Return to Transcripts main page

Don Lemon Tonight

President Trump Wants To Use Dirty Tactics Against His Opponents; Rep. Steve Cohen (D-TN) Was Interviewed About The Outrageous Statement Given By President Trump; Trump Said He Would Accept Dirt On Political Rivals From Foreign Governments; O.J. Simpson Case; Prosecutor Linda Fairstein Says 'When They See Us' Defames Her. Aired 11p-12a ET

Aired June 12, 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.

Here's our breaking news. And it's frankly, it's outrageous. The president of the United States says he'd take dirt about political opponents from foreign governments like Russia or China. He's acting like there's nothing wrong with that. Insisting it's not election interference, which it is.

Also saying he wouldn't necessarily report a contact like that to the FBI. Here's some of the president of what he said tonight to ABC News.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS, CHIEF ANCHOR, ABC NEWS: Your campaign this time around, if foreigners, if Russia, if China, if someone else offers the information on an opponent, should they accept it or should they call the FBI?

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: I think maybe you do both. I think you might want to listen. I don't -- there's nothing wrong with listening. If somebody called from a country, Norway, we have information on your opponent, I think I'd want to hear it.

STEPHANOPOULOS: You want that kind of interference in our elections?

TRUMP: It's not an interference. They have information. I think I'd take it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: Let's dig into it now with Laura Coates, Josh Campbell, Shimon Prokupecz, and Michael D'Antonio. Michael is the author of "The Truth About Trump." So, all right. Hello, everyone. Let's get right to this.

So not only does the president say that he wasn't wrong to take the meeting, right, that it wasn't wrong that he wasn't wrong to take the meeting with Russia, during the 2016 election to get dirt on Hillary Clinton, but essentially that same offer or type of offer that he would take it up this time. Shimon, I mean, what's the reaction in Washington been like?

SHIMON PROKUPECZ, CNN CRIME AND JUSTICE REPORTER: I think, look, I think we've heard from a lot of lawmakers tonight that certainly they're off not surprised. It's stunning that the president would continue to say what he's saying and to continue to have this kind view on this.

That I think is certainly going to always be shocking to people. But I don't think people are surprised that he is doing it, that he is saying it the way he's saying it. They're not surprised that he's going to continue to defend these actions.

To me, one of the most significant things in all of this, I know we're going to get into this, is how he is undermining the FBI and the FBI director --

LEMON: Yes.

PROKUPECZ: -- and the intelligence community.

LEMON: And Attorney General William Barr.

PROKUPECZ: All of them. He's undermining, consistently undermining them, knowing full well that they have a different view of this. These are people who are investigating all of this, that he continues to undermine their thinking and really the laws that they feel have been broken and that they are investigating.

LEMON: Laura, let's bring you in because this is what judiciary chairman Jerry Nadler tweeted out tonight, OK? He said "It is shocking to hear the president say outright that he is willing to put himself in debt to a foreign power, not to mention the foreign interference in an election part."

So, let's speak to the legality of what the president is saying and what are the implications of the president saying that he would take help from a foreign adversary again?

LAURA COATES, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Well, first of all the idea of who among us wouldn't do this? Who among us wouldn't take the information is very concerning knowing it's the head of the executive branch whose job it is to enforce the laws of this land, number one.

Number two, about the legality of this issue. There are very clear rules on the books that say you cannot have a -- as a foreign national or a foreign government try to interfere with the American election or provide some sort of influence to it.

As a person who is in America you also cannot solicit that information from anybody because of those books. And if you do, it could be qualified as kind of the campaign contribution. Meaning, what you would have had to pay for, in the form of research or other services provided to you but you got it for free. And so, you have the president of the United States here whose already

been named as what, individual number one in an SDNY litigation involving Michael Cohen about campaign finance laws. You also have them very well aware of what happened in the WikiLeaks scandal of essentially saying, can anybody find these mails and provide it. And lo and behold they come up.

And now you have him saying well, he hasn't learned much from the volume two of Mueller report or even volume one, which suggests that you cannot be complicit in a foreign government's attempts to interfere with the election.

So, they have the president of the United States have all that background and context and still say well, who among us wouldn't do this. It happens all the time. Why not me is surprising and should not pass.

LEMON: Josh, remember when the president said this during the campaign? Watch. And then we'll talk.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

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

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: Was tonight a similar invitation to interfere, Josh?

JOSH CAMPBELL, CNN LAW ENFORCEMENT ANALYST: Yes. It seems like they're laying out the welcome mat. Now words matter whenever you're a top tier presidential candidate. They certainly matter when you're the president of the United States.

And it's interesting when you go back and look at Robert Mueller, remember him, his indictments in 2018 of 12 Russians, he actually indicated that the same day the president made that comment, asking Russia to go after the 30,000 e-mails on that same day the Russians began trying to hack Hillary Clinton's office server.

[23:05:08] And so, words matter and again, the president knows that now. One thing interesting is that you go back and look at that, that period of time and people said well, the president this was hyperbole, he didn't really know better. He certainly knows better now.

And I have to tell you that if you're in intelligence service worth to your salt and Russia or China, you're convening meetings tomorrow right now to try to figure out how you can possibly interfere in the 2020 election.

Because again, they're laying out the welcome mat. The president didn't say he's going to go out and seek help from foreign government but the fact that he's saying he's at least willing to accept it should trouble all of us.

LEMON: Michael, I want to read this. This is from a former Clinton White House press secretary Joe Lockhart, OK? He says, "Would someone please aggregate all the outrage Republican statements tonight at real Donald Trump's willingness to engage foreign powers against Democrats and our democracy. I'm sure there are too many for me to go through myself. Why is the media not reporting this?"

Well, I think he's being a little facetious there, right, that's sarcasm. Because everyone is so quiet. Where is the Republican response? Why are they so quiet on this?

MICHAEL D'ANTONIO, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: Well, they're terrified of him. You know, this is a person who uses threats and punishment against everyone who crosses him. He's demonstrated that he is the alpha dog in American politics. And it's certainly it's his Republican Party now.

But I think one of the most interesting things that's been said this evening was when Laura talked about how he sort of violating every norm and deciding that he's going to do whatever he can get away with and this is actually his method.

He has always been a person who's had his eye on am I going to be prosecuted for this behavior? In this case, it's am I going to be impeached? So, he cannot do the right thing here because he's already done the wrong thing. He did the wrong thing during the campaign. And for him to go back and now say well, I wouldn't reveal, I wouldn't take help from another country would be to open himself up to --

LEMON: Yes.

D'ANTONIO: -- criticism in the first instance. So, he's always thinking what's my defense strategy?

LEMON: He's got to say what he said --

D'ANTONIO: Absolutely.

LEMON: If he responds to it. I said that tonight that if he's going to respond to it, he has -- instead of saying listen, I'm not going to take questions. Or whatever. Whatever his new comment would be.

D'ANTONIO: He doubles down.

LEMON: He's got to double down because it's a defense for what happened last time. And a defense for possibly what happens in the future.

D'ANTONIO: And that a defense for his sons. It's a defense for Jared. It's a defense for everyone who is in that meeting.

LEMON: Yes.

D'ANTONIO: They are all --

(CROSSTALK)

LEMON: Were you listening in my office today? D'ANTONIO: Just as the Republican Party is now all in it too.

LEMON: Yes.

D'ANTONIO: So --

LEMON: Can we imagine though, you know, we do this every time and I sort of hate doing it. But imagine if that was the response from the former president in the White House. I mean, do you think that --

D'ANTONIO: Any former president.

LEMON: They would be going -- the conservative radio would be going to the bunkers at night, we're going to do a special live show because of what the president said. Can you believe this? And no one is saying anything.

D'ANTONIO: But this is a man for whom nothing is sacred. His marriage vows aren't sacred, his oath of office isn't sacred, the Constitution isn't sacred, the oath of office, the laws of the United States are not sacred. Nothing is sacred. If it's in his interest to break the vow, he'll break it.

LEMON: So, Shimon, the Mueller report says accepting a thing of value from a foreign country is against campaign finance law. And I had had the campaign finance law here. It says -- it says "commission regulations prohibit foreign nationals from directing, dictating, controlling, or directly or indirectly participating in the decision- making process of any person with regard to any election-related activities."

So, when the president says he's OK with taking dirt from Russia on his rivals, wouldn't the FBI and the Justice Department disagree with that if you look at the actual law?

PROKUPECZ: They would absolutely disagree with that. And this is something that, you know, the president could sit here today and say well, I'm going to listen and I'm going to take it.

But let's say if he doesn't get elected and he does take this information, well, we know where the FBI is on this. We know where a lot of U.S. attorneys are on this. He is no longer the president if he's not elected. He could get indicted; he could get arrested for this.

So, he needs to think a little bit before he's willing to go ahead and do this. He's not going to have the power of the office to protect him as he does now from getting indicted.

LEMON: Laura, I want you to weigh in on this. But also, do you think the president understands that accepting help from the Russians puts him at risk of being manipulated by them?

COATES: I think that conceptually he sees that as a possibility for other people but perhaps men not as intellectually strong as he believes he is. I think he feels that he is immune from that (Inaudible) manipulation and that he is simply doing what his gut tells him and what his mind guides him to do.

And having said that, objectively, from somebody looking at situation, it is inconceivable that one could think that they were not compromised in some way or being used as a puppet and a pawn by a foreign government who your own intelligence communities already told you is trying to exploit and capitalize on.

[23:10:03] And the issue of what Shimon is talking about is absolutely right. The idea of this campaign finance issue and the contribution. Opposition research can be considered a campaign contribution. It is of value.

That word value however is so important here because the Federal Election Commission and others who will litigate the matters of campaign finance violations have had a difficult time really stapling down what it really means to be of value.

Just ask John Edwards about this notion. How funds paid to try to hide the notion of a pregnant mistress came up in an issue about this very notion. It's not always easy to tie that down.

Having said that, you have this idea of what Congress needs to do now, Don. There is clearly a gap between what we believe is unacceptable behavior, getting that opposition research from and dirt from a foreign national or foreign government. And that which is actually considered be to illegal outside of the campaign finance laws.

This is another reason why Congress needs to have all the information available to decide how they should legislate to protect us against this issue in the future.

LEMON: Stick around, everybody. The big question is the president at war with his own intelligence community and how is all this going to end?

[23:15:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

LEMON: FBI director Christopher Wray is on the record telling Congress that the agency wants to be alerted by anyone who has been contacted by foreign governments trying to influence or interfere in U.S. elections.

President Trump flat-out contradicting that tonight saying, quote, "The FBI director is wrong."

We're back now with Laura Coates, Josh Campbell, and Shimon Prokupecz, also Michael D'Antonio with us, as well.

So, Shimon, you hear the president tonight, President Trump is undercutting his own FBI director, Christopher Wray, who he appointed. This is -- this was Wray and this was just last month. Watch this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CHRISTOPHER WRAY, DIRECTOR, FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION: My view is that if any public official or member of any campaign is contacted by any nation state or anybody acting on behalf of a nation state about influencing or interfering with our election, then that's something that the FBI would want to know about.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: What is it with him going after his own intelligence?

PROKUPECZ: I mean, it's a really puzzling thing that just -- he continues to do. The fact that he came out on ABC News tonight, really to the world, this is his FBI director and he's undercutting him, saying that he's wrong.

This is the man that's investigating all of this. You know, the FBI has said we have a lot of concern that the Russians are going to continue to try and interfere, others may try to interfere. This is a big concern for us.

And the fact that he would undercut his FBI director the way he did today, I think in all of this, to me, that is one of the most significant parts of what went on here today with this interview.

The fact that he went out on national television openly in the public and said that his FBI director is wrong. LEMON: Yes.

PROKUPECZ: That is very, very bad.

LEMON: Josh, I have to tell you, you know Jim Baker, he is the former general counsel for the FBI, I had him on earlier. And I asked him a similar question. He said if he were Christopher Wray or anyone, as a matter of fact, or even Barr, he would be trying to set up an appointment tomorrow to meet with the president to tell him that he's wrong on this issue and he needs to change his mind.

If you're Christopher Wray, if you're anyone else in the intelligence community, what are you thinking right flow?

CAMPBELL: Well, look, the president did two things today. First, he went on national television and signaled to the country that he's opening to potentially -- he's open to potentially committing a crime in the future. Which is stunning.

We know that he's defended himself against allegations in the past. But to know what the law is and to say that he might still break the laws or believes to accepting information from a foreign government is astounding.

And the reason that's important is because in 2017 the FBI established what they called the foreign task force on influence, which is basically set up to combat foreign influence. So, he went after their one mandate saying that's not illegal.

And the second thing he did, as you mentioned relates to the FBI director undercutting the very person who runs that agency who is there to protect this country from foreign counterintelligence threats.

And so, if you're the FBI I think there are two options for you, essentially. You can step up and speak and say this is wrong. I think doing so will help insure the public that the FBI takes these allegations seriously.

Because again, at the end of the day this comes down to public confidence in these institutions. If they're quiet, if he stays quiet, he's signaling to his own troops that this isn't a big deal, and he's signaling to the public that it's not a big deal.

The other option is to pack your bags. And again, if you think that you're in a job where you're not effective or something has happened that's so egregious, that is often an option to do is to leave, is to resign on principal.

And so, it's one of those two things. I don't think staying quiet right now is an option for this president. For this FBI director as it relates to this president.

LEMON: Laura, I want your view here.

COATES: This comes down to basic civics to me. The president is the head of executive branch of government. Their role is to enforce the law. You know that there are laws on the books, you know that you heard from special counsel Robert Mueller who began his very short statement and ended the same way that there is a real concern about Russian interference in our elections.

States like Florida and their governor have been alerted that there were attempts to actually try to interfere with their individual counties in their report and actually explain later on.

The president at one hand talks about in the intelligence community as being that, intelligent, as being able to convey American concerns and preempt things like this. And then when he fatally undermines their statements and their objectives, it really is just challenging to understand what his motivation here.

Is it apparent trying to protect his son? Is it him trying to double down? Or is it he fails to understand that very basic civics lesson here, Don, which is your job is to enforce the law, not grease the wheels to make things that should be illegal somehow OK.

[23:19:56] LEMON: You know, Michael, plus you have this directive now from the president. From President Trump to investigate the investigators. Where does this all come from?

D'ANTONIO: Well, this is him now owning the intelligence agencies. So, Gina Haspel has now told the people who work with at the CIA you're vulnerable to this president's whims. And we now understand that the president requires people to hand their -- well, let's say, dignity to him.

And some people have done that. Rod Rosenstein did that. He's lost his dignity; he's lost his esteem in the eyes of the world by toting up to the president and doing his bidding. But other people like James Mattis did not or Gary Cohn did not. These are people who left rather than be emasculated by the president.

So, this is a setting up I think a series of crisis, not only in his conflicts of Congress but now within the administration. There are people who should be independent minded who aren't anymore and who we can't count on to have the integrity that would defend us from a president who is out of control and this is fast becoming a presidency that's out of control.

LEMON: You got to lock (Ph) on. You did mention the CIA, right, tonight. Because I want to talk to you about that. Because you know this report in the New York Times that he mentioned.

PROKUPECZ: Yes.

LEMON: That the Justice Department is now questioning CIA officers as they reviewed this Russia investigation which is --

PROKUPECZ: It's troubling because it's not -- you don't do this. The CIA kind of operates in their own world. And for the Department of Justice to start begin questioning CIA agents, people who work there, their analyst and staff questioning their work.

You know, for me I think what all this comes down to is the former CIA director, John Brennan. I know the president obviously has been very unhappy with the way John Brennan has behaved since he left office. And so, I think it goes all back to that.

That he's very concerned about some of the information and how some of the information that the CIA had really may not have been stood up. They couldn't really verify a lot of the information.

And the CIA, certainly John Brennan was sounding a lot of alarms to members of Congress saying something is going to on here. I know he was talking to people that the FBI at the time concerned that something was going on.

But what we're seeing from the attorney general right now is that he's saying, well, you know, they were acting on a lot of information. That he's concerned was not verified, was not, there was no there there. And perhaps they were over reacting and therefore caused other people to start reacting like the FBI.

And so, it's very -- this is we're in an extremely unprecedented time in terms of when you have Department of Justice officials now questioning CIA agents and analysts.

LEMON: Yes.

PROKUPECZ: Just one other point. You know, the FBI, the inspector general is doing its own review of the way they conduct it so that's being done separately. But this is really an unprecedented thing.

LEMON: Josh, I've got to ask you because also in that reporting is the Times, the Justice Department review has provoked anxiety in the ranks of the CIA as Shimon is mentioning here. I just want to get your reaction on what that might mean for how the future of investigations are conducted here.

CAMPBELL: Yes. Well, I can see the anxiety because it all goes back to the genesis of this investigation. I think all of us on this panel agree that oversight is important, especially these are very powerful agencies. You have to have someone looking over their shoulder and reviewing their work.

The problem here is the genesis of this investigation goes back to William Barr, or someone who has cast down in the minds of many on his own impartiality by running interference for the president, by calling their work spying right out of the gate this pejorative phrase.

And so, if you're in the CIA right now, yes, you have to have a little anxiety because you signed up to do a mission to work as part of this interagency group to go after counterintelligence threats. You didn't think that you were going to open yourself up to some investigate the investigator, you know, possible witch hunt, to coin a phrase.

And so, again, I think that they should be very concerned. I hope that and I expect that CIA director Haspel will ensure that CIA lawyers are in those meetings with the Justice Department. I think at the end of the day that that investigation is going to tell us exactly what the FBI review is going to tell us. And say since you have these patriots in the intelligence community that were trying to stop a threat and worked to do just that.

LEMON: All right. Thank you, all. I appreciate it. We'll be right back.

[23:25:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

LEMON: President Trump telling ABC News tonight that he would welcome potential information from a foreign power about a potential political rival, saying his own FBI director is wrong to encourage anyone offered such intelligence to report it.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

STEPHANOPOULOS: You want that kind of interference in our elections?

TRUMP: It's not an interference. They have information. I think I'd take it. If I thought there was something wrong, I'd go maybe to the FBI, if I thought there was something wrong, but when somebody comes up with oppo research, right, they come up with oppo research, let's call the FBI.

The FBI doesn't have enough agents to take care of it but you go and talk honestly to congressmen, they all do it and they always have. And that's the way it is. It's called oppo research.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: Tennessee Congressman Steve Cohen, a member of the House Judiciary Committee joins me now. I mean, it's wow. I mean, when you hear it, you can hardly believe after everything that's transpired that he's actually saying it. So, I have to ask you, OK? If you were approached with that kind of information by a foreign entity, what would you do, congressman?

REP. STEVE COHEN (D), TENNESSEE: Unquestionably, you'd call the FBI and you'd report it and anybody would do that when they have seen the trouble.

[23:30:00] A, they know the law because that has been reported. And B, they see the potential jeopardy that Trump is putting to (INAUDIBLE) by welcoming this information. The fact that he says he would continue to welcome it and take it says to me that he's basically admitting, yeah, I took it, there's nothing wrong with it.

And if it comes out, they find and show that he was taking information and knew it was from Russia, he's going to say, well, why not, it was OK, it was just oppo research, all the congressmen do it. No congressman had probably been offered oppo research from a foreign entity.

He's so wacko. Last week, it was go to the Mars and forget the moon. A month ago, it was go to the moon. He ought to go to the moon. Ralph Kramden ought to send him and not Audrey Meadows.

DON LEMON, CNN HOST: Wow! It sounds like you're really upset by this. Listen, it should be troubling to all Americans. But being offered information or dirt by a foreign adversary is not the same thing as opposition research. We should make that clear.

COHEN: There's no question about it. That's ridiculous. One is against the law and totally illegal. And the other is opposition research, which is part of the game.

LEMON: But I think he's trying to conflate the two. Maybe confusing Americans or maybe he just believes that they're the same thing. I don't know.

COHEN: I think he's trying to confuse Americans. That's what he's been doing ever since he was born.

LEMON: Yeah. So I want to play now. This is FBI Director Christopher Wray last month when he was asked what someone should do. Here it is.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CHRISTOPHER WRAY, DIRECTOR, FBI: My view is if any public official or member of any campaign is contacted by any nation state or anybody acting on behalf of a nation state about influencing or interfering with our election, then that's something that the FBI will want to know about.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: So Congressman Cohen, the president says that his handpicked FBI director is wrong. How do you reconcile that?

COHEN: He says everybody is wrong but himself. I don't know how Melania stands it, poor Baron. It's a tough situation. He doesn't like anything and the man is unbelievable. He thinks he's the source of all knowledge, and he thinks he's right. He thinks he knows something. He's the most poorly educated president we've ever had.

LEMON: Yeah. On Monday, you told CNN your oath requires to be for impeachment because the president has committed impeachable offenses.

COHEN: Right.

LEMON: After hearing what the president said tonight, do you expect other members to join you?

COHEN: I don't think so. Some will. It's a slow thing. We got about 60 who said they have been -- would be for impeachment. There are some more out there that are kind of close. I don't know if this is the thing that would put them over to our camp or not.

But, you know, the fact that the speaker is against it makes a lot of people even who are for it reticent to say that. Speaker Pelosi is well liked. She's got a lot of power and people will give her -- if it's close, people will give her the call.

LEMON: The former White House communications director is Hope Hicks. Hope Hicks has agreed to testify in front of the House Judiciary Committee. What do you want to hear from her?

COHEN: I like to hear what she knew, especially during the campaign when there won't be an exertion of executive privilege about the meeting in the Trump Tower, particularly when she was on the plane, which I believe she was, with Trump coming back from Russia -- excuse me, from Europe. He might have been in Germany but he had been with Putin and they called Putin.

If she knows anything about the phone call to Putin, if she knows about him writing the note that he did to try to help Donald Jr. out when he said it was about adoptions rather being about dirt on Hillary or sanctions or whatever and how many times that was written and what he did and any knowledge she has of that, and other information she might have from the White House about things he did possibly to obstruct justice and things he might have told Don McGahn.

Things he might have said about Jim Comey and why he wanted to fire Jim Comey or why he want Sessions fired or just all the things he might have said about his activities with Russia and with obstructing the investigation and trying to get rid of Sessions, Comey, et cetera, Saturday night live massacres that lived -- Saturday night massacres, not Saturday night live -- Saturday night massacres that lived in his brain.

LEMON: One last question. Hope Hicks is one of five aides formerly subpoenaed by your committee. Do you expect others to testify?

COHENB: Well, they might. Hope Hicks came through. She's going to have an attorney with her who will probably object to a lot of the questions based on executive privilege and will challenge that in time. But I think this might be a fact that some of -- they are going to come follow her and that their attorneys thought it was best for them to testify.

LEMON: All right. Thank you, congressman. We appreciate it. Thank you so much.

COHEN: You're welcome, Don. It is nice to be with you.

LEMON: Democrats outraged by the president's comments tonight but from the GOP, crickets. Will Republicans ever stand up to the man leading their party? We are going to ask former Congressman Charlie Dent, next.

[23:35:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

LEMON: President Trump saying tonight he takes dirt on his political rivals from foreign governments, acting like it is no big deal and everyone in Congress does it. That's what he says. So, he apparently expects you to believe that everyone in Congress is OK with election interference.

Let's discuss now with former Republican Congressman Charlie Dent. Charlie, thank you so much for joining us. The president had this to say about getting election help from foreign powers. Watch this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I think you might want to listen. I don't think there's nothing wrong with listening. If I thought there was something wrong, I'd go maybe to the FBI, if I thought there was something wrong. But when somebody comes up with oppo research, right, they come up with oppo research, "Oh, let's call the FBI."

[23:40:02] The FBI doesn't have enough agents to take care of it. But you go and talk honestly to congressmen, they all do it, they always have. That's the way it is. It's called oppo research.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: You're in Congress. Did you take information from foreign governments?

CHARLIE DENT, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: No. It's interesting. Having run for Congress, I can tell you that I'm not aware of ever anybody, you know, hostile foreign power, approaching my campaign or anybody else's campaign I was aware of. That would raise red flags immediately with any campaign.

Now, do campaigns have people who come up to them and say, hey, we got some information or gossip on your opponent? People will listen but it is not a hostile foreign power, you know, somebody who has maybe a political motivation but if it's a foreign hostile power, I don't understand what we're talking about. I really had to do a face plant when I saw that statement earlier today, that after all we've been through with this whole Russian matter, you'd think the president will have the answer down now, which is no, we don't take that information and we immediately will call law enforcement.

LEMON: Yeah. I want you to listen to some of the reactions from the 2020 Democratic candidates.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. BERNIE SANDERS (D-VT) PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: To tell you the truth, I am not exactly shocked. I think we have a president who neither understands the constitution of the United States or respects the constitution.

SEN. KAMALA HARRIS (D-CA) PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: The guy doesn't understand the job and can't do it very well.

SEN. MICHAEL BENNET (D-CO) PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: This is weak and pathetic. The president of the United States needs to be somebody who can stand up not just for America but for our allies as well, and he has failed that test again.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: And Joe Biden, Kamala Harris both tweeting tonight saying that the president or his behavior is a national security threat. What do you think? Are they?

DENT: Well, I think his behavior and his conduct in office certainly brought discredit upon the country, whether or not it's a national security threat remains to be seen. His treatment of allies, I think, is disgraceful and it's undermining American power and influence throughout the world. He's doing great damage to us internationally.

Whether or not it's creating a security threat is another matter but he has done great damage to our national reputation with so many of our closest friends and allies.

LEMON: I've got to ask you, because, you know, Republicans have offered a lot of excuses for the president's behavior and, you know, we've talked about it a lot on this program. But where is the outrage tonight?

DENT: I tell you what. I'm a bit surprised. I haven't heard any reaction yet. The statement only happened a couple hours ago, so I haven't heard a lot of comments. But I've often said to my former Republican colleagues, you can actually get the president to change course if enough of you speak up. I would say that to them regularly.

Just look at this most recent tariff threat against Mexico. I believe in small measure, the president backed off on the tariffs because he was getting serious pushback especially from Republican senators who were going to be voting against him. And I think that was not a small part of the reason as to why the president retreated from that tariff threat. So if the do speak up, I think thaw can affect the president's conduct and his actions.

LEMON: Charlie, potential conflicts are obvious. So, what is to stop the Saudis or anybody else from saying, well, we'll help you get elected if you sell us more arms or something?

DENT: This president, I think we all know, is very transactional. He doesn't seem to have a lot of real core convictions other than restriction in his immigration policies and protection in his trade policies. He is consistent on those two issues.

But he is very transactional. It would be stunning to me that level of amorality would exist. We'll cut a deal with you for information on our political opponents. Wow! I mean, I just -- that would be -- that would almost rise to the level of the dreaded "I" word which nobody likes to talk about.

LEMON: Yeah. Speaker Pelosi has been against moving to the dreaded "I" word, as you said, impeachment so far. Will the president's words tonight increase pressure on her to start those hearings, you think?

DENT: No, I don't. I believe Speaker Pelosi is not going to move on impeachment as long as the American public is skeptical or is largely opposed to it. Speaker Pelosi knows that in order -- she's most concerned about maintaining her majority.

And the people who you do not hear speaking about impeachment are those Democrats who want seats from Republicans who are in swing or marginal districts there. They are not talking about impeachment because they know it's not a political winner where they live.

They're afraid that will simply anger and motivate the Trump base. So they see that as a political loser. Until the American public moves in that direction of impeachment, I just don't see Speaker Pelosi going in that direction.

[23:44:59] It's more satisfying for the Democrats to beat him in the election than it is to impeach him in the House and then of course not get a conviction in the Senate. I would suspect the Democratic base would be deflated by that outcome.

LEMON: Charley Dent, thank you.

DENT: Thank you, Don. Great to be with you.

LEMON: You as well. W. Kamau Bell is going to have a lot to say about all of this. He is here, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

LEMON: President Trump dominating the headlines tonight with his latest outrages statement saying that he'd accept dirt on his political rivals from a foreign government. Lots to talk about with W. Kamau Bell, the host of CNN's "United Shades of America," the show where he just shades everybody. Is that what happens?

Hello, Kamau.

W. KAMAU BELL, CNN HOST: You've never seen it. You never watch it.

(LAUGHTER)

[23:50:00] LEMON: Yes, I did. I actually watched it this weekend. So, give me your reaction on what's happening.

BELL: I mean it's as if Trump is daring the Democrats to stand up to him and daring the people in his party who have any backbone to stand up to him. And they won't. I think your last guest said that, you know, people are worried about being re-elected or people are worried about it's not politically savvy. Was Martin Luther King Jr. doing what was politically savvy? Is it always a good time for justice?

(LAUGHTER)

LEMON: To do the right thing, right?

BELL: Yeah. Clearly that's the stakes. Trump can say anything and now he's basically inviting foreign governments to give him information. Oh, did you want that? You know it's going to happen and the election will be tampered with, and democracy will be affected, yay.

LEMON: Let's talk about -- this is today, sad anniversary, really, marks 25 years since Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman were killed. O.J. Simpson spoke out to the Associated Press this week, saying he had moved on. I got to get your reaction to that.

BELL: I would like us to move on from asking O.J. Simpson questions. You know, it is a tragedy. Ron Goldman's family has been out there a lot talking about it. I'm certainly happy to hear from them and the Brown family.

I feel like we need to stop being fascinated with hearing what O.J. has to say, and, you know, he served his time for that second thing he did. All of us have all right mind know that he murdered those two people. We need to stop sort of hunting him down. Let him be so we can all be.

LEMON: Let's talk about --

BELL: We need to move on from O.J.

LEMON: Let's talk about Linda Fairstein, OK? Linda Fairstein, I'm not sure you saw when she said, she's saying that Ava DuVernay's new miniseries on the Central Park Five, she's talking about that, she has an op-ed in The Wall Street Journal calling it an utterly false narrative. This isn't the first time the series -- the first series, I should say, on this case. Why do you think Fairstein is so defensive now?

BELL: Because there are actually real consequences now. I think that, you know, I mean, I'm a big Ken Burns van, but Ava DuVernay has the pulse of the culture in a way that Ken Burns does not. So Ava DuVernay has like really figured out a way to match justice and entertainment and she's done that several times with "Selma" and also with "13th" and this.

And so she has figured out a way to take a very difficult, thorny and sad case, and turn it into something to get people fired up and talking about it. And now this prosecutor finds out there's consequences for this. I think that, you know, we all know this case was a mischaracterization of justice. It's been talked about for years.

Donald Trump took out full page ads in the newspaper calling for the death penalty. These people have not suffered the consequences. She's a best-selling author based on her work in this case. These are the consequences of the actions. I'm sure that she's had to resign from some boards and step down from these. These are the consequences. She thought she escaped the consequences.

LEMON: She was a prosecutor. We should make people aware of this. She was a prosecutor here in New York City during that time.

Listen, I want to talk about now about now your show. This episode was inspired, I should say, by the Flint water crisis, and as you started looking into it, you found toxic communities like Flint all over. Let's look at a clip and then we'll talk.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

ROBERT BULLARD, PROFESSOR: People don't vote to get poisoned. Usually it happens to them. And usually it happens in a way that people find out later.

BELL (on camera): After they have a kid with asthma or after a kid has a learning disability and can't figure out where it's coming from.

BULLARD: We say that's cruel, unfair and unjust, and we say it should be illegal. Right now, the zip code is the most important predictor of health and wellbeing. You tell me your zip code and I will tell you how healthy you are. All zip codes are not created equal.

BELL (on camera): Really?

BULLARD: Yes. You can find zip codes that are adjacent to each other and have a life expectancy disparity of 10, 15 years, depending on what's in that neighborhood and what's not in that neighborhood.

BELL (on camera): Just by the zip code.

BULLARD: Just by your zip code.

BELL (on camera): Wow! You're breaking it all the way down.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

LEMON: You can actually tell how healthy a person is and their life expectancy based on their zip code.

BELL: Yeah. That's Dr. Robert Bullard, who is known as one of the leaders of Environmental Justice Movement. I think the hard part of this episode is, you know, two of the most boring words you can say are environmental justice followed by environmental racism.

We had to figure out a way to sort of talk about how important this is. This is all manmade disasters, as we talk about in the show. It's easy to fix this stuff. It's easy to fix Flint. It's easy to fix lead poisoning in Philly. But the people in power won't do it because it's more expedient and cheaper to not do it.

LEMON: Do you spend time with families whose children are suffering from lead poisoning because of the toxic neighborhoods they live in? I mean, often they didn't know it until their kids were already sick. What are their lives like?

BELL: You're talking about -- especially in Philly, there are buildings that are still painted with lead paint. There are schools. There are people's houses. And people don't know it. And there's sort of insidious thing about lead paint, is that it's sweet and so kids will eat the lead paint.

[23:55:03] And then if you don't know that your house has lead paint in it, your kids eating it, you don't know your kids eat it because kids put all sorts in their mouth, and then you decide, well, my kid is not learning at the rate other kids are, and if you decide to get your kid tested for lead poisoning, you could find out that sometimes your kid could have ingested so much lead that it that it's hard to catch up. They'll be developmentally delayed.

And it's also based on what your income is. People in poor neighborhoods can't afford the services to help their kid catch up the way people who have more money can. The thing that's important is that it affects all of Philadelphia because lead paint is everywhere.

LEMON: Wow. Kamau Bell, thank you so much. I appreciate it. Nice work, by the way.

BELL: Thank you.

LEMON: Nice work. Nice work.

BELL: Thank you, Don. That's the first compliment you've ever given me. Thanks, Don.

LEMON: Oh, man. It's not the first compliment. Thank you, Kamau. I'll see you next time. Don't miss an all new episode of "United Shades of America" with Kamau Bell, Sunday night at 10:00. Thank you for watching, everyone. Our coverage continues.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)