Return to Transcripts main page

Don Lemon Tonight

Two Top GOP Senators Blast Classified Briefing On Iran; Trump Administration To Impose Sanctions On Iran; President Trump Says Iran Appears To Be Standing Down; Interview With Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi (D-IL) About Today's Iran Briefings; House To Vote On War Powers Resolution Tomorrow; Questions Surround Ukrainian Plane Crash In Tehran Just Hours After Missile Attacks. Aired 10-11p ET

Aired January 08, 2020 - 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: Two-thirds of the island is still without power. Two-thirds. And for those hit hard by Maria the second blow is worse. Would he be silent if it were Texas? God forbid. Then why now? Compassion counts especially from him.

But you know what matters more? It's to be careful to know about the need in Puerto Rico from our countrymen and women. Be on the lookout. We will not forget them.

All right. Thank you for watching. "CNN TONIGHT" with D. Lemon starts now.

DON LEMON, CNN HOST: Probably he's got a lot on his hands. He's dealing with a lot right now. No? You don't agree with that?

CUOMO: He's dealing with a lot. He can deal with this too. I think if it weren't Puerto Rico, he would have said something and I think the silence as the cliche goes is deafening. I was just there. Some of the places are fine, some of the places are not. All of it is filled with beautiful people that are tied to this country.

LEMON: Yes. I was being facetious.

CUOMO: I know.

LEMON: I mean, the president of the United States you should be able to deal with everything. Al of these people. And remember those American people there as well, and they should be dealt with.

CUOMO: You practice compassion --

LEMON: Yes.

CUOMO: -- like it was religion.

LEMON: Yes.

CUOMO: You are a good man. It comes naturally to you.

LEMON: Yes.

CUOMO: But if it were your job, you would have to do it even if you don't feel great about the situation.

LEMON: Yes.

CUOMO: He doesn't do that. To be silent about this come on.

LEMON: Yes. So I'm tying my necktie just before and I'm listening to you. I was like yes, you know, I agree with everything he says. But this whole kumbaya like Congress is going to do that -- Chris, you know they're never going to do this. You know, I love you but they're never going to do it. It's not going to happen.

You got two Republican -- two Republicans who are coming out today saying this, the senator saying, my gosh, this briefing today was unbelievable. There's two that take a vote on it. They say they're going to vote with Tim Kaine. But how many others are going to do it?

CUOMO: Well --

LEMON: We live in a time right now where other -- where Republicans pretty much right now the party of hypocrisy. It's not the old Republican Party the party of principles. The party of values. The party of Max Boot.

(CROSSTALK)

CUOMO: Character counts.

LEMON: Where character counts. It's a party of hypocrisy.

CUOMO: OK. Well, down in the mouth, Don. What I'm saying is that while your --

(CROSSTALK)

LEMON: I know, that's not down in the mouth. It's real --

CUOMO: -- critics --

LEMON: Have you been paying attention to the news? Are you a news anchor? Have you -- I mean, aren't you -- are you living in reality?

CUOMO: Award winning, brother. Award winning. What I'm saying is this. The job is to work for the governed and to test power.

LEMON: I don't disagree with that.

CUOMO: Their job is to take a vote. Their job is to debate. Their job is to be in the loop at a minimum. If they don't like it, if they want to give away their power and abdicate, that's fine. Not on my watch.

LEMON: Yes.

CUOMO: I will call it out. And I will shame them when appropriate because it is a deadly game.

LEMON: I think you should shame them. But I don't think that it's going to happen. And I said Max Boot. Max Boot.

(CROSSTALK)

CUOMO: I do, by the way.

LEMON: Max Boot is sitting right here and he's coming up.

CUOMO: I think it will happen; I just don't know when.

LEMON: Max Boot is sitting right and he's going to come up with us.

(CROSSTALK)

CUOMO: Max agrees with me. He told me when I saw him in agreement.

LEMON: Max, I saw Max. I was -- Max, did you see me teeing my tie?

MAX BOOT, CNN GLOBAL AFFAIRS ANALYST: I'm not getting in the middle of this.

LEMON: And what did I say when I was tying my tie?

CUOMO: Max --

LEMON: Chris -- there's Chris with this kumbaya and, and? And I said what?

CUOMO: God forbid, I hope for better from Congress. Max Boot, you've been doing the same thing in editorials for months. Now you stand silent. I will stand silent for you as well, Max Boot.

LEMON: Yes. We got a lot to get to. Chris, I'll see you. Wishful thinking, I hope what you said happens but we shall see.

CUOMO: Got to fight the good fight, man.

LEMON: Yes. This is CNN TONIGHT. I'm Don Lemon.

We have some breaking news. We have some new information on just how close, just how close we may have come to a dangerous escalation with Iran after last night's attacks on military bases housing American troops. It came really close.

A senator who spoke with the president saying that he appeared ready to launch attacks on Iran if there had been even one U.S. casualty. We're going to have much more on that bit of breaking news to come just moments away.

And we are learning a lot more about what happened behind closed doors on Capitol Hill today. There was a lot of happenings. A lot of goings on behind closed doors today on Capitol Hill.

A classified Iran briefing turning into what sounds like an epic fail. That's how you have to qualify it. You got to wonder exactly what was said in that room in that SCIF. That make Republican senators like Senator Mike Lee, a Trump ally come out and tell reporters this. Watch this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. MIKE LEE (R-UT): Probably the worst briefing I've seen at least on a military issue in the nine years I've served in the United States Senate. To come in and tell us that we can't debate and discuss the appropriateness of military intervention against Iran.

It's un-American. It's un-constitutional and it's wrong. That was insulting. That was demeaning to the process ordained by the Constitution. And I find it completely unacceptable.

[22:05:06]

I walked into the briefing undecided. I walked out decided. Specifically, because of what happened in that briefing.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: Un-American. Un-constitutional. Insulting. Do you know who that is? That's Mike Lee. Mike Lee is a Trump ally. Un-America -- un- American he is saying unconstitutional and he is saying insulting. A Trump ally. Who now says that he is going to support the Senate war powers resolution sponsored by a Democrat. The same Democrat who ran on the ticket with Hillary Clinton. Tim Kaine.

He said he's going to vote with it. That -- this will limit the president's ability to use military force in Iran. Rand Paul, also saying that he's going to support it. Rand Paul. Another Republican.

And he says the briefing from top officials including the Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, the Defense Secretary Mark Esper, the chairman of the joint chiefs, Mark Milley. CIA Director Gina Haspel didn't give senators any more information that they could have read in a newspaper.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. RAND PAUL (R-KY): There was no specific information given to us of a specific attack. Generality, stuff you read in the newspaper was given to us. I didn't learn anything in the hearing that I haven't seen in a newspaper already.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: Republican source telling CNN the attitude coming from Pompeo and others in that room was don't second guess this move. Don't do anything to question us. Although the source said that's not a quote. And went on to say I don't think that goes over well in the Senate. Sure, doesn't seem like it.

All this coming hours after the president spoke to the nation about his high stakes gamble in Iran. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: Iran appears to be standing down which is a good thing for all parties concerned and a very good thing for the world. No American or Iraqi lives were lost because of the precautions taken. The dispersal of forces and an early warning system that worked very well.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: So, there's no question that cooling things down with Iran is a very good thing for the world. The question is why was it so hot in the first place? We still don't have answers. No answers so far.

That is as we are hearing that some administration officials believe Iran intentionally missed areas that those two bases populated by Americans. One State Department official saying that Iran's message appears to be we could have done it and we didn't do it.

But in the sign of confusion and chaos it seems to be a feature of this administration, the chairman of the joint chiefs is contradicting that.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MARK MILLEY, U.S. CHAIRMAN OF THE JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF: I believe based on what I saw and what I know is that they were intended to cause structural damage and destroy vehicles and equipment and aircraft and to kill personnel. That's my own personal assessment.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: So, let's not forget that's not just anybody's personal assessment. That is the chairman of the joint chiefs. And a defense official tells CNN that Secretary Mark Esper agrees.

But at this very crucial moment for our country, for the world, and for his presidency to be frank, Donald Trump just can't resist doing what he always does. Blame Obama.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: The missiles fired last night at us and our allies were paid for with the funds made available by the last administration.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: Not a shred of evidence to back that up. Not a shred. The president is referencing the release of frozen Iranian funds. Money that already belonged to Iran negotiated by the Obama administration in the Iran nuclear deal. As well as money owed to Iran from a settlement in an international court.

There is absolutely no evidence that any of that money was used to pay for missiles. But this president never seems to miss an opportunity to slam his predecessor. By CNN's count he mentioned the former president 537 times in the first 10 months of 2019. And average of 1.8 times every day.

[22:10:09]

Like I said, never misses a chance to slam Barack Obama. Lives rent free in Trump's head.

Let's bring in CNN's Pamela Brown now with new details on the scene in the White House Situation Room in the minutes after Iran's attack. Pamela, thank you for joining us with this new information that you have. You're learning more about what was behind the decision for President Trump not to strike back at Iran. Tell us about that.

PAMELA BROWN, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: That's right, Don. Our team has learned that as the president huddled with his national security team inside the Situation Room in the White House the first objective was to determine whether any Americans had died in the Iranian strike.

A senator who spoke with Trump told CNN that the president appeared ready to attack Iranian facilities had there been any American casualties. Though it took well into the night, into the morning to confirm the early evidence coming in to the White House suggested that there had not been American deaths. And the lack of U.S. casualties led to a sense of calm and restraint in the room, I'm told.

And the decision was made to hold off until more information came in. Until they got the final assessment which occurred on Wednesday morning. Now this is what a senior administration official tells me.

Now we also learned that Iran through multiple intermediaries including the Swiss and other countries sent messages to the U.S. that it was done with its counterattack in retaliation for Soleimani's killing.

Those messages started coming in last night, Iran saying that it was basically waiting to see what the White House would do. The U.S. responded I'm told, that it was well aware Iran could still use proxies to launch future attacks and then Iran claimed that it wasn't responsible for what the proxies would do, but I'm told the U.S. made it clear it didn't buy that. Don?

LEMON: Biggest concerns from Trump's aides, what are they most worried about?

BROWN: Well, there were a lot of concerns. I mean, obviously the biggest concern was U.S. casualties but also messaging that the gravity of the moment wasn't lost on Trump's top aides. Knowing that the ensuing hours could really kind of redefine, redeem a chaotic several hours -- I'm sorry -- several days, rather, over -- ever since the strike against Soleimani.

In fact, top White House officials, Don, express regret that Trump hadn't addressed the nation soon or after that strike that killed Soleimani. They are worried that he had missed a chance to shape the narrative in his favor. So, within hours of the strike last night at Trump's direction, aides

began making urgent plans for an address to the nation which the president as we know delivered this morning, saying the U.S. was imposing sanctions on Iran. More sanctions. As one official told me, Iran took a step back and now the U.S. is taking a step back a bit, Don.

LEMON: Yes. And they were, I understand they were surprised that so few Iranian missiles were launched, Pamela?

BROWN: Yes, that's right. I'm told that one of the initial reactions in the situation room as intelligence was coming in was this is a surprise that so few Iranian missiles had been launched considering Iran's large arsenal, thousands of missiles.

Several administration officials have told CNN that it appeared Iran was trying to send a message, as you pointed to before the segment. Trying to send a message more than inflict maximum harm.

There have been other officials that have disagreed with that view such as the top U.S. general, Mark Milley, as you pointed out, who said he believed that Iranians wanted to do more harm, wanted to kill Americans. So, there are differing opinions, differing views in the administration of what Iran's true intention was. Don?

LEMON: All right. Pamela Brown, thank you so much for that new information. I really appreciate it. A senator calls today's Iran briefing the worst he has seen in nine years. And he's a Republican. What went on that got him so steamed. We're going to discuss.

Max Boot is here. Matt Lewis, Scott Jennings, next.

[22:15:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

LEMON: Two Republican senators breaking ranks slamming the classified briefing they got today on the U.S. attack that killed Iran's top general, Qasem Soleimani. One calling it completely unacceptable.

Let's discuss now. CNN's Global Affairs Analyst, Max Boot is here. Making a second appearance in the show. Political commentators Matt Lewis, Scott Jennings is here as well. Good evening, gents. Happy New Year to one and all. Max, I'm going to start with you.

BOOT: Yes.

LEMON: What happened in that briefing room that upset Mike Lee and Rand Paul to this extent?

BOOT: Well, clearly, the administration did not make a very good case for its stated irrational for killing Qasem Soleimani, which was that they were preventing an imminent attack. And they have really presented no evidence to back up that claim.

Now you can still say it was justified to kill General Soleimani because there's no doubt he has been responsible for a lot of American deaths in the past. But the legal justification they chose to use and that Secretary Pompeo tried it out was that they were disrupting an imminent attack. Which never made a lot of sense.

Because if there was an attack in motion how would killing General Soleimani stop the attack. He is not the guy who is going to carry out the attack. He just gives the orders. And now, you know, the members of Congress listen to the evidence the intelligence behind closed doors have found it to be incredibly uncompelling and unconvincing.

And it's pretty significant that it's, you know, Mike Lee who is out there denouncing the administration because you can't describe this guy as being some kind of far-left socialist Democrat. He's a Republican. He's a Trump supporter.

LEMON: Well, I find it interesting that some people have been casting it that it's mutually exclusive. That you can understand that Soleimani was a bad person.

BOOT: Sure.

LEMON: But you could also -- you also can want the administration at least to hold them accountable to give the evidence of how it was imminent. Because you heard the president saying well, we stopped him from doing some bad things. Where's the evidence of that? Especially after nine -- after the Iraq War.

BOOT: Right.

LEMON: Americans should want to see the evidence after the faulty -- there were no weapons of mass destruction.

Manu Raju asked Mike Lee a question. And I just want to play that exchange, Scott, and then I'm going to bring that one to you. Let's listen to it.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MANU RAJU, CNN SENIOR CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Do you think the president should have carried out this attack against Soleimani?

[22:19:59]

LEE: Look, I'm still agnostic as to that, Manu. I still haven't had the questions answered that I came into that briefing expecting to ask. We had to leave after 75 minutes. While they're in the process of telling us that we need to be good little boys and girls and run along and not debate this in public. I find that absolutely insane. I think it's unacceptable.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: Scott, he is angry. They didn't get the answers they wanted on why this U.S. strike had to happen. And they're being told to stick to the script. What is going on here? SCOTT JENNINGS, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well, I guess it's really

predictable that Lee and Paul are the two people out banging this gong tonight. To call them the president's biggest supporters in the Senate is incredibly misleading.

In fact, if you look all the Senate Republicans, they have two of the three worst Trump voting records in the entire Senate republican conference.

(CROSSTALK)

LEMON: We didn't call them the biggest supporters. We say that they were Trump allies. We never said they were the biggest supporters.

JENNINGS: They are not allies, nearly as often as the rest of their colleagues. And on national security issues this is where they most often break with the president.

I mean, obviously Rand Paul has been in the president's ear repeatedly over time trying to get him to pull completely out of the Middle East. And so, when Donald Trump does something in that region it makes them angry.

They have a different point of view on this but they are out of step with the rest of the party in the Senate. They're obviously out of step with people like Dan Crenshaw who was on CNN earlier tonight, saying that he thought after his briefing the attack was justified.

And they're out of step with the President of the United States. So, I think they're going to rant and rave. But they're just in the minority of their party on this as they have been since Donald Trump took office.

LEMON: So, Scott, they shouldn't want to hear the evidence of why this was a legitimate strike and why there was, according to the president, there was an imminent attack and they had to take this guy out as U.S. senators they don't deserve to get that, have that information?

JENNINGS: Of course, they do. They deserve to get all the information and ask all the questions that they are entitled to get. But that doesn't mean that there are -- that their point of view on this, that they have expressed in the video and other statements they have made today is going to be shared by anyone else in the Republican Party in the Senate.

I'm just telling you these guys are not in step with the rest of the Republicans when it comes to what the president did here, and larger than that when it comes to general views on Republicans engaging in the Middle East.

They're not in step with the party on it. So, I'm not surprised they're complaining. And I don't have a problem with them asking questions. But to cast them as somehow spokespeople for a larger movement inside the party that will be unhappy with Trump on this would not be accurate. LEMON: Yes. Listen, Scott, I don't think that any one is casting them

as spokespeople. I think that people are casting them as Republicans and generally as supporters of this president. Not that they agree with him on everything.

But I think to -- for them -- I think that they are saying they agree that Soleimani is a bad person, they just want to hear the evidence especially after being in the Senate and knowing what happened with the Iraq War.

I think they're saying they are deserving of the evidence and the information and they are not getting it. I don't understand what is so wrong with that and how that makes them somehow different than anybody in any party or somehow being aggressive or against the president because they want to get information.

JENNINGS: Yes. Look, I don't have a problem with them having information and asking questions. But I just -- I think their reaction to this is always going to be the same. Which is, they don't like it when the executive branch acts in this way.

I'm sure they didn't like it when Obama droned 2,800 times in Syria and Afghanistan. And they have problems with George W. Bush's foreign policy in the same way. So, I don't expect them to ever really get in line with this decision no matter what they are told. And again, but I agree with you. I don't -- I don't have problem with them asking questions. I just think their point of view is never going to be in step with most of the party.

LEMON: Well, I mean, if people are listening and they will probably say they probably had a right to be, you know, to disagree with George Bush especially when it came to the Iraq War.

Matt, I want to bring you in here. Senator Rand Paul said that he didn't learn anything in the hearing that he didn't -- that he hasn't seen in a newspaper. He also reacted to Senator Lindsey Graham attacking them. Watch this and then I'll bring you in. I'll let you talk a lot as well. Here it is.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM (R-SC): They're overreacting quite frankly. Go debate all you want to. I'm going to debate you. Trust me. I'm going to -- I'm going to let people know that at this moment in time to play this game with a War Powers Act, which I think is unconstitutional, is whether you mean to or not you are empowering the enemy. I don't you don't mean to but we live in the real world here. So debate all you want. This a constitutional democracy but get ready for a lively debate

PAUL: I think it's sad when people have this fake sort of drape of patriotism and anybody that disagrees with them is not a patriot. He insults the Constitution, our founding fathers and what we do stand for in this republic by making light of it and accusing people of lacking patriotism. I think that's a low gutter type of response.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: We're seeing sharp words between senators on the same side of the aisle. But clearly, I mean, these senators found this briefing extraordinarily lacking and they are concerned about the president's actions.

[22:25:01]

MATT LEWIS, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Yes. Well, first, I want to say, I mean, the notion that Mike Lee and Rand Paul are out of touch with the Republican Party is interesting considering you have Donald Trump a president who said he was going to end forever wars. A president who withdrew, you know, from Syria and abandoned the Kurds.

I think Rand Paul and Mike Lee are pretty consistent with that Donald Trump. I don't know which Donald Trump is president. That's part of the problem here.

But look, I think the reason that they were upset is because there is this notion, apparently, that it was a notion that was expressed during the briefing. Which says if you question the whether Congress should have been consulted before, you know, Soleimani was killed, if you question whether Congress actually as the founders intended should be declaring war, rather than having the president unilaterally do that, then you are somehow a traitor. You are somehow aiding and abetting the enemy.

I think that's incredibly insulting. There are conservatives who are war hawks who think we should be everywhere invading everything. And there are conservatives who are isolationists and I don't know who is right. Maybe it just even depends on the situation. But it's fair to debate that. And to say otherwise I think is part of the problem.

LEMON: Well, Matt, here's the thing, I have to get to the break. But listen, it may turn out that there was an imminent threat. But no one has seen the evidence yet. It may turn out that it was the right thing to do at this time. But there is no evidence of that yet. The evidence is there that Soleimani was a bad guy. What is wrong with debating that, Matt?

LEWIS: That's the point, Don. I think you're absolutely right. To shut down debate and discussion by saying if you ask these questions, then you are supporting the enemy. I think it's, you know, that is -- that is un-American actually.

LEMON: Yes.

LEWIS: That's the part that's actually un-American. Look, I think the president obviously, the commander in chief obviously has emergency powers but that's not what this was.

LEMON: Yes.

LEWIS: He should have consulted Congress. I think that's what the founders intended. LEMON: All right. We're going to talk more. Matt, we got -- you wrote

a piece about this. We're going to talk more about that and get you guys in more.

Everybody, stay with me. We've got a lot more to talk about including what's behind the president's high stakes decision to order the Soleimani strike. We'll be right back.

[22:30:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

LEMON: President Trump telling the nation today that Iran appears to be standing down after its missile strikes on Iraqi bases housing U.S. forces. Strikes that didn't hurt anyone or cause much damage. Back now with Max Boot, Matt Lewis and Scott Jennings.

OK, Matt, I promised you that you would be able to talk as much as Max did. I'm sorry, as much as Scott did. And Max. Max didn't get to talk that much. So this is your latest piece. It's from the Daily Beast and here's what you write.

You said, just when it looked like we might be headed for World War 3, it seems we found a way for Iran to save face and for Donald Trump to turn his inconsistency into a declaration of victory. Isn't that the president's entire M.O. create a crisis and then claim that you solved it and declare victory?

MATT LEWIS, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Yes. It seems like it. I think that what happened, you know, is we had a situation where Iran and Donald Trump were both able to save face. Iran was able to say that they responded forcefully to the killing of Soleimani. Donald Trump was able to say they didn't kill any Americans. Now, what if they had, right? Who knows where we would be tonight. This sort of escalation that might had been sued.

But both were able to save face and Trump was able to declare victory and he comes off looking like this hero. Of course he created, in my opinion, he created this problem that brought us to the brink of war. That could have escalated very seriously.

BOOT: I would also add to what just said, which I think well taken. We're not out of the woods yet. We still have a confrontation and a crisis with Iran going on right now. In fact, we may not even be done with the Iranian retaliation, because this may just be stage one. They could have a stage two retaliation down the road, where they do something like cyber-attack or a terrorist attack and they will attack when they have some plausible deniability.

Then the other thing I would point out is, we are not any closer to achieving our goals with Iran. Iran just renounced the limitations on its nuclear program on Sunday. So, Donald Trump keeps talking about how Iran will never acquire a nuclear weapon. Well, they are now closer to acquiring a nuclear weapon. Now, when Donald Trump took office and by the way, the United States is closer to having its troops expelled from Iraq. So, he may have won an immediate tactical victory by avoiding a

disaster war with Iran in the last few days. But we're no closer to achieving our large goals. And it's not clear that Donald Trump even has a strategy for achieving that.

LEMON: That's what you write. Here's what you write, Max. You said, in fact, it was Donald Trump -- Matt writes this, sorry. Matt writes, in fact it was Donald Trump's incoherent foreign policy, one that wildly isolates between isolationist dove and aggressive war hawk that invited his brush with war. Again, that was Matt, not Max who wrote that. I mean, this isn't the only example that we have of this. Right? Matt?

LEWIS: You know, Don, right. So I have this different take. I think a lot of people are questioning Donald Trump on various things, you know, should we have gone to Congress first, some people are hitting from the left. I'm actually hitting from the right. My criticism of Donald Trump is actually from the right. And that is based on the assumption that a regime like Iran responds to power. They only understand strength. Peace through strength.

And they see, if you tolerate their provocation, they actually interpret that as a sign of weakness and so, if you look at the time line of events that happened in the past several months, you had Iran go after oil tankers and Trump, you know, responds basically with a tweet. You know, they shoot down one of our drones. And remember Trump is like we're locked and loaded, we are ready to go and then he backs down publicly. Backs down. That sends a bad message to Iran in my opinion.

[22:35:00]

And then, you have the oil fields, the Saudi oil fields where Trump says, once again we're locked and loaded but we are going to wait to hear from Saudi Arabia. If we should -- what we should do. I think that that telegraphed weakness to Iran, inviting provocation. And then he does nothing, does nothing, does nothing. And then all of a sudden goes to 11.

You know, it takes out Soleimani. Now, that's obviously a truncated version of events. But I think that basically what happened is, Trump was sending this message -- mixed messages, training them to assume he was all bluster and tweet. And then all of the sudden, he takes it to 11. I think it was very dangerous. Luckily does it looks like it worked out so that at least in the time being there won't be more escalation.

LEMON: Well, speaking of truncated, we have a short time here. So, Max, in your latest column, you said that President Trump's Iran strategy is still a failure. Why do you say that?

BOOT: Well, because as I was saying earlier, Don. He has not ended the Iranian nuclear program. He has not ended Iranian's support for militia and destabilized activities abroad. He has not achieving any of the objectives that he has laid out. In fact in many ways Iran has become more aggressive and more

threatening. Since he saw this confrontation. And the United States is losing this political battle again with our troops on the verge of being expelled from Iraq.

LEMON: Scott, was President Trump's order to strike Soleimani the right move given now Iran responded. What if they have responded differently would it have been a bad decision then?

JENNINGS: Well, I mean, I don't know. I mean, it's hard to play out these hypotheticals. Look, this guy was a terrorist. Maybe the number terrorist in the world. He had done a lot to deserve what he got. He was in Iraq fomenting attacks against our embassy. Iran is (inaudible) these attacks on our embassy. And our people say now, that he was helping plan future imminent attacks.

We don't have all the evidence on that as you pointed out. But that's the -- that's what our government is telling us. So, he was in war zone in a country where we have been fighting. That embassy is under siege. He's helping plan other attacks. Yes, I think he got what he deserved and I think the president of United States, did what she should have done to the number one terrorist in the world. And that's take him out.

Now I guess the guy who replaced him will probably think twice about driving into Iraq or flying over there and do what exactly what Soleimani was doing. So, I hope it's a deterrent. I hope the Iranian are serious about standing down. And I hope they understand that the United States won't stand for this provocations of the way they were doing to our embassy in other ways across the Middle East.

LEMON: That has to be the last word. Thank you gentlemen. I appreciate it. Why were lawmakers so steamed about today's Iran briefings? Well, Congressman Raja Krishnamoorthi is going to weigh in on that. There he is, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[22:40:00]

LEMON: So we have been reporting about the lawmakers are angry about the briefings they received today on the president's decision to strike Iran's top general Qasem Soleimani. Well, many Democrats saying tonight they are dissatisfied by the answers to their questions and even two GOP Senators breaking ranks to slam what they heard. Joining me now to discuss is Democratic Congressman Raja Krishnamoorthi, who was at the House briefing? We appreciate you joining us. Thank you so much, sir.

REP. RAJA KRISHNAMOORTHI (D-IL): Sure thing.

LEMON: Happy New Year to you.

KRISHNAMOORTHI: Happy New Year, Don.

LEMON: Well, you know, Senator Mike Lee said it was the worst briefing he has heard in nine years. Senator Rand Paul said that he didn't hear anything that he couldn't have read in the newspaper. Can you give us an idea of the mood, the tone, why lawmakers are so upset?

KRISHNAMOORTHI: Yes. It was kind of a joke of a briefing. I thought it was a big waste of time. And the reason is that we -- I left unsatisfied by the information because it didn't address some key questions that I walked into the briefing with. You know, what was the nature of the imminent threat? Remember that is what justified in the White House's view the killing of Soleimani.

Secondly, whether that threat is going to unfold anyway despite Soleimani not being around. Whether it's going to be worse. And you know, are we better off or worse off that he was killed from the standpoint of the threat and the nature of the threat and harm to American lives. Nobody mourns his loss. But on the other hand, are we going to face a threat that's worse now than before?

LEMON: Well, I kept today when the president came out I thought immediately he would give the evidence saying, you know, there was an attack planned here. Soleimani spearheaded this attack. This was being planned here. But really, none of that. It was just sort of generality about how bad he was and that they took out this bad person. CBS News caught up with the House Speaker Nancy Pelosi tonight. Take a look at this and I want your response.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Some people are calling it the worst briefing they have ever gotten.

REP. NANCY PELOSI (D-CA), U.S. HOUSE SPEAKER: Well, there's stiff competition for that in this administration.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: So, I mean, what was so different about this briefing to make lawmakers so upset? It must have been really on another level.

KRISHNAMOORTHI: Well, I think it's because of the gravity of the situation. I think that -- thank God we had a pause in active hostility on both sides. That being said, I think that people are still on pins and needles with regard to the Iran situation. I know that today there was tension in the room even before the briefing began.

And so when we started hearing the briefing and the answers to the questions that were posed, and they were so unsatisfying and we weren't getting anywhere in terms of our understanding. It was very frustrating. And I think that's what made people so upset. You know, given the gravity of the situation.

LEMON: Listen, this is probably better for a Republican or Trump supporter. But this president ran on remember you said, from the very beginning early on I did not support the war in Iraq.

[22:45:07] KRISHNAMOORTHI: Right.

LEMON: I never thought we should go. He questioned the intelligence. He questioned President Bush. He question all the people who voted for it and now, doesn't want anyone to question why this happen? Doesn't that seem hypocritical?

KRISHNAMOORTHI: It is hypocritical, but also raises serious questions about the motivations for the killing of Soleimani. He didn't want anybody in the Gang of Eight, who normally would be consulted before an attack to receive that information before the attack. And now after the fact he still doesn't want us to really understand the intelligence with the granularity that what we should understand it in order to know why Soleimani was killed.

And that just raises a question for the motivation as to why he was killed. But most importantly, we want to know that the commander in chief is thinking a couple steps ahead in terms of the consequences. Because we cannot stumble into a war with Iran. Another endless war in the Middle East is completely unacceptable. And if anybody wants to have that war then they should come here and try to pursue a declaration of war. I doubt they are going to get very far.

LEMON: Speaking of that, Speaker Nancy Pelosi announcing earlier that the House will -- is going to vote tomorrow on the war powers resolution. That limit the president ability to wage war with Iran. Is it going to pass?

KRISHNAMOORTHI: I think so. And I think there's going to be bipartisan support. Especially after today's briefing. I think the briefing was so awful that I would not be surprised if there are Republicans that join with us in asserting our Congressional authority just for viewer's edification. Basically the war power resolution says that unless Congress acts, all military hostilities with regard to Iran must wind down within the next 30 days.

Of course the commander in chief must protect America and has that ability to mount a self-defense. However, initiating affirmative hostilities and certainly war is within the prerogative of the power of the American people. In other words their representatives in Congress.

LEMON: Congressman, thanks for staying in and thanks for being on live with us tonight. We really appreciate it.

KRISHNAMOORTHI: Thank you. Thank you, Don.

LEMON: A plane crashing just after takeoff at the airport outside of Tehran. Only hours after Iran fired missiles at bases housing U.S. troops. We are going to tell you everything we learned about the mystery. That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[22:50:00] LEMON: A deadly mystery in Iran, investigators trying to determine

what caused Ukrainian airline to crash shortly after taking off from Tehran's airport just hours after Iran fired missiles at bases housing U.S. troops. All 176 people on board the Boeing plane were killed. I want to discuss now with CNN aviation analyst, Miles O'Brien.

Miles, good evening to you. Thank you so much for joining us. Initial statements from Ukraine and Iran have been contradictory. What do we know about what went obviously terribly wrong here?

MILES O'BRIEN, CNN AVIATION ANALYST: Well, I will tell you this. When people tell you the cause of accidents while they're still smoldering hole in the ground, they don't really know what they're talking about. So, a lot of what they said initially they have backtracked.

And if you look at the basic evidence, Don, an aircraft that was videotaped on fire, catastrophically on fire, falling to the ground, breaking apart in a number of pieces, no call at all from the highly experienced crew, you have to go into the realm of some sort of nefarious activity. A bomb either external or perhaps internal.

LEMON: There was no radio communication from the pilots to the control tower. What do you know about that, Miles?

O'BRIEN: Well, imagine for a moment, Don, if it was, in fact, an engine failure. Let's say it was one of those fragmentation engine failures where it -- fragmentation, the shrapnel comes off of the engine. If that, in fact, were the case, the aircraft is designed to fly in that scenario.

There certainly would have been an opportunity for the crew to radio back to the approach controllers in the control tower, explain their predicament and try to get back. But there was no communication whatsoever, which implies something much more catastrophic.

LEMON: So, let's talk about, you know, the information of the plane's black boxes. They have been recovered. But Iranian officials say they will not hand them over to Boeing or the U.S. Should the U.S. get the black boxes?

O'BRIEN: Well, if you're looking at the United Nations treaties which cover all of this, yes, that wouldn't be a bad thing. I mean, it's kind of bushy language. But basically they're supposed to be a party to the investigation. Boeing should have a seat at the table, the NTSB because it is a U.S.-manufactured airliner.

That said, given the climate, that's not going to happen, of course. So who is going to analyze this flight data recorder, this cockpit voice recorder? It takes a certain amount of expertise. It's unclear what level of expertise the Iranians have.

Perhaps the only ally they have that might have the ability to do this in an objective manner and a scientific manner would be the French. So that could happen. In that case, at least, we'd have some sort of objective notion of what was in those boxes. If it stays in Iran, there will always be skepticism about what is reported out. LEMON: Well, you said that could happen, meaning with the French. So

will we ever find out, really find out what really happened?

[22:55:04]

O'BRIEN: Well, until we find out where those black boxes end up, it's kind of, kind of black box. The Ukrainians do have a seat at the table here, and they are likely to get access to some of this data. So that might be an avenue to get some objective information out of this investigation.

But in the case of the Iranians, it's very difficult to know what they will release and what they will tell. If it in some way implicates the Iranian military, for example a mistaken shoot down, you can imagine them wanting to suppress that.

LEMON: Miles O'Brien, thank you very much, I appreciate it, sir. Tensions with Iran cooling for now, at least anyway. But with the world watching, what comes next?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

LEMON: This is CNN TONIGHT. I am Don Lemon. There is a lot going on. And we're going to catch you up on all the big headlines.