Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

President Donald Trump Have Unannounced Visit To Walter Reed Medical Center; Mayor Pete Buttigieg Is Now Leading The Pack In Iowa; Week Two Of The Impeachment Battle Will Kick Off Tomorrow; Boston Marathon Bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev Filed An Appeal For His Conviction And Death Sentence; Syracuse University Suspends All Of Its Fraternity After At Least Six Racist Incidents In Just The Last Few Days. Aired 2-3p ET

Aired November 17, 2019 - 14:00   ET

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

[14:00:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:00:48] FREDRICKA WHITFIELD, CNN HOST: Hello, again, everyone. And thank you much for joining me this Sunday. I'm Fredricka Whitfield.

All right. New questions today about President Trump's unexpected and unscheduled medical visit. A source tell CNN the President's unannounced visit to Walter Reed Medical Center Saturday afternoon did not follow protocol for routine visit. The White House continues to downplay the surprised visit saying the President underwent quick exam and labs as part of an annual physical.

CNN's chief medical correspondent Sanjay Gupta and CNN historian Tim Naftali are standing by for us.

First let's bring in CNN's Jeremy Diamond who is at the White House.

What are you hearing, Jeremy, about this routine medical exam?

JEREMEY DIAMOND, CNN WHITE HOUSE REPORTER: That's right, Fredricka. A person familiar with the matter is telling me this morning that President Trump's visit yesterday to Walter Reed Military Medical center did not follow the typical protocol for a routine medical visit by the President of the United States.

Typically, I'm told there would be a general notice sent out to the medical staff at Walter Reed informing them of a VIP visit, letting them know there would be certain closures for a VIP like the President of the United States. That did not happen in this case, according to my source. That doesn't mean necessarily that there were no doctors who were notified ahead of time, but clearly what the source is telling me is it was not a routine medical visit based on the protocol that was followed. So that remains to be seen.

The White House is responding in a statement to me this morning saying this is from the White House press secretary, Stephanie Grisham. She says, we are not going to get into security and movement protocols when it comes to the President. But as my statement said, he's in good health and it was a routine checkup as part of his annual physical. I have given plenty of On the Record statements that were truthful and accurate -- actively trying to find and report conspiracy theories really needs to stop.

But Fredricka, this latest reporting that I am hearing about this morning kind of fills out the picture that we have already learned in the last 24 hours which was that his visit was unscheduled. It was not announced ahead of time. Reporters traveling with the President were under direction not to report that the President was moving until he actually arrived at Walter Reed. They didn't know that they were actually headed there. The President himself has also tweeted. He said that he did undergo the first routine for part of his physical exam and he'll complete it next year.

I also asked the White House press secretary Stephanie Grisham about why the President was not able to do the full typically four-hour physical exam during this weekend, because she cited this free weekend that the President had. She did not respond to that question -- Fred.

WHITFIELD: All right. Jeremy Diamond, thank you so much.

We are going to talk further about all this. Dr. Sanjay Gupta and Tim Naftali both with me.

We are talking about this in this context because customarily the President's medical exam is one that has to be publicized to a certain extent because we are talking about the commander in chief, the President of the United States. But ordinarily there is some notice to the public, Sanjay Gupta. So why in this case does it seem unusual for an unscheduled yet routine exam, and now we're hearing it's only the first part of what would be a full four-hour exam?

DR. SANJAY GUPTA, CNN CHIEF MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes. No, I mean, it is unusual. It's unusual in that the public didn't know. Which, by the way, this President in the White House has alerted in the past, so it wasn't like in the past they hadn't told. This was different from even the way that this White House has talked about his physical exams in the past. The fact that the hospital didn't know, that's a big deal.

WHITFIELD: Why is that a big deal? What has to be put in place?

GUPTA: There is a lot of prep when the President of the United States is going to Walter reed or attend any of the military hospitals. As Jeremy mentioned, they close off certain parts. There is a staff-wide notice people understand that the President is going to be there. So there are procedural protocols.

There is also -- if there are certain exams that are going to be done at the hospital that can't be done at the White House, such as tests on the heart or the scans, things like that, you know, those things have to be ready. He is probably not going to sit around and wait, right, for those things to happen.

I should point out as well, I spend a lot of time in the White House Medical office within the White House itself. They have pretty good capabilities there. They certainly can do, you know, a physical exam. They can take certain laboratory tests and things like that. If he was getting basic labs and a physical, why was that at Walter Reed?

I guess -- Stephanie Grisham wasn't very clear. She said there were no problems. There were no symptoms, nothing that sort of prompted this visit. But I think as a medical person, if somebody makes a surprise unannounced visit to a hospital, that is the first question you would ask.

[14:0:26] WHITFIELD: It usually means it is provoked by something new.

GUPTA: Right, something happened.

WHITFIELD: Something about his condition has changed, is the presumption.

GUPTA: May not be serious, official serious, , hey, let's get this checked out, but as a routine matter to have not let the hospital know and anyone know again seems unusual.

WHITFIELD: So back in the day before a President's routine exam or medical exam, it would be at Walter Reed or Bethesda Naval. Now they have been combined. So when we talk about Walter Reed, we are talking about Bethesda Naval. That's where the President has gone at this time. Talk to me what usually constitutes a routine exam? What is in there? What is the discovery that a doctor is looking for?

GUPTA: We know some of what President Trump has done in the past in terms of his exam. There are some basic things that are done with physical exams, you know, blood pressure, heart rate, doing a general physical assessment, taking certain laboratory values. We know certain things about the President from the past in terms of his own, what we learned from his previous physical exams, his height, his weight, those are things taken obviously and compared to years past. Also we know he has a common form of heart disease. He has calcium in the blood vessels that lead to his heart, how are those doing? Maybe they want to follow up on that. He takes a cholesterol lowering medication, maybe they want to test for that, see if that dosage needs to be adjusted.

There are some things that go into it and there are a certain number of tests, like a stress treadmill test. When you get on a treadmill and you see how your heart react to the stress of running, of activity in this case. So you know, again, some of those things cant be done at the White House. A lot of them can be done. So what was it that needed to be done at the hospital that can't be done at the White House?

WHITFIELD: Yes. Because of those you mentioned in a routine exam, heart changes might be more of an urgent matter of those routine things.

GUPTA: I think so, yes. That is always top of the list, especially for anybody who is in their 70s. WHITFIELD: All right. Let's bring Tim into this.

Because Tim, customarily the President gets a routine exam. Nothing alarming about that. But talk to us about some of the examinations that Presidents in the past have received. Almost all of them would be at Bethesda Naval or now Walter Reed?

TIMOTHY NAFTALI, CNN PRESIDENTIAL HISTORIAN: Yes. And when Presidents have an unscheduled trip to the doctor, it is natural, regardless of the presidency, for the public to be worried. I remember, I'm sure Sanjay does, too, when President George W. Bush apparently choked on a pretzel. I think it was at camp David. And there was a great deal of speculation about whether that was indeed what had happened and the cause and what the consequences were. So I think it's absolutely normal and natural given that we are talking about the leader of the free world, or at least we used to be talking in those terms, that when something unscheduled happens, one begins to think about the history of a little bit of deception from White Houses, you know, Republican and Democratic.

One of the things White Houses don't like to do is to create anxiety and concern about the President. They don't want to send the wrong signal to the markets, for example, to foreign adversaries. A weakness in the presidency is something that no White House, regardless of party, wants to do. So if there is an uncertainty about the condition of the President, the White House is the last place where they are going to share that with the public.

And that has historically been the case. During Ronald Reagan's period in office, the White House did try to catch up with the truth about the President's condition, but it took a while. After he was unfortunately shot, the White House didn't really share the extent to which he not only nearly died but how deeply weakened he had been by the incident. Fortunately for all of us, he came roaring back. But the White House wasn't straightforward about it.

We have had instances in the case of John f. Kennedy where the White House doesn't share anything about the basic underlying physical weaknesses of the President. So there is a history of presidencies not being honest. And given that this President has a strained relationship with the truth, let us say, it makes us even more concerned that perhaps we are not getting the full story from the White House.

WHITFIELD: So, then, Tim, underscore the importance of the kind of transparency that comes with the President is getting an exam, and here are the conditions and the reasons why. And you can't help but overlook the importance of this timing of this weekend and the President, you know, getting this exam unannounced in the midst of an impeachment inquiry. There may be no correlation, but one can't ignore the fact that it is happening unannounced but with some level of urgency that it has to happen this weekend.

[14:10:16] NAFTALI: Fred, I don't know. I just hope the President gets better. And one of the things we're discussing a lot when we talk about impeachment these days is the poisonous character of conspiracy theories. And we are not discussing conspiracy theories now, but let's just say this is a time when it is especially important for the White House to be transparent, given everything else that's going on.

WHITFIELD: Dr. Sanjay Gupta, what are your thoughts on the transparency, the amount of information that is owed to the public?

GUPTA: Tim makes very good points. I mean, there is not without precedent. There is a lack of a willingness, I think, on candidates, even, to not share medical information. We asked for medical records. I have been doing this for 20 years. We typically get a one-page summary. It's not full transparency.

But this seems a little different, still, because he goes to the hospital, he leaves the hospital. Reagan got shot. They knew eventually that eventually was going to would find out. With George Bush they said he actually passed out from choking on a pretzel. He actually had an abrasion on his face that people would be asking about.

Here there would maybe be nothing specific that would be an indicator at all, so we may never know. We are not required to know. There is no mandate that we need to be told this, the press or the people. So who knows where this goes from here.

What we have heard is they will release the test results at some point when the entire physical is completed. They could have done the entire physical this weekend, as Jeremy mentioned. But when it is entirely completed we will see what they show at that time.

WHITFIELD: All right. All of you have given us great information, but still a lot of big question remain.

Dr. Sanjay Gupta, Tim Naftali and Jeremy Diamond at the top, thanks to all of you. I appreciate it.

All right, still ahead. A closer look at key witnesses expected to testify this week in the impeachment inquiry.

And later, (INAUDIBLE) former mayor Michael Bloomberg does a 180 in his stop and frisk policy ahead of a possible Democratic presidential run.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MICHAEL BLOOMBERG, FORMER NEW YORK MAYOR: However, today I want you to know that I realize back then I was wrong, and I'm sorry.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:16:00] WHITFIELD: All Right. This week Capitol Hill is gearing up for what could be the most consequential hearings to date in the impeachment inquiry. We are expecting to hear new public testimony from some of the key players in the case. Among them, the President's ambassador to the EU, Gordon Sondland. He has firsthand he would accounts of the Trump policy in Ukraine and how much of it may have been tied to pressuring the Ukraine president into starting investigations of Joe Biden and his son.

This as we are learning details of just-released transcripts. A former official with the national security council testified he heard from Sondland that U.S. aid to Ukraine was conditioned on announcing those investigations.

And meanwhile, Republicans continue to blast the process saying Democrats have wanted to impeach President Trump even before these revelations. And that the proceedings are unfair. But today House speaker Nancy Pelosi is pushing back.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. NANCY PELOSI (D-CA), MINORITY LEADER: There are certain things the President does that aren't impeachable and they are about the election. But when it comes to violating the constitution of the United States as he undermines our national security, jeopardizes the integrity of our elections, dishonors his own oath of office, that's about impeachment.

The President could come before the committee and speak all the truth that he wants. He has every opportunity to present his case. But it's really a sad thing. I mean, what the President did was so much worse than even what Richard Nixon did. But at some point Richard Nixon cared about the country enough to recognize that this do not continue.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WHITFIELD: Here with me now, CNN's David Shortell.

David, good to see you. SO Several people are testifying this week. Break it down for us. Who will be the focus?

DAVID SHORTELL, CNN CRIME AND JUSTICE PRODUCER: Yes. Right, Fred, eight people, men and women, scheduled to come and testify this week, some with some very high national security credentials meaning that this week could really shape up to be the most consequential of the Trump presidency.

Now you are looking at the eight men and women, and some of their names you may recognize because these are some individuals who previously came in to testify behind closed doors. While this week will be the first opportunity for the American public to really hear and see from them themselves.

I want to focus on, Fred, on two of the individuals who are expected to have some of the most important testimony this week. That's former national security council official, Tim Morrison. He was the top Russia expert up until late last month. And then ambassador Gordon Sondland, the top envoy to the European Union and a close ally of President Trump's. Morrison is expected on Tuesday afternoon. And people believe that

what he is going to be able to do is to really kind of shed some light on this shadow Ukraine policy that was operating, that the President in a small circle of his allies had run to really try to convince the leader of Ukraine to open these investigations into Joe Biden and Hunter Biden, an investigation that would have been a political boon to the President.

Now, we also expect Morrison to really be able to kind of show how Sondland is directly related to that effort, that shadow Ukraine policy, because Morrison had some direct communications with Sondland which are really going to help show that Sondland was working at the behest of President Trump, and that also helped set up the Wednesday testimony of Sondland himself.

Now, Fred, you will remember Sondland, who is coming in Wednesday, is a wealthy businessman. He owned hotels and donated a million dollars to the President's inaugural committee while he later became the top envoy to the European Union. His testimony is not necessarily expected to be a slam dunk for Democrats. That's because he is expected to talk about this phone call that he had with President Trump in which President Trump explicitly stated, I'm not looking for a quid pro quo with the Ukrainians. That is, I'm not looking for you to make the release of military aid to the Ukrainians contingent on this political investigation.

But now, Fred, you are going to remember there is another phone call that ambassador Gordon Sondland also placed to the President that we just learned about this week that is certain to come up. And we learned about this from an official who was at the table. It was at a restaurant in Kyiv over the summer when Sondland talked with the President, and this person who testified, he said he heard ambassador Sondland talking with President Trump and Trump asked him for an update on the status of the investigation into Biden, the investigation that he so wanted. And, Fred, that's certainly something that the Democrats are going to try to really drill in on come Wednesday.

[14:20:40] WHITFIELD: All right. David Shortell, thank you so much.

All right. With me now, Liz Weihl, the chief for the Hillary Clinton impeachment and former federal prosecutor and Renato Mariotti, chief analyst. Good to see both of you.

RENATO MARIOTTI, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Thank you.

WHITFIELD: All right. Liz, let me begin with you. Because Democrats have changed their language, trying to build the case for what they say bribery or at least alleged bribery. And it begins with this so- called testimony, but you are hearing from a number of Republicans who are being critical of the closed door testimony. Explain why Democrats said they have to know what witnesses are going to say in an open testimony, and they do that by discovery in a closed door testimony. Is there anything wrong with that?

LIS WEIHL, FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR: No, of course not. That's exactly what happened during the Clinton investigation when the Republicans, of course, had the majority. As you know during the Starr report, Ken Starr accumulated all the depositions and then conducted that Starr report in front whole house. I was there when he did that. And even after that, the depositions were taken.

And depositions, by the way, President Clinton's personal secretary Betty Currie, his personal lawyer, Vernon Jordan, I mean, you know. And the President, of course -- I'm sure, very happy about those depositions in the grand jury, the testimony have been taken, but he nonetheless didn't thwart them, he let them go forward, and those were of course used in the abuse of power articles of impeachment that were presented against the President. So very different language now that the Republicans are using.

You know, the rules are exactly the same, that the Democrats are saying, we are playing by the same rules, Republicans, that you put forth with us, and now you are not happy with the same ground rules? They're exactly the same as was used in the Clinton impeachment.

WHITFIELD: So, Renato, this week ambassador Gordon Sondland will be testifying in the open, and already a state department official David Holmes testified and said in his opening statement that there was a phone call that he overheard and that Sondland had direct conversations with the President about whether Ukraine would open up an investigation. And apparently according to testimony, there were at least six conversations that the President had. So how do you see the questioning of Sondland being carried out this week? Will it be zoning in on any firsthand accounts, directives, allegedly or possibly coming from the President?

MARIOTTI: Yes. No question. I mean, the Republican talking point, their biggest talking point this past week has been a lot of these witnesses didn't have direct knowledge, they weren't talking to the President themselves. Now it's coming to the test, because we have a witness who is going to testify about conversations with the President. Clearly he has firsthand knowledge.

And what he has to say is interesting. You know, one of the things I think is going to be fascinating to watch with one particular witness, Fred, is that, you know, a lot of these witnesses are sort of straight arrow types, career public servant. Mr. Sondland is not that. He is a tycoon, a hotel guy who donated a million dollars to the Trump inauguration. And he comes off when you read his deposition transcript like somebody who is trying to do his best to put a good spin on this for the President. And yet, despite that, he has some very damaging things to say. And I think in some ways that is going to make his testimony more powerful because he is going to look like somebody who is really a Trump loyalist who wants to stay inside that camp. Unfortunately, he has to acknowledge some of the truth.

WHITFIELD: Is he considered a reliable witness, especially since he had to correct his testimony?

WEIHL: Yes, I think he is exactly because he is now going to have to correct his testimony. You know, I think the good lawyer there for the counsel for the Democrats is going to say, now, can we refresh your recollection? That of course that's kind of a nice saving his face pretty much after now he has had to hear from these hearsay testimony, if you will, because he has already admitted to the committee that he did tell a high Ukrainian official that they would have to promise a Biden investigation if they wanted to unfreeze those resources, those funds, to the Ukrainian government. So he has already on record saying that that. So now he can't walk back that, and now there are other conversations other witnesses are coming forward saying. So he is kind of in a hot spot that way.

[14:25:16] WHITFIELD: So Renato, a bevy of witnesses this week, but if you are trying to build the case for impeachment, what is missing thus far?

MARIOTTI: I think what is missing thus far is really the sort of firsthand account of Trump saying or doing something that shocks the nation, that people are like, wow, right. jaw-dropping stuff related to the specific quid pro quo.

I think the testimony this week has been riveting. There's no question the two men who testified earlier in the week are career public servants that were very credible and they testified about this quid pro quo deal, which is, you know, very disturbing. And obviously the ambassador was very moving testimony. But it wasn't about what Trump did, what Trump said, and I think that's why Sondland's testimony is so important.

WEIHL: If I could just go back one minute to the Clinton impeachment. Remember, ultimately there was no quid pro quo with Monica Lewinsky. She even came out and said there was no quid pro quo, but there were articles of impeachment, and that was about the abuse of power. And you can still have an abuse of power even if there is ultimately no quid pro quo. And I'm not saying there isn't one here. I mean, there are bribery, extortion, all of that that could still be brought in, but you could still have articles of impeachment being drawn in on the abuse of power, which is fundamental.

WHITFIELD: All right. Lis Weihl and Renato Mariotti, we'll leave it right there for now. Thank you so much.

And we will be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:30:54] WHITFIELD: All right, welcome back. The 2020 Democratic race just took a significant turn. Mayor Pete Buttigieg is now leading the Pack in Iowa. And it's not even close. That's according to a new CNN/Des Moines Register Mediacom poll. Buttigieg now hold a clear lead in the first of the nation caucus state with 25 percent support. That's a 16 point increase from September. Meantime, Elizabeth Warren, Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders are all virtually tied as they battle for second place.

The mayor's significant rise in Iowa comes after his campaign, invested a lot of time and money in the state.

CNN's Kyung Lah got Buttigieg's reaction to his new front rudder status in Iowa right after the poll dropped last night.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MAYOR PETE BUTTIGIEG (D), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Well, that is extremely encouraging, you know, obviously. We have felt a lot of momentum on the ground. Even now we know that we are not as well known as some of my competitors. So it's very encouraging. And at the same time there is a long way to go.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WHITFIELD: Buttigieg also says he credits his rise in the poll to his recent debate performance and his speech at the Iowa Democratic party's biggest event of the year earlier in this month in Des Moines.

Meantime, we are learning about a stunning reversal from billionaire and former New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg ahead of a possible 2020 bid. Today, Bloomberg spoke at a predominantly African-American megachurch in Brooklyn and apologized for his long-time support of the NYPD's controversial stop and frisk policy.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BLOOMBERG: I got something important really wrong. I didn't understand that back then, the full impact that stops were having on the black and Latino communities. Now, hindsight is 20/20. But as crime continued to come down as we reduced stops, and as it continued to come down during the next administration, to its credit, I now see that we could and should have acted sooner and acted faster to cut the stops. I wish we had. I'm sorry that we didn't.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WHITFIELD: CNN's Cristina Alesci is in New York for us.

So Cristina, this is a complete 180 for Bloomberg. However, some are now questioning his timing.

CRISTINA ALESCI, CNN POLITICS AND BUSINESS CORRESPONDENT: That's right. And I was in that church this morning. He did get a warm welcome from church goers, but to your point, the timing of this apology on the eve of a potential announcement of a presidential run in 2020 will open him up for questioning that he is doing this because it's an expedient thing to do and it's not genuine.

Now let me just put context around the stop and frisk tactic that we are talking about here. I was immensely controversial here in New York. And it was a main pillar of NYPD's policing practices. And at its very peak in the first three months of 2012, about 200,000 people were stopped, mainly blacks and Latinos, and that's why activists have called the policy racist.

Now after that peak, the stops did decline precipitously. And by the time Michael Bloomberg -- by the time -- at the end of his administration, the stops had been reduced nearly 95 percent. So we do see that the policing tactics changed under Mike Bloomberg,

but it went on for so long and it created so much controversy that it's hard for him to back away from it now, especially because he stuck by it up until this very point.

Look, it's going to be hard to understand how voters will react to this, but certainly his political opponents will not be quieted by this apology.

WHITFIELD: Right. So many of his opponents are now wondering whether the apology is his effort to try to clean the slate.

All right, Cristina Alesci, thank you so much.

ALESCI: Of Course.

WHITFIELD: All right. Next, President Trump and his allies cry foul on process ahead of more impeachment hearings. But can they get on the same page? The twist and turns of the Republican defense, straight ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:39:18] WHITFIELD: All right, week two of the impeachment battle will kick off tomorrow with a new round of consequential public testimonies. And that includes the highly anticipated hearing with President Trump's ambassador to the EU, Gordon Sondland's firsthand accounts of the President's Ukraine policy. And that will be key in the Democrats' inquiry. This all comes as Republicans continue to cry foul over the process and the witnesses.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

REP. STEVE SCALISE (R), LOUISIANA: The real bottom line is he got the money. Ukraine got the money, Chris.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: First of all, a dozen people listened in on the phone call and a number of them were immediately upset because of what the President said about Burisma.

(CROSSTALK)

[14:40:00] UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No, sir. They are career foreign service officers and these are people who worked in the Trump administration.

SCALISE: There are other witnesses and Schiff will not allow us to bring one --

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Sir, you had a woman yesterday who was on vice president Pence's staff. She said it was inappropriate. You had Tim Morrison who was on the NSC staff who said that alarm bells immediately went off for him. Alexander Vindman immediately went to see -- these are all people, you say they are Schiff's witnesses, they all were working in the Trump administration.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

WHITFIELD: All right. Does the exemplifies it's getting harder and harder to argue.

Joining me right now, CNN political analyst Margaret Talev.

Margaret, good to see you. So what does this signal, I mean, that's the Republican strategy is to perhaps discredit the process or even the witnesses?

MARGARET TALEV, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: Yes, this is, Fred, going to be a difficult week potentially for the President, especially because of Gordon Sondland's testimony expected on Wednesday. He has already had to substantially revise his initial comments to lawmakers. And so Democrats, we would expect, would be pretty tough on him.

Republicans are trying a few things but one was to try to keep this distance between the President's direct involvement and whatever the strategy was by Rudy Giuliani or other people who are involved. And part of the difficulty with Gordon Sondland is going to be that on the one hand, Republicans are looking for ambassador Sondland to kind of exonerate the President. And on the other hand, they are gong to try to make this argument that he really wasn't actually that close with the President, you know. He was eager to please the President and so maybe he got a little animated in some of the things he said.

WHITFIELD: Except that according to the testimony, there were at least six telephone, perhaps, conversations between Sondland and the President.

TALEV: Yes. Sondland is sort of where the rubber meets the road. And so, I think a lot of what we are going to see from the defenders of the President this week are efforts to kind of go down these other channels. Is Adam Schiff being fair, you know? How come they're not allowed to have their witnesses when they want to have their witnesses. And part of this is because the facts that are going to be drilled down on this week may be very difficult for the President as they come out.

WHITFIELD: So Republican congressman Mike Turner spoke with our Jake Tapper and this is what was said.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. MIKE TURNER (R), INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE: All of that is alarming. As I said from the beginning, I think this is not OK. The President of the United States shouldn't even, in the original phone call, be on the phone with the President of another country and raise his political opponent. So no, this is not OK.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WHITFIELD: So what does this mean when there were members of the Republican party who are willing to go at least that far and say that?

TALEV: Well, the part of the strategy here is to say we don't agree with this, but it's not impeachable. The President is a little frustrated with that strategy. He wants a strategy which says everything is OK, because he Is concerned that even that creates a window that could exploited, that can move this further. But ultimately the Republicans trying to make sure right now that the President doesn't get impeached. There is a separate question about whether he can be reelected that may or may not be affected by the way these hearings play out.

WHITFIELD: All right. Margaret Talev, thank you so much. Appreciate it.

All right. We have so much ahead in the NEWSROOM, but first here is this week's "Staying Well."

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I was obese, pre-diabetic. I also had high blood pressure. I really felt like I needed to take control somehow. I wanted to experiment with intermittent fasting and I wanted to give it a shot.

Intermittent fasting means you purposely restrict your calories which is different from starvation. Some will fast of eight or 16 hours. Alternate intermittent fasting means that you alternate a day of extreme caloric restriction.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I decided to jump in to full day fasting. My first month I lost close to 15 pounds. I kept kind of spreadsheet of my weigh-ins, what I was eating and just how intermittent was affecting me. I found that sparkling water is my lifesaver on a fast day. I drink a lot of tea and coffee. I typically break my fast with some kind of egg dish, with avocados.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The food choice does matter. Restrict the carbohydrates and eat some protein and some moderate fat. People who have serious diseases should consult their doctor before proceeding with IF.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:48:41] WHITFIELD: All right. Welcome back. A new court document shows that one of the Boston marathon bombers was allegedly involved in a triple murder back in 2011, almost two years before the terrorist attacks -- the terror attacks, rather. This new information comes after Dzhokhar Tsarnaev filed an appeal for his conviction and death sentence. The affidavit says his older brother Tamerlan and another man allegedly bound, beat and slit the throats of three men in the Boston area.

CNN correspondent Natasha Chen is here to breakdown all of this for us. NATASHA CHEN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yes, Fred. Let's remember first

that Tamerlan Tsarnaev, the older brother, actually died in a firefight with police shortly after the Boston marathon bombing in 2013. After that, his friend named (INAUDIBLE) gave an interview to investigators. And that interview is what we are learning about now. That's the search warrant that became unsealed this week and a lot of it is redacted. You can see just black pages right here.

But from the part we can read, Tadosha told investigators that he and his older Tsarnaev brother Tamerlan had committed a triple murder two years before the bombing on the tenth anniversary of 9/11. He said it was supposed to be a robbery, that they went in and sold thousands of dollars, and that Tamerlan then wanted to eliminate witnesses to the crime.

And here's the quote from the documents. It says the murders were particularly grisly. The victims were bound, beaten, had their throats cut. In addition the victims were covered with marijuana. Tadosha then tells investigators that they spend more than an hour trying to clean up the fingerprints. And interestingly, he was actually shot and killed during the course of giving this interview because sources say he tried to attack the FBI agents in the room.

The investigation into the murders is still ongoing. And of course we have these documents because the younger surviving Tsarnaev brother is appealing his death sentence. That case is going forward next month.

[14:50:39] WHITFIELD: Wow, extraordinary details.

Thank you so much, Natasha. Appreciate it.

CHEN: Thank you.

WHITFIELD: All right. Straight ahead, Syracuse University suspends all of its fraternity after at least six racist incidents in just the last few days. A live report next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:54:37] WHITFIELD: Syracuse University taking action after a series of racist incident on campus in the last eleven days. The school now suspending all fraternity activities for the remainder of the semester. Some of the incidents under investigation include graffiti of swastika found outside of dorm and a racial slur toward a student.

CNN correspondent Polo Sandoval joins us now from New York with more details on this.

Polo, where is the investigation?

[14:55:02] POLO SANDOVAL, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Fred, what is particularly disturbing that this is not first time the Syracuse University has been basically exposed to this kind of reported behavior here. Just last year, members Thao (ph) fraternity were actually expelled from the campus after a video surfaced again last year. Here we are now a year later, now at least six incidents in the last ten days that have been reported to police, many of them having to do with racist symbols and also graffiti that has been found in and around campus. The chancellor of the university making it very clear that none of this is free speech. Many of these kind of markings directed toward members of the Asian, black or Jewish communities. And so the result, as you mentioned here now, these social events have been canceled or suspended at least to the end of the semester which is the middle of December.

There has been some questions about why all events have been canceled, but the chance to responding to that in a letter that was just released this morning. And in it the chancellor Kent writing, while one fraternity may have been involved in this particular incident, referring to last night's, given recent history, all fraternities must come together on how to prevent a recurrence of such seriously troubling behavior.

What we have seen on campus here are students coming together and essentially calling for change here with list of demands her, Fred. And among them to set up a curriculum that would essentially teach students about diversity. If they do not see that by Wednesday, and they say they will call on the chancellor to resign.

WHITFIELD: All right, Polo Sandoval in New York, thank you very much.

SANDOVAL: Thanks, Fred.

WHITFIELD: All right. Still ahead, the White House says President Trump is healthy as can be, but now questions are emerging after CNN learns of his unexpected medical exam and that it did not follow protocol.

We are live from the White House, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)