Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Trump's Unannounced Hospital Visit Raises Questions; Week Two of Impeachment Hearings Set to Begin. Aired 3-3:30p ET

Aired November 18, 2019 - 15:00   ET

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

[15:00:22]

BROOKE BALDWIN, CNN HOST: You are watching CNN. I'm Brooke Baldwin. Thank you so much for being with me.

By this time tomorrow, the second and potentially most consequential week of public impeachment hearings will be in full swing, eight witnesses expected to testify before Congress, including an aide to Vice President Mike Pence. You have a decorated war veteran who sat in on that July 25 phone call between President Trump and Ukraine's President Zelensky, and the former special envoy to Ukraine.

But it's the hearings scheduled for Wednesday that will likely have lawmakers and pundits and even the president of the United States himself glued to their screens.

That is when we will hear from Gordon Sondland, the Trump donor and E.U. ambassador who recently revised his closed-door testimony to admit that, in fact, there was quid pro quo, after being contradicted by multiple officials.

Sondland, who has been in conversations with everyone from President Trump and other top diplomats to aides to Ukraine's president, is emerging as a key player in this inquiry.

So we start this hour with CNN chief political analyst Gloria Borger and CNN senior political analyst John Avlon.

And before we even get into this week's hearings, just moments ago -- Gloria, this will be for you -- moments ago, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi released this dear colleagues letter.

And I'll just read part of it for both of you.

She writes: "The facts are uncontested, that the president abused his power for his own personal political benefit, at the expense of our national security."

And then the speaker went on to say this to critics and Trump allies who say let the voters decide in 2020. She says -- quote -- "That dangerous position only adds to the urgency of our action, because the president is just jeopardizing the integrity of the 2020 elections."

So, Gloria, what do those words tell you about what we could see playing out in the next couple of weeks in terms of pace of hearings, drafting of articles of impeachment, and of the vote itself?

GLORIA BORGER, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: Well, this is not slowing down. It's getting more and more intense.

And I think that's what you saw in the Pelosi letter. I mean, let's just take a look at what we have. You just showed your list of those who are going to testify in the impeachment inquiry, very important people.

There's a question now of the House investigating whether the president lied to the special counsel's investigation. There is going to be perhaps a showdown at the Supreme Court over the release of the president's tax returns.

And so, as you play this out, it's coming at everyone very, very quickly. But each part of this is a part of a larger puzzle that I think Nancy Pelosi is trying to put in one letter to her colleagues, which is, we have to pay attention to all of this right now.

BALDWIN: You foreshadowed a lot of what I want to get to with taxes and SCOTUS and the like.

But, John, let me just turn to you, because, as we outlined, Wednesday -- I mean, every single day is huge, right, but Wednesday is one of the money day with Gordon Sondland testifying. He's still in the job. He is the person with direct involvement, no more of this, well, this person talked to this person to this person.

Like, this is the guy directly -- direct -- with direct knowledge. Does he show up? Does he plead the Fifth? Does he sit there and say, I will remember? Does he throw the president under the bus?

What...

JOHN AVLON, CNN POLITICAL CONTRIBUTOR: This is an unknowable, but here's what we do know. One, he changed his testimony.

BALDWIN: He refreshed it.

AVLON: He refreshed it. He said, you know what, actually, upon further reflection, there was a quid pro quo.

BALDWIN: Yes.

AVLON: Democrats would frame that it's bribery or extortion. But that's a big deal.

It also shows that the Republican -- a lot of the Republican arguments last week, it's the hearsay defense. Your first big witnesses don't have direct knowledge.

Sondland does, and he's already given testimony, so it's going to be a little bit difficult to put that genie back in the bottle. Still a State Department employee. Still interested in self-preservation. It has yet to be seen whether he's interested in the truth.

And if he does appear, it will presumably be as a hostile witness, not a cooperative one.

BALDWIN: Gloria, just...

(CROSSTALK)

BALDWIN: Go ahead. Go ahead. Go ahead.

BORGER: No, I was just going to say, if you go back to that May 23 meeting inside the Oval Office, where Gordon Sondland was there, and Ambassador Volker was there, and the energy secretary, Rick Perry, was there, and they said, we got to get aid to Ukraine, it's great.

They had just come back from the inauguration. The president said, talk to Rudy. So what you might hear from Sondland is, I was just trying to figure out the best way to get that money to Ukraine, and so I had to work with Rudy, and I had to work around Rudy, because I knew that was the best way to get the money.

And he's going to say, I would -- I don't know for a fact, but I would presume, that he was -- his motives were good, but he had to figure out a way to do it, which was not State Department protocol at all.

[15:05:07]

And that's what angered a lot of the people around him.

AVLON: Yes, I think the problem with that is, I mean, it's almost inevitable the State Department's going to throw Rudy Giuliani under the bus.

The problem is that, because Sondland is the position he's in, it will be difficult to take that tack without also implicating the president.

BORGER: Right. Exactly. Exactly. And they will have to do that.

BALDWIN: What about tomorrow? Jennifer Williams, she's the vice president vice president, Mike Pence's aid. Trump's already attacked her on Twitter, suggesting she's this never-Trumper.

This is after the tweet while Marie Yovanovitch was testifying last week and those extraordinary moments. What do these latest rants targeting witnesses, what does that tell you about his mind-set?

AVLON: Well, it says the president is impulsive. He believes in intimidation. He doesn't filter things through a normal presidential frame. Is this presidential? Is this in the national interest?

It's everything is a form of radical self-interest. Here's the stunning thing about him going after this young woman. She works for Vice President Pence. And it took him no seconds to castigate her and attack her in public.

There's just a lack of decency you see from this president over and over again. And it's starting to really impact morale, not only in the State Department, but a sense in the White House that this president may be asking you to lie for him, but he's not going to have your back when the chips are down.

BALDWIN: Stay with me, both of you.

I want to get this other piece in. Gloria alluded to this a second ago.

Here's the other breaking news, that the House is now investigating if the president lied in those written answers to former special counsel Robert Mueller, adding to existing concerns about potential obstruction.

And I know you're thinking, well, wasn't that a bunch of months ago? Correct. But the reason for this is two words, Roger Stone. During Stone's trial, former Trump deputy campaign chairman Rick Gates testified the Trump and Stone talked about WikiLeaks and talked about that document dump in 2016.

But Trump told Mueller that he couldn't recall ever talking to Stone about that very issue. And now Democrats want to get their hands on grand jury documents that were previously redacted.

The House's general counsel telling a D.C. appeals court -- quote -- "There is evidence, very sadly, that the president may have provided untruthful answers."

Also new this afternoon, House Democrats were hoping to get their hands on President Trump's long elusive taxes as soon as this Wednesday. Folks, that is not going to happen, at least for now. The Supreme Court is temporarily blocking a ruling requiring the president's longtime accounting firm to turn over the financial records to the House Oversight Committee.

But get this. House Democrats said they would not oppose the delay.

CNN Supreme Court reporter Ariane de Vogue is following this for us.

And, Ariane, is this a win for Trump, or is it too soon to say?

ARIANE DE VOGUE, CNN SUPREME COURT REPORTER: It is too soon to say, because what the court did today is, it said that President Trump's financial records could not go to the House on Wednesday.

Remember, a federal appeals court last week ruled against the president, said that that House subpoena could go into effect on Wednesday. Trump raced to the Supreme Court, and the Supreme Court said today, whoa, we're putting things on hold for now. Nothing is going to go out on Wednesday. We want more briefing.

But it's hard to say that that telegraphs how the Supreme Court might rule on this down the line. It probably just says, look, we need a little bit more time here to catch up. Keep in mind, this all comes from that House investigation. They were looking into Trump's financial records.

They subpoenaed his longtime accounting firm, and Trump raced to court and said, you can't subpoena them. All the lower courts on this issue have ruled against the president. And now he's in front of the Supreme Court, and he's raising significant separation of powers arguments here.

The House on one side says, look, this is all within our authority. We're doing oversight. But Trump's lawyer say, no, this is overreach, and the Supreme Court needs to take it up.

So it'll be interesting to see how the justices will act on this. For now, we know that no documents are going to go out until further notice. We're waiting for more briefs to come in. But the ball is in the Supreme Court's hands right now, Brooke.

BALDWIN: Ariane, thank you.

John and Gloria are back with me.

And, John, just first just on the taxes, Trump's lawyer says, if the Oversight Committee gets the records, such intrusions will become -- quote, unquote -- "the new normal," no matter which party is in power.

I see you shaking your head.

AVLON: Well, look, the Supreme Court is -- this is just a delay as they get all the information.

But how bad it would be for the country and the institution of the Supreme Court if they take up the case and have a 5-4 decision along partisan lines. This is something that's written in the statute dating back to scandals that implicated the Harding administration about -- that shall hand over tax returns.

Every lower court has sided with the Democrats on the right to exercise that and get the -- these tax returns, which the president clearly does not want released.

It's not about an alleged audit. That lie has been blown out the window. It's not that he really wants to release it. He's going to the mattresses to try to avoid releasing this.

[15:10:02]

And if the Supreme Court takes this case, and if it's a 5-4 decision, that will be evidence of a deep politicization. And, basically, people will say, partisans on the court playing prevent defense for the president.

That will do a great deal to further divide our country and reduce trust in our institutions.

BALDWIN: Going to the mattresses.

(CROSSTALK)

AVLON: Always like a good "Godfather" reference.

(CROSSTALK) BALDWIN: Like that. Like that. I got you.

Gloria, the House said it was willing to delay getting Trump's taxes to give the court time to consider legal arguments. The Supreme Court wants the House to respond Thursday to the president's request to block the subpoena.

What is the likelihood that lawmakers or the American public ever see these tax returns?

BORGER: You got me.

BALDWIN: I got you?

BORGER: I don't know what the court is going to do. I mean, what will the court do? Will the court say that it should do anything at all, for example?

I really don't -- I really don't have any idea. I think what Democrats in Congress want to do is, they want to pass a law making it clear that anybody who is president the United States or, I believe, who is not -- a nominee of a political party needs to disclose tax returns, after this has occurred.

And, of course, this becomes so much more important in the era of Trump because of his personal businesses all over the world, which his children continue to run and from which he continues to benefit.

So this is -- this is a question that's going to be decided in the Congress one way or another. Whether it has to do with Trump, in particular, we will see. I just can't predict, Brooke. I just can't.

BALDWIN: I know. If we all had a penny for how many times we've said that...

BORGER: Yes.

(LAUGHTER)

BALDWIN: A nickel.

Let's go back to the reporting, to John, about -- this is all coming out of Roger Stone -- Roger Stone's trial last week, week before, Rick Gates, the testimony, what the president knew about the WikiLeaks dump, 2016, and what the president said in those written responses to Robert Mueller and the whole Russia investigation.

And so the question now is, did he lie?

AVLON: Yes.

BALDWIN: And why is this relevant now?

AVLON: It's massively relevant.

The question, did the president lie, too often -- spoiler alert -- is yes. That is his habit. But they were very careful in these written answers. And you see the answers he gave to the WikiLeaks question particulars. I do not recall.

BALDWIN: I do not recall.

AVLON: But he specifically mentioned Roger Stone. And the things that came out in the Stone trial showed a preoccupation by the candidate, now President Trump about WikiLeaks and a constant back- channeling and liaisoning it with Roger Stone and others in the presence of Rick Gates and other folks.

So that is very difficult to square. And it's very easy to see that he perhaps defaulted, and even within that legalism of, I don't recall, did not tell the truth about his preoccupation with getting information about WikiLeaks and Hillary Clinton's e-mails, which were hacked by the Russians.

BALDWIN: Right. So perhaps, as I talked to two lawyers last hour, this could become an article of impeachment.

AVLON: Another article of impeachment, correct.

BALDWIN: John, thank you. And, Gloria Borger, thank you very much.

BORGER: Sure.

BALDWIN: A meeting that went -- quote, unquote -- "off the rails" -- new reporting on Ambassador Sondland's interactions with the Ukrainians as he gets ready to testify.

Plus, despite attempts by the White House to downplay it, there are new questions today about President Trump's unexpected and previously unscheduled medical visit to Walter Reed Medical Center over the weekend.

Stay right here. You're watching CNN. I'm Brooke Baldwin.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[15:18:10]

BALDWIN: Back to the impeachment inquiry.

Of course, all eyes on E.U. Ambassador Gordon Sondland. He's the one testifying Wednesday, after other witnesses have described his direct talks with President Trump about efforts to investigate Joe Biden.

Erin Banco is a national security reporter for The Daily Beast.

And you wrote this incredible piece that we wanted to talk to you about, about -- and I will leave some of the description for you. But you described this meeting, July 10 meeting, at the White House with a number of White House officials and Ukrainians as erratic and very emotional and lots of yelling.

Erin, who was there and what was this about? ERIN BANCO, THE DAILY BEAST: So this is the July 10 meeting that

Gordon Sondland attends with former National Security Adviser John Bolton and a couple other State Department officials, including Kurt Volker, Alexander Vindman, and, of course, Ukrainian officials.

And the original meeting was really to sort to set the stage for U.S.- Ukrainian relations moving forward. The Ukrainian officials were sort of really excited about the John Bolton meeting, thought it went pretty professionally, of course, until Sondland steps in and brings up the topic of investigations into the Bidens and Burisma.

And then, of course, we know there's this second meeting that happens in the wardroom. Sondland guides the Ukrainians into that room. And what ensues is basically a yelling match between Gordon Sondland and the Ukrainian officials that were there about this topic of investigations.

Sondland is -- quote, unquote -- "emotional," from one source we talked to. He gets very worked up and sort of demands that the Ukrainians agreed to launch these investigations in exchange for a White House meeting between President Trump and President Zelensky.

BALDWIN: OK, so two follow-ups out of those descriptions, one on John Bolton, what -- his role -- his presence is interesting.

You write about how he seemed to know something was wrong and let it be known. How?

[15:20:03]

BANCO: Right.

So, the first meeting ends when John Bolton abruptly ends the meeting, after Sondland speaks up and begins to talk about the investigations. I believe it was in some of the testimony that came over the past couple of weeks, where a witness says that John Bolton stiffens.

I believe it was Fiona Hill's testimony. And he abruptly ends the first meeting. And then Bolton basically tells Fiona to go to the wardroom to figure out basically what Sondland is up to in the wardroom and to sort of put a stop to whatever shenanigans are unfolding in that room.

And I think what we have been told is that the Ukrainian officials, amid Sondland's sort of outbursts, really looked at Fiona Hill as the professional in the room, as somebody who could guide the conversation and tell them what was what.

They were very confused about sort of the tenor of the first Bolton meeting that went professionally and then the second meeting with Scotland.

BALDWIN: And you paint this picture of Gordon Sondland, his efforts early on. And he's often the point man on that Ukraine pressure.

BANCO: That's right. And so I think this week is going to be incredibly interesting, when

we have Gordon Sondland coming in for impeachment -- the impeachment hearing on Wednesday. It's sort of up in the air how he will perform.

Most people we have spoken to have said that he's sort of quick- tempered, quick to anger, and is sort of emotional on this subject. He's worked incredibly difficult, according to sources that we have talked to, to sort of get the meeting going between President Trump and President Zelensky at the White House.

He's had direct conversations, as we know, with President Trump, about Ukraine policy. And we will expect to see some more testimony from him this week on exactly what him and Trump spoke about and exactly what President Trump directed him to help to tell the Ukrainian officials.

BALDWIN: It's a great piece, quite colorful.

Erin Banco, thank you.

BANCO: Thank you.

BALDWIN: More answers -- more questions than answers, after President Trump makes this sudden visit to the hospital over the weekend.

The White House trying to spin it as a routine visit. But I talked to a leading cardiologist last hour with White House connections who flat out told me he is skeptical.

Plus, the potential security breach that will play a key role at this week's impeachment hearings. Gordon Sondland, as we were just discussing, speaks to the president about Ukraine in the middle of a restaurant in Kiev on a cell phone. Were the Russians listening to that call?

We will be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[15:27:23]

BALDWIN: I spoke with this leading cardiologist, who gave new details to me about President Trump's unscheduled hospital visit over the weekend.

He's a cardiologist for the former Vice President Dick Cheney, Dr. Jonathan Reiner. He says that he's still baffled as to why the president made the trip to Walter Reed Saturday.

Dr. Reiner says a White House source authorized to speak with him on the visit shared this with him:

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DR. JONATHAN REINER, CARDIOLOGIST FOR DICK CHENEY: This had been something that they had been thinking about doing for a while, that the president had some downtime on Saturday afternoon.

So he decided to go over to Walter Reed to get some of this done. And, according to this source, there was really no sophisticated testing done.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BALDWIN: Dr. Reiner also says that he was not told why the tests the president could receive on site at the White House were actually performed at Walter Reed.

The White House is only saying that the president underwent a -- quote, unquote -- "quick exam and labs."

Are you at all suspicious that perhaps there wasn't something that led to this, other than normal procedure?

REINER: I'm skeptical. I think skeptical is the right word.

BALDWIN: Skeptical.

REINER: Think about it this way. The president the United States, who has access to multiple physicians on site, on Saturday afternoon, goes unannounced to a medical center.

It's worrisome.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BALDWIN: One source tells CNN that there was no notification to any of the staff at the facility, which happened the last two times the president had his physical, that they had been notified previously.

Another source described Trump's visit as -- quote, unquote -- "abnormal," but added that President Trump, who is 73, looked to be in good health as of late Friday.

So, CNN law enforcement analyst Jonathan Wackrow was a Secret Service agent in the Obama White House. So he knows a thing or two about protocol. Also here, CNN correspondent Josh Campbell, formerly of the FBI.

So, Jonathan, just first to you.

You heard my conversation with the cardiologist. You know protocol. What are you thinking?

JONATHAN WACKROW, CNN LAW ENFORCEMENT ANALYST: Listen, there are things that are really anomalous around this.

We're not chasing conspiracy theories here.

BALDWIN: No.

WACKROW: We're not brokering in fear around the president's health. There has been protocols set forth by the Trump administration to make

notification of the president's annual physical. They broke that protocol. So that's anomalous. It's healthy to question, why did this happen?

There are a lot of things that just seem last-minute around this.

BALDWIN: What would be -- what would a reason be?

If you were working in President Obama's Secret Service detail, and, all of a sudden, something happened health-wise, I mean, what would lead a president to need to show up without giving anyone a heads-up at a hospital?

[15:30:00]