LANDRIEU: I'd be happy to come back.

CUPP: All right, great.

LANDRIEU: Thanks. Sure.

CUPP: Up next, the path former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg would take to the White House. Well, it's never been a successful one. I'm sure he's different though.

And later, House Republicans want to call Hunter Biden and the whistleblower to testify at next week's public impeachment hearings. I'll talk to a congressman about whether they'll get their wish.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:15:00]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BIDEN: With regard to Michael Bloomberg, I welcome him in the race. Michael is a solid guy and let's see where it goes. I have no problem with him getting in the race.

And in terms of he's running because of me, the last polls I looked at, I'm pretty far ahead.

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: He's became a nothing. He was really a nothing. He's not going to do well.

There is nobody I would rather run against than little Michael.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CUPP: Welcome to the race, Mr. Bloomberg. One thing President Trump and Joe Biden have in common, maybe the only thing, they both seem unfazed by a potential Michael Bloomberg run.

Meanwhile, Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, who have spent a solid chunk of their campaigns railing against income and equality in the billionaire class, they seem giddy of the prospect of taking on the billionaire, former mayor of New York City.

Warren invited Bloomberg to try out her billionaire tax calculator, which shows he'd pay $3 billion under her wealth tax. And upon hearing the Bloomberg news, Sanders posted, the billionaire class is scared and they should be scared. Okay. But that's all campaign bluster.

What do the hard numbers say? Well, as two of my CNN colleagues, to simply put it yesterday, Michael Bloomberg, the ultimate data guy, is ignoring the data. Most recently, an October Fox News poll found that 32 percent of Democratic primary voters would never vote for Bloomberg, not to mention his advisers saying that if Bloomberg runs, he'll skip the first four primary states and instead focus on Super Tuesday.

So why run when the numbers are against you? Why run if you're skipping the early states, which has never worked? And if you're goal is for Democrats to nominate a formidable moderate, why run if your candidacy weakens the formidable moderate in the lead and boosts the two left flanking non-moderates?

Okay. Here to figure it all out, Democratic strategic Aisha Moodie- Mills and Republican strategist John Brabender.

Aisha, Bloomberg skipping the early caucus and primary states, hedging his bets on Super Tuesday.

AISHA MOODIE-MILLS, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: I don't even live in those states and I feel disrespected by the whole thing.

CUPP: Totes.

MOODIE-MILLS; Totally disrespectful. He is just going to jump in this race and say, look at me, I've got all this money, I'm going to snub the early states and claim that he's going to try to compete on Super Tuesday.

The reality though is that he has no path to victory with regards to the delegates. Who is Bloomberg's base? I don't know. I don't think that he knows. I'm not sure how the strategists are actually counting this out here. Yes.

JOHN BRABENDER, REPUBLICAN STRATEGIST: Yes. But if he's going to do this -- look, you can say it's unfair but it's actually smart strategically if he's going to do this. What he said there, he's saying is -- all right, this is not going the way Democrats thought. They all thought we're going to play nice.

CUPP: Says who? 74 percent are satisfied.

MOODIE-MILLS: You're talking about the billionaire boys' club donor class, like that's --

BRABENDER: Let me finish. What they're saying Biden was supposed to be the pick, we were all going to have these --

CUPP: Still the front-runner, okay.

BRABENDER: But now he's fourth in Iowa. CUPP: Okay.

BRABENDER: And what a lot of people believe he's falling, falling, falling, he's going to lose Iowa, he's going to lose New Hampshire and there's going to be a lot of people get excited about Elizabeth Warren when she probably wins both of those and then all of a sudden there is no centrist. And that's why he doesn't want to get in those early ones.

CUPP: But how will Bloomberg explain the optics of getting in this late, parachuting in just because he's a billionaire? He can only do that because he's a billionaire. How does he explain that?

MOODIE-MILLS: To Democrats?

BRABENDER: He with the gold makes the electoral rule. I mean, there is no doubt about that.

MOODIE-MILLS: I just want to put some massive air quotes around this, they. Who this -- these massive air quotes around this mysterious they, that they think that Biden is tanking, they wanted it to be Joe Biden. The they that we're talking about are not the people. We're talking about a donor class that's condemned a moderate donor class that's concerned that Elizabeth Warren is going to take their money from them and they want to prop up Joe Biden. That is not the people, which is why --

BRABENDER: Hillary Clinton is making phone calls to potential donors about potentially getting in this race.

[18:15:07]

So if it was go so well for Biden, do you think even Hillary Clinton would be thinking about getting into this race?

CUPP: I think that says more about Hillary Clinton than it does about the state of this race. But, listen, John, I heard it non-stop over the past two days. Mike Bloomberg is a centrist. He can appeal to Republicans. I don't know a single Republican, including this one, who likes Mike Bloomberg. This feels like a fantasy to me. Who is his base?

BRABENDER: No, I don't think that's where his base is. I think his base is to say you'd better be fearful of these Democrats on the left because they can't get elected in November, I can. I'm a real Democrat, but I'm a centrist one sand a reasonable one.

MOODIE-MILLS: And who is he telling that to? The Democrats?

Here is the problem with this entire conversation we're having, is that we're not actually talking about the people. So when we look at the polls, when we look at Iowa, when we look at just the national polls, the people are clearly saying, the Democratic base, the voters are saying, look, sure we want somebody who could beat Donald Trump but we think that most of these candidates in the field already can beat Donald Trump, number one. So we don't need another person to be an alternative.

Ad two, the entire narrative of the Democratic base right now is to figure out some kind of parity and equity regards to the economic-like condition of America. We're not about propping up billionaires and making them our saviors in the way the Republican Party did.

CUPP: You need to tell that to Mike Bloomberg.

I've got one more, and this references something I said in the last block. Aisha, Deval Patrick, former governor that no one outside of donors knows who that is, and Eric Holder was held in contempt of Congress by some Democrats even, John Kerry couldn't beat George W. Bush, Hillary Clinton couldn't beat Donald Trump. Should any of these people consider getting into the race right now?

MOODIE-MILLS: No. I just don't -- I think that this old school philosophy and, frankly, it's paternalistic politics that says that this middle of the road person is the only person that can galvanize America has been proven to be false. All those people that you just mentioned are winners, frankly. And the folks that exciting to Democrats are the people who actually are principled and stand for something and, frankly, on the more progressive side (ph).

CUPP: John, I'm going to give you the last word in the next block because you guys are sitting tight, and we're going to talk more.

After the president humiliated Jeff Sessions repeatedly, he is crawling into a campaign for Alabama Senate by pledging fealty to his abuser. He's not alone.

And the president gets a loyal attack dog assigned to the Intelligence Committee just in time for impeachment hearings next week. How is that going to go for Democrats? I'll ask one. Stick around.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:25:00]

CUPP: President Trump called him weak, confused, ineffective. He allegedly called him a dumb southerner and, according to The New York Times an idiot, to his face. How has Jeff Sessions, this fired attorney general, responded to those humiliating insults? Take a look.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JEFF SESSIONS (R-AL), SENATE CANDIDATE: When I left President Trump's cabinet, did I write a tell-all book? No. Did I ago on CNN and attack the president? Nope. Have I said a crossword about our president? Not one time.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CUPP: That was Session's new ad for his bid to reclaim his old Alabama Senate seat and it's, in a word, pathetic. Here is what all that groveling and preening got him from the president. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: Well, I haven't gotten involved. I saw he said very nice things about me last night, but we'll have to see. I'll have to see.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CUPP: Sessions joins a long line of GOP heavyweights who have groveled at the feet of the president despite being personally insulted and humiliated by him.

Trump once called Rand Paul a delusional narcissist and fake conservative. Trump once gave out Lindsey Graham's personal cell phone number on national television. He insulted Ted Cruz's wife, attacked his faith, questioned his citizenship and accused his dad of being involved in the Kennedy assassination and yet all three have lined up behind Trump to shield him from oversight and defend his regular abuses of power, and for what? We'll have to see what this grand bargain gets them in the end.

Back with me now are Democratic strategist Aisha Moodie-Mills, Republican strategist John Brabender.

You know what I just want to say to Jeff Session's, John? Have you no balls, sir? Where are your balls? That ad was pathetic.

BRABENDER: Well, I understand what he was trying to say.

CUPP: You would never make an ad like that for a candidate.

BRABENDER: I would not have executed that way. But I understand what he's trying to do. But here is what he really should have been talking about. Nobody fought harder for the Trump agenda than Jeff Sessions. He was the first senator to actually come out and endorse Donald Trump.

He has all of these things that if he wants to tie himself to Donald Trump, he can do that. And he can say, look, I'm sorry, I had to take a principled position as attorney general but that's what we in Alabama do, even when they're hard decisions, and then everybody could move on.

But I think the other candidates that went after Sessions looked any better, quite frankly.

CUPP: Aisha, what did you make of that ad?

MOODIE-MILLS: I think -- well, I mean, I think he was completely emasculated. He looked ridiculous. And, frankly --

CUPP: Trump has a way of doing that.

MOODIE-MILLS: I don't care what side you're on. I don't want my leader to be a punk. Like I need you to stand up and have some conviction and some backbone. And so, to me, just the whole thing fell flat. But in your opening, you reminded us how much of a jerk the president is, how horrible of a human he is. And if we look at the cautionary tale of Kentucky this week, little miniature Trump, voters said, we don't want someone who is a bully, who is a nasty person, who is a jerk, and they ended up getting rid of him. And so I'm not sold that --

CUPP: Matt Bevin.

MOODIE-MILLS: Bevin in Kentucky, I'm not completely sold on the idea that hanging on to Trump is a winning strategy for some of these folks when it comes to the general. Getting to the primaries --

CUPP: But we'll see.

MOODIE-MILLS: -- but we'll see.

BRABENDER: And we'll find out in Louisiana in a week.

CUPP: Well that's true.

John, as you know, Trump wants to flip that seat back to red, that seat in Alabama.

BRABENDER: Yes. I think he's going to stay out of it unless somehow Roy Moore starts to. But I think Roy Moore is running last. I think you got really good candidates there. You have the secretary of state, John Merrill, you've got Sessions, Tommy Tuberville.

CUPP: Yes, there's like a hundred of them. Yes.

BRABENDER: I mean, there are some good candidates. There's no reason for Trump to get involved unless somehow Moore starts to rise and I don't think anybody believes that's going to happen.

CUPP: Well, so let's just go back for a second. Someone insults my spouse, my father, my faith and my ethnicity, I'm pretty sure we're not going to be friends any more. What happened to Ted Cruz?

[18:30:01]

BRABENDER: Well, look, the thing that you find in Trump world is, I mean, if you remember Cruz hijacked the night of the convention.

CUPP: The RNC. I was there. Yes.

BRABENDER: Right before Mike Pence ...

CUPP: Yes.

BRABENDER: OK.

CUPP: No, he has been just as vicious in attacking Trump before they became best friends. I don't understand.

BRABENDER: Right. But what you do find is there's always seats on the Trump train if you're willing eventually to get on and that's how this President is.

CUPP: I mean, Aisha, Trump is a very effective insulter.

MOODIE-MILLS: Yes.

CUPP: I mean, if there's a word for it. But he's effective at it. Is it worth ...

BRABENDER: And universal at it.

CUPP: Yes. Oh, yes, he spares no one. But is it worth the humiliation to keep your job?

MILLS: Look, every 'good Republican' I speak to and I have some friends who are Republicans, we were just talking about one former RNC Chairman, Michael Steele, talks about how embarrassed they are with this president and his behavior. And I am just so confused at why the Republicans aren't lining up and getting rid of this guy and saying these are not our values, even when it comes to like the Vice President Mike Pence who is a Christian man, a man of faith who always talks about leading with his values and they literally are running around behind this guy who they would not want their children to emulate. Welcome to mind battle.

CUPP: And to me it's circa 2015.

BRABENDER: Right.

CUPP: I mean, this is where we've been.

BRABENDER: But you know too, they compartmentalize it between Donald Trump, Trump the attacker ...

CUPP: We do, yes.

BRABENDER: ... and the Donald Trump agenda. In fact, they're shocked how conservative he is.

CUPP: Yes.

BRABENDER: How much of a Republican he is and a lot of things he's doing they're saying, "Go get them." But every now and then they're wincing and like everybody else they're turning on Twitter in the morning and (inaudible) ...

CUPP: I've never bought the compartmentalization idea. You bought them. You got all of them. You can't take this and leave that in any way.

MILLS: Exactly.

CUPP: Aisha Moodie-Mills and John Brabender ...

MILLS: Thank you.

CUPP: ... thanks so much for spending time with me tonight, I appreciate it.

Well, if over 2,600 pages of transcripts weren't enough transparency, next week begins the public phase of the impeachment inquiry. It is arguably also the most critical, I'll have a Democratic lawmaker join me next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:36:13]

CUPP: In THE RED FILE tonight, the impeachment inquiry is going public. This morning Republicans submitted their own impeachment witness requests to House Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff. Not shockingly, topping that list, the anonymous whistleblower and Hunter Biden.

Chairman Schiff said the committee is evaluating the requests and will give them 'due consideration'. Although it's doubtful those two will make the cut. And just in time for public hearings, GOP Congressman, one of Trump's closest allies, Jim Jordan, has been temporarily appointed to the Intelligence Committee, seeming to all but guarantee a televised circus. So how will Democrats strategize this new phase of the impeachment inquiry?

With me now is Chief Deputy Whip and Michigan Congressman Dan Kildee. Congressman, starting with the GOP witness list which also includes former Ambassador Kurt Volker, former Fusion GPS staffer, Nellie Ohr, and former DNC staffer Alexandra Chalupa. What do you think Democrats will do with these requests? Will any of them be approved?

REP. DAN KILDEE (D-MI): Well, certainly, Chairman Schiff will have to take a close look at this. But I think the idea of outing the whistleblower, for example, is preposterous. I mean, it's called the Whistleblower Protection Act.

The whole idea is that we want to protect people who are willing to speak truth to power without any retribution toward them. And rather than dealing with the facts that the whistleblower brought forward, of course, which have been corroborated by the other witnesses, they want to try to impugn the whistleblower's integrity somehow, so I think we set that aside.

The idea of bringing Hunter Biden in, to allow the Republicans to pursue their ridiculous conspiracy theories about the Bidens is what some of my friends would call a goat rodeo. Though they may want to engage in it, we're not going to be a party to it.

CUPP: So what are your thoughts on Congressman Jim Jordan joining the Intel Committee?

KILDEE: Well, it's just another example that the Republicans have decided that the best way to protect the President is to turn this whole thing into a gong show and to try to make it a theater of chaos with antics rather than dig in and get to the facts. They have an Intelligence Committee. It's been functioning for a long time. The idea that they want to bring sort of one of the TV players from

the Republican conference into this is a pretty strong signal that they're not going to take the facts seriously.

CUPP: Well, I mean, let me just be fair, look, just to be fair, Democrats are not above antics. Adam Schiff is on television all of the time and if I recall in one of the hearings, he read a not factual reading of what actually happened on the call. Politicians politic, but I think I understand your point that Republicans are planning to use these hearings as distractions, because really it's their only play.

KILDEE: Yes.

CUPP: Those hearings begin this Wednesday. What's the goal here for Democrats as far as this week's testimony? Is it swaying public opinion or are you guys targeting potential Senate jurors?

KILDEE: Well, I think one will affect the other. Public opinion will clearly have an impact on the senate. Public sentiment is everything. This will be a chance for the American people to hear directly from these witnesses.

CUPP: Yes.

KILDEE: These people who have dedicated their lives to serving the country and I think it's very difficult to refute the stories that they tell, the characterizations that they will bring forward about this president.

CUPP: Yes.

KILDEE: And it also helped make the point that this is not just about one phone call.

[18:39:57]

This is about a concerted, coordinated, organized effort by this administration at the direction of the President to solicit political intrusion by Ukraine into our election in order to benefit the President.

CUPP: Well, to your exact point, President Trump is boasting about releasing another transcript from another Ukraine call, that one from April. He's boasting about and giving it over to Democrats. Do you know anything about that transcript?

KILDEE: I don't and I hate to speculate about it.

CUPP: OK.

KILDEE: But this president, he does have a bit of a habit of using what you'd call a controlled burn. Maybe there's something in that transcript that is bad, but he will sort of point out that he's the one who brought it forward so it must exonerate him in some way.

CUPP: Redeeming, yes. Right. Right.

KILDEE: No matter what's in it. So he does tend to lead with bad news as if somehow if he reveals it, then it's like he's committing some sort of a sacrament.

CUPP: Yes. Quickly before we go, I know you guys want to hear from Mick Mulvaney. He's stalling, of course, and I know Democrats don't want to drag this out interminably. But he's a relevant witness, so how long are you guys going to wait to get him?

KILDEE: Well, they're obviously going to use stall tactics. I think for many of us, we feel that we have the witnesses and the information that we need. We still need to pursue all of the witnesses that we can, but if they're going to just simply stall, I think we have to take action.

I hope Mr. Mulvaney comes forward. He is at the center of all of this.

CUPP: Yes, he is.

KILDEE: He sort of slipped and had a moment of truth when he was standing before reporters, a couple of weeks ago.

CUPP: Yes.

KILDEE: He has some questions to answer.

CUPP: All right. Congressman Kildee, thanks so much for coming on and breaking that down for us.

KILDEE: Thanks. Thanks, S.E.

CUPP: All right. The President's allies and right wing media outlets have made a concerted and dangerous effort to out the whistleblower, including a misidentification. That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:46:09]

CUPP: As more and more evidence mounts that a political quid pro quo did exist between President Trump and Ukraine. Some Congressional Republicans are sharpening their line of attack, expose the whistleblower. Most publicly that charge came on Monday from Senator Rand Paul at a Trump rally in Kentucky.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY): I say tonight to the media, do your job and print his name.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CUPP: He then went further Tuesday by saying he could reveal the whistleblower's named himself. Well, that was the Rand Paul who's pretending to be a Trump suck up. But the other Rand Paul, the one who is pretending to be a libertarian back in 2013, he actually won an award for his work protecting whistleblowers.

That Rand Paul pushed for protections for whistleblowers to extend to government contractors such as Edward Snowden. That Rand Paul was outraged by the NSA's bulk data collection exposed by Snowden, a violation of privacy rights.

But the Rand Paul who's pretending to be a Trump suck up no longer cares about privacy or conservatism. Not when it comes to the whistleblower. Senator Lindsey Graham is also saying now he needs to know who this person is. Republicans put him on the list of people they want to testify publicly in the impeachment inquiry and no surprise, Trump wants him outed too.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: The whistleblower is a disgrace to our country. A disgrace. And the whistleblower, because of that, should be revealed.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CUPP: All right. Let's make something clear. The whistleblower is protected by law. He's also kind of unnecessary to this investigation now that officials have corroborated all of the complaints he laid out.

OK. With me now is CNN Chief Media Correspondent and Anchor of "RELIABLE SOURCES," Brian Stelter. Brian, as you know, every major news outlet has refused to publish the name of the whistleblower. Even Fox News, as you reported, told their hosts and personalities do not identify the whistleblower. Here, the media is refusing to aid and abet Republicans who seems to just be out for blood.

BRIAN STELTER, CNN CHIEF MEDIA CORRESPONDENT: And I think that's partly because it's very, very hard if not almost impossible to confirm the name of whoever this was.

CUPP: Yes.

STELTER: News outlets may think they know the whistleblower was, they may have some evidence. I certainly don't know. I don't think most journalists know who it is. But certainly the shorthand is they're all been claiming they know who this whistleblower is.

CUPP: Yes.

STELTER: If the lawyers won't confirm it and the whistleblower won't confirm it and others won't confirm it, then how do you know, for sure, that's number one. And number two, as you said, it doesn't really matter anymore.

If I'm the first person to spot a fire on the horizon, but then everybody else notices the fire and the fire fighter show up and the fire is being fought, then what's the point of identifying the original fire witness, it's irrelevant. I understand though why for political reasons it makes for an interesting argument. I get that. But I hope people and I think most people do see through the smoke.

CUPP: Well, so sticking with the media on this, if President Trump or any other elected official chooses to expose the whistleblower as they seem to be threatening, how do you think the media should handle that?

STELTER: It is striking that Facebook and YouTube, for example, have said, "Hey, we're going to make sure the posts that are claiming to identify this person don't show up in your feeds either."

CUPP: Yes.

STELTER: Facebook, for example, is saying, "Any mention of the name, the potential person's name, violates our coordinated harm policy which prohibits outing of a witness or informant or activist.

CUPP: Yes.

STELTER: That is a remarkable position for these big tech companies to take.

CUPP: Yes.

STELTER: I don't think they will be talking that way a few years ago.

CUPP: Yes.

STELTER: So we see a number of different institutions trying to be responsible in this situation.

CUPP: Yes.

STELTER: However, being responsible feeds into the GOP or the right- wing narrative that there's a cover up going on.

CUPP: Right. Right.

STELTER: They said, "The whistleblower must be a Democratic spy."

CUPP: And then he is with him, yes.

STELTER: I think it's a double-edged sword, isn't it?

[18:50:00]

CUPP: Well, so a guest on one Fox News show named a person he thought was the whistleblower on air. Do you think hosts should be held accountable for what their guests say?

STELTER: I thought it was strange that the host didn't say anything in that moment. I've been in this situation where a guest says something, you're the host, you don't catch it. You're embarrassed by it later. Maybe that's what happened in this case.

But Albert Alsnar (ph) reported this week that Fox hosts and stars were told, we are not in this game, we are not outing this whistleblower. We don't know who it is. We don't know who this person is.

CUPP: Yes.

STELTER: Even though the Sean Hannities of the world do want to, I guess, blur out whatever name they think applies. I guess at the heart of this, it's an attempt to deflect and distract. And it can seem like a petty game, but I think there's a layer where this is dangerous because it's ultimately about disinformation. There's a disinformation campaign trying to get away from the core of the story.

CUPP: Yes. Well, and I want to talk more about that with you, so don't go anywhere. We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:54:52]

CUPP: I'm back with Brian Stelter. We're talking about the whistleblower and the media's responsibility here. Now, the person who said his name on a fox news show, the guest was a radio host, a right-wing radio host name Lars Larson and he's now complaining that he's getting death threats and people cursing at him.

Ironic, considering what the whistleblower's own attorney is saying that he's urging people, notably Members of Congress to reflect on the important role of whistleblowers and the danger that they are put in, if revealed.

STELTER: Right. And this whistleblower should be nonpartisan.

CUPP: Yes.

STELTER: It used to be nonpartisan. There is a value in a democratic society to create forums and channels where government staffers can come forward with allegations of wrongdoing. Now, I get we're in an incredible situation here where that allegation is against the President.

CUPP: Yes.

STELTER: But we don't have to throw away all of the rules in this situation just because of that. The President is still out there demanding who this whistleblower is. But Lars Larson doesn't actually know. The people who are claiming to know the name of this person, him or her, they don't actually know. Only his lawyers, really know.

CUPP: Yes. And we'll have to wait for that confirmation if we ever get it.

STELTER: If it even matters at all.

CUPP: That's right. Brian, thank you so much.

STELTER: Thanks. CUPP: And make sure to catch Brian on "RELIABLE SOURCES" tomorrow at

11:00 am Eastern. That does it for me. But next up, do not miss hour of "THE AXE FILES." David Axelrod speaks to Cindy McCain about her late husband's legacy and the state of the Republican Party on "THE AXE FILES." It's powerful. Stick around.