Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

House Impeachment Probe Moves To Public Phase Next Week; Trump Says He's Not Concerned About Testimony So Far; Michael Bloomberg Gearing Up For Potential Presidential Run. Aired 10-10:30a ET

Aired November 08, 2019 - 10:00   ET

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

[10:00:00]

POPPY HARLOW, CNN ANCHOR: The family deserves answers as soon as possible. Patrick, thank you very much for staying on this for us.

All right. Top of the hour, 10:00 A.M. Eastern. Good morning, everyone. I'm Poppy Harlow.

JIM SCIUTTO, CNN ANCHOR: Welcome back. I'm Jim Sciutto in Washington.

HARLOW: And I'm Poppy Harlow.

We're waiting for the president. He is about to leave the White House. We don't know whether -- or we do know that he is, we've just learned, talking to reporters after a week of really damaging testimony. We're covering all of it.

SCIUTTO: And sure to catch the president's attention this morning, the latest news to shake up the 2020 race. Fellow New Yorker and multibillionaire, many tens of billions of dollars, in fact, Michael Bloomberg considering jumping into the Democratic race. Definitely political news there, Poppy.

HARLOW: For sure. We'll talk all about that.

But let's begin on the impeachment inquiry this morning. Our Congressional Correspondent Phil Mattingly is on the Hill.

So are lawmakers expected to respond to today's no-shows? I mean, they knew Mulvaney wasn't going to come when they issued that subpoena.

PHIL MATTINGLY, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes, there was every expectation Mick Mulvaney wouldn't come. Obviously, the closer things have gotten to the president in terms of personnel, the more likely it is they weren't going to show up for depositions whether they were subpoenaed or not.

And I should note another top Office of Management and Budget official, Mark Sandy, has not shown up yet. The expectation is he may well not show up as well. Here is why this matters, right? If you look at Mick Mulvaney, obviously, he had the press conference where he admitted the quid pro quo. People pay a lot of attention to that. You also need to pay attention to his role in all of this. There have been several people who have testified that they were directly by Office of Management and Budget officials that the order to hold the U.S. security assistance to Ukraine came directly from the chief of staff, acting chief of staff, that's Mick Mulvaney, who got that order directly from the president.

That is one piece of this investigation Democrats haven't had a lot of insight into. They know it was withheld. They know a lot of diplomats have come and testified that there were serious problems, but they didn't have a direct link to the president. That's what Republicans have seized on saying Democrats cannot make the case that the president knew or ordered this, and that's what Democrats need insight to.

However, Democrats were fully aware Mulvaney wouldn't show up and all this will do is create one more piece of the obstruction article impeachment Democrats are expected to draft here in the coming weeks. Every time a top administration official doesn't show doesn't mean he's going to the wayside. It means that that person becomes a central part of the impeachment effort. Guys?

SCIUTTO: George Kent's testimony yesterday, and for folks at home who might not be following this every day, his language about the president's clear political intentions with regard to Ukraine damning, are arguably some of the most damning we've heard so far under oath.

MATTINGLY: Yes. I think, look, you can take out a lot of different pieces of George Kent's testimony. And to be clear about who he is, he's a career U.S. diplomat. In his role at the State Department, he oversees six European countries, Ukraine being top among them or one of them at least. But it was his way of going through kind of this systemic, almost undercutting of the department of the U.S. government by some of President Trump's closest allies, people like Rudy Giuliani running a shadow foreign policy, people like Rudy Giuliani and his top allies serving to undercut and essentially get rid of at the time the Ukraine Ambassador Yovanovitch. . But it was also his willingness to dive into his views of what he thought were politically motivated investigations, saying, under no circumstance should the United States be pursuing things like that. It was his understanding that that's exactly what was happening. And he made clear this is usually the type of stuff the U.S. is castigating other countries for doing, not doing itself. So I think it was that view that Democrats have been pointing to at all, so that view then underscores what you're going to see next week.

George Kent is testifying publicly, so is Ambassador William Taylor, both on Wednesday, Marie Yovanovitch on Friday. Democrats trying to paint a kind of broad picture of what was going on here, something Adam Schiff, the chairman of the Intelligence Committee, who said the facts are not in dispute on this one. And we have seen it in these transcripts that at least on the central points of Rudy Giuliani's role of how the administration was attempting to address Ukraine and the political motivations behind that, people are mostly in agreement and you're about to see that on live camera next week.

SCIUTTO: The choice for Americans and, frankly, for lawmakers is believe the president or believe this string of public servants testifying under oath, simple choice. Phil Mattingly, thanks very much.

Joining us now from the White House, CNN Senior Washington Correspondent, Joe Johns.

We understand the president is speaking right now, not far from where you're standing. What do we believe he's going to focus on this morning?

JOE JOHNS, CNN SENIOR WASHINGTON CORRESPONDENT: A number of things. Obviously, reporters can ask any kind of question they want to. Clearly, the impeachment inquiry will come up in some form.

One of the interesting questions this morning, of course, is about the president's continued insistence that the name of the whistleblower in the intelligence case ought to be made public. The White House continues to insist that it's akin to the president facing his accuser.

And we did get word in this letter written that was yesterday, released today by the attorney for the whistleblower as simply indicating that, yes, there was an opportunity for the whistleblower to attend depositions on Capitol Hill and had been planning to do so, but changed direction because of the president's words and actions, which the lawyers essentially have likened to the president engaging in obstruction and other activities.

[10:05:13]

So here is a cut from that letter that was written just yesterday. I'm writing out of deep concern that your client, the president of the United States, is engaging in a rhetoric and activity that places my client, the Intelligence Community whistleblower and family in physical danger and essentially asking the president to cease and desist.

Also important to to note, as you all know, this is one of those situations where so much information the whistleblower has put out there has been corroborated by others. The question is whether the whistleblower's testimony is even relevant. Back to you.

HARLOW: Okay. Joe, thanks very much. And learning, Jim and I, we were just getting a little bit of a readout of what the president has said. I think the headline here, Jim, is that the president is telling reporters he's not concerned about any of the testimony this week, saying he doesn't even know some of the people of testified, not concerned. And what's interesting, Jim, is that he's pointing to the transcripts of the White House's release of the call, which is the tactic that Vice President Mike Pence told Republican Senators to make in their case. So we're still getting more. He's still speaking. But that's what we've got so far.

Let's talk about it. David Gergen is here, of course, former presidential adviser to four presidents. Jennifer Rodgers, former federal prosecutor, joins us now.

David Gergen, it is notable that the White House strategy here seems to now be a bit consistent. And that is dismiss any testimony, point to the transcript, which is not that great for the president.

DAVID GERGEN, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: No, it is not. And I think the underlying issue now when you get the brush and try to cut to the heart of it, the underlying issue is that the Republicans are now arguing, well, you have a lot of secondary players who have testified, but nobody has said or quoted the president directly. It's all been secondhand.

Well, there are three people who know what really happened. One is Bolton, one is Mulvaney and the other is Giuliani, especially Giuliani. In all three cases, the White House is blocking them from testifying and telling us what really happened. So we don't know what happened because the White House is shutting down the key witnesses.

And that's why it makes it so frustrating for the investigating committee to deal with this Republican charge. Well, you don't have the president. You don't have the president saying anything. Well, guess what? The people who talked to the president aren't allowed to talk.

HARLOW: That's a good point.

SCIUTTO: So one of those, Jennifer Rogers, is Mick Mulvaney, who has now been subpoenaed by House Democrats, knowing that he would refuse and that, it seems, is going to be added to an article of impeachment for obstruction of justice. But from a legal standpoint, how substantive is that refusal to such an article?

JENNIFER RODGERS, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Well, listen, I think the obstruction article is a great idea. It's really important given the stonewalling that's come from the White House. It will have many, many parts to it now that we've had so many witnesses obeying the White House's order not to testify.

The problem is I don't like the way that they've just dropped the court side of this. The court takes too long. We've talked many times about how frustrating it is, how long the delays are. But I think if you don't press ahead with trying to get these people to honor their subpoenas, you're basically giving everyone else a blank check to do the same thing.

So I would like to see them proceeding on both fronts, go ahead and try to get them in using the court system, but then, yes, draft that very lengthy article of impeachment that says the White House is stonewalling and obstructing. SCIUTTO: That's interesting, Poppy, because that relates to John Bolton's response here, because he's indicating -- he's telegraphed, yes, I would be willing to testify as long as I got an okay from the court. So it kind of gives him a path out.

HARLOW: No, it's true.

And, David Gergen, just to your point, I mean, I think of the key lines -- well, two key lines of testimony that we've had this week from the transcript released this week are about investigations and money and who blocked it, right? And one of them came from the transcript we got yesterday of George Kent's testimony, quote, POTUS, the president, wanted nothing less than President Zelensky to go to microphones and say three words, investigations, Biden and Clinton.

So you have that. And then you have Bill Taylor's testimony tying it directly to the president, saying the directive to OMB to block the money came from the president. But who talked to OMB? Mick Mulvaney, and that's what we don't have. And I don't think there's any indication we're ever going to get that.

GERGEN: Well, I think, right now, probably we won't. But I think that's why it is so frustrating because the order went from Mick Mulvaney to the OMB staff. Mulvaney, obviously, has the hat of the OMB director.

So the order went there, but we don't know whether Mulvaney decided to do that on his own or whether Mulvaney talked to the president and the president directed him to do it. And that's critical to this kind of case.

[10:10:01]

And yet the Republicans are blocking us from knowing what's true and what's not true.

I might add one more thing, and that is -- one more thing there. It's also very interesting when they talk about getting the person to the microphone, and talking about Biden and Clinton. When they say the word Clinton, that sends an obvious signal, this is about politics. This is about politics. It's not about national security.

SCIUTTO: Yes. That Kent testimony was pretty damning.

But I have to ask you, Jennifer Rodgers. Okay, so you don't have Mulvaney saying I got the order. You do have a transcript of a call where the president makes an explicit connection, does he not, and says you've got to do me a favor here regarding those investigations.

From a legal standpoint -- I know it's not the same as Mick Mulvaney on the stand. And who knows if Giuliani or Sondland, for instance, decided they're being thrown under the bus and there are legal implications for them individually that they later do it on their own. But how much evidence from a legal standpoint is the transcript of the call for the president's involvement here?

RODGERS: Well, it's huge because it's his own words, right? So you don't get any better evidence than that.

And also I'll just make this point, which is we're not in a court of law. The standards here are not as strict as if you were in a criminal case. You can use circumstantial evidence. Even in a criminal case, you can use circumstantial evidence.

So the fact that we're learning that all these people very close to the president aligned with the president are doing these things, the president is not speaking out to say that he wasn't instructing them to do these things, and then you have the phone call. To me, even without what evidence they would love to have is a very compelling case on circumstantial evidence the precedent of this (ph).

SCIUTTO: And there is a gut check here. Because what the American people but also lawmakers are being asked to believe as an alternative is that Sondland, Mulvaney, et cetera, given the president's deep interest in Ukraine in these investigations, we're just acting freelance here and doing it independently, you have to decide at hoe if you buy that.

David Gergen, Jennifer Rodgers, stand by because we're soon going to have these comments from the president. Of course, we want your take on that.

Meanwhile, from Mayor Bloomberg to Mr. President, the New York billionaire poised to shake up the Democratic race. How the leading candidates already in that race, and there are lots of them, are reacting.

HARLOW: Also just weeks before a death row inmate is set to be executed, several celebrities and lawmakers are jumping into the fight to keep him alive. Why his attorneys has new evidence proves he's innocent.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:15:00]

HARLOW: All right. So the president is speaking right now to reporters on the White House lawn before he heads to the State of Georgia. Let's go to the White House. Our senior White House Correspondent Joe Johns is there.

As I understand it, he's been talking for about 20 minutes taking questions and continues. But what do you know so far in terms of what he has said?

JOHNS: Well, I can just give you the headlines clearly today is the president indicating that, in his view, the House should not be holding public impeachment hearings. As you know, public impeachment hearings are scheduled to start next week. The president says he doesn't think that's a good idea.

He also indicated that, as far as he is concerned, a number of the people testifying, he does not know them, that he does not feel concerned about any of the testimony that has been provided so far. Probably the other headline, the major headline coming out of the president's comments on Jeff Sessions, his former attorney general, and now running for Senate in the State of Alabama, trying to get back a seat that he held for years and years, the president indicating he hasn't made up his mind, at least not yet, about Jeff Sessions, but he also said that, from what he heard, Sessions has had some nice things to say about him, even just last night. Back to you.

HARLOW: Well, that tends to go a long way. So we'll see. Joe Johns, thank you very much. I appreciate it.

Let's about all these headlines and a lot more.

I'm joined now by Democratic Congressman Steve Cohen of Tennessee. It's very nice to have you. Thanks for being with me this morning.

REP. STEVE COHEN (D-TN): Good to be with you, Poppy.

HARLOW: All right. So let's just get first your reaction to the president. Not only did he say he's not concerned about any of the testimony that has happened or been released this week, but he said you guys, Democrats, should not hold public hearings.

What's your response?

COHEN: Well, if I knew what was going to be in the public hearings, and it was going to make it clear that respected and well-educated State Department foreign affairs officials are going to say that you abused your power, you subverted the Constitution, and you tried to help a foreign power against an ally and leveraged it on getting political advantage for yourself -- which is something unheard of and violating the rule of law -- I wouldn't want it to be said publicly either.

HARLOW: All right. So you're not surprised by that. The hearings are taking place, of course, they're starting on Wednesday morning. Let's talk about impeachment --

COHEN: But, you know, Poppy, if they were -

HARLOW: Sure, go ahead.

COHEN: -- public hearings, he would complain that they weren't public hearings and that it was a Star Chamber.

[10:20:03]

So, I mean, the man just kind of changes his course depending on how the facts are to make it look good for him. And he's a better actor than Ronald Reagan ever was.

HARLOW: So you, Congressman, actually introduced five articles of impeachment back in November of 2017. This was tied partly to the Emoluments Clause, to the Russia probe, et cetera.

I want you to listen though to what your fellow Democratic congressman who chairs the Judiciary Committee that you sit on, Jerry Nadler, told Jim just yesterday.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SCIUTTO: Have you seen enough evidence to be convinced that the president committed high crimes and misdemeanors?

REP. JERRY NADLER (D-NY): I've seen a lot of evidence of that, but maybe there will be evidence contradicting it, which I haven't seen yet.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HARLOW: He's reserving judgment. Are you?

COHEN: No. This man, from the first day he went into office, he wanted to have an alternative foreign policy where Jared Kushner wanted a special backchannel communication to Russia that no one would know about.

Now, he's got Giuliani running a backchannel, improper foreign policy to get dirt on his political officials. You throw in obstruction of Congress, you throw in obstruction of justice for Mueller -- this is just an -- a lawless administration that knows no restraint.

And we're supposed to be publicly -- say we're going to listen -- and I'm going to listen, and there could be some unbelievable thing that the president brings up, but, no, there is clearly obstruction of Congress, obstruction of justice, and abuse of power.

HARLOW: I just wonder, Congressman, if you think that that is a dangerous path to take for you and your party, to say you've already made up your mind when all the evidence hasn't been heard and public hearings have not even started, and certainly a trial in the Senate has not begun.

COHEN: Well, most in my party hasn't said this -- and probably very few in my party will -- and I'm probably not supposed to. But I've always considered speaking truth to power and saying what I believe and what I think the facts will show to be important.

And I think somebody needs to make it clear that there is no question that what we're looking at is a lawless presidency, and that's what we're looking at.

And so I understand Chairman Nadler --

HARLOW: I appreciate your candor. I just -- I'm challenging that with, I know you think facts are important, so why not wait for all of them?

COHEN: Well, because I've seen the obstruction. Mick Mulvaney not -- subpoenas are under power of law. When people refuse to comply with subpoenas and when the administration says we're not going to comply with anything, they are flouting their noses at the law, at the Congress, and at the respective Article I powers. And to me, that's just clear as the nose on one's face. It's clear

what they're doing. And there is no reason to dance around it, Poppy. This is a lawless administration that doesn't respect the Constitution.

HARLOW: And, 30 seconds left, you're willing to take the heat when voters say in response to hearing you say this, you just want to get rid of a duly elected president any way you can?

COHEN: No, not any way I can. I want there to be an impeachment, which is a power Congress has of a man who has violated the Constitution.

I take an oath. He took an oath. I support my oath. He does not.

The American public needs to understand we're not dealing with a gray area here. This is a black and white violation of the Constitution, a lawless president who has done everything he can to keep the public's minds away from his involvements with Russia, his involvement of trying to change foreign policy for his own political good and destroying our reputation around the world where the rule of law and democracy is what people respect America for. And now, we're not doing it.

As Mr. Kent said, we condemn countries that use political prosecutions all over the world. This was America's values. America no longer has values. We only have interests. And foreign policy is supposed to be a combination thereof.

HARLOW: As John McCain said, right, our values are interests and our interests are our values. Congressman Steve Cohen, thank you very much.

COHEN: And John McCain was an American hero -

HARLOW: That he was.

COHEN: He was an American hero who was blasphemed by this president.

HARLOW: Congressman Steve Cohen, he was. I appreciate your time this morning. Thank you so much. Jim?

COHEN: You're welcome.

SCIUTTO: We've just that the president has finished his comments on the White House lawn. We're going to bring you those headlines shortly. One headline in there, the president says that he's thinking of visiting Russia and attending the Mayday Parade, a celebration of Russian military power in May, a remarkable thing for a U.S. president to consider, that and more. We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:25:00]

SCIUTTO: We're going to hear from the president on the White House lawn in just moments. Meanwhile, former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg is expected to shake up the 2020 field. A spokesperson saying he will add his name to Alabama's Democratic primary ballot. The president saying just moments ago he doesn't think he'll do well.

HARLOW: And calling him Little Michael, getting that nickname ready.

Let's discuss. So CNN Editor at Large and Political Reporter, Chris Cillizza, and our Senior Political Writer and Analyst, Henry Enten.

[10:30:03]

Cillizza, you're like a machine. You already have your Bloomberg column out, why Donald Trump will --