Return to Transcripts main page

Cuomo Prime Time

The Impeachment Of Donald J. Trump; Interview Of Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-IL) And Sen. Mazie Hirono (D-HI) On Senators Defeat Motion Allowing Witnesses; LeBron James' Emotional Tribute For Kobe Bryant. Aired 12-1a ET

Aired February 01, 2020 - 00:00   ET

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

ANDERSON COOPER, CNN ANCHOR: Our impeachment trial coverage continues. So let's turn things over to Chris for CUOMO PRIME TIME -- Chris.

[00:00:13]

CHRIS CUOMO, CNN ANCHOR, CUOMO PRIME TIME: All right, thank you, Anderson. I am Chris Cuomo. There has never been an impeachment trial in this country with no witnesses. Can't say that anymore. Our disgrace is now defining us. The acquittal a foregone conclusion. But we knew that.

This skipping of process, this perversion of process, and it is the first time we've seen a party in power try one of its own, and they have brought every point of cynicism now to bear as truth. The question is, where do we go from here? Let's get after it.

So the current schedule makes it look this way. By next Wednesday, we will probably have the vote and the acquittal of President Donald J. Trump.

Now, depending on the politics of it, they say that acquittal on the Democratic side has no value. Why does the Senate Minority Leader say that? Chuck Schumer? Because he'll say this wasn't a real trial. This is what the Republicans are exposing themselves to and we'll talk about what the balance here was, because they know this comes at a price. I just don't think they understand how big a price it is.

So let's talk about what happened today. What it means in terms of process and what it means in terms of realities in this country going forward.

I've got the big brains. Professor, first of all, the idea of not the outcome, I believe we've talked about here often that I think you can make good faith arguments that the President did what they say he did, it was wrong. The reasons he did it were wrong, but not worthy of removal. I think it could be a good faith argument. But no witnesses.

What kind of stain does that put on the senators who vote that way and this period of history?

MICHAEL GERHARDT, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: I believe it's going to be a very big stain. You pointed out very well, the beginning of the show how this is the first time in American history when a party, the party's leaders, and party's coalition, put one of their own Presidents on trial, so to speak, but they didn't.

They played defense the whole time. They looked for the fastest way out, and this is the only -- just to put it again, to perspective -- the only time in American history when we've had a presidential impeachment trial or any kind of impeachment trial, that didn't result in witnesses. Extraordinary. And now why is that?

The most common answer we're getting right now, as Republicans kind of scramble for explanations is well, it's the House's fault.

But keep in mind, that blaming the House like Senator Murkowski did makes no sense because she's blaming the House for not being able to get information that the President was refusing to give.

So at some point, historians see that and they see what the Senate did which is bury it and you can add those things together, and it's pretty clear that the Republicans are now complicit in the cover up.

CUOMO: The logic problem here, Jennifer, the idea of the President's side saying, listen, these people are going to clear me, but they don't let them testify. Have you ever had anybody hide an alibi from you?

JENNIFER RODGERS, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: No, never. That doesn't happen. I mean, you know, look, trials, at least as we experience them, as prosecutors are a search for the truth, right? All kinds of trials are a search for the truth.

The problem here is it just turned it all on its head, you know, usually you have prosecutors with all of the power. They can subpoena the documents, the witnesses. They have all of this information, which means that the criminal justice system has very strong built-in protections for the defendant.

Here, you had the defendant holding all of the cards because he wouldn't allow the prosecutors to have any of the evidence and prosecutors are entitled to a fair trial, too. So the fact that this was not a search for the truth, the defendant wouldn't let anything out just means you know, it doesn't have any credence at the end of the day.

That's really the problem from my perspective.

CUOMO: And people don't like it, Elie, but I say first of all, this is -- I don't blame his defense counsel. They did a good job. They put these senators in a place where they were willing to do this. That was their objective.

I don't even blame the President that much. I liken him to you know, my producer was saying, you mean Frankenstein's monster? Not Frankenstein. Frankenstein was a doctor. The doctor? Yes, yes, yes.

This is a monster of their own making. I don't mean to call the President ugly or a monster. They did this to themselves, because they wanted to capitulate to power. And now what stops the President from saying, here's what I'm going to do.

You're in my party. You're in my party. I'm going to crush you if you don't do what I say. And I'm going to do whatever I want, and if you come at me, I'm going to come where you live -- I mean, it sounds like a mobster threat. But that's what works. Isn't that the precedent?

ELIE HONIG, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: It is and this is exactly why process is so important. Our system is about process, not results.

I always remember, when I tried a case early on at the Southern District of New York, you go in, we lost. I lost. It was disappointing. I go in and talk to the judge, and the judge said to me, I always remember, he said, it's not about the outcome. It's about the process. Was this a fair trial? Yes, Then you can live with it. That's how our system works and you move on.

And I don't think we can say that about what we saw from the Senate over the last couple weeks, and I think it sends a terrible message to the United States.

And I think you're right, the Senate itself bears responsibility for it. Donald Trump's a party to this, his lawyers are a party to this. They are trying to win. That's what they should be doing. The Senate let this get shut down, and they didn't have to.

[00:05:20]

CUOMO: Right, and they didn't have to accept that they wanted to cover themselves out of fear. Now, Mike Isikoff is with us, mentor of mine through this entire years' long process.

This idea of we are going to deny this process. I argue we have seen nothing like it throughout the rest of this, you know, journey that we've been on. What does it mean to you, Mike?

MIKE ISIKOFF, CHIEF INVESTIGATIVE CORRESPONDENT, YAHOO NEWS: Well, you know, I thought the really remarkable thing about Lamar Alexander's statement last night, which was the decisive statement, which signaled there was not going to be witnesses is that he actually accepted the House's case that they had made their case on the facts. Implicitly, he was rejecting the President's defense.

I think it's going to be really interesting to see how many other Republican senators when they give their closing speeches and justify their votes for acquittal, follow Alexander's lead on that, because that goes to the core facts at issue.

And you put on top of that, that we've still got John Bolton's book coming. The possibility -- the certainty that John Bolton will be promoting his book and going on to your show, I presume, and many others, in which will be asked all the key questions that he would have been asked if this trial allowed witnesses and the public in the end will be much better educated than the senators who took this fateful vote tonight. So we'll see how this plays out politically, what the cost is to the

President. But I think that if you take Alexander's statement and put it together with likely what's to come, it's pretty ominous, at least for the defense, the arguments the President's lawyers were making as it went to the facts.

CUOMO: Yes, I think that the thing here, you won't be able to slip it past people because they're not sophisticated with the law and in the weeds and all of that, because this is different than Clinton.

When they acquitted Clinton, a lot of senators attached to their acquittal vote. Boy, is he a dog? You know, boy, do I not like what he did. This is different because they had full process there.

Now, of course, Mike is right. The book comes out just after the Ides of March on St. Patrick's Day, right, and we'll see what kind of snakes you know, this book is able to chase out.

But the argument of, you know, it's bad. It's bad what he did, but not worthy of removal. Isn't it ruined by the suggestion that I was against the process of showing the proof as well?

GERHARDT: I would think so, and the problem is that the senators who were saying that, who were saying that look, I think he did something bad, but I don't think it rose to the level of an impeachable offense. We're also cutting short, the inquiry.

CUOMO: Right.

GERHARDT: They were asking for there not to be witnesses.

CUOMO: Right.

GERHARDT: No documents. Nothing. So what did they look at? They looked at what the House presented, which was, I think, a pretty airtight case, a very strong case. And they seem to have missed some of the most important things in it.

But what they didn't do was they can't reach the conclusion, it's not serious enough to be an impeachable offense without actually talking to the most relevant witness of all -- John Bolton, who says he spoke to the President of the United States, and what's the senators' reactions? The majority of the Senate seems to think, we don't need to hear that. That's not relevant. But that seems quite relevant.

CUOMO: And so what grabbed me about Alexander's statement was something a little different than Mike. Mike is right, the shock effect of what? You think they proved the case.

But his rationale is really this is for you to decide. You. You, the voters, you should decide. But I'm not going to give you the information to decide it.

And then comes Rubio, you know, who you know loves to quote from the Good Book. He has got a Bible passage for us every week about something that should instruct our humanity. And he says, this was wrong, but I'm not going to vote to remove

because it would hurt our division. Aren't they the cause of the division?

RODGERS: They are. And it's so ironic, because you know, if the abuse of power was something different, like, say, the President, personally, financially profiting off of the office, or something which he's done, too, by the way, but let's say that's what we're talking about here. Then, you know, it makes a little more sense to say there's an election coming up. If the people don't like it, they can remove him.

But this abuse of power was about manipulating the results of the election. So how can you say, hey, we don't want to tear up his ballot because the election is coming up.

It's like he's going to cheat in that election. That's why you needed to remove him.

So it entirely misses the point for Alexander and Rubio, anyone else to say there's an election coming and that's why he could be removed.

CUOMO: Right, and I'll tell you what, I give -- I'd still take that argument that Jennifer is putting down, and rightly so, if you had had witnesses.

[00:10:03]

CUOMO: If you'd had witnesses and said, look, I listened to them. I actually believe they would net to neutral, to positive for the President, so I'm going to vote to remove. You wouldn't be able to bang me by saying I did this unfairly.

HONIG: Right. Exactly. And to me, the gold medal for worst excuse is a tie between Rubio. Rubio said the standard was met, meaning I find this to be a high crime and misdemeanor, but it would hurt the country. That's a new one.

CUOMO: Right.

HONIG: And then the tie for the gold medal, if you can do that is Murkowski who said, I voted for no witnesses because the process was broken, so I'll break it further.

CUOMO: That's right.

HONIG: I mean, how does how does that add up?

CUOMO: She said for a problem she created, Mike Isikoff, so now they talk next week. Why do you believe the Republicans have apportioned as much time as they have or allocated as much time as they have to the speeches for votes when they want to speed it up?

ISIKOFF: That's a good question, and I was really surprised.

CUOMO: It's the only kind I ask. ISIKOFF: I assume that --

CUOMO: We both know that's not true. What's your answer?

ISIKOFF: Right. Yes, look, I thought Senator McConnell would just go for a quick motion to dismiss/acquittal tonight and be done with it.

Obviously, he ran into some problems with, you know, Schumer threatening to have amendment after amendment that was going to keep the process going along.

The only explanation I can come up with is that if Democrats are going to be denouncing the President and laying out all the arguments that some of your guests there have been making tonight, the Republicans want to have equal time and give their speeches defending the President or at least defending their votes for acquittal.

I think at this point, we've pretty much heard all the arguments and I'm not quite sure how much public appetite there will be on either side to keep listening next week.

We now know the outcome, but can I just make one other point?

CUOMO: Please.

ISIKOFF: We knew the outcome from the beginning.

CUOMO: Yes.

ISIKOFF: And, you know, this was sort of the problem with Adam Schiff's argument, his closing argument for why we had to do -- why the House had to impeach the President in the first place.

Because if he doesn't and gets away with it, then he's going to do it again. That's what Schiff kept hammering as the reason why the President had to be impeached, but Schiff knew what the political makeup in the Senate was, he knew the high -- the unlikeliness that the President was ever going to get removed from office.

So the argument that he was making as to the need to impeach the President in the first place, you know, he was going to be even stronger once he got the inevitable acquittal.

So it could be argued that the House would have been smarter not to impeach him, but to keep investigating, keep pursuing those facts, keep the subpoenas in court, and I think, you know, you can make an argument that they would have been -- and the country would have been better off.

CUOMO: I think that when it is written and it's going to be written soon, they may be accused of having overthought it and under planned it, and when they decided not to hit him with a real crime and abuse of power, and does not communicate that to the American people, it was a mistake.

Mike Isikoff, thank you very much. Each and all of you, thank you, as always.

All right, the truth is going to come out. That's what we do know. Why? Because this White House leaks like a sieve. They may not talk about this President out in the open, but they do it when he's not around, and Bolton's book is coming out.

So the next two guests I have were both jurors or are still both jurors. What do they think the path forward is for them and their fellow Democrats, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[00:17:51]

CUOMO: Despite Democratic efforts, Republicans repeatedly voted down any idea of new witnesses, documents and amendments; acquittal, all but certain.

Let's get some perspective on how this played out and what to expect in the days and weeks ahead. We spoke to not just one, but two jurors, both Democratic senators.

First up, Tammy Duckworth.

Senator, thank you so much for joining us.

SEN. TAMMY DUCKWORTH (D-IL): It's good to be on, Chris.

CUOMO: So whether it's there in D.C. or when you go back home to Illinois, people are going to say to you, so is that it, Senator? Is everything just broken? There is no more anything but politics, is that it? Even the Senate has fallen, the House has fallen. The President -- we don't trust -- we just can't trust you guys anymore. What are you going to tell people?

DUCKWORTH: I'm going to tell them there are still good people here and we're still working hard that the truth will come out, and that we still must uphold the Constitution and I intend on getting up every single day, like I have my entire adult life and living by the oath that I've sworn from the time I was in the Army, to now, to protect and defend this Constitution.

CUOMO: The hard sell here is senators are coming out on the Republican side now and saying what they would never have said until it was convenient.

Look, what he did was wrong. Look, what he did was probably impeachable. What he did was impeachable, but probably not removable. I mean, this was wrong. But you know, it's really too much for removal. And that makes it all the worst.

Lamar Alexander saying, listen, you should decide Mr. And Mrs. America, but them all voting after saying it's wrong to not give people access to the witnesses and proof. What's worse than that?

DUCKWORTH: Well, I think it is really a perversion of our processes here in this country. Imagine if there was a murder trial that was going on, and somebody gets up and says, hey, I was in the room and I saw who committed the murder, and then you vote to not allow that witness to come testify in the trial.

Americans know that that is absolutely wrong, and I don't think history will judge my colleagues very kindly who voted against allowing for witnesses.

CUOMO: They legacy they seem to be concerned most with is the legacy of how the President felt about them. I mean, is this just proof positive that Trump is the most powerful presence in Republicans' lives?

[00:20:21]

DUCKWORTH: Well, I think so, as far as Republicans are concerned, he's got some sort of a hold over them. And it's unfortunate because now they're putting this President and party ahead of the people. I mean, that's simply not the oath that any of us took when we all swore an oath to become senators and also to become impartial jurors in this trial.

CUOMO: Now, you are not the best person to ask this question because your life is a testament to bravery, and not letting people tell you what to be afraid of or where to back away from. But how do you explain how a President who checks almost none of the boxes of what that party is supposed to care about, has this kind of power over them where they will even vote for what they know 75 percent of the country wants.

DUCKWORTH: I can't tell you why this person has that kind of power over my colleagues. You're going to have to ask them that. I just think that at some point --

CUOMO: I do, they're too scared to tell me.

DUCKWORTH: You know, you've got to be able to stand up. I mean, they must be afraid of, you know, they worry about the election year. Well, I think they need to be worried for November of this year because I don't think the people of this country are satisfied with having representation where their senator is voting to not have witnesses and evidence.

And you know, the truth will come out. The truth will come out and I think it's going to come out over the next weeks and months as more and more of Mr. Bolton's book is leaked, as more and more evidence comes out from Lev Parnas and all sorts of folks.

The truth will come out and those who voted against allowing the American people to see the evidence, you know, they will be judged poorly.

CUOMO: It is a much more dangerous vote than the acquittal vote I think in any estimation because it shows you were afraid of the truth. Now, criticism for the process going forward. Why don't the Democrats

just let this end? That's it. You're not going to get witnesses. You know they're going to acquit. Why do we have to spend days on this?

DUCKWORTH: Well, we're not in charge of the process. That's the problem. This was Mitch McConnell's call. He decided to do this. And so we -- you know, this was an internal fight within the Republican Party. We had no say in this process whatsoever.

And as you saw in the four votes that we took tonight, it's very partisan and very party line.

CUOMO: It is now 64 troops have been affected by TBI after the shelling at that base in Iraq, of course done by Iran. The President said, I heard about the headaches. They're not as bad as a lot of the other injuries I've seen. What do you think of that?

DUCKWORTH: I think the President is absolutely wrong in this case, and let me just say something about traumatic brain injury. It is the hidden wound of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Over 30 percent of the troops who served in Iraq, especially during the Battle for Fallujah, came home with traumatic brain injuries.

These are lifelong injuries that will occur and will actually be compounded throughout these people's lives and our troops need to know that they need to go and get help. This is a real wound.

And I cannot believe the Commander-in-Chief of our military would undermine literally years and years of hard work by veterans, advocates, medical professionals and the DoD itself in trying to make sure our troops get help for their wounds that they received in combat.

CUOMO: Until you start balancing that interest against what looks good for him politically, and we see once again, even our fighting men and women, they will fall victim to being on the wrong side of the President's interest in this case.

Senator Duckworth, thank you so much for doing this interview at such an important time.

DUCKWORTH: Thanks for having me on.

CUOMO: Senator Hirono, thank you for joining us.

SEN. MAZIE HIRONO (D-HI): Thank you.

CUOMO: So when you go home and people say, why should I vote to put anybody in the Senate or in the House or in Congress? I mean, I see the game you guys are playing, if you've got the power, you do whatever you want. And the rest of us just watch this. The system doesn't work. We're not the problem. You guys are the problem.

HIRONO: Sadly, that's a terrible message that they're getting from this trial that Mitch McConnell had absolutely no intention of making it a fair trial. He wanted a fast trial, and that's pretty much what they got. And then

as the information comes out about Bolton and the firsthand information he had that would corroborate with the witnesses said, the Republicans don't even want to face it.

CUOMO: I think that it's about how we got here. The President is going to use the power. He is good at that.

HIRONO: Yes.

CUOMO: I liken him to a Frankenstein, not to make him something ugly or scary. He was created. This was created as an opportunity for him by a breakdown in the system, a discount effect on principle, integrity, working together and an increase on party loyalty, and you guys keeping power as long as you can.

He's just playing the system well. He didn't create it this way. How do you fix it?

HIRONO: Trump has been playing the system since he became an adult. That's what he does. He's a grifter. He's really good at it. And we now, in an environment, where he is in the best place to be as the President of the United States where he can use the full powers of his office, where he believes that he can do anything he wants under Article 2, and it looks like he is going to not be convicted by the Republicans.

It's not the people in our country who are not going to convict him. It's a bunch of Republican senators who don't want to face facts, and so he loves it. You know, he's going to feel as though this is like a license to keep doing more.

And I think we should remember, but for the whistleblower, we would never have found out about any of this. This is going to be the President unleashed, and we're on notice. We know this and particularly the Republicans, I'd say that they own this guy, or actually he owns them.

CUOMO: Yes, he owns them. I believe there are good faith arguments that people, you know, in the party would certainly accept as to why it wasn't worthy of removal, but no witnesses? That's about shutting down process, smacking people in the face, telling them you don't get the truth. You get what we give you.

And I wonder how it reverberates, and Senator, I actually think that it is going to be a challenge for Democrats and Republicans to get the people in your parties to believe it's worth the effort to participate in this system and put people into a place that they don't have very high expectations of.

HIRONO: Well, if anything, I think people should get that it is the Republicans who are stonewalling this whole process. And it started with the President's stonewalling all requests for documents and to make witnesses available.

So you know, it's really important for our country to figure out who actually is screwing them over. It is not the Democrats, it's the Republicans. Let that sink in for a while. And then it's our job, part of my job as a Democrat to put it out there as to what else the President is going to do next. Who else is he going to go after?

CUOMO: If you're not on the side of what he wants -- you know, I was talking to Senator Jon Tester about, you know, he was saying, look, I still have got to reach across the aisle, I've got to get things done.

I don't know how you guys are kidding yourselves. You're not reaching -- you're not getting anything done unless it's what the President wants them to do.

So if you happen to like what the President wants on something, you'll get something done, but you can't expect Republicans to go against him.

HIRONO: They punishment for going against them is fast and fierce. And that is why they're not able to do what in their heart of hearts they know is the right thing to do.

And what's going to happen is, as more information is going to keep coming out about what he did, not just about Ukraine, but you don't know what else he's been up to. And all of this information is going to come up and the voters will get to decide if they want a lying grifter for the President.

CUOMO: Senator, thank you very much for taking the case on such an important day.

HIRONO: You're welcome.

CUOMO: Be well.

HIRONO: Thank you. Aloha.

CUOMO: It's interesting. Even the President's own former Chief of Staff, John Kelly says, without a trial without witnesses, the job is only half done.

Why are he and John Bolton choosing to speak out only now? Why are these other G.O.P. senators speaking out only now about wrongdoing? That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[00:32:58]

CUOMO: Look, as we're processing what all this has actually meant, the impeachment trial really was never about what the President did. That's always been clear. It's about what this Senate was willing to do and not do.

And the irony is, you know, they can vote to hide the witnesses, but the truth is going to come out. The question will be, what is the price for what they chose to do today? Not just acquitting or voting not to remove the President. That's not the problem. Let's take it to the political minds. Karen Finney and Scott Jennings.

Scott, you heard what I said. You've heard me say this before. I don't get the vote to deny witnesses. One, I don't even know that they would have been bad for the President. I think it could have easily been net to neutral in terms of the perspective of people who would have shown fairness of process, giving you a high ground over the House and allowed you to avoid the stink that is going to be all over your party now for capitulating to the power of Trump.

SCOTT JENNINGS, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR Well, I think the alternative view is, is that Republicans in the Senate, and obviously Republicans in the House, and generally Republicans all over the country just didn't think that this mattered, whether you were not at all concerned about what the President did, or really concerned about what he did is in the case of Lamar Alexander, they just didn't think that it rose to the level of throwing the President out of office.

So you're left with a choice? Do we sit here and prolong this? Do we go on and on and on when we know what the outcome is going to be? Or do we go ahead and get it behind the American people and let them decide in the election?

So I think it's actually a really reasonable decision by the Senate to just get this trial behind us. We knew what the result was going to be. The President was going to be acquitted.

I think on Monday and Tuesday, you're going to hear a number of Republicans express varying levels of concern about what happened.

But again, it all fell short of the threshold question, should we throw the President out for the first time in American history? The answer was no.

CUOMO: The answer was no. Although, what's going to happen Monday and Tuesday, Karen, is going to upset what Scott Jennings and the Republicans need people to believe, which is that they knew the facts.

But they didn't know the facts, because we had Republican after Republican saying, you know, I only watch Fox. Now that I'm watching this, there are things I didn't know.

[00:35:11]

CUOMO: Even Senator John Kennedy said that, and I like having the senator on here. So it's not about, you know, criticizing them as people, but they don't have the witnesses. How can they make the case, Karen, that they knew everything they needed to know?

KAREN FINNEY, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: They can't and I mean, I'm sorry, but to what Scott said, I mean, we knew that we were going to get here because the fix was in from the beginning. We always knew, and I think the House Managers did a valiant incredible job of making their case.

But we always knew that the case they were really trying to make was to potentially get at least four -- you know, the right number of senators to agree to let the truth come out.

And I'll tell you something, Chris, you know, thinking of -- stepping back, I think this is going to end up being like the Iraq vote.

When you step back and think about it, the question that a voter is going to say to you is, did you have the wisdom to see through the lies? And did you have the strength to stand up for what was right? Or did you go with the cover up?

And I don't think the Republicans are going to have a very good answer to their constituents because people aren't stupid, right? They're busy in their lives. They can't follow all the names and the machinations, but they know what it means to block the truth. They absolutely know that.

CUOMO: And also, Scott, I just want to be clear about something. I don't blame the President for this. I don't blame him, maybe it's because I grew up in politics. Somebody wants to give you power, you take it in politics.

You know, he was -- you know, I was talking about it earlier, in terms of Frankenstein. I'm not saying the President is ugly or a monster, he played this beautifully. But he is the creation of a party that didn't want to stand up for its own values.

It's not just Lamar Alexander or Marco Rubio. It's impeachable, but I don't want to remove him because it'll add to this terrible division.

Murkowski -- I'm sad. This Congress wouldn't have a fair trial. You voted to not make it a fair trial. Marco Rubio, you created the division by not having the witnesses. I don't get the wisdom and the move.

JENNINGS: Well, they obviously don't think that it's worth throwing the President out over. For whatever they feel about it --

CUOMO: I agree.

JENNINGS: However they feel about it.

CUOMO: I agree.

JENNINGS: They made a judgment. They didn't want to throw the President out.

CUOMO: I agree.

JENNINGS: And you all sort of, I think have these conversations about this as though there was some magic way to spin the Rubik's Cube here where it was going to come up, you know, with all the right colors on all four sides.

CUOMO: I don't think it ever would have.

JENNINGS: And this was never going to.

CUOMO: I don't think it would have either.

FINNEY: But what about accountability, Scott? What about accountability.

CUOMO: Right.

FINNEY: It doesn't mean -- we're not saying, look, they could have still voted to say -- they could have said, you know what, let's have the witnesses and they might have still -- they could have said, how about censure? How about I don't -- you can't have it both ways.

CUOMO: They could still do that.

FINNEY: I think that's the mealy mouth stuff that we're going to hear next week is gee, I think it's really awful --

JENNINGS: You make a powerful -- you make a powerful argument for what they should have done in the House. You make a powerful argument.

FINNEY: You can't blame the House, Scott. Come on, that is the most weak argument.

JENNINGS: The House should have subpoenaed John Bolton. You make a powerful argument for why the House rushed it. And by the way, as far as I know, the sun is going to come up on Monday and the House is open for business.

FINNEY: So the Senate should abdicate their responsibility to do their job? How ridiculous. That's ridiculous.

JENNINGS: If they want to go back in on Monday, they are more than welcome to do it.

FINNEY: Scott, I'm going to tell you something, voters are going to see right through that.

CUOMO: But look, here's what we know. If they don't want to play by the rules, it doesn't matter how often they play the game, and until they figure that out in Congress, I think everybody is just going to keep losing confidence.

Karen Finney, thank you. Scott Jennings, as always.

Some of these Senate Republicans who admitted now -- now -- that what Trump did was wrong, still wouldn't vote for a fair trial. You have a right to be mad as hell about that. The argument, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[00:42:19]

CUOMO: You should be mad as hell, and you need to show these people you will not take it anymore.

Republicans are voting as expected, a likely acquittal of the President, a vote I could actually see on the merits; not a great argument, but plausible.

What is without any basis except in bold faced cowardice is the vote to hold the first trial in history, where you will fully avoid the people who know the truth of the President's words and deeds.

And that takes us to the worst part of all of this, I argue. Now, that it's safe. Here come the Republicans admitting the truth.

First came Tennessee Senator Alexander, "I think it was inappropriate and wrong for the President to do what he did -- and I think it was proven. The question is whether you will apply capital punishment to every offense. And I think in this case, I think the answer is no."

No, it's not the question. The question is, how can he think you should decide what the consequences and then in good conscience vote to deny you the information to make that decision? And that job of spin there is from a guy who is retiring.

It gets worse. Florida Senator Marco Rubio, "Just because actions meet a standard of impeachment doesn't mean it's in the best interest of the country to remove a President from office. I will not vote to remove the President because doing so would inflict extraordinary and potentially irreparable damage to our already divided nation."

Now you want to say it's impeachable. You talk about inflicting damage, you keep your mouth shut. You keep your head down.

But now you say he was rightly impeached, but you deny people access to the proof of the same. And then you complain about division. You are creating the division.

You called Trump a con artist who should be selling fake watches. Well, who is selling junk now?

This isn't politics. This is poison. Here's another dose. Alaska Senator Murkowski supposed to be open to both sides. "It is sad for me to admit that as an institution, the Congress has failed. We are sadly at a low point of division in this country." Murkowski has said.

If you are sad, don't be the problem that you are sad about. You vote to not have witnesses that you have been carping about? We need to know first person.

Don't let these people play you. The division is not about us. Our society isn't failing. They are the problem. Politicians who choose tribe and Trump over truth. Position in party over a position of principle.

And yes, I'm talking about both sides, but I'm looking at you, G.O.P. This is the very first time we've seen a party try one of its own, and it has sadly confirmed all cynicism about you people not being able to be about anything bigger than yourselves.

You want to play what about ism? Fine. You made Putin jealous tonight. How you cower before Trump. No, Democrats are not the same. Democrats under Clinton went after

their own outwardly and inwardly over something way less important than us. And these solicitous senators know it.

Then the President went under oath. Starr got everyone in there. Starr was allowed to go from a real estate mess to a blue dress. Republicans sided with Democrats to acquit. And that President apologized.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BILL CLINTON, FORMER U.S. PRESIDENT: Now that the Senate has fulfilled its constitutional responsibility, bringing this process to a conclusion, I want to say, again to the American people how profoundly sorry I am for what I said and did to trigger these events and the great burden they have imposed on the Congress and on the American people.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CUOMO: And by the way, he felt he'd been done dirty, and he still said that because he thought that was the humility that leadership demanded and he was right.

Now, you have the exact fear of the founders made manifest by a President who openly mocks principle. He lies to your face. He calls you names and he mocks you even when you're in his own party anytime it suits him.

He may as well have grabbed Lindsey Graham and so many others by their ankles and shook them upside down as the currency of their credibility fell from their pockets like their lunch money.

If Republicans think what this President did was wrong, even impeachable, but removal was too much, and that's what you're going to hear. It's going to fill your screens. They're going to try to salvage their souls.

Well, force them to show it. Censure him. They did it to Andrew Jackson for basically doing the same thing, assuming power not confirmed him by the Constitution.

You know, in the movie "Network," there was this famous call to outrage against the politicians and the systems who were doing you dirty. Go to your windows. Scream that you're mad as hell and you're not going to take it anymore.

Well, I'll tell you what. I hope your voices echo all over this country. Denying you due process was wrong. Let them know that you know what they did, and you are mad as hell.

That's the argument.

All right. There's another big story going on tonight. The LA Lakers are playing their first game since the death of Kobe Bryant, his daughter, and of course, seven others.

The King, LeBron James has just offered an emotional tribute. You're going to see it, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[00:52:25]

CUOMO: The Lakers paying tribute tonight to Kobe Bryant during their first game since the NBA legend and his daughter were killed in that helicopter crash along with seven others.

So the team blanketed the arena with Bryant's jersey numbers 8 and 24, every seat covered. Two special seats were adorned with red roses and jersey numbers honoring the father-daughter duo. Then a tearful tribute from LeBron James.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

LEBRON JAMES, NBA PLAYER: I've got something written down. I know they asked me to kind of stay on course or whatever the case may be, but like our nation, man, I will be selling you all short if I read off this sheet, so I'm going to go straight from the heart.

[APPLAUSE]

JAMES: The first thing that come to mind is all about family, and as I look around this arena, we're all grieving. We're all hurt. We're all heartbroken.

When we're going through things like this, the best thing you can do is lean on the shoulders of your family. And from Sunday morning, all the way to this point, I heard about Laker Nation before I got here last year, about how much of a family it is.

[APPLAUSE]

JAMES: And that is absolutely what I've seen this whole week, not only from the players, not only from the coaching staff, not only from the organization, but from everybody. Everybody that's here. This is really truly, truly a family. And I know Kobe and Gianna and Vanessa and everybody, thank you guys from the bottom of their heart as Kobe said.

[APPLAUSE]

JAMES: And I know at some point, we will have a memorial for Kobe, but I look at this. I look at this as a celebration tonight.

This is this is a celebration of the 20 years of the blood, the sweat, the tears, the broken down body that's getting up and extended down to everything, the countless hours.

The determination to be as great as he could be. Tonight, we celebrate the kid that came here at 18 years of age, retired at 38 and became probably the best daddy we've seen over the last three years, man.

[APPLAUSE]

[00:55:07]

JAMES: Tonight is a celebration. Before we get to play -- love you all, man.

[APPLAUSE]

JAMES: Kobe is a brother to me, and from the time I was in high school, to watching him afar, to get in this league at 18, watching him up close. All the battles that we had throughout my career. The one thing that we always shared is that determination of just want to win. I just want to be great.

And the fact that I'm here now means so much to me. I want to continue along with my teammates to continue his legacy not only for this year, but as long as we can play the game of basketball that we love because that's what Kobe Bryant would want.

[APPLAUSE]

JAMES: So in the words of Kobe Bryant, Mamba out, but in the words of us, not forgotten, live on, brother.

[APPLAUSE]

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CUOMO: You see that? Off the court, James revealed his new tattoo honoring his friend it says, "Mamba for life."

That's it for us. Please stay with CNN for continuing coverage of what's coming next in the Trump impeachment trial.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[01:00:00]