Return to Transcripts main page

Don Lemon Tonight

State Department Aide's Testimony Not a Hearsay; Roger Stone Found Guilty; Marie Yovanovitch Intimidated by Trump's Tweet. Aired 10-11p ET

Aired November 15, 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: Convicted or pleading guilty. We still have a long way to go in this impeachment inquiry but some of those closest to the president, his personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, V.P., chief of staff, secretary of state, they haven't offered answers about what they knew, what he knew, and what actually went down.

So be on the lookout because if the list of convicted Trump associates tells us anything it serves as a clear warning, starting with Ambassador Sondland next week. If you lie, you'll likely get caught. And this president has saved no one to date from that fate.

Thank you very much for watching. CNN Tonight with the man, D. Lemon right now.

DON LEMON, CNN HOST: Be on the lookout for all of the best people. All the best people.

CUOMO: All the best. Drain the swamp, drain it.

LEMON: Drain the swamp.

CUOMO: And by drain, I mean put the biggest nastiest alligators that even you down the bayou way has ever seen up in this swamp.

LEMON: Swamp creatures, critters. Crocodiles and everything. Boy, what a day today was. What a day the testimony. I thought she handled herself very, very well.

CUOMO: Yes. I think, look, again, it makes you proud to be an American --

LEMON: Right.

CUOMO: -- that you have people like that working in our government, but then, my man, Yoho, the congressman from Florida comes on and says, hey, Don, listen, she's born in Canada. OK?

CUOMO: She's got a Ukraine parent, and Poroshenko, the former president in Ukraine, he liked her.

LEMON: Man. CUOMO: So Zelensky thought, you know, maybe she's not loyal to him,

she's loyal to Poroshenko. So. And he thanked the president for telling him those things about her. Wait, wait. The Ukraine president thanked our president for a telling him bad things about our diplomat?

LEMON: Who are --

CUOMO: That's where we is, brother. That's where we is.

LEMON: Who are these people? I sat there and I was like, I can't believe -- I don't want to go there. I got a lot to see to. You've got to get your weekend on.

CUOMO: It's going to get you there. You're going to wind up talking about it at some point.

LEMON: I've got to talk -- I've got to talk about it right now.

CUOMO: You got to talk about it at some point because they are not hearing things the same way in these hearings.

LEMON: They're not. But I think there's a rude awakening coming. I really, really do. The longer this goes on, the more witness that come out, the more information, I think there's going to be a rude awakening. I think at some point they're going to have to make a decision between their dignity and the cognitive dissidents that they all are experiencing right now.

CUOMO: Well, at the very least, somewhere in the future, some little baby who is just, if they become a Republican and they run for office they're going to feel like they can do just about anything because this will stand as precedent to that, if nothing happens at all.

LEMON: There's a Democrat coming up now, or Republican, the next one. And if it's a Democrat, look out. You reap what you sow. Thank you, sir.

CUOMO: Always a pleasure.

LEMON: Have a good one. Have fun Sunday night.

CUOMO: Thank you.

LEMON: I'll be watching.

This is CNN Tonight. I'm Don Lemon.

Shocking revelations tonight that we need to tell you about. It's about that overheard phone call between the president and Gordon Sondland, the one that we first heard about in the testimony of a top diplomat Bill Taylor this week.

CNN has a copy of the opening statement from Taylor's aide. His name is David Holmes. David Holmes overheard the E.U. ambassador, a million-dollar Trump donor, Gordon Sondland's phone call with President Trump. OK? And we're going to tell you how it all went down. It is full of evidence, evidence that's devastating for this

president. So, let me set the scene for you. Holmes describes a lunch on July 26th, this is the day after the president's infamous Ukraine phone call.

Sondland, Holmes, two staffers sitting on an outdoor terrace in Kiev, and sharing a bottle of wine. Sondland calls the president to give him an update. Now this is from page, page six of Holmes' opening statement, OK? This is from page six. And I quote here.

"While Ambassador Sondland's phone was not on speakerphone, I could hear the president's voice through the earpiece of the phone. The president's voice was very loud and recognizable, and Ambassador Sondland held the phone away from his ear for a period of time, presumably because of the loud volume." OK? That was from page six.

The president's loud, recognizable voice, easily heard from Sondland's phone in the middle of a restaurant terrace. But just listen to what comes next here, OK? He goes on to say, "I heard Ambassador Sondland greet the president and explain that he was calling from Kiev. I heard President Trump then clarify that Ambassador Sondland was in Ukraine."

Ambassador replied, yes, he was in Ukraine, and went on to state, that president Zelensky loves your ass. His words, not mine.

[22:04:55]

He goes on, "I then heard President Trump ask, so he's going to be, he's going to do the investigation? Ambassador Sondland replied that he's going to do it. Adding that President Zelensky will do anything you ask him to."

Anything you ask him to. And what the President of the United States was asking the president of Ukraine to do was give him the investigations that he so desperately wanted. That's very clear.

David Holmes testifying to that under oath, but there's more, OK? "After the call ended, Ambassador Sondland remarked that the president was in a bad mood, as Ambassador Sondland stated was often the case early in the morning." Does that sound like someone the president hardly knows?

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: Let me just tell you, I hardly know the gentleman.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: Well, you apparently knew him well enough to take a call from him and ask him about the investigations you wanted from Ukraine.

Holmes' statement continues on. He says, "I then took the opportunity to ask Ambassador Sondland for his candid impression of the president's views on Ukraine. In particular, I asked Ambassador Sondland if it was true that the president did not give a s, or-ish about Ukraine -- as they say in common parlance (Ph) -- about Ukraine.

Well, Ambassador Sondland agreed that the president did not give a ish about Ukraine, and I asked why not, and Ambassador Sondland say that the president only cares about big stuff. I noted that there was big stuff going on in Ukraine like a war with Russia and Ambassador Sondland replied that he meant big stuff that benefits the president like the Biden investigation that Mr. Giuliani was pushing. The conversation then moved on to other topics."

That really couldn't be more clear. The president only cares about big stuff that benefits him like that Biden investigation he want. And Ambassador Sondland had already assured the president that Zelensky would do anything you ask him to do.

Remember Holmes says two staffers were there at the table sharing that bottle of wine on that restaurant terrace when the phone call happened. And that the president's voice was as loud as Holmes says it seems like they heard all of this too.

Holmes also says that the lunch, after that lunch, he immediately told the deputy chief of mission and others at the embassy about the call and repeatedly referred to it in meetings.

So, it sounds like there's a lot of people. There are a lot of people who know what was said on that phone call. Let's not forget, Ambassador Sondland, who already amended his closed-door testimony when his memory suddenly got better after reading the testimony from Bill Taylor, and top Russia adviser Tim Morrison.

He's set to testify publicly next Wednesday under oath, and he's going to have to tell the whole truth, including about this call if he doesn't want to end up like Roger Stone. More on Roger Stone in a minute.

But you heard that mention of Rudy Giuliani in David Holmes opening statement. Well, there's more. This from a meeting prior to the inauguration of President Zelensky, when someone asked why Rudy Giuliani had so much to say to the media about Ukraine.

And I quote here again. "My recollection is that Ambassador Sondland stated, damn it, Rudy, every time Rudy Gets involved, he goes -- oops, I can't say that -- f's everything up."

All of that on the same day, same say as a dramatic public testimony from former Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch who was abruptly removed from her post, by the way, from president, President Trump in May.

The White House claimed that he would be too busy to watch anything more than Devin Nunes' opening statement, right? But it seems like he found time to watch at least a bit of it, a bit of what Maria -- Marie Yovanovitch had to say. And she apparently got under his skin. Because just a little after 10 a.m., this came out.

The president tweeted -- of the United States -- tweeted, an attack on the former ambassador while she was testifying on live television, talking about being attacked and smeared by this president. This is what chairman Adam Schiff said about that.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. ADAM SCHIFF (D-CA): As we sit here testifying, the president is attacking you on Twitter, and I'd like to give you a chance to respond. I'll read part of one of his tweets. "Everywhere Marie Yovanovitch went, it turned bad. She started off in Somalia, how did that go?"

He goes on to say later in the tweet, "It's a U.S. President's absolute right to appoint ambassadors."

[22:10:03]

And now the president in real time is attacking you. What effect do you think that has on other witnesses' willingness to come forward and expose wrongdoing?

MARIE YOVANOVITCH, FORMER U.S. AMBASSADOR TO UKRAINE: Well, it's very intimidating.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: Intimidating. Schiff during a break in the hearing bluntly calling the president's attack witness -- witness intimidation.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SCHIFF: We saw today witness intimidation in real time by the President of the United States, once again going after this dedicated and respected career public servant in an effort to not only chill her, but to chill others who may come forward. We take this kind of witness intimidation and obstruction of inquiry very seriously.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: Unless you think it's just Democrat who are up and arms. Two Trump campaign sources, one inside the reelection team and the other a surrogate, well, they tell CNN, quote, "it was idiotic to tweet today about her." The ambassador sure seem to be getting to this president who refuse to back down saying this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: I have the right to speak, I have freedom of speech.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: Lots of bad news for this president today. And like I said, it seems to be getting to him, but it's not just what happened on the Hill, OK? In a courtroom just minutes away, long-time Trump crony Roger Stone was found guilty on all charges today of lying too and obstructing Congress in a case involving WikiLeaks, stolen Democratic e-mails and the Trump campaign. Stone is going to jail for lying. He's not the only one. Michael

Cohen, lying to a bank. Paul Manafort encouraging witness to lie on his behalf. Michael Flynn, Rick Gates, George Papadopoulos lying to the FBI. All the president's liars.

The message for members of the Trump administration who have been called to testify like Gordon Sondland. The only thing to do now is tell the truth.

Today's statement from State Department aide David Holmes is the latest bombshell in the impeachment investigation. How would the president's defenders explain the fact that this time the witness himself heard the president, heard him ask about investigations from Ukraine.

Lots to talk about. Max Boot, Laura Coates, Susan Glasser, they're up next.

[22:15:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

LEMON: So, here's our breaking news on CNN. A State Department aide testifying that he overheard the phone call between President Trump and E.U. Ambassador Gordon Sondland, which took place at a restaurant in Kiev in July.

David Holmes telling impeachment investigators that the president asked Sondland directly if Ukraine's president would give him the investigation he so desperately wanted. And the answer was, yes.

A lot to discuss now. Max Boot is here, Laura Coates, and Susan Glasser. Good evening, one and all. Let's see. Laura, I'm going to start with you. So, I've got to get your reaction to this stunning opening statement, it's from the career diplomat who overheard Trump's call with the ambassador, Gordon Sondland.

So, I just want to read part of it again. He said, "I heard President Trump then clarify that Ambassador Sondland was in Ukraine. Ambassador replied, yes, he was in Ukraine, and went on to state, that president Zelensky loves your ass.

I then heard President Trump ask, so he's going to be, he's going to do the investigation? Ambassador Sondland replied that he's going to do it. Adding that President Zelensky will do anything you ask him to."

So, we now have the president's voice in this unfolding investigation. This isn't hearsay, how devastating is this?

LAURA COATES, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: I mean, those very important five words "I heard President Trump say" are the five words that have alluded the Democrats so far in the public hearings, that have alluded the Democrats as far as it's been relayed by the Republican members who have been responsive to it. The notion that you don't have firsthand information, it's all

secondhand, and down the chain, and everyone threw innuendo, and this notion that everyone has freelanced it. Now you have these five damaging words. And they are damaging precisely because it shows not only that this notion that he doesn't know Gordon Sondland very well, that he's taking his call. That's a hog wash at this point in time.

That yes, that he is able to have this sort of we don't have to explain everything in the moment. We -- the thing. Yes, the thing with the guy, the investigation. The way that it's being described, they had prior conversations about this issue.

And the timing of it is right after that call, where he also says that he mentioned, he heard Zelensky say that he had mentioned that the president had brought up sensitive issues no less than three times.

And just to point out the absurdity of all of this, Don, the very -- the conversation he writes then shifts away from a discussion about withholding essentially military aid and an investigation with Zelensky. They then start talking about the rapper ASAP Rocky.

LEMON: Yes.

COATES: Who is being held. I mean, that is the --

(CROSSTALK)

LEMON: And the Kardashians. Still the Kardashians you -- that you tried or something out. Crazy, crazy.

So, after Sondland takes -- talks to the president, Holmes details this, Max. He says, "I asked Ambassador Sondland if it was true that the president did not give a you know what, ish about Ukraine. Ambassador Sondland agreed that the president did not give an s about Ukraine. I asked why not?

And Ambassador Sondland said that the president only cares about big stuff. I noted that there was big stuff going on in Ukraine like a war with Russia. And Ambassador Sondland replied that he meant big stuff that benefits the president, like the Biden investigation that Rudy Giuliani was pushing."

All the president it seemed to care about as it relates to Ukraine were these investigations into the Bidens.

[22:19:59]

MAX BOOT, CNN GLOBAL AFFAIRS ANALYST: That blows away one of the key alibis, Don, that the Republicans have tried to put forward for Trump. We already heard Laura talk about the fact that this blows away the hearsay objection. It also blows away the notion that Sondland is somehow freelancing.

But it really lows away the idea that the president cares about corruption in the abstract, that he wasn't just pursuing a politically motivated investigation of Joe Biden. Clearly, he was. Because in fact, if you read the very wording of the -- of what David Holmes overheard, you heard the president asking about not investigations like generic corruption investigations, he was asking about the investigation. And it's pretty clear which investigation he was asking about. It was about Joe Biden.

And by the way, that is further reinforced by the transcript of the April 21 phone call between Trump and Zelensky that Trump released today, which he thought would be exculpatory, and in some ways, it was an innocent cal. But note, never once in that call --

LEMON: That he talks about --

BOOT: -- did Trump actually ask about corruption, even though these talking points were to talk about corruption. But he couldn't care less. He doesn't care about corruption. He cares about getting dirt on Joe Biden. That's what becomes clear from this latest evidence.

LEMON: Here's more, Susan, what Holmes thought in the weeks after, as they struggled to lift the hold on military aid. OK.

He said, "My clear impression was that the security assistance hold was likely intended by the president either to express dissatisfaction that the Ukrainians had not yet agreed to the Burisma/Biden investigation, or an effort to increase the pressure on them to do so."

He is corroborating what he has heard from other witnesses about the shakedown. Isn't he?

SUSAN GLASSER, CNN GLOBAL AFFAIRS ANALYST: Well, he is, absolutely. And again, remember, this puts even more pressure on Gordon Sondland who is going to testify next week, not only because it contradicts his previous testimony that he really was not discussing the investigation of the Bidens at all. He's already revised that once.

But remember, that Gordon Sondland supposedly on September 1st in fact said that I was wrong before and everything, everything is contingent on the investigations that the president want being done and that includes the military assistance, and it includes withholding the Oval Office meeting.

Gordon Sondland is going to come in a televised meeting next week and he going to say, yes, I discussed this with the president, and yes, it was contingent. That would be a really, I think a significant moment.

LEMON: All right. Everyone, stick around. We have more to come. Ousted Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch responds in real time to a tweet from President Trump. Could that lead to a new article of impeachment?

[22:25:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

LEMON: Maria Yovanovitch, the former Ambassador to Ukraine who was ousted earlier this year by President Trump, testifying publicly today in the impeachment inquiry, telling investigators she was shocked and devastated that the president attacked her during his July 25th phone call with Ukraine's president. And while she was testifying, Trump attacked her in a tweet.

Back with me now, Max Boot, Laura Coates, and Susan Glasser. It was like a made-for-TV movie, like I couldn't believe it was -- it was like a reality show.

Max, Yovanovitch, let's dig into her testimony, shall we, because I want to start with it. Thirty-three-year diplomat, 33 years of service. Her testimony was incredibly compelling. Let's watch this, and then we'll talk.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

YOVANOVITCH: Individuals who apparently felt stymied by our efforts to promote stated U.S. policy against corruption, that is to do our mission. We're able to successfully conduct a campaign of disinformation against a sitting ambassador using unofficial back channels.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: So, they want to fight corruption. She was fighting corruption, well then why was she pulled from the scene if she's fighting corruption in Ukraine?

BOOT: Well, it's pretty obvious that Trump wants to weaponize corruption, he doesn't want to eliminate it. And she was actually trying to eliminate it. You know, Ambassador Yovanitch's testimony, I think, I speak for many people on saying really it makes me feel proud to be an American because she is obviously a very dedicated, very patriotic, very capable civil servant, who has served this country for a long time.

And what happened to her is outrageous. And of course, the outrage is continued. Even as she was testifying, where Donald Trump was engaging in what could be construed as witness tampering or witness intimidation. And what he was saying was just deranged and stupid. He was blaming her for the messed-up situation in Somalia and the messed- up situation in Ukraine, like a U.S. diplomat could possibly fix a country that's gone off the rails for decades.

So absurd. She served us honorably, and she got caught up in this conspiracy that Donald Trump is fomenting to pursue his own personal political interest in Ukraine at the expense of U.S. policy, which she was pursuing which was to fight corruption.

LEMON: Laura, you're watching the hearings all day. You were reporting on it. When you saw the president attacked her via Twitter while she was testifying, and then Schiff reads it put, and Yovanovitch says, yes, it's intimidating. Could those tweets end up being part of an article of impeachment against the president?

COATES: Absolutely they can. Justifiably they would be part of the new inquiry. Because remember part of the idea here is not only the call with the Ukrainian president, but it's also about what steps the president has taken following recognition of an impeachment inquiry.

[22:29:52]

Remember back at the Clinton impeachment, the substance of some of his articles of impeachment were about suborning perjury. That's a fancy way of saying trying to influence somebody's testimony, in that case trying to get somebody to lie. But at its heart it's trying to influence for a corrupt purpose their testimony.

[22:30:00]

Now, when you see the president of United States and watching this woman who has a stellar record of public service and she notes that have the effects of intimidating her, don't even it is trying to essentially influence her testimony or that a future witnesses? A full docket is set up for next week. Including Lieutenant Colonel Vindman, who is somebody who was very important in the last few weeks of testimony, talking about Gordon Sondland, somebody is testifying tomorrow, you have the man testifying today and a whole hoax of other people.

This was a signal, and he should look for the opportunity -- really as opposed to trying to perhaps influence testimony, perhaps he should note the head of the executive branch, their job is to ensure that you faithfully execute the laws of this country, not try to undermine the process.

DON LEMON, CNN HOST: Susan, let's talk, let's hear from Yovanovitch, more of her testimony and then we'll discuss.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

FMR. AMB. MARIE YOVANOVITCH, AMBASSADOR TO UKRAINE: I obviously don't dispute that the president has the right to withdraw an ambassador at any time for any reason, but what I do wonder is why it was necessary to smear my reputation.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I wasn't asking you about that, but thank you very much, ma'am.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: So, as you pointed out, President Trump smeared a career diplomat in real-time while she was testifying about being smeared.

SUSAN GLASSER, CNN GLOBAL AFFAIRS ANALYST, THE NEW YORKER: You know, Don, it was a really I thought powerful presentation by Maria Yovanovitch. And you know what, because it's hard not to succumb to the cynicism of just, you know, what can you even do about Donald Trump? And I feel like, by expressing her amazement and outrage and just disbelief that the president of the United States in the Oval Office could be captured by corrupt Ukrainian interests that's sought to remove an American ambassador.

She gave the best statement that I have heard yet, crystallizing the impact of this around the world as well as here in the United States, that anyone can take the message away that a U.S. Ambassador can be dumped essentially, if can you find a route into the Oval Office. The signal that this sends is just extraordinary.

And so, I thought she was extremely powerful and very clear, because she essential didn't succumb to the, well, so what? There aren't enough Republican votes in the Senate to do anything about it. She essentially said, you know, this is nuts, and I'm going to testify about it. And we still got to acknowledge the facts.

And I thought, you know, it was just -- this sort of breath of like, hey, remember, this is kind of crazy, this is not normal, and it's not acceptable. It may or may not ultimately prove to be impeachable, but this is not acceptable. And I mean, hear any Republicans today defending trump's conduct, by the way, in firing her. Although I also didn't hear any of them condemning it.

LEMON: Yes. Go ahead, go ahead Laura.

COATES: I'd say one thing that is so bizarre to and the point here is that this witness, well, who was supposed to be kind of a tangentially witness, she was not -- they may be added in in terms of background information and here's why she was supposed to be that person. She left office -- left service, excuse me, unceremoniously because of the president of the United States, but she left service prior to this call that is the very impetus for the entire impeachment inquiry, months prior to that.

And so, by the president attacking her strategically, if you are part of your team, you're thinking, you have now elevated the credibility of this witness as somebody who has been trying to establish foundationally that there was a smear campaign. You've added to that, You've now transformed her testimony from being perhaps a tangentially point that was added into Bill Taylor, to being front and center about why would you not have pursued the normal course for somebody to (inaudible) your pleasure to just say, you don't need to be here any longer. Why go through everything else? And now she has become front and center, because of this self-inflicted wound of the president.

LEMON: And Max, Yovanovitch basically says that she was effectively thrown to the wolves by the Secretary of State Mike Pompeo.

MAX BOOT, CNN GLOBAL AFFAIRS ANALYST, COUNCIL FOR FOREIGN RELATIONS: Well, it's an extraordinary indictment of Mike Pompeo. You know, when he took over, I and all of the other people thought he would be an improvement over Rex Tillerson, but in fact, he has been much worse, because while Tillerson was simply incompetent, Mike Pompeo has been almost malevolent in the way that he has destroyed morale.

LEMON: (Inaudible), that he treated -- that she said, she was thrown to the wolves.

BOOT: I think it will matter greatly to the future of the State Department, because they've all seen what happen to her. And you know, let's forget, this is not just a scandal involving Donald Trump, this is a scandal involving a lot Donald Trump enablers, and one of those enablers is Mike Pompeo. He is somebody who has ambitions, perhaps of going to the Senate, perhaps in becoming a president himself and all these things should count against him in the long run, because what he has done is an extraordinary dereliction of duty.

LEMON: Thank you all. I appreciate it. I really do.

[22:35:00]

Up next, John Kasich, he's going to weigh in on what he thought of today's testimony.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

LEMON: Breaking news. Damning new evidence from the State Department aide testifying behind closed-doors, David Holmes says that he overheard President Trump asking about Ukraine launching investigations on a phone call with E.U. ambassador and million dollar Trump donor, Gordon Sondland. Holmes testifying the ambassador said the president only cares about big stuff like the Biden investigation.

John Kasich, is a former Republican governor of Ohio and he joins me now. Good to see you, John. Give me your reaction please to this opening statement from David Holmes tonight, where he says he heard the president on the phone with Ambassador Sondland asking about the investigation into the Bidens.

[22:40:00]

FMR. GOV. JOHN KASICH (R-OH), CNN SENIOR POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: You know, what's going to be riveting, Don, I think to all of us who are following is, what Sondland is going to say next week. As we know, he went before the committee in those closed -- in the closed investigation, and then he went back and he changed his story, as you know. He revised his testimony. Now, the question is what does he do when he goes before the committee? Because he's going to be under oath again.

And so, is he going to confirm this conversation, or is he going to deny it? And that's what we're going to have to watch for. And you know, this is to me, it's a big deal. We will have to see what Sondland has to say for himself.

Again, I don't think he can go back and revise like he did the last time. And I don't know what his thinking is. I can't read his mind, but, you know, this is obviously something that is very significant, because it could potentially tie the president directly to this investigation, which people are saying he was really not directly involved. So, last night we talked about firsthand testimony. This sounds a little bit closer to it.

LEMON: Yes. I'm just wondering. Because now you know there's been this whole thing about hearsay, hearsay, hearsay, let's take a step back --

KASICH: Yes, exactly.

LEMON: I want to take a step back and look at this first week of public impeachment hearings. Trump claims that it is good for him. Give me your assessment.

KASICH: Oh, I don't this is ever good for any president to be investigated. Nobody wants to be investigated. I don't care who you are, you don't want that to have to happen.

But Don, the one thing that I've noticed here, when you think about -- when you think about Taylor, the witness William Taylor, I think is his first name and you think about Kent, and you think today about Yovanovitch, we hear this stuff about a deep state. You know and look, there's bureaucrats always trying to undo any new elected official. It happened to me when I was governor.

But these whole notion that there's some deep state. These people were serving our country with the highest ideals. Listen to him. Ambassador Yovanovitch today was talking about the fact that she wanted that place cleaned up. She was talking about American values. The same thing with Taylor. What they were saying is we should be proud of these people that they entered the Foreign Service, not belittling these people in some quote, deep state and they disagree with --

LEMON: So why are they attacking them?

KASICH: I think because they're trying to figure out how to discredit them. Obviously that's what it is, but any American should look at them and say, wow, I mean, these people are out there promoting America, American values, freedom, the rule of law. I mean, I think they have been very sophisticated, by the way, I think today when the ambassador was testifying and the president was tweeting and attacking her, this is starting to get some attention.

This is one of those things that I think people can understand at home. You know, like, why was he attacking that lady? Why was he doing that? She's just an ambassador. Why was he doing that? Those are the kind of sparks that can drive more attention to this thing, in my opinion. That's something the people can get.

LEMON: So, do you think that that's going to end up an article of impeachment for him?

KASICH: Don, I can't begin to figure that out. That's what the House is going to have to do and the committees going to have to do. I just don't know, but, you know again, the things that struck me was the professionalism of the witnesses and, of course, also this overheard conversation. Where that leads, and I'm going to be particularly interested in what Sondland is going to have to say about all of these matters.

LEMON: Is there anything that can be said at this hearings that cause Republican to turn on the president?

KASICH: I don't think at this point I've seen it. Again, I think we are really should be thinking about those people who are really not watching television, not looking at their screens every day, who at some point if this grinds on and there are things that come out on a firsthand basis that might say, you know, to their spouse, honey, we ought to take a look at this, what is this? Has this crossed the line for us?

Because we're dealing with the partisans. I don't think we are going to get a lot of changes with the partisans either, the Democrats or the Republicans. I think it's going to be people in the middle who are not glued to all of this, Don. That's my sense.

LEMON: John, I want you to take a listen to this moment, it's at the end of today's hearing.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. ADAM SCHIFF (D-CA): There is for camouflaging that corrupt intent. We are adjourned.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Mr. Speaker -- Mr. Chairman, you disparaged those members on this side of the aisle. We should have a chance to respond to your disparaging remarks. Mr. Chairman.

(APPLAUSE)

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: What does it say to you that there was this kind of applause after a hearing? Are you worried that Republicans are on the wrong side of this of history here?

[22:4%:00]

KASICH: Well, first of all, I'm not looking at this as a Republican or a -- I don't think of it in those terms. This is a serious matter. And you have to examine this kind of presidential behavior and the precedent that it sets. I think people were probably cheering for the woman, the ambassador who was there. You know, she did a really good job. And you know, I watched a little bit of the -- I think they were cheering for her, saying, hey, you did a great job today. And we can see that you love your country and you love the Ukrainians. And that's what I think, the cheering was about, if I had to guess.

LEMON: John Kasich, come back to the East Coast, will you. Come back in studio. We would love to have you.

KASICH: All right, Don. Thank you very much.

A new member in the all the president's liars club. Roger Stone becoming the latest Trump associates convicted of lying among other crimes. Is that putting pressure on those involved in the Ukraine scandal to tell the truth?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[22:50:00]

LEMON: Roger Stone convicted today on charges stemming from Special Counsel Robert Mueller's investigation after less than two days of deliberation. The jury found Trump's longtime ally, guilty of charges in witness tampering. Obstruction of Congressional investigation, five counts of lying to Congress. He is just the latest in the growing with the trump associates who have been convicted since the president took office. Joining me now to discuss, Shimon Prokupecz, and Jennifer Rodgers. Did I misspeak in less than two days or two hours? Yes? No? Someone tell me.

JENNIFER RODGERS, CNN LEGAL ANALYST, FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR: Two days.

LEMON: I'm right, OK, good. OK, because someone said something in my ear. Wasn't sure if I misspoke. Hello one and all. Good to see you. So, Shimon, here's Roger Stone returning home being found guilty on all charges.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Stone, what's your reaction to the verdict?

ROGER Stone, PRESIDENT TRUMP'S LONG-TIME ASSOCIATE: No comment.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Are you seeking pardon from President Trump?

STONE: No comment.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No, no, don't do that. Just be polite.

STONE: No comment.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: So, he's scheduled to be sentenced this coming February. What message can this send you think, does this case send?

SHIMON PROKUPECZ, CNN CRIME AND JUSTICE REPORTER: I think it's a very significant message. And I sat there in the courtroom when the prosecutor were making their closing argument. And they explain to the jury really the last words from the prosecutor were probably the most significant talking about how truth matters. Because Roger Stone's attorneys tried to in the end argue, so what -- so what that he lied to members of Congress.

This case was really not about anything that significant. But for these prosecutors, it was very significant. They talk about why truth matters. We have institutions, we have laws, we have courts of law. They mention, you know, members of Congress. Congressional hearings in how important it is to be honest. When you go in there.

So, it has very -- the implications are much bigger. This really is bigger than just Roger Stone. And I think that what's it's so important here. Especially given what we're all seeing go on right now. With the investigation into the continued investigation into the president.

LEMON: Well, the timing, I mean, it was unbelievable. Let's put this up. He's the sixth person in Trumps orbit, Jennifer, convicted of a crime. Stemming from the Mueller investigation. He joins Paul Manafort. Rick Gates, Michael Cohen. What's the significance of this verdict, do you think?

RODGERS: Well, it's certainly a victory for the rule of law. And for the notion that facts matter. And that you can't go into Congress and lie. It's also important, because this one actually involves the president. I mean, there was nothing that Roger Stone was doing with respect to WikiLeaks that was inherently illegal. It was the lying in order to cover up for the president and the facts that he and members of his campaign knew about this, they were gleeful about this. Happy about getting this information from WikiLeaks. That's what he was hiding and covering up. That's why he's going to prison. So, otherwise he wouldn't be. So, that's why.

LEMON: And that he's sort of a conduit between the Trump campaign and WikiLeaks, right?

RODGERS: And he wouldn't admit that, because he knew that would hurt the president.

LEMON: Shimon, let's talk about Ambassador Gordon Sondland's testimony next week. Already corrected his testimony to Congress once. How do you expect him to handle this next week given what we have seen already with Stone and the back of his mind now?

PROKUPECZ: Well, I would expect given what we saw today and given how seriously the prosecutors are now taking the fact if you lie before Congress they are going to take it serious and they are going to charge you. I bet his lawyers are very concerned. And we have already seen some information, additional corrections information that he's coming and providing.

And I would expect that if there's anything additional that needs to come forward, he's going to do it before he appears at the hearing. Or his attorney will find some way to get it out there beforehand. So, I think he should be worried and no doubt that his lawyers are very worried. This is really serious stuff. And I think for him he should realize that and perhaps that's already happened, Don.

LEMON: I wonder, Jennifer, what -- how you would advise witnesses if you were advising them for next week. And also the people who are ignoring these subpoenas as well, because it's not over if they ignore the subpoena. Maybe they are not going after them now, but afterwards they could essentially --

RODGERS: Yes. I would be less worried about them. I mean, that's the most -

LEMON: But if you're a witness.

RODGERS: But the witnesses have to tell the truth (inaudible). I mean, Gordon Sondland unquestionably misled Congress when he testified the first time around. He came and corrected some of the things. But now, more information is coming out, suggesting that there is more that he needs to say to be fully forthcoming. So, I expect we -- whether it's as Shimon said beforehand or maybe in his opening statement that we hear a lot more information from Sondland. Because he's now going to be about saving his own self. Right? LEMON: Rear end. Pardon?

[22:55:02]

RODGERS: Well. Maybe. Not until after the election for sure. I expect Roger Stone is going to try to push out the sentencing and the prison surrender day as long as possible. So that he spends as little time as possible, but yes, I think he's going to be looking for a pardon, November -- whatever it is, 2020.

LEMON: Thank you, Jennifer. Thank you very much, Shimon, I appreciate it. And thanks for watching everyone. Our live coverage of the impeachment inquiry continues.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)