Return to Transcripts main page

Don Lemon Tonight

Evangelical Magazine Wants Trump Out of Office; Rep. Cedric Richmond (D-LA) Was Interviewed About Joe Biden's Standing in the Race; Pelosi Versus McConnell Over the Senate Impeachment Trial; State of Presidential Race; Rep. Cedric Richmond (D-LA) is Interviewed About Presidential Race, Economy, Joe Biden and Michael Bloomberg; The Washington Post Reports Former Trump Administration Officials Fear the False Ukraine Election Conspiracy the President Keeps Promoting Came Straight from Putin; Boy Bullied by Teacher for Having Two Dads. Aired 10-11p ET

Aired December 20, 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: I'll see you on Monday night. Now my time is up. There's a lot of news, so let's go to CNN Tonight with Don Lemon. You like my tie?

DON LEMON, CNN HOST: Yes, it's mine.

CUOMO: Yes, thank you so much.

LEMON: What happened?

CUOMO: You know, I came in on the red eye this morning and you know, Rose was supposed to make sure that I had everything for tonight. She dropped the ball.

LEMON: Yes.

CUOMO: It's Christmas, but somebody's got to go, Don.

LEMON: So, I'm knocking on the door --

(CROSSTALK)

CUOMO: Accountability --

LEMON: And I'm like, don't come in. I'm changing.

(CROSSTALK)

CUOMO: I wouldn't come in. I'm knocking on the door. It's like I just need a tie. Hey, wait. I'm changing. I said I just want a tie.

LEMON: I didn't know it was you.

CUOMO: Go away. I just want a tie.

LEMON: I didn't know it was you. I didn't hear it. CUOMO: Do you know who this is?

LEMON: I didn't know it was you. I don't like the whole thing. I like -- listen. I want the pat downs. I want the extra screening, you know, because I want to be safe. I don't matter. I don't care if it makes me late.

CUOMO: Yes.

LEMON: I don't care if the lines are long.

CUOMO: This is terrible news.

LEMON: I don't. No. I don't mind.

CUOMO: Terrible news. Everybody says it. Nobody likes lines. But we get it. God forbid, we know what we lived through.

LEMON: Yes.

CUOMO: We remember the shoe bomber. We know how these guys are looking for ways all the time to be evil. We've been so good. To lax for what, an extra five minutes, an extra 10 minutes? Come on.

LEMON: I get frustrated but I'm never, I'm never rude to the agents. I always tell them thank you. 'm always kind to them. I say hello, thank you.

(CROSSTALK)

CUOMO: And you're a sneaker too. You try to bring water through. You're one of those guys.

LEMON: No. I always think that I get the water out of my bag. You know, because -- and then --

(CROSSTALK)

CUOMO: I've been with you, Don. I know what you try. You're a little shady.

LEMON: No. You don't fly commercial.

CUOMO: And if they don't catch the water, you're like he, he, he. You know, you're one of those eyes.

LEMON: You don't even go through security. You don't fly commercial, I'm kidding. You flew commercial back, you flew the red eye back.

(CROSSTALK)

CUOMO: I look like one of the drivers. They're nice to me because they figure someone like you has been mean to me all day.

LEMON: No. But a lot of people are going through. And I want everybody to be safe, so you should be kind to the TSA people because they're working very hard to keep you safe even if the lines are long. If they check your bag and they've got to do, you know, check your finger, you know, when they do the fingertips and they swab you and all that.

CUOMO: Chemical substances.

LEMON: They're doing their job.

CUOMO: Absolutely. But to the leadership, no being nice.

LEMON: Yes.

CUOMO: We've got to be firm. You got to get after it with them about why are they doing this? They have to justify it, safety first.

LEMON: I got to get after it. So nice job last night. Good to have you back. And I will see you soon. So, I'll great you a Merry Christmas right now.

CUOMO: All right. Have a great show.

LEMON: But have a good weekend. I'll see you.

This is CNN Tonight. I'm Don Lemon. Thank you very much for joining us this evening. I hope you're having a good one.

And with the black mark of impeachment on his permanent record -- this is going down on his permanent record as they say -- President Trump is in a fighting mood. He wants a trial in the Senate, and he wants it soon.

A trial he insists will vindicate him, and he's going after his nemesis. You know who that is. That is the House speaker Nancy Pelosi. He's tweeting -- and I quote here -- "Nancy Pelosi is looking for a quid pro quo with the Senate. Why aren't we impeaching her?" Well, because that's not really how it works.

And you got to wonder whether a president who has just been impeached, only the third president to be impeached in this country's history -- you got to wonder whether it's such a good idea for him to be bringing up the exact thing that got him into so much trouble, a quid pro quo.

That as Pelosi and Mitch McConnell are locked in a standoff over the Senate trial that the president -- well, at least that's what he says he wants. She says the House won't vote on impeachment managers or send over the articles of impeachment until she knows more about how the trial would be conducted in the Senate.

McConnell says they're at an impasse, and though Pelosi has yet to choose the team that will argue the case, sources tell CNN that Adam Schiff and Jerry Nadler are expected to take the lead.

But for all the naysayers who wonder whether the speaker has any actual leverage over the Senate, she clearly does. And that leverage comes from the president himself. Let me explain. Because he is insisting that he wants a trial. He

doesn't want the dark cloud of impeachment hanging over him. And that means Mitch McConnell is going to have to play ball to get the president what he wants even though the majority leader claims that he would be fine -- that's a quote. He would be fine if Pelosi never submits the articles.

It sure doesn't seem like the president would be fine with that. He's made it very clear he wants a big, dramatic TV trial. What else would you expect from the reality TV president? The president who doesn't believe it until he sees it on TV.

But standoff or no standoff, House Democrats are quietly getting ready for a trial to begin as soon as the week of January 6th. Staffers are expected to work through the holiday recess.

[22:04:55]

That as White House counsel Pat Cipollone and legislative affairs director Eric Ueland scouted out locations in the Senate today. There you see them walking right there on your screen -- where the trial would take place.

And with the president on his way to Mar-a-Lago for two weeks. So, here's what a lot of members of team Trump are really worried about tonight. These are real concerns, all right? They have a right to be concerned.

White House aides they are working feverishly to draw up plans for the looming Senate trial. The president will be surrounded by his millionaire and billionaire buddies, doing what he loves best, and that's holding court, right? Hanging out on the patio, chatting at dinner. Just about anybody at Mar-a-Lago could get inside his head, which is exactly what his advisers don't want.

And with all that going on, there's also the president's feud with the leading Evangelical magazine Christianity Today. I'm not sure if you've heard about it, right?

Well, he is steamed because the editor in chief of the magazine, which was founded by the late Billy Graham, published an op-ed calling for Trump to be removed from office, saying -- and I'm quoting here -- "President Trump has abused his authority for personal gain and betrayed his constitutional oath. The impeachment hearings have illuminated the president's moral deficiencies for all to see. This damages the institution of the presidency, damages the reputation of our country, and damages both the spirit and the future of our people. None of the president's positives can be balanced -- can balance the moral and political danger we face under a leader of such grossly immoral character."

As I'm sure you can imagine, that did not sit well with the president, not at all. He's been on a Twitter tear, saying "Christianity today knows nothing about reading a perfect transcript of a routine phone call." Here we go again. A perfect transcript, a routine phone call. Let's

remember that's the same phone call that got the president impeached. So maybe he shouldn't refer to it as a routine, as routine, but he goes on, claiming the magazine would rather have a radical left non- believer who wants to take your religion and your guns.

A scare tactic with absolutely no basis in reality. It's just talking points. Go to guns and radical left, and I'm sure deep state will come up somewhere. Going on to boast, "no president has done more for the Evangelical community," threatening, I won't be reading E.T. again, by which I assume he means C.T., which is Christianity Today.

E.T. is either entertainment tonight, which you can watch on TV and not read, or maybe the movie extraterrestrial, which he can watch and not read. But it's no surprise that this president is furious. He's not used to hearing condemnation like that from the religious right. He's used to hearing that he is the chosen one.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

RICK PERRY, U.S. SECRETARY OF ENERGY: I said, Mr. President, I know there are people that say, you know, you said you were the chosen one, and I said you were.

NIKKI HALEY, FORMER U.S. AMBASSADOR TO THE UNITED NATIONS: I think that God sometimes places people for lessons and sometimes places people for change.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Could it be that President Trump right now has been sort of raised for such a time as this, just like Queen Esther, to help save the Jewish people from an Iranian menace?

MIKE POMPEO, SECRETARY OF STATE: As a Christian, I certainly believe that's possible.

SARAH HUCKABEE SANDERS, FORMER WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: I think God calls all of us to fill different roles at different times, and I think that he wanted Donald Trump to become president.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: Whew. Was it the day before yesterday he it was Pontius Pilate? He's even said it himself.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I am the chosen one.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: My gosh. God bless ye merry gentlemen and that's where we are tonight in this Christmas season. The chosen one, steaming, the black mark of impeachment on his permanent record, and his trial is up in the air.

With Nancy Pelosi and Mitch McConnell locked in an impeachment standoff, who will blink first and how is this whole thing going to play out? I'll discuss with one of the first people to predict the president would be impeached over Ukraine.

[22:10:04]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

LEMON: President Trump is only the third president in our history to be impeached, and with that black mark on his permanent record, he is demanding a Senate trial, one he thinks would vindicate him.

But Nancy Pelosi and Mitch McConnell are locked in a standoff over what form the trial would take, and that's got the whole thing on hold.

Joining me now, one of the first people to predict the president would be impeached over Ukraine, and that's the former acting Solicitor General Neal Katyal, the author of "Impeach: The Case Against Donald Trump." Neal, thank you so much for joining us. I really it and good to see you by the way.

NEAL KATYAL, FORMING ACTING SOLICITOR GENERAL: Good to see you, Don. I missed you.

LEMON: Yes, absolutely. We first learned about the whistleblower complaint. You wrote an op-ed with George Conway believing this would lead to his impeachment, and here we are now awaiting a Senate trial. You called it.

[22:14:57]

KATYAL: Yes. So, three months ago to the day, George and I wrote that op-ed. It was just a few hours after the Ukraine allegations began to break. But I think both of us felt one pretty important thing about this.

Regardless of what people thought about Mueller and that involved really 2016 activity, when the president was a private citizen, and, yes, he was trying to seek the help of a foreign government according to the allegations.

But he was doing it as a private citizen. The Ukraine one was different because it was the president, as commander in chief, using the suite of powers the Constitution gave to him and using it not for the ends of the American public but for his personal ends.

So, what he tried to do basically, Don, was he tried to cheat in the 2020 election with the help of a foreign government, and that's why we wrote that op-ed, because we felt like that's just the paradigmatic case of what impeachment was about. And then this book that I've written, it's a 150 pages. It's a bit longer but it's still concise. And it just basically outlines that and what impeachment is about and things like that.

LEMON: Neal, I'm wondering if you saw the president's tweet. It says "Nancy Pelosi is looking for a quid pro quo with the Senate. Why aren't we impeaching her?"

I mean we know Trump is anxious for the Senate trial. At least that's what he's saying, to start as soon as possible. He is furious over the article. She's clearly getting under his skin. It looks like Pelosi does have some leverage here.

KATYAL: Definitely. So, dios mio. You know, I don't know where to begin with that tweet. First of all, you can't impeach members of Congress. So, you can't impeach Pelosi. Our Constitution doesn't allow it. The quid pro quo.

You know, quid pro quos and this is what I argue in the book, are often good in government. You know you want to have deals. The problem is if you have a quid pro quo for personal ends and that's why, you know, the beginning of my book starts with a quote from a congressman in 2008 who says, what is a high crime and misdemeanor? Well, it's when the president puts his personal interests above those of the American people.

That congressman was Mike Pence, now our vice president, and that's what I think, you know, the president has quietly violated. That's why I think he's so scared because I think down deep, you know, after all the obfuscation and everything else, he knows he committed an impeachable offense. I mean, this is core impeachment, Don. This is exactly what the founders put impeachment in the Constitution for.

LEMON: Neal, how do you see this Pelosi/McConnell standoff playing out because some people are saying, she has leverage. Others are saying she has no leverage. How do you see this playing out?

KATYAL: Well, I mean there's no doubt that the president wants to try and have this fake trial in the Senate so he can, you know, be cleared, you know, Soviet style. And as Nancy Pelosi --

(CROSSTALK)

LEMON: You say it's a fake trial because you don't believe it's fair, do you?

KATYAL: Well, I mean, look, a trial in which there will be no witnesses? I mean, I've done lots of trials. That's my job. I've never seen a trial with no witnesses, a trial in which the jurors like Mitch McConnell say their mind is already made up.

I mean, there's a bunch of stuff here which is just fundamentally inconsistent with the oath that the members of Congress take in impeachment proceedings. And so, I think Pelosi is right to say, look, we're not going to have that. That's not a trial. That's just, you know, some sort of Soviet rush to a decision.

But, you know, if you want to have a real trial, absolutely. You know, nobody wants a real trial more than Pelosi because if the allegations -- excuse me -- if the witnesses came out or if the transcript was studied and read, there's only one real conclusion.

And I think, Don, here's another way of thinking about it. I mean, in poker, there's always a tell. You can always tell when someone's lying by one particular move they make. Here there is one.

The president has a tell because the two articles of impeachment are, number one, that he's abused his power because of Ukraine and, number two, that he's obstructed justice by not providing witnesses and documents to the Congress.

Now, in a stroke of a pen, he could resolve both those articles. He could allow his chief of staff, Mick Mulvaney, his national security adviser, John Bolton, and, you know, the other folks to testify. That would mean there would be no obstruction of Congress, so that article would be, you know, removed as long as the evidence came out.

And then if he did nothing wrong, those witnesses would say that. But he won't do that. He is scared to get those witnesses out in Congress because he knows what they will say because, you know, he was on that call. He knows exactly what that call was about.

LEMON: So, the original question, how do you see this playing out, the standoff between Pelosi and McConnell?

KATYAL: Well, you know, I'd like to think if this were any other Senate majority leader, they he would say, I want to have a real trial and, you know, that's what the American Constitution demands. We've not seen signs of, you know, Mitch McConnell caring one whit about our Constitution, so I'm unfortunately thinking right now that there will be a standoff.

My hope is that McConnell, you know, will take the cues from people like Jeff Flake, who just two hours ago wrote a Washington post op-ed saying, look, the Senate's on trial as much as President Trump. And, you know, you got to behave fairly.

LEMON: Yes.

[22:20:02]

KATYAL: And I sure hope he does because that's what his oath to our grant document is all about.

LEMON: Harvard professor Noah Feldman, he was a witness for House Democrats. He says this, and I quote. He says "If the articles are not transmitted, Trump could legitimately say that he wasn't truly impeached at all."

Does that argument hold water with you, Neal?

KATYAL: No. I mean I don't know what they're drinking in Cambridge, but that argument makes no sense whatsoever. It's not text actually grounded. It's not historically grounded. It's semantic and I think ultimately goes nowhere.

I mean, look, I think we've had this debate in over the last week. Our eyes have been glued to the television. I don't think Congress was just staring at their naval and say this is some academic exercise.

I mean, this was a very solemn decision taken to impeach the president. I mean, that's what the articles are. They're impeachment articles. They're not, you know, advisory articles or anything like that. So, I think, you know, with all due respect to Professor Feldman, the argument makes no sense and I think is going nowhere.

LEMON: Let's talk about your book, shall we? "Impeach: The Case Against Donald Trump." If a senator about to hear the case picked up your book, what should they take from it?

KATYAL: I think one central thing, which is the rule of law is blindfolded. And I do this at the beginning of my first-year law student classes. I say you know, just, you know, you've all got biases. Someone a vote for a man or women or corporations or little guys. Just pretend your -- the position is reversed, and here it's real simple.

And here it's really simple. If you're Republican, pretend that President Obama did all the things that President Trump was accused of. Would you say, it's OK to cheat in the 2020 election with the help of a foreign government, that that's something you could just look past?

It's OK to say, I'm going to thumb my nose at the Congress and not give a single witness, a single document, something no president has done including even Richard Nixon didn't do that. Would you say that's OK?

So, it's just a very simple idea that, you know, the difference between law and politics is that in law, you're supposed to apply the same rules to both sides and not have different rules when it's your guy who's the one being attacked. And if you did that here, I think there could only be one conclusion, which is that President Trump has to be removed from office.

LEMON: You also look at some of the legislative changes to make sure something like this doesn't happen again. Talk to me about that, Neal.

KATYAL: Yes. So, I mean beyond, you know, this immediate episode, I think there's a lot of things that we should be thinking about for the future. I mean one is very simple. The president has to release his tax returns.

Every presidential candidate, all those Democrats you see onstage and any Republicans who run in 2020, they all should release their tax returns because there's such a risk that people are beholden to foreign governments.

I mean, yesterday we learned that President Trump was getting his intelligence from Putin and being affected by it. I mean there's all sorts of scary stuff happening, and I think tax returns is one important place to start.

Another is to look at, you know, whether a sitting president could be indicted. There are a couple of Justice Department opinions that prevent at least the trial of a sitting president. But do they apply to the indictment, just the formal bringing of charges? I think the answer to that is no, that a sitting president can be indicted, and I think it's real important to take a look at that because right now President Trump has been emboldened.

I mean after the Mueller report, which didn't by any stretch clear him -- it found him, you know, potentially guilty of 10 different instances of obstruction of justice. But they said, I can't indict -- we can't indict a sitting president, so he has effectively a get out of jail free card.

After that he was emboldened. Indeed, the very next day after Mueller testified in Congress on July 25th, that was the day he had the phone call with Ukraine. And now, Don, he's saying I'd do it again. China, help me get dirt on Biden and the like.

This is so beyond the pale. It's so unpresidential. It's so unconstitutional that I think we need to think about every possible reform we can. That includes things in campaign finance as well so that presidents can't go get help from foreign citizens or foreign officials the way that President Trump has sought here.

LEMON: Neal, thank you so much. Good luck with the book, OK?

KATYAL: Thank you, Don. I really appreciate it.

LEMON: The book again is "Impeach: The Case Against Donald Trump."

Tonight, the state of the race. Twenty-twenty candidates going head to head on the debate stage, and the Biden campaign national co-chair joins me to talk about that and a lot more. Congressman Cedric Richmond -- there he is -- and he is next.

[22:25:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

LEMON: Seven Democratic candidates took to the debate stage in their final face-off of the year last night. But as we get closer and closer to the Iowa caucuses, who is making the strongest case?

Let's discuss now with Congressman Cedric Richmond. He's also the national co-chairman for the Biden campaign. Congressman, I appreciate you joining us from New Orleans of all places. Good evening. How's the city --

(CROSSTALK)

REP. CEDRIC RICHMOND (D-LA): Thank you for having me, Don.

LEMON: Yes, I appreciate it. How's the city tonight? I got to ask you.

RICHMOND: The city is good. Look, we are resilient. We're a robust city, and we're a city full of fun and more importantly a city full of love.

LEMON: Yes. So, Congressman, listen. The Joe Biden that we saw at the debate looked confident, pushed back on the attacks.

[22:30:00]

A brand-new CNN poll shows that he is beating Trump by five points in a hypothetical matchup. How is the campaign feeling with the Iowa caucuses just six weeks away?

REP. CEDRIC RICHMOND (D-LA): We feel good. Actually, it is pretty similar to how we felt when he launched. He launched very strong, very straight, and said why he was running, to unify the country, restore the soul of America, the middle class, and to just run on those real three principles that he had.

And it's all about who we are, the dignity of who we are, the dignity of work, and the dignity of all of those things. So we really feel good about where he is. And more importantly, he feels good about it.

LEMON: Mm-hmm. So what do you think? Do you think he was -- in the beginning, do you think he was a little rusty or what?

RICHMOND: No. The truth of the matter -- I'm not knocking the DNC, but a debate stage with 10 or 11 people on it and they ask you a serious question about how you fix climate change or other serious issues and then they say you have a minute to answer, that's not fair to any candidate on the stage.

And so for a candidate like Vice President Biden, who served all of these years, who has been vice president of the United States, his answers are far more substantive than a 30-second or 60-second answer. So that is why I think last night, that's why he knocked it out of the park is because he had a chance to really articulate his vision and all of the thoughts that he was having.

So I thought he had a great night. I think that it's always been in him. But like a heavyweight fighter, you want to peak towards the fight, not early when you start training.

LEMON: We actually said that -- in an interview I did with him a couple weeks ago, he said, I'm looking forward to when the debates get smaller because he would have more time. Let me tell you about this new poll we have. A CNN poll is also showing 76 percent of Americans think that the economic conditions are good. Last night, the vice president made a different case. I want you to listen to it, and then we'll talk about it. Here it is.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOE BIDEN (D), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Well, I don't think they really do like the economy. Go back and talk to the old neighbors in middle class neighborhoods you grew up in. The middle class is getting killed. The middle class is getting crushed. And the working class has no way up as a consequence of that.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: When you look at how positive people feel about the economy in these polls, is this really a convincing argument?

RICHMOND: No, I don't think so. Look, the president likes to use Wall Street and the stock market as his barometer. But if you look at all the people in the country that are just trying to figure out how to keep a roof over their head, clothes on their children's back and food on the table, they're not worried about the stock market, they're worried about tomorrow.

And that's the segment of the population that I think that Vice President Biden talks to the best. And so while you have a few people that are doing very well, the majority of the people still struggling to make ends meet, and we want to create an economy and an America where everybody thrives. And those who are not thriving, we want to figure out a way to help them get there.

So, if you're not in the middle class, we want to create a path for you to the middle class. And so I think that's where he's most comfortable, but he is not going to let people fool us into thinking that this economy is doing well for everybody right now because it is not.

LEMON: Let's talk about Michael Bloomberg, OK? He's in the race now. He's a 2020 candidate. He wasn't on the debate stage last night, but he's saying this today. Listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. MICHAEL BENNET (D-CO), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: I'm spending a lot of money, but my investment is to keep Donald Trump from being president the next time. And when people -- some of these candidates criticize me for spending a lot of money, I think, you want me to spend less to get rid of Donald Trump? I don't think so.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: Vice President Biden told me this when I asked him about Bloomberg entering the race last month. Watch.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BIDEN: Trump is so bad as a president and so corrupt as a president that everybody in America who has ever been involved in politics, especially if they have a billion dollars, thinks they can beat Trump.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: Bloomberg is making huge ad buys in key states. How do you see these impacting things? Do you think it's going to impact things at all? Is it going to affect the vice president?

RICHMOND: Let me just start out by saying this. I don't know Mayor Bloomberg, but I do believe that he's a man who's putting his money where his mouth is. However, I think that there is something for experience, know-how, and being battle-tested. And Vice President Biden is battle-tested. He has run a national campaign twice as the vice president nominee, vice president running for re-election, and I think that he is proven. The real question is do you want to put an unknown commodity against Donald Trump, who is going to have more money than the U.S. meant to continue to lie, cheat, and steal his way into the White House? And I think that when you're playing for the Super Bowl or the national championship in college football, you put your best quarterback on the field. And right now, that is Vice President Biden. And there's no if, ands or buts about it.

[22:35:00]

RICHMOND: So my future, my kids' future, and the future for my neighborhood and my community, I am with Vice President Biden because, one, I know he's been there before. He has the experience from day one to unify this country, restore the middle class, and restore the soul of America.

So, look, nothing bad about Mayor Bloomberg at all, but I'm just not going with a person who is not battle-tested for the most important election in my lifetime.

LEMON: Congressman Richmond, merry Christmas, and go Tigers.

(LAUGHTER)

RICHMOND: Absolutely. Grand Delpit number seven. How about that?

(LAUGHTER)

LEMON: I'm with you, yes. Congratulations to him and congratulations to Joe Burrow as well. All good. It's all good. Thank you.

RICHMOND: Absolutely.

LEMON: All right. The Washington Post reporting that former Trump administration officials fear the false Ukraine election conspiracy the president keeps promoting came straight from Vladimir Putin. More on that, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[22:40:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

LEMON: President Trump reportedly stated explicitly out loud that he believes that it was Ukraine, not Russia that meddled in the 2016 election. And why does he believe that? Because "Putin told me." That's according to a former senior White House official quoted in The Washington Post.

Joining me now to discuss, Julia Ioffe and Michael Isikoff. Good evening to both of you. Michael, you first. According to the Post, Trump seemed to latch on to this theory after a private meeting with Putin at the 2017 G20 summit in Hamburg, Germany. What do you make of that?

MICHAEL ISIKOFF, CHIEF INVESTIGATIVE CORRESPONDENT, YAHOO NEWS: Well, first of all, it's worth remembering that that meeting in Hamburg included this private conversation between President Trump and Putin where no U.S. officials were present. So exactly what was said between the two of them, we don't know.

But it's pretty striking to see these words from a former senior official that the president came to believe that Ukraine interfered in the U.S. election because "Putin told me."

Somewhere, wherever the retirement home is for old KGB officers, you can almost hear them saying, well played, Agent Putin. He managed to inject this conspiracy theory into the American political dialogue through the president of the United States and got him to buy it.

It's something that the president had been told over and over again was debunked, that there wasn't -- that it was Russia who engaged in the systematic sweeping campaign to interfere in the U.S. election, not Ukraine, and yet the president, for his own reasons, continues to accept what apparently Vladimir Putin told him.

LEMON: Here's what the Post is also reporting, Julia, that after the 2017 G20 summit in Hamburg, that multiple Trump administration officials tried to convince Trump that it was Russia, and that didn't work. And here's what Trump said about those efforts at the G20 summit in Helsinki a year later. Here's what he had yet another private meeting with Putin. Watch this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: 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, but I really do want to see the server.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: So why is he inclined to believe Putin over someone who is incredibly respected like the former director of National Intelligence, Dan Coats?

JULIA IOFFE, CORRESPONDENT, GQ: Well, for two reasons. First reason is Donald Trump believes whoever flatters him and whoever gives him the information that fits with his world view of himself as this very stable genius.

So in this view, he had that crushing Electoral College victory over Hillary Clinton, he did that all by his stable genius self, and he had no help, right, although he, of course, got the intelligence briefing both as a candidate and as president-elect and as a newly sworn in president saying that, in fact, the Russians did help him win the presidency.

The second reason is that he just instinctively likes guys like Putin. Like this Washington Post story was just an extravagant confirmation of what we've heard for a long time, that Putin -- excuse me -- Trump's views on Ukraine were shaped by Putin, by Viktor Orban, the authoritarian leader of Hungary.

This is why he likes Xi Jinping so much. This is why he likes Kim Jong-un. This is why he likes Erdogan of Turkey. He just instinctively gravitate these kinds of authoritarian leaders. He feels that is what true masculinity and true leadership looks like. It's how he wishes he could run his own country.

Remember, he says about Kim Jong-un, I like the guy. When he talks, his people sit up and listen, and that's how I want it to be. Well, of course, Kim Jong-un's people get shot if they don't sit up and listen.

LEMON: Michael, you've been a reporter for a long time. You've seen it all. Here we've got a senior White House official who was told by the president that he is basing his foreign policy off Vladimr Putin and not experts in our Intelligence Community. Should they have come forward sooner?

ISIKOFF: Sure.

[22:44:53]

ISIKOFF: I mean, if they had been told what The Washington Post is reporting in this piece, it is pretty shocking information and it's the kind of thing -- this is a former senior U.S. official. It would be wonderful if people like that would go on the record, would identify themselves, and cite chapter and verse of how they knew this information.

It's sort of the same issue that we saw with the anonymous book. Yes, it's great that somebody lays out what they believe is, you know, the president's misconduct and unfitness for office, but it would carry a lot more weight if we knew who it was and what exactly they had to say.

LEMON: Michael, Julia --

IOFFE: Real quick, did you see the president just re-tweeted -- the president of the United States re-tweeted Vladimir Putin saying -- a new item saying Vladimir Putin thinks the impeachment was all made up and he'll be exonerated in the senate. The president re-tweeted it saying, see, I knew it was a witch hunt. So we don't even need The Washington Post to tell us the president relies on Putin.

LEMON: There you go. Thank you both. A boy berated and bullied by a substitute teacher all for being adopted by two fathers. The family is speaking out, and they're speaking out right here, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[22:50:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

LEMON: Tonight, a Utah boy and his family are speaking out after he had to endure homophobic bullying from a substitute teacher. That teacher, who was later fired, bullied the fifth grader for saying that he was grateful for being adopted by two dads. Those two dads, Louis and Josh van Amstel, officially adopted 11-year-old Daniel yesterday. The whole family joins me now. I'm so happy to have you on. Hello, how are you guys doing?

LOUIS VAN AMSTEL, SON BULLIED BY TEACHER FOR BEING ADOPTED BY TWO MEN: Good.

JOSH VAN AMSTEL, SON BULLIED BY TEACHER FOR BEING ADOPTED BY TWO MEN: Great. Thanks.

LEMON: Daniel, thank you for staying up late. I know it's been a long day for you. I can see your bedtime is about nine minutes away, so I have to hurry up and do this sooner for you.

(LAUGHTER)

LEMON: I know you want to stay up and watch Scooby Doo. So listen. I had to ask you, though, about your teacher. What did your teacher say, what did she tell you and your classmates when you were going -- when you said that you are going to be adopted by your two dads?

DANIEL VAN AMSTEL, BULLIED BY TEACHER FOR BEING ADOPTED BY TWO MEN: Which teacher?

L. VAN AMSTEL: The substitute teacher, when she asked you the question.

D. VAN AMSTEL: She said you're not -- I can't remember. You say it.

L. VAN AMSTEL: Oh.

D. VAN AMSTEL: It's been a lot.

L. VAN AMSTEL: She asked what are you thankful for at Thanksgiving, and he said that I'm finally being adopted by my two dads. And then she followed it up with so many more questions that really made Daniel feel very uncomfortable.

D. VAN AMSTEL: Oh, yeah. She said why would you be thankful for that? That was the first one.

L. VAN AMSTEL: And of course, when we heard that as parents, how it hurt us to say it because we're so proud for him to say that because we wanted to adopt him for already five months by then. So, you want to add something to that?

D. VAN AMSTEL: (INAUDIBLE) crazy.

L. VAN AMSTEL: Oh. OK, well --

LEMON: Daniel, how did that make you feel when she asked you that?

D. VAN AMSTEL: I wasn't very happy.

LEMON: Yeah. I understand that the kids in the class sort of came to your -- your fellow students came to your rescue.

D. VAN AMSTEL: Yep.

LEMON: What happened?

L. VAN AMSTEL: Yes. Three girls stood up. And -- do you want to tell him what happened?

D. VAN AMSTEL: After that, it wasn't (INAUDIBLE) in school in math. Sometimes we finish early. So I am thankful she went off track. After that, I said it's time to go. We had five more minutes. I was, like, we should go early. And of course, I left. Everybody else did, too.

L. VAN AMSTEL: The two girls went to the principal and explained the situation, all three girls. And then the principal did what she did.

LEMON: Yeah.

L. VAN AMSTEL: We love her for it.

LEMON: How did you guys hear about it?

J. VAN AMSTEL: (INAUDIBLE) actually gave us a phone call. You get the dreadful call from your kid's school wondering what they did or what's wrong. And the first thing out of her mouth was your child is not in trouble, but I do need to inform you about an incident that happened at school today. So, she gave us time to process. I told her I needed to talk to my husband about it and get the story from Daniel directly before I give her a call back.

LEMON: Daniel said he went red when the teacher said that to him. How did that make you feel?

L. VAN AMSTEL: Daniel didn't want to get in trouble, Don. It is horrible because school should be a safe space. And when we heard what happened and the reason why he got red, it was purely the reason to be fearful not to be adopted. That was really what made us so emotional.

The substitute teacher doesn't know his background, that he had failed adoption. He's been in foster care for three and a half years. She did not think about that. She didn't miss a beat. That was really what was hurtful.

That is why he really was kind of embarrassed. He didn't really want to say anything. He didn't want to get her in trouble. Therefore, the three girls saw that he was so quiet, embarrassed, unhappy. And we thank those girls for what they did. And these are 11 years old, fifth graders.

D. VAN AMSTEL: Eleven or 10, I can't remember.

[22:55:00]

L. VAN AMSTEL: I know but they stood up for you, buddy.

D. VAN AMSTEL: Yep. I'm thankful for that. L. VAN AMSTEL: We are, too.

LEMON: He had a failed adoption. But you guys also had been trying to adopt for a while as well. You were concerned about this -- about Daniel that this may not work as well. So you had an added concern, correct?

L. VAN AMSTEL: Well, we have to go through a process, but every family, whoever you are, straight gay or same sex, it doesn't matter. You have to go pretty much through the ringer. But that's normal. And I think that process is right because there are unfortunately people too that take advantage of the system.

So, the social workers and the states, they really want to do a good job to make sure that this is a success story. So by the time we took placement on father's day, of all days, this year, we kind of knew in our hearts that we had kind of passed the test. And now it was a matter of sitting out the six months and that was yesterday that we went to court. So, we are a success story. We are all happy. The process is a good one. We are very happy with the process.

LEMON: What do you want -- listen, I am a gay man and I have friends who have children through surrogacy and also have adopted children as well. What do you want from this experience now that you have the platform of CNN now, people are watching, what do you want people to know about gay parents?

L. VAN AMSTEL: Allow us to adopt. We are loving. We care. And we had a plan. We first wanted to get married. We moved from Los Angeles to Utah because we knew we wanted already to have kids. So, we had a plan and the plan is working out really well. We are not done yet with adopting. We want to adopt more older kids. It doesn't matter from where.

So even if they are from West Virginia or below the mason (ph) line where maybe the acceptance is not as well as the bigger cities, we hope that everyone will allow us to adopt wherever because we can be equally as loving as any couple that doesn't come from the same sex.

LEMON: Yeah. Well, Daniel, Louis, and Josh, best of luck to you. May you have an amazing holiday season. Merry Christmas, happy New Year to you. Thank you so much for joining us.

J. VAN AMSTEL: You as well.

L. VAN AMSTEL: Same to you, Don. Merry Christmas.

D. VAN AMSTEL: Merry Christmas. Ho-ho-ho.

(LAUGHTER)

LEMON: We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)