Return to Transcripts main page

Don Lemon Tonight

World Leaders Overheard Bashing Trump At NATO Summit; Three Experts Testify Trump Committed Impeachable Acts, One Dissents; Quid Pro Quo And Impeachment; Next Steps In Impeachment; House Judiciary May Hold A Hearing Next Week; Interview With Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX) About The Experts In Constitutional Law Answering Questions From Democrats And Republicans In The Impeachment Hearings; Hot Mic Moments During Trump's NATO Trip; Trump Cancels Press Conference; Biden Campaign Releases New Ad Slamming President Trump. Aired 10-11p ET

Aired December 04, 2019 - 22:00   ET

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

[22:00:00]

CHRIS CUOMO, CNN HOST: Now, it's mostly Justin Trudeau, obviously the leader of Canada. But you saw them all laughing. That's Macron. You know, you got Boris Johnson there just laughing at the president of the United States. Now, thank you for watching though I'm sorry you had to see that. Let's get the take with D. Lemon here as "CNN TONIGHT" takes over the coverage. That's not posing, not posturing for the cameras. This is how they talk about our president.

DON LEMON, CNN HOST: Yes, as if he's a joke. They're talking about him -- it's the truth.

CUOMO: You know, the whole payoff here of his style --

LEMON: Look, when people are laughing at you, that means you're the joke. He's the brunt of a joke right there, and the irony here -- he's the one who's always making fun of people, coming up with pet names, calling people horrible names, you know, pet names. You know, Sleepy Joe and whatever, right? And he gets laughs saying, oh, the whole world -- he's right. People are laughing not at us, but at him.

CUOMO: They're certainly not laughing with him like they do at the rallies. You know, it's like our mothers taught us, you know, when you see ugly things, it says more about you than whoever you're directing it toward. And like Angela Merkel, sit next to him today, when he said, Trudeau is two-faced, but you know what, he's a pretty nice guy.

You know, the payoff to his style is supposed to be that it's perceived as strength around the world and that Obama was soft, but Trump is strong and that's why we get so much respect. Does that look like respect? Those are major world leaders.

LEMON: They put up with him because they know they have to. They smile for him -- you could listen, you can see the body language when they have to sit there for the photo op and when they have to talk to him. They put up with him, and then behind his back, that's what they do. And it has been reported that they've done it before. This is not the first time. You know that, Chris. Come on.

CUOMO: But I mean, look, I'm just saying that, you know, for the people who support the president and they say, listen, I like his muscularity, you know, you don't like the way he talks, Cuomo. You don't like the way he talks, Lemon, but you know what? It projects strength, and it's good for America to be strong. Do we look strong now?

LEMON: Look, he can talk the way he wants to talk. He's the president of the United States.

CUOMO: Right.

LEMON: He represents me. He represents you. He represents the entire country. And so, if you're going to represent me, then act like you've been there before. Have some dignity about yourself. Don't do things that are gauche. Don't act like a 5-year-old and be -- and expect to be treated like you're -- and expect to be treated with respect.

Don't act like a child and expect to be treated like an adult. Don't be disrespectful to people or not respectful -- disrespectful I think is not actually a word. But don't not be respectful to people and then expect to be treated with respect. Don't be nasty to the media and then say, well, the media always treats me terribly. Don't do horrible and unethical things and then expect people to write glowing reviews about you.

So, I think the hypocrisy is just unbelievable. That is not an opinion that I'm giving. That is a fact. And this is what happens. People laugh at you behind your back, and they talk about you terribly, and then you take your marbles and your toys, and you go home, because the kids are laughing at you.

I want to leave camp early, mom. Everybody's being mean to me, so I'm going to go back, and I'm just going to leave. I'm not going to have my press conference. That's what happened.

CUOMO: Or he has one for way too long, which was what Trudeau was complaining about. I mean, look, at the end of the day, an election is about persuasion, and did he deliver? You're better off than you were, and there are different gradations of that.

You know, his slogan is make America great again. You tell me what's great that. You tell me what great about being laughed at. Not on the basis of a policy, not because we're in economic decline and people are saying, oh, you're not so big now. They're laughing at you despite your greatness.

LEMON: Do you know he did that with?

CUOMO: They all need us. Everybody there needs us for their own wellbeing and they still laugh.

LEMON: They never did that with the guy he is jealous of, and that's Obama. Did you see the way Justin Trudeau used to look at Obama, like he was in awe? CUOMO: You give what you get. You know, on that level, everybody

thinks that the big -- you got to give what you get.

LEMON: Listen, I got a tight show, but I've just wondered as I was watching today, and I know that you watched. I just wondered if the folks on the Republican and the hearing today, if they were hard of hearing because they were all talking so loud! Everything they said was like this! And I had to lower the volume of my television like, I can hear you. I don't know why you're talking so loud.

CUOMO: Did you have it up too high to begin with?

LEMON: No, because they were all talking like this the whole time, Chris!

[22:05:05]

CUOMO: Like what?

LEMON: Like this!

CUOMO: Man, that's loud.

LEMON: Thank you. This is CNN TONIGHT. I'm Don Lemon.

CUOMO: You never lose key, though.

LEMON: See you later.

CUOMO: I'll see you later.

LEMON: This is CNN TONIGHT. I'm Don Lemon. See, you can hear me. They were on a microphone. You don't have to scream. I can actually whisper. You can hear me, because I'm wearing a microphone. You don't have to do this!

If you thought that a hearing with four constitutional law experts wouldn't have any big moments, boy were you wrong. Just minutes after the professors are sworn in, top Republican Doug Collins -- Doug Collins! Gets a clap back from Pamela Carlin for saying this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. DOUG COLLINS (R-GA): You couldn't have possibly actually digested the Adam Schiff report from yesterday or the Republican response in any real way.

PROF. PAMELA KARLAN, PROFESSOR OF LAW AT STANFORD LAW SCHOOL: Mr. Collins, I would like to say to you, sir, that I read transcripts of every one of the witnesses who appeared in the live hearing, because I would not speak about these things without reviewing the facts. So, I'm insulted by the suggestion that as a law professor, I don't care about those facts.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: That as three of the four professors agree the president committed impeachable acts.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Professor Feldman, did President Trump commit the impeachable high crime and misdemeanor of abuse of power based on that evidence and those findings?

PROF. NOAH FELDMAN, PROFESSOR OF LAW AT HARVARD LAW SCHOOL: Based on that evidence and those findings, the president did commit an impeachable abuse of office.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Professor Karlan, same question.

KARLAN: Same answer.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And Professor Gerhardt, did President Trump commit the impeachable high crime and misdemeanor of abuse of power?

PROF. MICHAEL GERHARDT, PROFESSOR OF CONSTITUTIONAL LAW AT THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA SCHOOL OF LAW IN CHAPEL HILL: We three are unanimous, yes.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: And with all of this going on, guess who makes an appearance in the hearing room today? None other than Devin Nunes. You remember his phone records were uncovered in the Intel Committee's impeachment report, showing a web of calls between Nunes, Rudy Giuliani, and Lev Parnas. But there's -- let's call it a novel defense going around, and it comes from none other than Fox News' Greg Jarrett who suggests that maybe somebody else was using Nunes' phone.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GREGG JARRETT, FOX NEWS LEGAL ANALYST: Well, we just don't know because we don't know the details. In fact, it's a call log. Does that mean that Devin Nunes was actually on the call or somebody else? And we don't know the import of it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: OK. So some mystery man or woman borrows Nunes' phone to talk to Giuliani and Parnas? It's ridiculous. And what Congressman would do that anyway? But I digress. Back to today's hearing. Listen to this. This is from Professor Jonathan Turley.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JONATHAN TURLEY, GEORGE WASHINGTON SCHOOL OF LAW: If you prove a quid pro quo, you might have an impeachable offense.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: You might have an impeachable offense? Talk about moving the goal post. Let's cast our minds way back, way back to the end of September to what Chris Christie said hours before the White House released the rough transcript of the president's July 25th Ukraine call.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. CHARLIE CRIST (D-FL): If he's saying, listen, do me a favor, you know, go investigate Joe Biden, that's one thing? Let's take a breath. Let's read the transcript and let's read the whistle-blower complaint and then we're going to be able to make some real judgments here.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: That's pretty clear. Christie is saying if the president says, listen, do me a favor, go investigate Joe Biden, that's a problem. Spoiler alert. That's what the president said. It's right there in the rough transcript released by the White House, the one Chris Christie said that we should all read, and I quote.

I would like you to do us a favor, though, because our country has been through a lot and Ukraine knows a lot about it. I would like you to find out -- I would like you to find out. I would like you to find out what happened with this whole situation with Ukraine. They say crowd trike. I guess you have one of your wealthy people. The server, they say Ukraine has it.

And this. I would like to have the Attorney General call you or your people, and I would like you to get to the bottom of it. And this. There's a lot of talk about the Bidens' son that Biden stopped the prosecution, and a lot of people want to find out about that, so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great.

[22:10:00]

By the way, someone in the hearing said it didn't say in the transcript to investigate the Bidens. That had my head spinning today, because it was right there in the transcript. It was like wait. It was a woman. I forget who it was. Like I said, it's pretty clear. The president says do me a favor, investigate the Bidens, and the DNC server right there in the transcript.

Yet we have Professor Turley today moving the goal posts and questioning whether there was a quid pro quo. You know who might be able to clear all of this up? Do you know who? The government officials who testified under oath. Roll the tape.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

AMB. GORDON SONDLAND, E.U. AMBASSADOR: Was there a quid pro quo? As I testified previously, with regard to the requested White House call and the White House meeting, the answer is yes.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: Gordon Sondland says there was a quid pro quo. The answer is yes. And how about Bill Taylor's testimony to the Intel Committee? Adam Schiff asks, so, if they don't do this, they are not going to get that was your understanding? Taylor, yes, sir. Schiff, are you aware that quid pro quo literally

means this for that? Taylor, I am. Bill Taylor says it was his clear understanding that aid would not come until Ukraine's president committed to an investigation, which is the definition literally of a quid pro quo. Tim Morrison says the same thing.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What did Ambassador Sondland tell you that he told Mr. Yermak?

TIM MORRISON, FORMER NSC AIDE: That the Ukrainians would have to have the prosecutor general make a statement with respect to the investigations as a condition of having the aid lifted.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: So, was there any doubt? Any doubt at all that the president was demanding Ukraine announce investigations? Lieutenant Colonel Alexander Vindman says none at all. Question, was there any doubt in your mind as to what the president or our president was asking for -- our president was asking for as a deliverable? Vindman, there was no doubt. Fiona Hill backs him up.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

FIONA HILL, FORMER OFFICIAL NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL SPECIALIZING IN SOVIET, RUSSIAN AND EUROPEAN AFFAIRS: When I came in, Gordon Sondland was basically saying, look, we have a deal here that there will be a meeting. I have a deal here with Chief of Staff Mulvaney, there will be a meeting if the Ukrainians open up or announce these investigations into 2016 and Burisma.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: George Kent also really clear that the White House meeting President Zelensky wanted was dependent on politically motivated investigations.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GEORGE KENT, U.S. DIPLOMAT, DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY, EUROPEAN AND EURASIAN AFFAIRS: In mid-August, it became clear to me that Giuliani's efforts to gin up politically motivated investigations were now infecting U.S. engagement with Ukraine. Leveraging President Zelensky's desire for a White House meeting.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: You know who else was pretty clear about a quid pro quo, at least until he tried to deny he said what we all heard him say? The ever popular Mick Mulvaney. Well, he may not be so popular with the president for saying this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) MICK MULVANEY, WHITE HOUSE CHIEF OF STAFF: Did he also mention to me

in the past the corruption related to the DNC server? Absolutely. No question about that. But that's it. That's why we held up the money.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: To be clear, what you just described is a quid pro quo. It is funding will not flow unless the investigation into the Democratic server happened as well.

MULVANEY: We do -- we do that all the time with foreign policy. I have news for everybody. Get over it. There's going to be political influence in foreign policy.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: I love that face when Jonathan says, do you know what you just described is a quid pro quo? He's like going, oh, oh, I guess -- it was a twofer, a quid pro quo and a get over it. That's a whole lot of current and former officials saying there was a quid pro quo. And let's not forget the president himself on the White House lawn telling us right out loud -- cameras were rolling by the way -- he wanted Ukraine to investigate the Bidens.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Mr. President, what exactly did you hope Zelensky would do about the Bidens after your phone call? Exactly?

[22:15:00]

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Well, I would think that if they were honest about it, they'd start a major investigation into the Bidens. It's a very simple answer. They should investigate the Bidens.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: Like I said, the president's impeachment defenders are trying to move the goalposts. But to believe them, you'd have to ignore the evidence. You'd have to ignore testimony from one government official after another. You'd have to ignore what the president's acting chief of staff said.

You'd have to ignore what the president himself said on the call. Maybe that explains all of the yelling! So, what happens after today's hearing? What are the next steps in the impeachment? We'll discuss with Phil Mattingly, Max Boot, Susan Hennessey, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[22:20:00]

LEMON: The House Judiciary Committee holding its first impeachment hearing today, and it was heated from the very start. Republicans tried to derail the whole thing by throwing up one procedural roadblock after another. But that didn't stop three legal scholars from testifying there's evidence President Trump has committed impeachable offenses. The legal expert called by Republicans disagreed.

I want to bring in Phil Mattingly, Max Boot, Susan Hennessey. Good evening one and all. Thank you so much. Phil, let's start with you. I'm surprised you're not in the halls in the Capitol. They actually let you in the bureau tonight. So Republicans and Democrats in opposite corners on impeachment, but what happens in the House after today's hearing?

PHIL MATTINGLY, NEW YORK BASED CNN CORRESPONDENT: They even let me sit down. This is a very big night for me. Look, here's what you need to know. The partisan divide is not going to be bridged anytime soon. I think anybody who has been watching any of the hearings knows that for a fact. But clearly Democrats are moving forward.

Here's what we know at this moment. The next hearing -- and we still don't know the date, but it will happen next week -- will be a presentation of the House Intel Committee report. Both the staff counsel for the Democrats and the Republicans will present that report. At the same time the drafting of the articles of impeachment will start kicking into gear.

You saw a few mentions related to specific articles that may came up -- come up today with the legal scholars, expects some of what you heard from the legal scholars, those supportive of the Democratic position, those words to be involved in that process as well. There could be other hearings. Right now, it's still pretty fluid.

But one thing you need to know for a fact, Don. This morning at a closed door meeting, no staff was allowed in. It was Democratic caucus members. They weren't even allowed to bring in their phones which makes our jobs a lot more difficult. Nancy Pelosi, the Speaker of the House came in and said simply, are you ready? Her point being this is moving forward. Not a single person said no. Democrats are going. The question is when they actually finish up.

LEMON: Very interesting. Susan, let's bring you in now. Three experts today saying, no question there is enough evidence for impeachment. One saying take more time, get more evidence. What do you think?

SUSAN HENNESSEY, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY AND LEGAL ANALYST: Yes, I think that the reason why the Republican witness Jonathan Turley was brought in today was really to create the impression that there is a sort of reasonable minds can disagree as to whether or not what we have seen described and really the uncontested facts at this point -- whether or not that constitutes an impeachable offense.

That's just not the case. This is clearly -- you know, the conduct of the president of the United States is accused of, trading an official act for a personal benefit is a classic impeachable offense. And I don't really think that this is something on which reasonable minds can differ. Now, whether or not the evidence actually establishes that as sort of the appropriate remedy, that might be something that's appropriate to debate. But sort of the suggestion today, you know, that it's not clear whether or not this -- you know, as statutory elements of bribery are necessary, things like that. I don't think that was a good faith presentation of the constitutional

law, and I would point to Jonathan Turley's far more convincing testimony in 1998 in which he took essentially the diametrically opposed position when he was supporting the impeachment of President Bill Clinton for what I would say was a far lower standard, you know, of misconduct in that case.

LEMON: When he talked about power and it being combustible if you allow it to get out of control -- I'm paraphrasing what he said here, but, Max, let me bring you in because House Democrats have the power really to keep this up, to fight in the courts and to get Trump's closest people, aides to testify, people who have firsthand knowledge. So then why would they move this process to the Senate where Senate Republicans will control it and control the process and probably kill it?

MAX BOOT, CNN GLOBAL AFFAIRS ANALYST, COUNCIL FOR FOREIGN RELATIONS: Well, I think it's a close call, Don. I think it's a tactical issue. There's no question that I think they've already established beyond a shadow of a doubt that Donald Trump did commit impeachable offenses, but there is no question that if they could actually get the testimony of people like Mick Mulvaney or John Bolton or Mike Pompeo or others, they could nail it down some more.

And that was basically the point that Jonathan Turley was making, the Republican witness. He wasn't even really defending Trump. He was just saying, well, you need to go more slowly and get more testimony to nail it down. Well, that's a little bit difficult, because the White House is stonewalling. They're ignoring subpoenas. They're not cooperating with Congress. And that is likely to be another article of impeachment against President Trump, but there is an argument to be made.

Because there was recently a court ruling against Don McGahn, the former White House counsel saying, no, he has to actually answer the subpoena and testify, which suggests that perhaps if the Democrats wait a little bit longer, maybe a few more months, maybe they could compel some of this testimony and, you know, nail down all the objections that have been made that they haven't spoken to the people who were in the room with Trump.

But I think on balance, I think the stronger argument is just to move forward, because otherwise you're really risking that Trump could just run out the clock and push this all past the next election.

[22:25:03]

LEMON: Well, if there's nothing to hide and whatever, couldn't he just allow the people to testify --

BOOT: Bingo.

LEMON: -- who were there?

BOOT: Nobody has ever tried to prevent the testimony of a witness who would exonerate them, right? LEMON: You know, here's the one thing that -- I think that the

Republicans have a weak argument here, Max, because two things can be true at once. You know, you can hold more than one thought in your head at once. Let's just say -- and I'm not saying this is accurate. Let's just say that -- give it to them that the Democrats are out to get the president, right? They wanted to impeach him. But the president could have also given them the ammunition as well. So they could be out to get the president, but the president can also have done something that is impeachable.

BOOT: Well, exactly. And Democrats have not been out to impeach every Republican president. I don't remember them trying to impeach George W. Bush, for example. They're impeaching Donald Trump, because he did something so flagrant, and it doesn't matter if they want to impeach him from day one. They only launched the impeachment proceedings like 70 days ago, because this evidence of this incredibly impeachable conduct surfaced.

LEMON: Yes. I juts -- there's a larger point here about Rudy Giuliani that I want to talk about, Susan. Reportedly that he is in Ukraine this week talking to former Ukrainian prosecutors accused of corruption. He's there talking about a documentary or doing a documentary. If Giuliani is still out there doing this, doing who knows what, doesn't that suggest if impeachment doesn't happen quickly, the dirty work will continue? That's what the Democrats are saying. That's why they're moving so fast, because they think if they don't, they will continue to meddle in the 2020 election.

HENNESSEY: Yes, I think that's right. One of the sort of astonishing features of this is the extent to which people like Rudy Giuliani and indeed the president himself are utterly unabashed by this. The president continues to insist this was a perfect phone call. Now, keep in mind that, you know, despite the fact that the president has said, you know, Rudy's out there. He has other clients, he's doing his own thing and has attempted to distance himself a little bit --

LEMON: But, Susan, in Ukraine?

HENNESSEY: To the extent that the president is genuinely -- you know, that the president genuinely doesn't think that Rudy Giuliani speaks for him and conducting, you know, this back-channel pressure campaign, why isn't the president coming out and making that very, very clear, not just to the American public but also to foreign governments. You do not -- you should not be speaking to Rudy Giuliani about politically motivated investigations. That's not what I'm interested in. That's not the way to get U.S. support, and instead we hear the president essentially being silent on it.

So, I do think that both the, you know, egregiousness of the misconduct and the lack of remorse and intention openly stated intention, you know, to do it again and continue in this course of conduct is one reason why it's so incredibly important to move forward with impeachment. And to Max's point, to move forward quickly and not necessarily wait for the courts to weigh in on every single new additional witness considering the overwhelming evidence that is already on the table. LEMON: I got to run. Phil Mattingly, I hope you can see air. See

that?

MATTINGLY: You're welcome for your quarterback. I'm just going to say it. You're welcome.

LEMON: Thank you.

MATTINGLY: Joe Burrow is an Ohio guy.

LEMON: Go Tigers.

The big question now, will the Judiciary Committee hold more hearings, and who would they call? I'm going to ask Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee, who was in today's hearings, next.

[22:30:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

LEMON: A marathon day of testimony in the Judiciary Committee's impeachment hearing. Experts in constitutional law answering questions from Democrats and Republicans from 10:00 in the morning until 6:30 in the evening. Three of those experts argued in favor of impeachment. One argued against it. And my next guest was right in the thick of it.

Joining me now is Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee. Congresswoman, I appreciate it. I know it's been a very long day for you. I watched most of it, you know, until I had to come into work. Good evening to you. Why did the committee choose to begin these proceedings with testimony from constitutional lawyers, not fact witnesses?

REP. SHEILA JACKSON LEE (D-TX), HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE: I think we wanted the objectivity of scholars. Most people don't walk around with the constitution. They don't and cannot see the equating of the actions of this president to the constitution, and the tool that we're using to hold the president accountable is a constitutional tool. It's impeachment. And impeachment in this instance covers what the president engaged in, which was abuse of power, betrayal of our national security, and corruption of our elections.

He attempted to do all three of those, and it was important for scholars to say that even though we could not speak for the framers, the framers were fearful of kings, monarchs. They had fled England, and they didn't want to see someone who could do whatever they wanted to do. And we've heard the president over and over say that he's an article II president, meaning the executive has any power it desires that is not accurate.

LEMON: He has said he believes that he can do whatever he wants as president. But do you think you made your case today, you did what you had to do today?

JACKSON LEE: I think we had a methodical and very effective equating of the facts, the story to the constitutional elements.

LEMON: OK.

JACKSON LEE: And I think all of our professors indicated -- for example, Professor Gerhardt said if the actions of the president are not impeachable, then what is?

[22:35:03]

LEMON: I want to talk about Jonathan Turley, the expert witness for the Republicans, critical of how fast the process is going. Let's listen to this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Impeachments require a certain period of saturation and maturation. That is, the public has to catch up. I'm not pre-judging what your record would show. But if you rush this impeachment, you're going to leave half the country behind. You have to give the time to build a record. This isn't an impulse buy item. You're trying to remove a duly elected president of the United States, and that takes time. It takes work.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: What's your response to that, the idea that this is rushed?

JACKSON LEE: I think the president has been misbehaving for a long period of time. Committees have been meeting for a long period of time. Remember now, we used to have an independent prosecutor statute. We now have our committees. That means foreign affairs, oversight, intelligence committee have been investigating for quite a long period of time. Financial services have been investigating.

We've just received a victory on the Deutsche Bank. No, I think the American people get it, 70 percent of the American people believe that what the president did was wrong. I asked that question in my questioning. I asked Professor Karlan whether or not the depth of our evidence was strong enough and whether or not it was a wafer thin, which is what Professor Turley said.

And absolutely not as I held up both the Intelligence Committee report and the Mueller report, while hundreds of pages of documents are behind it. She said the circumstantial and real evidence was strong. We will continue to reinforce this information to the American people. We will not hide anything from them. But I do think it's clear.

And again, we are remaining open. We've asked the president to participate. We've invited the president to participate. His lawyers could have been there today. His lawyers can be there in the weeks to come or the days to come. But the fact is, he has the opportunity -- the president -- to be represented in this process.

LEMON: Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee, we appreciate your time. Thank you for joining us on this very long day for you.

JACKSON LEE: Thank you.

LEMON: And for the country. I appreciate it.

JACKSON LEE: Thank you for having me.

LEMON: And President Trump back in the White House tonight after a bizarre NATO trip complete with hot mic moments. Why he's calling Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau two-faced.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[22:40:00]

LEMON: So we have some breaking news to report to you. It's out of Hawaii tonight. Two civilian employees shot to death and one wounded by a U.S. sailor on joint base Pearl Harbor Hickman in Honolulu. The shooter also dead.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I can report that Joint Base security personnel did respond to the report of an active shooter today in the vicinity of dry dock 2 in the naval shipyard. I can confirm that there were three shooting victims. We have confirmed that two are deceased. One is in stable condition in a local hospital.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: Again, that shooting on joint base Pearl Harbor Hickam in Honolulu. We're going to keep you updated on this story as we get new developments here.

Meantime, the president canceling a press conference today and returning early from the NATO summit in London. It was meant to mark the 70th anniversary of the alliance. Let's discuss now with Catherine Rampell, also Michael D'Antonio and Ed Keenan, the Washington bureau chief for the Toronto Star. So good to have all of you on. Thank you so much. Catherine, I want to start with you, because we've got to start with this hot mic moment that shook up the summit. Let's listen to that.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

(Inaudible)

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: Catherine, you say it's not that they were laughing at him. It's what they were laughing at him about.

CATHERINE RAMPELL, CNN POLITICAL REPORTER: Well, I think it's both to be clear. Trump's greatest fear seems to be he will be laughed at. He's talked about how the world is laughing at us something like 50 times before he took office. Clearly they were laughing at him. he doesn't like that. But it's also the subject matter of this mockery or apparent mockery. You had them talking about three of the most sensitive things in Trump land, right? One is his failing businesses. They talked about the Doral, where he

was planning to have the G7 summit next year. They talked about his very transparent and inept corruption, also relating to the Doral and the fact that he lost that opportunity apparently to enrich himself at taxpayer expense. And they also talked about the fact essentially that his underlings don't respect him. And if they had just thrown in, you know, a joke about his hand size or something -- you know, this with have been a quadruple play, but instead, they got three of the subject -- three of the four subjects.

(CROSSTALK)

LEMON: I took it as they were saying how much he loved the cameras because he had a press conference, right, and that he loved the spotlight and the attention.

RAMPELL: Yes, obviously. But all politicians love the camera, so I'm not sure that he would be particularly offended by that critique.

MICHAEL D'ANTONIO, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: But I think the president's love is the greatest love of all. So, he loves it more than anybody else.

LEMON: Why do you say this proves that he's a pariah among people where he should be -- among our allies?

D'ANTONIO: Well, look, he has stomped around the world insulting people and threatening them. These are the two things that he does. Or if -- he might bribe you as well, so there are three things that he does. This has made him, I think, not only a pariah in the civilized world, he's almost an outcast especially among America's allies.

So the first thing he does when he gets into office is trash NATO. Then he goes around to every gathering of world leaders and favors the strongmen and the tyrants. So, I think people don't respect him. They respect the power he represents. But even that, I think, is less and less.

[22:45:13]

LEMON: You think they put up with him?

D'ANTONIO: Oh, of course they put up with him.

LEMON: When you see them again, when they have to do the photo op and they sit there, it just seems like they're just like, OK.

D'ANTONIO: He is the kid no one invites to their birthday party because he's a bully and he's a braggart.

LEMON: Ed, let's bring you in now. Pamela Brown is also reporting sources expect the two leaders to work through this, but this was the president this morning. Listen to this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Did you see that video of Prime Minister Trudeau talking about you last night?

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Well, he's two-faced.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Do you think that Germany is too naive?

TRUMP: And honestly with Trudeau, he's a nice guy. I find him to be a very nice guy. But you know the truth is that I called him out on the fact that he's not paying 2 percent, and I guess he's not very happy about it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: Sources are telling CNN that Trudeau spoke to Trump this morning and that he gave context, but didn't apologize. How are people in Canada reacting to this?

ED KEENAN, WASHINGTON BUREAU CHIEF, TORONTO STAR: Well, it's kind of complicated the way people in Canada react to this because on the one hand, Canadian -- Canada is a very small country next to a really dominant United States and is dependent on the United States in a lot of ways. And so because of that, Canadians like sort of shows of independence.

In the past when Justin Trudeau's father was the Prime Minister and Richard Nixon called him an expletive that starts with an a, and he responded, you know, I've been called worse by better people, that became sort of part of his legend. He was widely respected for that. So people like these kind of tweaking shows of independence.

But on the other hand, for exactly the same reasons, it's not good to have the president of the United States angry at you. So there's kind of mixed reaction in Canada, and you can see that on social media. You can see that in talk radio and in newspaper columns where some people are saying, you know, good for Trudeau. This is a mockable guy. He holds a 40-minute press conference largely on his impeachment scandal and domestic issues while you're sitting right there.

You know, of course you're going to sort of have a laugh about it afterwards. But on the other hand, there's a sense of like don't poke the bear, right. We're in the middle of the negotiating the new NAFTA.

This is a thin-skinned, impulsive, and vengeful president and who knows what he could do next, right? We need the United States as an ally is the (inaudible) in Canada. So there's sort of a cheering section and yet there's also a real fear of, you know, what retaliation might come if Trump feels angered by this, if it doesn't sort of go away and get smoothed over.

LEMON: It's fascinating you don't all often get to see behind the scenes, and people -- world leaders having this sort of gossiping session in front of the cameras. We'll continue to discuss. Don't go anywhere, everyone. We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[22:50:00] LEMON: So, I'm back now with Catherine Rampell, Michael D'Antonio,

and Ed Keenan. So, I want to go to this, Joe Biden releasing a new ad tonight using the hot mic sound. Watch this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: World leaders caught on camera laughing about President Trump.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Several world leaders mocking President Trump.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: They're laughing at him.

TRUMP: My administration has accomplished more than almost any administration in the history of our country. Didn't expect that reaction, but that's OK.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: Wow, Catherine, that video was released 30 minutes after Trump landed on U.S. soil. Biden believes in not criticizing the president while they're abroad. He is making the case that he can be a leader on the world stage. Is that effective?

RAMPELL: Well, I think, it's effective in the sense that it's turning Trump's own talking point against him, because he had made the idea that the United States was being humiliated by the rest of the world part of his campaign, right, in 2016. So, in that sense it's effective.

On the other hand, you know, I do worry that what's the expression, that if you wrestle with a pig, you get dirty and the pig likes it. So, I don't know if this is the necessarily the best strategy but you could imagine it's certainly getting under Trump's skin at the very least.

LEMON: He's hitting Trump where it hurts.

D'ANTONIO: Oh, yes. He couldn't get under his skin any more effectively if he used a scalpel. This poor man Donald Trump, nobody wants to be his friend and he not only during the campaign, but throughout his life has talked about how all previous presidents were humiliated. That they were the object of ridicule. Well, now he may best be known in this moment as the object of ridicule.

LEMON: When I saw that, I said here we go. It's on.

D'ANTONIO: It's on. Right?

LEMON: Right, this is just --

KEENAN: I'm pretty sure that's what Justin Trudeau is thinking too. Because while maybe effective for Biden. Trudeau's effort to sort of smooth it over and say, hey, we're all good, right. It was just a good laugh, and maybe not if it becomes a big campaign issue.

LEMON: Hey, I just had a couple seconds here. What do Canadians think of Joe Biden?

KEENAN: I mean, I think they like Joe Biden. They liked Barrack Obama quite a lot. He was very popular in Canada. Trump's not so popular. I think they like Biden. I think, they like a lot of the Democratic candidates.

LEMON: Yes. Thank you all. I appreciate it. House Democrats on the Judiciary Committee choosing to go with constitutional experts in today's hearing, was it a smart move? That's next.

[22:55:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

LEMON: This is CNN TONIGHT. I'm Don Lemon. There's a lot going on tonight with the historic impeachment investigation and we're going to catch you up on all the headlines in the hour ahead.

The House Judiciary Committee holding its first impeachment hearing. It was heated from the start as Republicans threw up road block after road block. Three legal scholars testified there's evidence President Trump has committed impeachable offenses. One of those scholars joins me in just a moment.

We'll also look at the role of powerful women at the hearings who stood up to badgering by some Republicans.