Return to Transcripts main page

Don Lemon Tonight

NYT: The Fbi Opened Investigation Into Whether President Trump Was Secretly Working On Behalf Of Russia; Longest Shutdown In U.S. History. Aired 11p-12a ET

Aired January 11, 2019 - 23:00   ET

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

[23:00:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

DON LEMON, CNN HOST: This is CNN Tonight. I'm Don Lemon. We have got a lot more on our stunning breaking news. The New York Times reporting that after President Trump fired FBI Director James Comey, law enforcement officials were so concerned about the behavior of the president of United States that they began investigating whether he was secretly working on behalf of Russia. That is according to former law enforcement officials and others who were familiar with the investigation.

Agents were reportedly also trying to find out whether the president was knowingly working for Russia or was being unwittingly influenced by Moscow.

There is so much to discuss. I want to bring in now the former director of National Intelligence and that is Mr. James Clapper. Good evening, sir. Appreciate your time beforehand. So listen, we have been talking about counterintelligence, counterintelligence investigation into whether the president of the United States constituted a possible threat to national security. Put that into perspective for us.

JAMES CLAPPER, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST, FORMER DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE: Well, I think, Don, it's obviously explosive just to read it in print, but it's not surprising. I think, in fact, I would go so far as to say I think the FBI would have been derelict not to have at least considered the possibility given the behavior of both candidate Trump and President Trump.

Going back to, you showed this in earlier segment, his comment (ph) to the Russians in 27th of July of 2016, you know, go find e-mails. By the way, as a subsequent indictment showed, Mueller indictment, they did exactly that. They abided by his direction that very day after ours (ph). They went out and looked for Clinton's e-mails.

So, of course, you have the pattern, the pattern which continues of deference to Putin personally and Russia institutionally which is kind of mysterious. Never had, you know, a good explanation for that. So, given the behavior and then the firing of Jim Comey in which the president acknowledges on television that he did it for the Russia thing, again, you showed this earlier on your segment, so given this track record, I think the bureau would have been derelict not having initiated the investigation. Now, a couple other points I'll make here. I was privy to a couple of investigations of members of Congress, so I can attest to the great discretion that the FBI uses in a sense of investigation like that, and I would magnify exponentially if it were involving a presidential candidate or president himself.

The other thing is it might be useful just to distinguish the difference between a law enforcement investigation on one hand and a counterintelligence investigation. The FBI straddles both those worlds. That's why there is such a crucial organization.

LEMON: Wait a minute. Say that. I think what you're saying is very important. Say that again slowly. I just want to make sure that I get it and that everyone else gets it.

CLAPPER: Well, in the case of a law enforcement investigation, you have to follow the rules of evidence. There are processes that must be followed, due process, probable cause and all those kind of things, if you're doing an investigation that could lead to a prosecution and a conviction.

[23:05:00] A counterintelligence investigation in contrast, you're actually looking at the behavior of a foreign power, particularly a foreign adversary power, who is trying to influence or spy on or gain access or coerce somebody in this country. So the rules are different. The process is followed to investigate the activities of a foreign power.

Now, it's possible that a counterintelligence investigation of foreign power could lead to a criminal investigation if it involves a U.S. person. It's kind of a nuance, but it's an important one.

LEMON: Yeah. The person who from The New York Times -- a reporter from The New York Times also talked a bit about that. He said he struggled with the story because it's so nuanced when it comes to this and how it is different from the Mueller investigation but Mueller will inherit this, according to him, for this -- his investigation.

CLAPPER: Yeah. I think that's probably right. And I think, you know, this is in my opinion great testament to the wisdom of Rod Rosenstein in establishing the operation of special counsel and the inspired choice of Bob Mueller to do that. So I would guess, I don't know, I don't know or have any inside baseball here, but that Mueller inherited the vestiges of whatever the FBI had done after the firing of Mueller and before he stood up.

And I'm quite confident that Bob will cross every T and dot, every I, in coming to a conclusion about this, particularly with respect to the president which obviously is sensitive and politically explosive and all that.

LEMON: Yeah. Just days after Comey was fired, Trump met with Russia's foreign minister, Sergey Lavrov, the Russian ambassador. There is a picture of Sergey Kislyak in the Oval Office. That's when he said firing 'nut job' Comey erase pressure on him. How that resonate in the intelligence community? CLAPPER: Well, not well. I mean, that would be a real no pun intended red flag, not to mention all the other -- and this is consistent with the pattern of the deference to Russia and the deference personally to Putin. I think Juliette Kayyem in the earlier segment of yours cited, you know, the behavior at Helsinki. And so this pattern going back to when --

LEMON: Hey, director, can I play that soundbite for your and then you can discuss it?

CLAPPER: Sure.

LEMON: Here it is.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: All I can do is ask the question. My people came to me, Dan Coats came to me and some others. They said they think it's Russia. I have President Putin. He just said it's not Russia. I will say this. I don't see any reason why it would be.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: So continue, director, about the ref flags, that that would raise to investigators.

CLAPPER: Well, again, I think that -- that performance and that statement would just a real red flag. Again, no pun intended. It seemed to reinforce what the intelligence community is long concerned about and certainly I was before I left in January 2017, about this deference to Russia and the vilification of the intelligence community and the FBI and anyone else who was in any way involved with our assessment or the follow-on investigations.

And when -- I think the Helsinki was kind of the epitome or the low water mark or high water mark, whatever metaphor you want to use, concern on the part of the intelligence and law enforcement communities.

LEMON: Yeah. Listen, I'm not sure if you have any, if you're in touch with any of the folks still at the White House, but I'm sure you have insight on what will be going on now because this is a White House in crisis, and I'm just wondering, you know, within the national intelligence community right now, what is going? What are they thinking?

CLAPPER: Well, you know, I was with large gathering of intelligence people today at a retirement ceremony and I think the general atmosphere is one of concern for the country but determination to continue to do their job. As I said repeatedly and I'll say it again tonight, the intelligence community will keep on shoveling coal down the engine room and will tell truth to power whether the power listens to truth or not.

[23:10:00] That's kind of a sacred rift of intelligence, and I believe they will continue it. My rubbing shoulders today with folks reaffirmed that.

LEMON: I just -- you know, we don't know if this investigation is over or not. People keep saying, oh, my gosh, this is an indication that Mueller is done. This is like he has got years to go. Where do you think things stand?

CLAPPER: I don't think he is done. I took -- I read a lot into maybe more --

LEMON: Hold on, you're right. Every time people say he's done, something else developed, and then now we have this, but go on, sorry.

CLAPPER: Well, all I was going to say was when he extended the life of the grand jury for another six months, that to me telegraphed that his investigation got a way to go. Now, you asked me about this before and I said, well, I think it is closer to the end than the beginning. That is still true.

(LAUGHTER)

CLAPPER: So I will stand on that.

(LAUGHTER)

LEMON: Director, thank you. Have a good weekend.

CLAPPER: Thanks, Don.

LEMON: We got much more to come on our breaking news. The FBI opened an inquiry into whether President Trump was secretly working on behalf of Russia. Congressman Joaquin Castro joins me next.

[23:15:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

LEMON: So we got a lot more on our breaking news tonight, news that after the president fired FBI Director James Comey, the bureau was so concerned that they opened an investigation to whether the president of the United States was secretly working on behalf of Russia.

Let's discuss now. Max Boot is here. He is the author of "The Corrosion of Conservatism: Why I Left the Right." Also CNN national security analyst Steve Hall, and CNN legal analyst Renato Mariotti. Good evening to all of you.

Max, I'm going to start with you. This is a stunning development tonight, this reporting from The New York Times. Again, it is saying that the FBI opened a counterintelligence investigation to the president trying to determine whether the behavior, his behavior was a national security threat.

Listen to this. This is from The New York Times. "Agents also sought to determine whether Mr. Trump was knowingly working for Russia or had unwittingly fallen under Moscow's influence."

What do you say to that? MAX BOOT, CNN GLOBAL AFFAIRS ANALYST: You know, don, you got to step back and you -- my jaw is on the floor. You could not imagine this happening with any other American president, but it's a little less shocking when it's Donald Trump. This is not something that comes out of the blue. There is a lot of evidence why the FBI would want to be looking into whether the president is, in fact, a foreign agent.

I mean, start with the basic fact that you have a foreign power interfering in our election to elect Donald Trump, and start with the other basic fact that we know, there have been over 100 contacts between the Trump campaign and the Russians. The details are just piling up.

I mean, just this week, we learned that Paul Manafort, the president's campaign manager, was sharing polling data with the Russians. What is a legitimate reason to do that? And then if you look at Trump's actions in office where he has been incredibly solicitous to Vladimir Putin at Helsinki and elsewhere, never says anything negative about the Russian dictator, you add it up and there's a big question mark here.

Is there something nefarious going on? Is this on the level or is the president compromised? That is a totally legitimate question for the FBI to ask about this president. And it's totally unthinkable for anybody to ask that question about any previous American president.

LEMON: These are things that make you go, hmm. Seriously. It's not a joke. I don't know. There are so many connections that it's kind of stunning to believe that it could be coincidence, Renato. So, let's talk about it.

According to Times, at least two factors led to this investigation. The letter that Trump sent to Comey trying to put in writing that he wasn't under investigation and the president's comments to NBC saying he fired Comey because of the Russia investigation. Listen to that.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: Regardless of recommendation, I was going to fire Comey knowing there was no good time to do it. And in fact, when I decided to just do it, I said to myself, I said, you know, this Russia thing with Trump and Russia is a made-up story. It's an excuse by the Democrats for having lost an election, that they should have won.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: OK, so Renato, if Mueller determines that that was obstruction, could that also be collusion?

RENATO MARIOTTI, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: You know, it's interesting, Don. Collusion is an illegal term. It's a term we use all the time. We talk about -- it doesn't have a specific legal meaning. But, you know, I think what the import of the story when I look at this from a legal perspective, to me what this tells us is the obstruction was the root of and the original seed of this collusion investigation. We keep looking to find the "collusion" as you put it and really here it is right in front of us. What it was is that the president of the United States was aiding Russia because he was obstructing an investigation into whether or not the Russians were undermining the United States and its elections.

I think that appears to be from The New York Times article what caused the FBI initially to think that he may have been working on their behalf.

LEMON: Steve, let's take another look at this headline. You worked in counterintelligence against Russia. What is your take on it? It is really an astonishing story. What's your take on it?

STEVE HALL, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: Don, I think the chickens are finally coming on the roost. You know, I said many times here and other places that from a counterintelligence perspective, there is simply way too much smoke for there to be absolutely no fire.

So then what we've seen over the past couple months is you've seen guys like Manafort, Flynn, you know, there has been a lot of fire there. They sort of paid the price from our legal perspective but the question has always been -- and the White House has been very quick to say, well, that's those guys, it's not the boss, it's not Donald Trump.

[23:19:56] Now we have a situation where the FBI is actually -- we now know started the investigation against him which then, you know, was transferred over to the special counsel. Let me tell you, you know, if you're -- first of all, I don't envy the FBI guys who decided, yeah, we need to do this because it is a really serious thing.

You don't just walk in the morning with a donut and cup of coffee and say, yeah, I think I'm going to start an investigation against the president of the United States. There are some really serious thresholds that you got to get over to get into that part and to start an investigation and they did so and then of course they were told, well, we got, you know, special counsel now who has been working on this.

But, you know, predictably, the White House has come out with this deep state stuff which is, you know, ludicrous. Having spent 30 years in CIA and working with a lot of FBI guys, this is not a political move, this is not something that you do as a, you know, I'm going to get back because he fired Comey.

This is because there are specific legal and regulatory thresholds that have to be met before you can start an investigation like this. They had that and that's why the investigation moved forward. So this is a significant thing.

LEMON: I want to bring in now Congressman Joaquin Castro. He is on the Intelligence Committee. He joins us now by phone. Listen, we are lucky to have you. Thank you very much. What do you make of this breaking news tonight?

REP. JOAQUIN CASTRO (D), TEXAS (via telephone): It's just jarring. Even as somebody who sat through all those committee interviews on the House Intelligence Committee, as an American, to read that FBI has opened the counterintelligence investigation against the president with the idea that he may basically be a Russian asset or working on behalf of Russia, particularly given the history between the United States and Russia, is jarring.

At the same tine, I kind of have a conflicting feeling because like millions of Americans, it's also not surprising based on everything we witnessed and based on Donald Trump's behavior over the past three years or so, you know, starting with, for me, and it's mentioned in the article, when he openly invited Russia to hack into the e-mails of his competitor, another American presidential candidate and the meeting at Trump Tower, the news yesterday about Paul Manafort sharing polling data with a Russian oligarch and that was probably close to Vladimir Putin, all of these connections.

And then all these people that seemed to end up on the Trump campaign that had deep Russian connections over the years whether it was Paul Manafort or Michael Flynn and others. So, it's just so strange to read an American president would be thought of or accused of this. But it's inescapable when you look at Donald Trump's behavior. You got to consider it.

LEMON: You mentioned it. Let's play this and then we'll talk.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: Russia, if you're listening, I hope you are able to find the 30,000 e-mails that are missing.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: You know, you recall that. Now we think about that disgraceful Helsinki summit as well.

CASTRO (via telephone): Right. It wasn't just the campaign. It's been that as president, Donald Trump has essentially carried out an agenda with regard to U.S. foreign policy that is very favorable to Moscow.

You think about undermining our alliance with NATO, getting out of Syria in a haphazard way, aligning with this autocrat and moving away from our longstanding alliances with Europe and other alliances around the world.

You know, Vladimir Putin -- even if there was no collusion, even if there was nothing between these two people, you could not have hoped for a better and friendlier American president.

LEMON: Helsinki, let's play it.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: All I can do is ask the question. My people came to me, Dan Coats came to me and some others. They said they think it's Russia. I have President Putin. He just said it's not Russia. I will say this. I don't see any reason why it would be.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: When you consider all of this, that -- and the report, is this something that the House Intel Committee will look into or has looked into?

CASTRO (via telephone): Well, we're obviously -- we were stymied in a lot of our work when Devin Nunez was leading the Intelligence Committee because the committee would not subpoena phone records, travel records, bank records that would allow us to figure out, for example, whether Russia has leverage over Donald Trump.

A lot of that would have to do with money laundering or, for example, the infusion of cash into the Trump operation. We couldn't figure any of that out. But we are pretty sure that Bob Mueller has a lot of that information.

[23:24:57] So now that we have the majority, we are going to go back and answer some critical questions, call in probably some witnesses that we already visited with, some new ones also perhaps, and try to find out some of the information that we just couldn't get to before.

LEMON: Yeah. The government has been shut down for almost record amount of time. Tonight this is really a pile on to the recent Russia investigation developments. There is no other way to put this, is our country in peril right now?

CASTRO (via telephone): Our government is unsettled right now. We've obviously been through -- it's never good to have a government shutdown, but we've been through periods with government shutdowns. But, you know, this is exactly where our adversaries want us. Fighting with each other.

LEMON: Understood.

CASTRO (via telephone): A government that is not working as it should.

LEMON: Go on.

CASTRO (via telephone): So we need to do everything we can to get this government open. And when you look at the person that has been stopping that from happening, like a few things, as you know, the Republican-led Senate by Mitch McConnell has a unanimous bill that added over billion dollars for border security but didn't include $5 billion for a wall. That Democratic House in January has exactly the same piece of legislation.

If this was 20 years ago, if this was 30 years ago if, if this involved another president, Mitch McConnell as a Senate majority leader would stand up to that president and say, look, Mr. President, I know that you may want to veto this bill that both chambers passed, but we got a unanimous vote on it, and I'm pretty sure that if you veto this, I can get 67 votes out of the Senate and the House is going to pass it and we're going to override your veto. So Mitch McConnell is just as culpable at this point as Donald Trump.

LEMON: Congressman Castro, thank you for your time.

CASTRO (via telephone): Thank you.

LEMON: Will you guys stick around? I saw during that, when I was reminding the congressman of everything, Helsinki, Steve, I saw you shaking your head. I want to get your response, all of you, on the other side of the break. We'll be right back with our breaking news.

[23:30:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

LEMON: I'm back with Max, Steve, and Renato. So, let's discuss this. Steve, I just want to get your response to what the congressman said about the president and Helsinki and so on.

RENATO MARIOTTI, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Yeah, Don. Helsinki for me was a real -- was a real bad moment. I think I tweeted that it's sickening to me. Before Helsinki, when you are doing the counterintelligence assessment which, you know, is the same as a legal assessment, there is much more just trying to put things together in patterns, and before Helsinki, I was like, you know, who knows?

I mean, there is so much swirling out there. We are going to have to get to the bottom of it, you know. Is it possible that the president of the United States could actually have somehow been involved directly with the Russians? There is a lot of doubt in my mind. And then I saw the obsequiousness. I saw the demeanor of the president of the United States standing next to this Russian autocrat.

And for me, it was a turning point. I mean, I don't mean to make too much of a big deal of having, you know, dark thoughts when you are doing counterintelligence, but there is a lot it in this assessment and pattern. And when I saw him come out, I was thinking, how can this be explained, his performance in Helsinki, except for the fact that they must have something on it.

That was what struck me immediately as the president would say as a gut reaction and that was what sickened me, the actual possibility that the president of the United States was somehow compromised. The Russians somehow had something over him which was making him behave in a way that was very favorable to Russia. And that's -- you know, for counterintelligence professionals, that is the unthinkable of the unthinkable. That is horrific.

LEMON: I just want to read this statement from the White House tonight. The White House put out a statement saying, "this is absurd. James Comey was fired because he is a disgraced partisan hack, and his Deputy Andrew McCabe, who was in charge at the time, is a know liar fired by the FBI. Unlike President Obama, who let Russian and other foreign adversaries push America around, President Trump has actually been tough on Russia."

Max, they appear to be saying that this is partisan, it's deep state. Would the FBI launch an investigation of this magnitude for something like that? MAX BOOT, CNN GLOBAL AFFAIRS ANALYST: That's ridiculous, Don. This be as partisan spin at the White House puts out only gives credence (ph) to the charges because what they try to do is they try to smear the investigators. They can't address the substance of the charges and suspicion so they scream witch hunt, they scream deep state, all this nutty conspiracy theories. They try to malign people like Comey and Mueller and so forth which suggests they don't have a very strong case.

And, in fact, that is the case. I mean, what is striking to me listening to Steve and Director Jim Clapper earlier, very down the middle intelligence professionals, decades of experience, they are voicing the same suspicions that the president of the United States could be compromised by the Russians and nothing that Donald Trump has done makes those suspicions go away.

In fact, the more we learn, the more credible those suspicions get. For example, I was struck by the fact that you were playing that clip of Donald Trump saying, you know, if you're listening, please go attack Hillary Clinton's e-mails and get those stolen e-mails.

[23:34:57] Well, we now know based on Mueller's indictment of the Russian hackers last year, that very day, the Russians actually went after the Clinton campaign. That's -- they began the hacking that resulted in the compromise of John Podesta's e-mails. So they were actually listening, seemingly, to what Donald Trump was saying.

Again, the more we learn, the more credible these allegations get. These White House attempts to attack the investigators do nothing to remove the suspicion.

LEMON: Renato, I just have one more quick question for Steve. Steve, let's talk about the deep state here. Would the FBI launch an investigation of this magnitude without evidence?

STEVE HALL, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: It's ludicrous, Don. Again, my hat is off to the FBI investigators who decided to sort of suck it up and say, look, this is going to be really controversial but, you know, we got to do it. And that's not an easy decision to make, not just in their own minds, but it's also there are thresholds, both legal and regulatory and just policy-wise, that you have to clear before you do that.

So, no, once again, you don't just walk in one morning and say, you know, we're going to do this. And to echo something that Max was just saying, yeah, the comment about finding those e-mails to Russia, that certainly of concern. But there are so many other things that -- the thing that really struck me was the comment that the president made in the Oval Office to Sergey Lavrov and others saying, yeah, I just got rid of this guy.

I mean, under what circumstances? You either got to be incredibly not smart about how you're dealing with your foreign counterparts. And then if you're talking to the Russians, I mean, it's ludicrous on -- there are so many things that this president has done that are just absolutely either crazy or illegal or both. It's beginning to boggle the mind.

LEMON: Yeah. Renato, special counsel Robert Mueller took over the counterintelligence investigation just days after it was opened. That is according to the Times. This makes the Mueller investigation so much more complex now. Can you break this down for us?

MARIOTTI: Sure. One thing I got to say, Don, just to starting point, I don't think anybody can seriously question now why Rod Rosenstein appointed Bob Mueller. I think there is no question he made the right move. Anyone who questions that, I think, at this point is simply not credible. I think what we see here is a counter -- now we know a counterintelligence investigation led to a criminal investigation. That was something Steve was alluding to earlier.

For example, there's a lot of discussion recently about why was Michael Flynn interviewed in a certain manner and not others, how are things written up. It was a counterintelligence investigation at first. And Steve was explaining a moment ago, the purpose there wasn't to find crimes and find criminal activity.

The purpose was to determine whether or not a foreign agent, a foreign adversary was engaging in subterfuge within the United States, potentially involving the president of the United States. I got to say, by the way, Don, as a lawyer, as an American, it's shocking that the president of the United States could be a Russian asset.

And, frankly, when you were talking about a moment ago that attack, Don, that Sarah Sanders was making on the FBI and the investigation, it is downright shameful and it is un-American. And I frankly think that all of us have gotten a little numb to the obstruction of justice that we keep seeing in front of our very eyes.

You should not be attacking if you're the president of the United States the FBI and our independent law enforcement. And if you're doing that, if that is your response to the fact that the FBI is investigating you of being an agent of a foreign power, that should cause all Americans and seriously question, what is going on here?

Frankly, our elected officials should be asked -- should be called to task and asked whether or not they find this disturbing and what they're going to do about it.

LEMON: Good luck with that. That last part because there seems to be no accountability now from our elected officials. Thank you, gentlemen. I appreciate it. Thanks for staying over a little bit longer because we got Congressman Castro there. I appreciate it.

Much more on our breaking news. Plus, in a matter of minutes, this shutdown will become the longest in American history and there is no end in sight.

[23:40:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

LEMON: There is much more in our breaking news. A report that after President Trump was fired -- after he fired FBI Director James Comey, law enforcement was so concerned that they opened an investigation to whether the president was working on behalf of Russia either knowingly or unwittingly.

Susan Glasser is here, April Ryan as well. April is the author of "Under Fire: Reporting from the Front Lines of the Trump White House." I'm so glad to have all of you on. First, Susan, I have to ask you about this bombshell in the Times. You tweeted earlier that you were having a tough time absorbing the story. Now that you've had some time process, where do you stand on it?

SUSAN GLASSER, CNN GLOBAL AFFAIRS ANALYST: Look, I'm struck by the fact that people are not shocked by it. This is something that is shocking. This is something that if you wrote this in a novel and sent it to your publisher, they would say, Don, you're a little over the top here. Come on, we're talking about the president of the United States.

LEMON: Right.

(LAUGHTER)

GLASSER: And I think the fact that we are so inward to the shock value of a story in The New York Times that says that the president of the United States is under investigation, a counterintelligence investigation, for a potentially -- essentially being a Russian intelligence asset --

[23:45:01] You know, it speaks to the incredible degradation and debasement of our local culture and our society over the last two years that this doesn't feel like the world is (INAUDIBLE) for this to happen.

I cannot imagine a scenario under any previous period in our public life where the revelation that the government of the United States was investigating the president of the United States for being Russian intelligence asset wouldn't be an earth-shattering story, and yet is being treated as, you know, with his White House statement just another partisan game. That's clearly not what this is. So, I'm shocked.

LEMON: Let me read the statement. Let me read the statement. And this is from Sarah Sanders, "This is absurd. James Comey was fired because he is a disgrace -- of disgrace partisan hack and his deputy, Andrew McCabe, who was in charge at the time is known -- is a known liar, fired by the FBI. Unlike President Obama who let Russia and other foreign adversaries push America around, President Trump has actually been tough on Russia.

What do you think of that, April?

APRIL RYAN, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: It's nice to know that Sarah Huckabee-Sanders is working during the shutdown. Here's the deal. This is not normal. And let's just -- let's say that and so much of this crazy has been -- we've let it go as normal. It's not normal.

But in the midst of all of this, I mean I go back to the first couple of months within the first year of this administration, this president talked to a Russian official in the Oval Office about how and why he fired James Comey, enough said.

You know, there is -- there's a lot of smoke here and we have to wait and see how it all plays out. But this president has said that, you know, he wanted to have a relationship early on. He wanted to have a good relationship. Would it be great for America to have a great relationship with Russia?

Well, he is trying to have a great relationship with Russia. According to the reports and what's spilling out, leaking out, from the Mullen investigation, you know, with these business dealings and things of that nature. But the bottom line is, you know, the Comey firing was just that because he didn't Russian. We've seen it played out over and over again. The president does not like this Russia investigation.

The bottom lime, we have to wait for this all to play out. But they have said one thing and it's always something else. So, we have to see how this plays out.

LEMON: Susan, I have to ask you, when you look at this and the president can no longer minimize, right, the Russia investigation, and I wonder what this means for the bar confirmation hearings. Is this a shot across the bow (ph)?

GLASSER: Well, that's interesting to connect the timing. Those are said to begin next week. And of course, you also have that in the context of what will be in just a few minutes record long federal government shutdown. Congress left town for the weekend rather than even try to reconcile them.

And I have to say, you know, you -- with your previous panel suggested that our elected officials would be responding to this extraordinary revelation of "The New York Times" about the counterintelligence investigation of the president here, you said, well, you know, good luck with that. There's no accountability anymore.

I think you're right that it's going to come up with a question of the attorney general and what kind of independent guarantees he is going to give that the special counsel continue its work, which has absorbed according to the Times this counterintelligence investigation.

So, basically, it was set up by the FBI and Mueller inherited this investigation. So, we don't know how active it is still or what the content of it is.

But just to go back to this issue of what we do know and what we can say right now about the president of the United States, even that in and of itself, it seems to me suggests a president who for two years has been acting essentially to further Russia's geopolitical priorities and not in the national interest.

And you know, to have turned it into a partisan political conversation, I lived in Russia for four years. I was at the Helsinki Summit. And I have to tell you we still don't know, months later, what was discussed between President Trump and President Putin --

LEMON: Very true.

GLASSER: -- at that two-hour private meeting.

LEMON: Yeah. This is a -- well, I'll get you on the other side. Let's take a -- no? OK. I got to run. I'm sorry.

RYAN: Good weekend. Have a good weekend.

LEMON: OK. Hang on. I'm getting conflicting information. You want me to continue on? OK. April, it's now the president and it's not just -- this isn't Papadopoulus. This isn't, you know, Flynn. This isn't, you know, Manafort. This is the president of the United States.

[23:50:11] RYAN: You know, we have been suspecting all along, you know, everyone under the president, all of his men or those close in that inner circle, had something. They were being indicted. They were convicted, what have you. And the tentacles have finally moved to the top.

And you know, the question is, could this president be an unindicted co-conspirator? Could this president be just someone who has all of these around him and he's been involved and he could actually got -- I mean, I'm hearing that there are a lot of talks about what could possibly happen in this White House.

I'm hearing -- and I don't want to say what it is because very seriously -- we're taking this very seriously because there could be repercussions for him if there is some kind of loophole or something that he could be prosecuted.

LEMON: Yeah.

RYAN: So, the tentacles are now leading to the top. I mean, we talked about the family. We talked about those who were -- the underlinks who were very closely in the inner circle that he has tried to distance himself from. Now, it's the president of the United States of America, the president of the United States of America, and while he is president, not just in the campaign.

This is huge. This is big.

LEMON: Yeah. April, Susan, thank you very much. I appreciate it.

Just minutes away from now it's going to be the longest government shutdown in history. We'll be right back.

[23:55:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

LEMON: Thanks for watching, everyone. And before we leave you, here is a look at a new CNN series. It's called "American Style." It premiers Sunday night right here on CNN.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Forties and fifties were definitely America finding itself. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Americans felt very second rate when comparing ourselves to Europe.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Sportswear became the defining style of the United States.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The bikini was the bikini was the biggest things since the atom bomb.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The 60s, 70s are style and fashion, represents freedom.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: When you look at the hippy culture, it's really oppositional to the Vietnam War.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Disco was very important in terms of people being free to express themselves.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: In the 80s, it was a lot of access in every way.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We had our Calvin Kleins and our Ralph Laurens and our Donna Karans.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Calvin Klein's advertising was rather scandalous.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: His underwear stopped traffic in Times Square.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: By the 90s and 2000s, things have become less formal.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Supermodels really brought fashion into every household.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Now, what's embraced is being yourself.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Style gives you a voice. It's freedom.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: American Style, premiers Sunday at 9 on CNN.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)