Return to Transcripts main page

Don Lemon Tonight

President Trump And His Allies Attempting To Put Their Own Spin On The Facts; Judiciary Committee Holding A Second Hearing; Trump White House Refusing To Turn Over Documents; Democrats Expected To Lay Out Two Articles Of Impeachment Against The President; An Anticipated Report From The Inspector General Validating The Launch Of The Russia Investigation; Justice Department Report: FBI's Launch Of Russia Investigation Justified And Unbiased; Interview With Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ) About The Democrats Laying Out Two Articles Of Impeachment Against President Trump On Abuse Of Power And The Other On Obstruction Of Congress; Durham On Department Of Justice Inspector General's Report; "Washington Post:" Barr Warned Trump That Rudy Giuliani Is A Liability; State Of The Race: Democrats Slam Lack Of Diversity In Field After Kamala Harris Drops Out. Aired 10-11p ET

Aired December 09, 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: Listen to Doug Collins.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. DOUG COLLINS (R-GA), RANKING MEMBER JUDICIARY COMMITTEE: Bottom line, the report shows the past Page 5 (ph) should have never been obtained. If you don't have the Page 5 (ph), you don't have a Russia investigation. If you don't have a Russia investigation, you can't knock out the president as a candidate at the time in the 2016 election, and you can't hamstring the president's first two years with a Special Counsel investigation.

I could go on. But Mr. Durham, who has already weighed in, has the next batch of this. And we'll see where it goes.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CUOMO: It's so nice that they know what's in the report already, nothing deep state about that. All right, time for "CNN TONIGHT" with Mr. D. Lemon.

DON LEMON, CNN HOST: Can I get 900? All right, come on, give me 1,000, 1,500.

CUOMO: Sold.

LEMON: Every time I see him, I am, like, that's what he sounds like. I have no idea what he's saying. He's just saying a lot of stuff. And he's just staying a lot of stuff, a lot of stuff over there, a lot of stuff, because it's a deep state, because the Democrats, they don't want this president. They've been trying to impeach him since the very beginning. They've been trying to overturn the election. That's what they're

trying to do, because they haven't been happy -- Hillary Clinton win the election. That's what they've been doing the whole time.

CUOMO: You sound like me walking around my house late at night.

LEMON: That's and what he does. And he makes no sense. But let me tell you, I heard the argument before the BOLO. It's never going to end, Chris. It's never going to end. I can't -- let's see. How far back do I want to go? We can go back to Benghazi.

CUOMO: Nineteen fifty eight when you were born.

LEMON: Well, no. I was born before that. It was 1956, so.

CUOMO: He's playing it differently now. I like that.

LEMON: We can go back to the president was born in Africa. And you won't believe what I am finding in Africa and Hawaii. We've got teams over there. Then people still believe --

(CROSSTALK)

CUOMO: I have the best people.

LEMON: We can go back to that.

CUOMO: I have the best people on the ground in Hawaii.

LEMON: We can go back to that. We can go back to, you know, Hillary Clinton is dying, and has all kinds of things. We can go back to that. We can go back to all kinds of things, all kinds of things that are put out there, promoted by the conservative media.

CUOMO: They're effective.

LEMON: And then you're going to get -- so then Trump Tower was tapped.

CUOMO: Spied on.

LEMON: Or tapped. That proves not to be true. And then they just move on to the next one.

CUOMO: Yep.

LEMON: Then what happens with the wait till the Horowitz report comes out, and there's going to be all kinds of abuses.

(CROSSTALK)

CUOMO: Even the president said it. It's going to be the big news.

LEMON: But then that's proven not to be true. But they say, oh, yeah, they don't believe it and then look deep inside of this report. And then they're lying about this. Oh, no, OK. Wait until the Durham report comes out. And then nothing happens, and they just move on to the next conspiracy theory.

It is never going to end. And guess what? People who want to believe that BS are going to believe it, and it just keeps going on and on and on no matter how many facts you present them. It is -- they're just never going to believe it.

CUOMO: It's the fringe effect in our politics, you know, where you hear these small -- you're hearing from these smaller slices being magnified. Conspiracy theories used to be for the outliers. You know what I mean? You'd never hear them at the convention. They'd never get a plank on any platform. They were just nonsense on the outside.

People you didn't want to own, like, ugly cousins. But now, they are the biggest part of this president's art of persuasion.

LEMON: Yeah.

CUOMO: And I got to tell you, after all that Comey junk about, man, he should have never talked, which by the way I agree with. I find it very frustrating when I was doing investigative work that the FBI won't talk to you about ongoing investigations. But we all accept that that Comey shouldn't have spoken out of school. We heard his rationale for why he thought he needed.

I don't know how compelling it was. And then Durham did it today and not a peep out of the same people who were so upset about it the last time.

LEMON: Yeah. I got to go. But here's the thing. He doesn't believe it. It's a means to an end. And they think he does. You know who I am talking about, big man, president. I got to go.

CUOMO: Thanks.

LEMON: Yeah.

CUOMO: See you.

LEMON: This is CNN TONIGHT. I am Don Lemon. A lot of news, President Trump, his allies in Congress, Attorney General William Barr, all trying to put their spin on stories today when the facts just don't match their narrative at all or that of the right-wing media, beating the drum over and over on their version of events, their version.

It's gaslighting, so that nobody knows what to believe anymore. So let's start with the House Judiciary Committee holding its second hearing before likely voting later this week on articles of impeachment against President Trump. The House Chairman, Jerry Nadler, laying out the Democrats argument very plainly and simply.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. JERRY NADLER (D-NY), CHAIRMAN JUDICIARY COMMITTEE: The president welcomed foreign interference in our elections in 2016. He demanded it for 2020. Then he got caught. If you do not believe that he will do it again, let me remind you that the president's personal lawyer spent last week back in Ukraine meeting with government officials in an apparent attempt to gin up the same so-called favors that brought us here today and forced Congress to consider the impeachment of a sitting president.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

[22:05:05]

LEMON: And then there is GOP Congressman, Matt Gaetz, who throughout the televised hearings has been yelling at and berating witnesses all to take the focus off the allegations that the president attempted to shake down Ukraine to get it to investigate a domestic political rival, Joe Biden. Gaetz doing what he does best, that is trying to distract the hearing by trying to turn it into a circus.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. MATT GAETZ (R-FL): I have a parliamentary inquiry.

NADLER: I will not recognize the parliamentary inquiry at this time.

(CROSSTALK)

GAETZ: Is this when we just hear staff ask questions of other staff, and the members get dealt out of this whole hearing for the next four hours? You're going to try to overturn the result of an election with unelected people giving testimony?

NADLER: The gentleman will suspend. This meeting -- this hearing will be considered in an orderly fashion. The gentleman will not yell out, and he will not attempt to disrupt the proceedings.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: He likes the attention, doesn't he? It's so obvious. That sad display, and that's what it is, a sad display. It is what you do when you don't have the facts on your side, right? You know what they say. You pound the table when you don't have the facts on your side. And the facts are these. As the rough transcript of that now famous -- infamous, I should say, July 25th call shows, President Trump clearly asked Ukraine's president for a favor, opening an investigation into Joe Biden and his son, Hunter.

And by the time of the call, the Trump administration had frozen nearly $400 million in much-needed military aid to Ukraine and wouldn't commit to a meeting between the two presidents until Ukraine's leader publicly announced he was investigating Biden. According to Republicans, Democrats are simply trying to overturn the results of the 2016 election.

But it wasn't until this year, this year that the president and his administration undertook this coordinated campaign and a whistle- blower brought it to light. Yet Steve Castor, the lawyer for the Republicans, dismisses the contents of the July 25th phone call when questioned by the lawyer for the Democrats. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Was it U.S. policy on July 26th to request that Ukraine investigate former Vice President Joe Biden?

STEVE CASTOR, COUNSEL FOR HOUSE REPUBLICANS: You know, I think you're reading a little too much into, you know, some of the eight lines. I don't think the president was requesting an investigation into Joe Biden. He just mentions an off-hand comment.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: It says in the transcript. OK, GOP gaslighting again, an offhand comment? Well, not according to the transcript. President Trump clearly asked Ukraine's president for a favor. He wanted investigations of the 2016 crowd strike conspiracy and the Biden's. After having his officials testimony shows, lay out groundwork for it ahead of time and keeping the pressure on after, after.

Castor then dismissed the impeachment proceedings as baloney, hardly. Most likely by the end of next week, President Donald Trump will be only the third sitting president in American history to be impeached. No baloney about that. And then there is this statement by Castor.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CASTOR: At the time of the July 25th call, senior officials in Kiev did not know that the security assistance was paused. They did not learn it was paused until the pause was reported publicly in the U.S. media on August 28th.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: Gaslighting again, trying to confuse the American public, not true. The New York Times reports the Ukrainian government knew back in July that the military aid had been frozen. And Pentagon official Laura Cooper testified the same day the president and Zelensky had their now infamous call, she received emails from the State Department that the Ukrainians were asking what was up with the aid. And then there is this from the Republicans' lawyer.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CASTOR: In this impeachment inquiry, however, Democrats have turned away information that could be valuable to the inquiry by disallowing agency counsel to accompany witnesses. Democrats have turned away information by declining to negotiate in good faith with the administration about the scope of document requests.

As a result of these failures, the evidentiary record in the impeachment inquiry is incomplete, and in many places incoherent. The failure to exhaust all avenues to obtain information severely risks undermining the legitimacy of any articles of impeachment.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

[22:09:49]

LEMON: That's just flat-out wrong. The Trump administration has refused to turn over documents that Congress has subpoenaed and blocked witnesses who have been subpoenaed from testifying. Key witnesses, such as the Acting Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney, who admitted publicly back in October that there was a quid pro quo. There was a quid pro quo.

The president was not happy about that. And Mulvaney then tried to walk back his comments, but it was too late, apparently though, never too late to make this bogus claim.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: The deep state and the failed ruling class -- the Democrats, the media, and the deep state are desperate to stop us. The opponents, the opposition, the Democrats, the radical left, deep state, whatever you want to call them. Then you have the deep state. We're getting rid of a lot of them, I'll tell you. We're finding them left and right.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: More gaslighting. There was no deep state conspiracy, nope. And today, the Justice Department's Inspector General released a long- awaited report stating that the FBI properly launched its investigation into Russia's interference in the 2016 election, and that there is no evidence of political bias for improper motivation.

Despite literally years of Republican claims of grave malfeasance, President Trump making this absurd statement today. It truly has no basis in reality.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: This was an overthrow of government. This was an attempted overthrow. And a lot of people were in on it, and they got caught. They got caught red-handed.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: I don't even know what that means. Attempted overthrow? The Attorney General, William Barr, didn't like the IG's conclusion either. Remember he said this. This is back in April.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

WILLIAM BARR, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL: I think there is -- spying did occur. Yes, I think spying did occur.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: Well, today he released a statement, which reads in part, the Inspector General's report now makes clear that the FBI launched an intrusive investigation of a U.S. presidential campaign on the thinnest of suspicions that, in my view, were insufficient to justify the steps taken, clearly trying to please his boss.

As I've stated before, Barr acts more like President Trump's personal attorney than the nation's chief attorney. Former FBI Director, James Comey, is pleased with the Inspector General's conclusions, saying the actions taken by the bureau had been vindicated. He was on Anderson's show earlier, talking about his vindication.

Interestingly enough, he was scheduled to be on Fox and Friends tomorrow morning. But after the conclusion reached by the IG, he says his appearance was cancelled.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JAMES COMEY, FORMER FBI DIRECTOR: They don't want to talk about what we just talked about, that the report is a complete vindication for the FBI against charges of treason, of spying, of planting informants in the camp, of all the criminal conspiracy that was supposed to land all of us in jail, turns out to be nonsense. That's not a message apparently they want to be spending the couch time talking about.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: So rather than talking about the truth or being challenged with the truth, just ignore it or push an agenda. And the only way to make that work is to keep gaslighting you. Are you falling for it? House Democrats planning to announce at least two articles of impeachment against President Trump tomorrow morning, a lot to discuss, Laura Coates, Max Boot, Susan Hennessey, next.

[22:15:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

LEMON: So we have some breaking news for you right now. Just hours from now, Democrats are expected to lay out at least two articles of impeachment against President Trump. Multiple sources telling CNN one is focused on abuse of power, and the other on obstruction of Congress. We're told they are still discussing how to deal with the Mueller report and whether a third article, obstruction of justice, should be added.

Joining me now, Laura Coates, Max Boot, and Susan Hennessey, appreciate all you joining us this evening. We got a lot to get to. Laura, I'm going to start with you. At least two articles of impeachment, abuse of power, one -- the other, obstruction of Congress, not final right now, sounds like the House Democrats are keeping this narrow and focused on Ukraine. What do you say?

LAURA COATES, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Well, there's a reason for that, to have this umbrella. First of all, neither comes as a real surprise given the breadth of information we've seen just in the course of this July 25th call. The real question is going to be whether it's going to expand, because in order to establish that abuse of power aspect of it or obstruction of Congress.

You really might need to have the context of having the Mueller report aspects of obstruction of justice. And of course, doing so will open them up to the Republican talking point of saying, see? You wanted this all along. It was a pre-determined impeachment.

LEMON: Max, despite the evidence of a shakedown, Republicans still saying no quid pro quo. Then they say, you know, look over here. Where is Schiff? Where is the whistle-blower? They focused on a disproven claim on, you know, about the Biden's. It really is astounding that they continue to push a narrative not based on the facts. Is this a lesson in gaslighting?

MAX BOOT, CNN GLOBAL AFFAIRS ANALYST: Absolutely, Don. I mean what we know from the Republicans is they really want to defend President Trump, but they're not sure how or why. They know that these charges are all phoney, made up hoaxes, but again, they're not actually sure why. And so they're trying out various arguments that have very little to do with the substance of the case, which is, so to speak, unimpeachable.

Because we saw a dozen witnesses testify about the quid pro quo. We've read the evidence with our own eyes and the transcript of the call between Trump and Zelensky. But Republicans are telling us what we see with our own eyes is not what's actually there. They claim that they're basically backing up Trump and saying that the call with perfect, or if not perfect, maybe it was less than perfect but certainly not impeachable.

[22:20:02]

And, you know, now they're advancing these crackpot conspiracy theories about Ukrainian interference in our election just as the previous conspiracy is being blown up by the Inspector General or the Justice Department. They have no case except tribal loyalty. That's what it comes down to.

LEMON: Listen. I want you to listen, Susan. This is the GOP's counsel, Steve Castor, echoing these false claims about -- that Max just mentioned about Ukraine interfering in the 2016 election. Watch this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CASTOR: Contemporaneous news articles in 2016 noted how President Trump's candidacy led Kiev's wider political leadership to do something they would never have attempted before, intervene, however indirectly, in a U.S. election.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: Susan, he's a lawyer. He is their counsel. This is not true. Ukrainians writing an op-ed is not the same thing as Russia's GRU targeting our election system. This is gaslighting. It's -- this is dangerous.

SUSAN HENNESSEY, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY AND LEGAL ANALYST: Yeah, look, I think Castor is trying to make the best of what he can with really, really bad facts, which is what he has on his side. You're right. Attempting to suggest in any way that a Ukrainian official writing an op-ed in their own name about a matter, you know, involving Ukrainian foreign policy and Ukrainian politics is somehow equivalent to election interference is preposterous on its face.

But they don't really have anything else to fall back on. You know, to Max's point, we saw lots of sort of whining about process, obfuscating by trying to talk about the whistle-blower. Now, you know, furthering this Ukrainian election interference sort of conspiracy. What we didn't see was a substantive defence of the president.

What we didn't see was any Republican, either Republican staffers or Republican members, who were willing to say the president of the United States asking a foreign country to investigate a political opponent is OK. The president of the United States holding up military aid in order to coerce a foreign leader into undertaking political investigations for his own domestic re-election, that that's OK.

And so I think whatever they're faced with, fundamentally indefensible facts, all really they can do is try and divert and throw a lot of sand in the air and hope people, you know, basically can't tell fact from fiction anymore.

LEMON: Laura, I almost hate to ask you this question because I don't have an 18-hour show but.

COATES: What? Meaning what? Am I long winded?

LEMON: No, no, no. It's not -- it's not -- I just mean -- because you'll understand when I ask you the question. The White House -- this is the White House Press Secretary, Stephanie Grisham. She tweeted out this -- these were five points that were indisputable. She says number one, evidence of wrongdoing by POTUS -- no evidence of wrongdoing by POTUS.

Number two, Ukraine said there was no pressure. Number three, lethal aid to Ukraine wouldn't exist without real Donald Trump. Number four, there's no obstruction whatsoever. Number five, this is unfair and unprecedented impeachment process. So my question is what is the most egregious gas light here?

COATES: Well, the idea that people are thinking about indisputable means simply because I said so, it is true. For a fact to really be indisputable, it means there's no evidence to support even a reasonable interpretation of that. Everything that was eliminated in that line of five essentially are things they would like to be true and would support a narrative.

But because these -- there actually has been support and testimony to the contrary, in fact from the president, their own readout of that transcript, the call between the Ukrainian president, the president's tweets, and at least, what, a dozen or more witnesses have talked about things about the issues that are corroborated, they would like it to be true.

But the idea of I know you are but what am I, cannot work in an impeachment hearing or inquiry.

LEMON: Yeah. Look, most -- I think all of these are not true because there were -- assistance was provided to Ukraine. There is evidence of wrongdoing. As you said, read the transcript. I mean, I think all of them --

COATES: None are indisputable. That's the primary -- none are indisputable.

LEMON: All right, so maybe you're right. It was a very short answer. I was wrong. Thank you all. I appreciate it. Thank you so much. The Justice Department Inspector General's report says the Russia investigation was legal and unbiased. That means a whole lot of people were smeared and slimed falsely by the president and his allies, including my next guest, the former Director of the National Intelligence, James Clapper. Let's hear from him right after the break.

[22:25:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

LEMON: A highly anticipated report from the Justice Department's Inspector General validating the Russia launch, the launch of the Russia investigation, I should say, and punching all kinds of holes in conspiracy theories pushed by the president. It finds the start of the investigation was justified and unbiased. It refutes the president's claims that the FBI illegally spied on his campaign and his attacks against former FBI officials, Peter Strzok and Lisa Page.

The report did find significant errors with how the FBI handled surveillance applications for Carter Page. Attorney General Bill Barr and John Durham, who is leading a separate review for Barr, taking the unusual step of publicly attacking the Inspector General's report. So joining me now is James Clapper. He's the former Director of National Intelligence.

Director Clapper, thank you so much. I appreciate that. So listen, the headline here is that the Russia investigation was no hoax. There was no political bias. There was no conspiracy. How big of a moment is this for all of you who were repeatedly smeared by the president and his allies?

[22:30:00]

JAMES CLAPPER, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: Well, it's a big moment especially for the officials in the FBI, former officials in the direct line of fire. I'm kind of a peripheral player with this respect. So I was very gratified for them. These are people I work with, had great respect for. So, yes, here is an independent, credible source that has independently corroborated what all of us knew to be true.

LEMON: James Comey was on with Anderson just a short time ago. Listen to this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JAMES COMEY, FORMER FBI DIRECTOR: It was a risk we've become so numb to the lying that we just move on to the next outrage, and we can't do that. For two years, the president of the United States accused our premier law enforcement agency of treason, of trying to defeat him, of trying to stop him. And it turns out that was all nonsense. That was all lies.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: He's right, but the president, the Attorney General, they're still trying to spin this their way.

CLAPPER: Yes, they are, and I find that -- well, I guess not surprising but depressing. And I think Jim is right about we get so inured of, you know, the fibbing and the lying and the distortions that we just move on to the next one. You know, we just expect another one or more the next day.

And I think I've spoken before, Don, with you about an excellent publication of the rand corporation called truth decay, that we are -- and we have a bad case of that in this country. And this kind of dialogue, narrative is, sort of makes that truth decay worse.

LEMON: It's frustrating because I'll watch or listen to conservative media sometimes, and once a conspiracy theory runs its course, they don't even correct it. They just let it fall by the wayside, and they all come up with another conspiracy theory, and that one will fall by the wayside, and they won't address it will just come up with another one.

And their audience -- the audience doesn't call them on it. They don't believe it or not believe it. They just move on, it doesn't matter. And I guess you're right about the truth decay. Nothing seems to matter.

CLAPPER: In fact, use of fact checkers is apparently not a standard operating procedure for some right-wing media, and I think that's regrettable. So every falsehood, every conspiracy that's out there, they don't circle back to correct it or say, you know, that's all wrong. Well, it just sort of hangs out there, and it becomes part of this large body of false narratives.

LEMON: Yes. Director Clapper, thank you for joining us. I appreciate your time.

CLAPPER: Thanks, Don.

LEMON: Thank you. Joining me now is Matthew Axelrod, a former senior Justice Department official during the Obama administration. Thank you so much.

MATTHEW AXELROD, FORMER JUSTICE DEPARTMENT SR. OFFICIAL, OBAMA ADMINISTRATION: Thank you.

LEMON: I appreciate you joining us. What an interesting day, right? AXELROD: For sure.

LEMON: The Attorney General slamming today's findings and here' what he's saying, he says the, the inspector general report now makes clear that the FBI launched an intrusive investigation of a U.S. presidential campaign on the thinnest of suspicions that, in my view, were insufficient to justify the steps taken. You say that you have never seen anything like this before. Why do you say that, Matthew?

AXELROD: Yes. This is really a sharp departure from the usual protocol when an Inspector General report comes out. What's supposed to happen is that the Department of Justice and the Attorney General as the head of the department is afforded an opportunity to comment on an I.G. report in writing, and that gets appended to the end of the report. It's what Director Wray of the FBI did in this report. You can read his written submission at the end of the report.

The Attorney General chose not to make a written submission but instead gave a press statement. That's not the way this is normally done, and given the tenor and tone of that press statement -- or it's not just that he gave a press statement. He gave one basically saying that the Inspector General was not harsh enough as to the FBI, which is a part of the Justice Department.

LEMON: It's interesting to me. When have you ever found anyone who was (inaudible) to either partial or peripherally the subject of an investigation to find it not intrusive? Right? Is isn't that kind of what happens?

AXELROD: Yes. For sure. I mean, look, I think a FISA surveillance is a highly intrusive technique, but the point is that here, the investigation was predicated, right? The conspiracy theory that was spun was that this was some partisan political witch hunt. No, the I.G. report makes clear that it was predicated and that it was open for legitimate national security reasons, not partisan political ones.

LEMON: Anything beyond that is spin. So let's talk about John Durham. He is the prosecutor who was handpicked by Barr to lead a separate investigation. Here's what he said. He said he disagrees with some of the report's conclusions. What he's doing is speaking out since there is an ongoing investigation. What is going -- is that unusual?

[22:35:15]

AXELROD: Yes, it's very unusual, right? So it's another break from protocol. As I think we all learned from what happened during the Clinton investigation with Director Comey, right, there are policies and some procedures at DOJ that you do not comment on ongoing investigations. Since so, for John Durham in the middle of his investigation to say something about the evidence he supposedly is or isn't seeing in his investigation and comment on the findings of the inspector general is highly unusual.

LEMON: CNN reported last week that Durham told Horowitz that he could provide no evidence that the U.S. Intelligence planted its spies in the Trump campaign, yet he is attacking the report now. What's going on?

AXELROD: Well, you know, we don't know what's going on, but it's strange. And when things that are strange happen, you have to ask yourself is there something happening that's not on the level? Now, John Durham is a longtime career DOJ employee. He's highly respected. But what happened today, the one-two punch of the Barr statement and the Durham statement, I think has led some people to question whether there is some partisan political motive behind those statements.

LEMON: What's this thread that you see between the president's reaction to the report and the impeachment hearings?

AXELROD: Well, so I'd say that the common thread is in both cases, you see the president putting his own narrow personal interest above the national interest, right? So that's been the discussion all day in the impeachment hearings. But it's present in the I.G. report too, because for over two years, he made the most serious of allegations without any factual basis that senior leadership of DOJ and FBI engaged in some partisan plot to overthrow his presidency.

And that's just a flat-out lie. And there are consequences of that lie because by advancing it, he is destabilizing or attempting to destabilize and to de-legitimate really important institutions that work every day to keep the American people safe from terrorists, from child predators, from carjackers, from drug dealers, and he's putting his own personal interest above the public safety of Americans by running down those important institutions.

LEMON: Thank you, Matthew. I appreciate it.

ZELDIN: Thank you.

LEMON: The Attorney General is reportedly warning the president that someone very close to him is a liability. What's going on with Rudy Giuliani? That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[22:40:00]

LEMON: President Trump's personal attorney, Rudy Giuliani, has been at the center of the Ukraine scandal since the beginning. His name comes up time and time again in the House Intelligence Committee's impeachment report, and he was mentioned in today's Judiciary Committee hearing, including this from Chairman Nadler. Watch.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. JERRY NADLER (D-NY): The president welcomed foreign interference in our elections in 2016. He demanded it for 2020. Then he got caught. If you do not believe that he will do it again, let me remind you that the president's personal lawyer spent last week back in Ukraine meeting with government officials in an apparent attempt to gin up the same so-called favors that brought us here today and forced Congress to consider the impeachment of a sitting president.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: So the question is, is Giuliani making things worse for the president? Joining me now to discuss is Ken Frydman. He was press secretary for Giuliani in 1993 in the mayoral campaign and Elie Honig. Good evening, gentlemen. Over the weekend, Elie, Trump told reporters that Giuliani was going to come out with his own Ukraine report. Giuliani said as much in an interview with Steve Bannon, I want you to take a listen to this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I just know he came back from someplace, and he's going to make a report, I think, to the Attorney General and to Congress. He says he has a lot of good information. I have not spoken to him about that information.

RUDY GIULIANI, ATTORNEY FOR PRESIDENT TRUMP: I was going to do an outline of it and try to present it at the convenience of the Republicans in Congress and the Attorney General at the end of this week. I should probably have it ready on Wednesday or Thursday. I don't know exactly when it will be made public, but it should be ready by then. I worked on it all weekend.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: Are they proving the Democrats' point that election interference is going on?

ELIE HONIG, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: I think they are. First of all I want to see that report. Is it going to be typed? Is it going to be bound? Right? I mean, what is this report?

LEMON: Written with a sharpie? Or like --

HONIG: But yes. I mean, he is a walking, breathing exhibit a for the Democrats' impeachment effort. The whole point -- you just heard Jerry Nadler say it -- we need to move forward quickly because they're trying to do it again. And there's Rudy as the impeachment hearings are happening trying to do it again.

LEMON: You were -- Ken, his press secretary in 1993 during the mayoral campaign. He married you and your wife back in 1994. Do you recognize this man?

KEN FRYDMAN, RUDY GIULIANI'S 1993 MAYORAL CAMPAIGN PRESS SECRETARY: I recognize him in the picture, yes. But, no, he's changed dramatically.

LEMON: Yes.

FRYDMAN: I think, you know, money and power and fame have seduced him.

LEMON: The Washington Post is reporting, Ken, that Giuliani has bragged about making millions of dollars since Trump took office. Is money the motivating factor, you think, when Rudy -- when you guys were close? FRYDMAN: No, no, no. Quite the contrary. He was only interested in

fixing a broken city. He wasn't interested in making money. You know, he would pay for a slice of pizza and a can of coke.

LEMON: So what's happening?

FRYDMAN: He's got a desperate need to, as we say, remain relevant and make money. He's got an expensive divorce coming up. But you've mentioned that Washington Post story. People are sending him a message, people close to him, to stop talking. They haven't had success doing that internally, so they've decided to use the media. It's no coincidence The New York Times and the Washington Post came out with long takeout's today about Rudy.

LEMON: The Attorney General has counseled Trump in general terms. They say that Giuliani has become a liability and a problem for the administration. So why is Trump sticking with him, Elie?

[22:45:05]

HONIG: I have no idea. I mean, look, I have a problem with the Attorney General advising Trump as to this to begin with. First of all, you're the Attorney General of the United States. You're not Donald Trump's personal lawyer, Bill Barr. That's Rudy Giuliani's role.

Second of all, let's remember, Bill Barr is overseeing the Southern District of New York, which has a criminal investigation of Rudy Giuliani. Does Bill Barr know something? Is he trying to tip off the president, give him a message? That's why even having that conversation in itself is problematic.

LEMON: Thank you, gentlemen. I appreciate it.

HONIG: Sure.

LEMON: Senator Cory Booker is here next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

LEMON: Breaking news. Democrats will lay out at least two articles of impeachment against President Trump tomorrow morning. Multiple sources tell CNN one is focused on abuse of power and the other on obstruction of Congress.

[22:50:08]

Senator Cory Booker joins me now. He is a Democratic presidential candidate. Senator, thank you so much.

SEN. CORY BOOKER (D-NJ), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Thank you.

LEMON: So, today's impeachment hearing featured a lot of partisan shouting from the Republicans. They are engaging in really process not really engaging in the facts. You would be a juror in the Senate. You are going to be a juror in the Senate, when it -- if it comes to that. Do you trust that your Republican colleagues in the Senate are going to handle this differently? There's going to be -- the antics that we have seen coming out of Congress.

BOOKER: I hope there's not. But I don't know, man. I think that this what we have seen so far is people putting partisanship over patriotism. The facts of these are so damming. Nobody is willing to say -- they knew the debate would be different if it was arguing over whether this are impeachable offenses or not.

But they're not even willing to say be what it is. That this is wrong. A president of the United States of America should not use taxpayer dollars in a real national security crisis. To benefit to use our dollars to hold hostage to benefit his own personal.

LEMON: Why aren't they talking evidence and substance?

BOOKER: The Republicans? Because when you stand there, there's no place to stand. And let's be clear, there's other things they are talking about the way the process is going.

You know, I'm upset about the process that the people that should be under oath and answering to this acting chief of staff. Mulvaney, yes, Pompeo, Rick Perry. These are people that should come in, swear an oath. They have direct knowledge of what's going on. But they're not even coming forward and participating in this process.

LEMON: lets (inaudible). You're running for president now. A Senate impeachment trial would keep you and four of your Senate colleagues seeking the nomination off the campaign trail in the beginning of next year, for several weeks. That's a critical time in 2020, isn't it?

BOOKER: Yes. And our whole election has been about winning it on the ground. We have one register, we have one of -- since we wanted two best ground organizing games there are. And to take us -- take me out of that which our best effort. You know, I just came from Iowa. We're picking up more endorsement and caucus goers and in ever town hall that we've done. It's tough.

LEMON: Since you're talking about that. Senator Kamala Harris dropped out of the race. Since then you have been talking about diversity a lot. You have raised $1 million since she dropped out. What impact has that had on your campaign?

BOOKER: Well, look. Since the last debate, we raised over almost closing in on $3 million. We've seen a real surge in our election, as people are realizing, wait a minute, they now get it. We have to have -- revive that old Obama coalition. And not only that, I want to see us beat Donald Trump and also win back the United States Senate. That means, Senate seats are up in North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Arizona. Very diverse states.

And the last time we had wave elections with record black or brown turn outs is when we had somebody who has lived experience that can connect to those communities. And so, we are starting to see people choose our campaign now in these late days, eighth weeks before caucuses. In ways that are really exciting. We are seeing some surge starting

for us and we need to compete with people -- when I was in Iowa, I didn't feel like I was watching late night TV with Kim (inaudible), whomever. I felt like I was watching wall to wall billionaires and their ads. Which were non-stop. So, we need help right now, in this last sprint. And if people want to get involved in our race. Keep my voice in it, which I think is critical in these final week, when people go to Cory Booker.com and help.

LEMON: It seems like -- it helps you with money, but it hasn't help to keep you on the stage. On the debate stage. How do you keep that momentum going?

BOOKER: Well, we have to run ads. We have seen everybody whose running this ads gin up their polling numbers and get on the stage. So, no polls have come out. There's been this sort of (inaudible) polls right now. But we have got to be able to have enough money to compete with those people. Now that are clogging the air ways and running their ads. We really just need help fund raising.

LEMON: Yes. Why do you think that has happened? Because -- this is the most diverse I think that we have ever, right, among people who are running for president. But yet, the people who are the diverse folks, right? The black and brown. Right? Asian, haven't caught on. Do you think it's the process?

BOOKER: Yes, well, this process --

LEMON: Because you have Republicans are saying, well, the Democrats, you know, they are supposed to be the ones that are diverse and they're woke and whatever, but they're not supporting their diverse candidates.

BOOKER: Yes, but that's the process is new this time. And it's excluding folks. Because, remember 2003 this month, December, John Kerry and John Edwards were polling at 2 percent or 4 percent. Four weeks later, later January primaries back then in the caucuses, they finished one and two in Iowa.

And went on to be the nominee in our vice presidential nominee. And so, when you create a debate stage that somebody has this new artificial barriers, they undermine what has been done every single president from our party has been a younger dynamic candidate underdog who's come from behind and won in the caucus.

LEMON: Every time you're like, running on e -- somehow you manage to pull it out.

[22:55:00]

BOOKER: My campaign. I'm a big guy, I believe in the power of prayer. My campaign manager says you got some powerful prayers on your side. Because every time we thought we are going to end, people save us. And we hope they will continue to do that.

LEMON: Thank you Senator. BOOKER: Thank you.

LEMON: I appreciate you joining us.

BOOKER: Yes.

LEMON: And thank you for watching. Our live coverage of the impeachment inquiry continues with Anderson Cooper.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

ANDERSON COOPER, CNN HOST: Good evening, 11:00 p.m. here in Washington. We're just hours away from learning the charges, the articles of impeachment against President Trump.