Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Bolton Says "Stay Tuned"; Rep. Anthony Brown (D-MD) Reacts To Fiona Hill Who Says Fake Ukraine Stories Are Aiding America's Enemies. Aired 2-2:30p ET

Aired November 22, 2019 - 14:00   ET

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

[14:00:14]

ANNOUNCER: This is CNN Breaking News.

BROOKE BALDWIN, CNN HOST: Here we go on this Friday afternoon. It is good to be here. I'm Brooke Baldwin. Thank you for joining me.

For two months ever since he left the White House, John Bolton has been silent on Twitter. That all ended today with a string of tweets teasing for his followers to quote, "stay tuned." And that his backstory was more to come.

But moments ago, the biggest bombshell. This is what he just wrote, quote, "We have now liberated the Twitter account previously suppressed unfairly in the aftermath of my resignation as National Security adviser," and also blaming the White House for keeping it under wraps.

But while Bolton is taking it on Twitter, he isn't talking. He is not talking on Capitol Hill, most specifically where after two weeks of testimony, partisan sniping and clear signs the Congressional Republicans will not budge in their defense of President Trump. Two key words loom for House Democrats in their Impeachment Inquiry. What's next?

CNN congressional correspondent Phil Mattingly is live on Capitol Hill. Kaitlan Collins is at the White House for us this afternoon. And Kaitlan, let me just start with you on this John Bolton, you know, tweeting, how is the White House responding to this?

KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Or not tweeting. We've asked the White House for comment on this, Brooke. They haven't gotten back to us.

But this is a pretty fascinating accusation from the former National Security adviser who is tweeting again now repeatedly today, accusing the White House of blocking his personal Twitter account after he resigned as the National Security adviser left the White House about two months ago.

Now he just tweeted again moments ago saying that they blocked his personal account. Look at this tweet here that he said essentially laying out what he believed it was that the White House did saying that they are not letting him tweet or use his personal account. I believe we have that tweet from John Bolton saying that they refused

to return access to his personal Twitter account, quote, "Out of fear of what I may say to those who speculated I went to hiding." He says, "I'm sorry to disappoint."

Now to add to this drama, the President did a nearly hour long interview on Fox News this morning where he was asked about a former tweet that John Bolton had sent, asked if the White House had blocked Bolton's account.

The President said, no, of course not. But then Bolton went even further with his accusations here. And now there are more questions that the White House right now is not answering.

But of course, Brooke, this is all more interesting not just because people have been missing John Bolton's tweets, but also because he is not speaking on Capitol Hill, even though his attorney teased that he has some potentially explosive information that those Democratic investigators over on Capitol Hill do not know yet about what is at the center of this in this pressure campaign on Ukraine to carry out these investigations that the President and his personal attorney, Rudy Giuliani wanted.

That's something we're still waiting to see if Bolton is going to be a witness to that, if he is going to come forward and speak. So far we do not believe so. And while Fiona Hill, his former aide was testifying, he was spotted by John Berman walking down Fifth Avenue in New York and not keeping a close eye on the hearings by any means.

BALDWIN: Okay, we're going to come back to John Bolton in just a second. Let's big picture this for a second, Phil Mattingly, because when we look ahead, but also think about what's happened in the last couple of days, Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy tells CNN that not only will he keep Republicans together, he may get support from some Democrats when the full House votes on impeachment.

You tell me, is there any nervousness on behalf of Speaker Pelosi, her team as they plot their next steps?

PHIL MATTINGLY, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes, so the short answer is no. And I think they probably wouldn't appreciate Kevin McCarthy trying to give his own whip counts of the Democratic Caucus at this point in time.

But the reason why I say the answer is no is one, you can obviously look at the public comments of the Speaker over the last couple of days, the public comments of House Intelligence Committee Chairman, Adam Schiff; but they're too far down the path at this point, right?

There's no turning back, given the fact they've had the closed door depositions, they've had the public hearings, and along those lines, the reason why is they believe the evidence is there. You talked to Democrats kind of up and down the board. It's not a monolithic caucus, but for the most part, they believe they have enough evidence to move forward. They believe they don't have to wait for people like John Bolton to

see if they can win court cases to get people like Mick Mulvaney in and testify, some of his deputies as well.

They believe the time is now and they have enough to move forward and therefore, they're comfortable with where they are.

Now, I will say, two Democrats voted against the House impeachment resolution last month. There is every chance that those two Democrats, Jeff Andrew and Collin Peterson from moderate districts who are in tough reelection races may vote against it again.

But for the most part, Democrats feel good about where they are or at least acknowledge that where they are now, there's no place else to go, but forward.

BALDWIN: What about looking forward to what happens within the Senate because we know Trump's allies on Capitol Hill, they're working with the White House to prepare for that likely send an impeachment trial. What would that even look like, Phil?

MATTINGLY: So something really important happened yesterday while everybody was watching the hearings, and rightfully so, everybody was watching the hearings, but Senate Republicans who for the last couple of weeks have really had a lot of conversations and closed door lunches inside their conference about what this would actually look like, a core group of them, five of them met with the White House counsel, Pat Cipollone to start kind of working through the structure of what the White House would like to see, what Senate Republicans would like to see about a Senate trial going forward.

[14:05:15]

MATTINGLY: Now, to be perfectly clear, there are no technical rules as to how a Senate trial would look like. With the Clinton impeachment that both the Republican and Democratic Leader got together, worked on a bipartisan resolution, and actually kind of laid the structure out that way. That's what they want to do here.

But what Republicans are doing with the White House right now is trying to get a sense -- what does the President want? What is he willing to accept? What can they bring to the table as those negotiations start?

Things are starting to happen in the Senate, and that just underscores the entire point of all of this. The house is going to impeach President Trump, likely before Christmas.

BALDWIN: Phil Mattingly, thank you very much. Kaitlan is back with me from the White House. Let me bring in two other voices here in New York. Samantha Vinograd, CNN national security analyst and former senior official for President Obama's National Security Council, and Elie Honig, CNN legal analyst and former assistant U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York.

Now, Kaitlan just set us up, but I want to talk to you two. John Bolton -- I mean, I get it that he is saying White House kept me from tweeting with my personal account. But what about talking on Capitol Hill? Talking on TV? Writing an opinion piece? What's going on?

SAMANTHA VINOGRAD, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: Brooke, this is such a lame excuse. I mean, John Bolton knows better than anybody that there are so many other platforms to speak up or speak out.

Previous officials, when they leave any administration revert to a different Twitter account, he obviously would have gained following. He could have written an op-ed. He could actually have gone to Capitol Hill and spoken with lawmakers.

Pretending that he didn't speak up because his Twitter account was blocked is frankly just lame. It appears that he is really speaking to an audience of one here. For one, he makes clear in his tweets that he resigned, which is something that the President has discounted and it really feels like he is taunting Trump and trying to trigger him into launching into some kind of Twitter tirade.

Now, John Bolton has been the subject of a lot of witness testimony and he now has something to respond to. Witnesses like Fiona Hill and Lieutenant Colonel Vindman have made allegations about John Bolton's behavior, both with respect to telling them to speak with the lawyers, and he now has something again to respond to.

So this timing is quite interesting and we'll see if he chooses to speak up in other fora as well.

BALDWIN: You know, interesting, Elie, you were just in my office and we were chatting about Bolton, and you were saying, you know, but despite all of these White House folks or former White House folks who've been subpoenaed, he has yet to be subpoenaed.

ELIE HONIG, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Yes.

BALDWIN: You think --

HONIG: Something is going on.

BALDWIN: What's up?

HONIG: So he wants to -- it seems he wants to talk. It seems he is also waiting for something. As Sam said, he had a million different ways he could have gotten word out there, and what he has to say could be so important.

Here's where I come back to -- Tim Morrison testified earlier in this proceeding. And he said, there came a point when Bolton had a one-on- one with Donald Trump because Bolton was trying to convince him to release the foreign aid, and Morrison doesn't know what happened inside that room.

BALDWIN: Yes.

HONIG: But he said when Bolton came out, basically the reaction was, he Trump, he is not ready yet. I want to know what happened in that room. That is crucial.

BALDWIN: You're not the only one.

VINOGRAD: It is and you know, it's worth noting, John Bolton is a hardliner. He is a hawk, but he is not a criminal. And so his testimony or him speaking up in whatever fora could be quite interesting, because number one, he'll speak about the security impacts of what President Trump did, how dangerous this was from a national security perspective.

But he also is one of the potential direct links between President Trump and these activities and finally, Brooke, let's remember, he went to Kiev. He met with Ukrainian officials. So he also has firsthand evidence or testimony about how the Ukrainians felt.

BALDWIN: No. He is a key player, obviously, Kaitlan, could he still testify?

COLLINS: That's a big question. Is he someone who is going to surprise everyone, come testify before Democrats wrap up their part of this and what they're doing before this moves on to the Senate trial.

But of course right now, it has not been likely. It has been tied up in the courts. The White House has been essentially believing that that is something that's not going to happen, that it's not something they're going to worry about because essentially what John Bolton is putting at risk here is john Bolton's future and his ties with the Republican Party that is obviously very closely aligned with the President.

And so if he is going to be the person to bring the President down, that's not something the White House is counting on right now, given that he does know a lot, but they say that they don't believe that is something he is going to risk to help Democrats out, essentially.

BALDWIN: Okay, let's move past John Bolton and Elie, just for everyone who has been paying attention, I think a lot of people are wondering, okay, so the testimony is finished. What now? How do you get from Point A to Point Z -- Z being the full House vote?

HONIG: Okay. Impeachment in 45 seconds.

BALDWIN: Go.

HONIG: All right. The House Judiciary Committee has to put out a public report. I think they're going to do some sort of presentation as well. Schiff would be smart to do that.

That report then goes over to House Judiciary Committee. That's Jerry Nadler. The Judiciary Committee then considers which Articles of Impeachment to put out for the whole House. The full House then votes. You need a majority of the full House, 233 Democrats right now. They can lose 15 votes and still have a majority, the President is impeached.

[14:10:04] HONIG: It goes over to the Senate. The Senate holds a trial. Phil

just gave us some insight of what the trial looks like. You need two- thirds of the Senate, 67 out of 100 senators to vote to convict. If they convict, then the President is immediately removed from office and the Vice President moves up.

BALDWIN: Now, Kaitlan -- well done by the way.

HONIG: Forty five seconds.

BALDWIN: I think that was less than 45. Kaitlan, the President says he wants a Senate trial. His Deputy Press Secretary says that the movement inside the White House is, his words, jubilant. They are sounding confident publicly, but tell us what really things are like behind the scenes.

COLLINS: They really don't have an option but to welcome this trial. They say they're looking forward to it. It's time. They're ready to mount this aggressive defense, but Brooke, they literally have no other option because if the House Democrats do move forward with this impeachment, there is going to be a trial.

So it's like driving down a one-way street. There is only one direction that the White House can go in. Now what does seem to be changing is they are coming to terms with the fact that there is likely going to be a trial. They want to mount this robust defense, and that's something that is a change.

Because for a while, people said that they thought the President was in denial about what was actually happening here. He didn't actually think Democrats would go that far and impeach him. So that does seem to be something that's changed slightly for the President behind the scenes as far as what they're looking ahead to happening.

BALDWIN: All right, Kaitlan, and Sam and Elie, thank you so much. Kaitlan, I hear that voice rested this week, and I know you've been working around-the-clock; everyone has, this past week in all things impeachment. Thank you all so much.

The dire warning over a debunked conspiracy theory. The President's former top of Russia expert, Fiona Hill says fake Ukraine stories are aiding America's enemies. So why are Republicans still spreading them?

And President Trump gets in the way of the U.S. Navy as it considers disciplining a Navy SEAL who posed with the corpse of an ISIS fighter. Let's talk about that. You're watching CNN. I'm Brooke Baldwin. We will be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:16:46]

BALDWIN: We are back. You're watching CNN. I'm Brooke Baldwin. Impeachment Inquiry witness Fiona Hill was hired by the White House for her expertise on Russia. Her resume shows years of dedication studying the country and also Eurasia. And yet, even though she has publicly testified under oath that it was Russia, not Ukraine the interfered in the 2016 presidential election, some Republican lawmakers are still resisting that.

And that includes Texas Congressman, Chip Roy, who took part in the closed door depositions as a member of the House Oversight Committee.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. CHIP ROY (R-TX): I do think that there is ample evidence of Ukraine having engagement and involvement with things -- talking about our 2016 elections so far -- I think there's more than enough evidence.

MANU RAJU, CNN SENIOR CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: She says that kind of theory helps Russia. That is the kind of theory that actually bolsters Russia's case and what Russia wants you to say.

ROY: In what universe are these things mutually exclusive?

RAJU: She said that. She just testified to that.

ROY: So all right, so that's her opinion.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BALDWIN: All right, meantime, this is what Fiona Hill testified under oath.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

FIONA HILL, PRESIDENT TRUMP'S FORMER RUSSIA ADVISER: The cost of this investigation, I would ask that you please not promote politically driven falsehoods so it clearly advance Russian interests.

As Republicans and Democrats have agreed for decades, Ukraine is a valued partner of the United States and it plays an important role in our national security.

And as I told the committee last month, I refuse to be part of an effort to legitimize an alternate narrative that the Ukrainian government is a U.S. adversary, and that Ukraine, not Russia attacked us in 2016.

These fictions are harmful, even if they're deployed for purely domestic political purposes.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BALDWIN: Congressman Anthony Brown represents Maryland's fourth district. He helped lead a bipartisan delegation to Ukraine last year.

So Congressman Brown, welcome, sir.

REP. ANTHONY BROWN (D-MD): It's great to be on with you, Brooke. BALDWIN: When you hear certain Republicans, including the President,

you know, still pushing this conspiracy that it was Ukraine that interfered in our 2016 election, given Dr. Hill's warning yesterday, what is your reaction to that?

BROWN: Well, first of all, let me say that Dr. Hill was a very credible witness and I think accurately portrayed the conditions on the ground in Ukraine. She knows better than anyone.

I had the opportunity of participating in a Codel, a bipartisan Codel in February of 2018. It was clear to me then, that Ukraine is not only -- it's not just the threat of Russian aggression. I mean, Russia invaded and now occupies Ukraine; 13,000 Ukrainians, military and civilian were killed by Russians. This is a real threat.

So when the President subscribes to and promotes this conspiracy theory that suggests that Ukraine --

BALDWIN: And other Members of Congress --

BROWN: I'm sorry?

BALDWIN: And other Members of Congress.

BROWN: And other Members of Congress, absolutely. When the President most -- and Republicans do that, it undermines Ukraine. It creates a divide at least, as it is perceived around the world that there is a divide between the U.S. and the Ukraine or Ukraine and they can't afford to have that today.

They are occupied by Russia and that is why Congress authorized $400 million in foreign military sales including the Javelin missile and communications equipment, night vision goggles, so when the administration holds that up, when they subscribe to these conspiracy theories - that harms Ukraine, it harms our interest in the region.

[14:20:00]

BROWN: And it could be devastating for that country and our interests.

BALDWIN: Devastating for that country and also for our interest because, Congressman, as we go into 2020, tell me why conspiracies like this are so dangerous? Like what message does this send Vladimir Putin?

BROWN: Right, so first of all, the American public understands, Congress understands, the President doesn't seem to get it that Russia is engaged in this continual information warfare campaign in Ukraine, and it shows distrust among Ukrainians.

So when you see the President engage in this conspiracy theory that somehow Ukraine was operating against United States, Russia takes that and their services, their Intelligence Services take that and they propagate that in Ukraine in the region and it suggests that Ukraine is on its own, and they are more vulnerable and susceptible to Russian aggression.

That's the real harm. That's the real threat.

BALDWIN: As a member of Congress who will ultimately be voting on presumably these Articles of Impeachment, you know, when you hear from folks like Texas Congressman Will Hurd, a Republican who has stood up to President Trump, who is not seeking reelection when he said this yesterday. Watch this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. WILL HURD (R-TX): The use of the phrase, do us a favor, though, in reference to the 2016 presidential election, and the mention of the word Biden. I believe both statements were inappropriate and misguided foreign policy. And it's certainly not how the Executive, current or in the future, should handle such a call.

An impeachable offense should be compelling, overwhelmingly clear and unambiguous, and it's not something to be rushed or taken lightly. I've not heard evidence proving the President committed bribery or extortion.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BALDWIN: So just to underscore, you know, Congressman Hurd says he doesn't like what the President did, but that it's not impeachable. If your Democratic colleagues can't get a Republican lawmaker like Will Hurd on board, Congressman Brown, what does that tell you?

BROWN: Sure, look, it is an uphill battle. But our job in Congress on behalf of the American people is to uncover the truth.

I agree with everything that Will Hurd said in terms of we shouldn't take it lightly. But I disagree that we have not yet seen enough evidence to suggest or to demonstrate the President has been engaged in bribery. He has been engaged in abuse of power. That he betrayed his oath of office.

He held up military aid, as we talked about how important that is to Ukraine, a partner of ours. He held it up, as well as a White House visit which was also important to the Ukrainian President until the Ukrainian President publicly announced that he would investigate President Trump's political opponent, Joe Biden.

BALDWIN: So you see that evidence, but Will Hurd doesn't see that evidence and if Will Hurd doesn't see that evidence, you know and that spectrum of Republicans -- it just, you know, it leaves folks wondering where this is all going.

Let me jump in and ask you about the former National Security adviser, John Bolton, because he has news today all of a sudden, because he has jumped back on Twitter, right, for the first time since leaving the White House and accusing the White House of blocking his Twitter account. And that being the reason he hasn't said much. Obviously, he could use other means to speak out. Right? He could testify on Capitol Hill. He could talk to us on TV. He

could write a piece in "The Wall Street Journal," for example. What do you make of his sudden appearance on Twitter?

BROWN: Well, let me say more importantly, what I would like to see and of course, this will be up to Adam Schiff and the Intelligence Committee. I'd like to see the former National Security adviser testify before Congress.

Ambassador Sondland stated clearly that Mr. Bolton knew of the sort of domestic political errand that was being run on behalf of President Trump. Fiona Hill - Dr. Hill corroborated that.

So Mr. Bolton knows a lot and I think he can even draw a closer tie between the President and this, you know, effort to investigate Joe Biden.

BALDWIN: Last question for you, sir, just has a retired Colonel in the U.S. Army Reserve, Vice Chair of the Armed Services Committee, I want to I want to ask you about Navy SEAL Eddie Gallagher.

He was acquitted by a military court with the majority of war crimes charges including charges of murdering a militant captive, but he was convicted and demoted on a lesser charge of posing for a photo with this man's corpse.

President Trump has pushed back on the military plans to strip him of his Navy SEAL status and that this is what he is now saying, quote, this is from the President, "The Navy will not be taking away Warfighter and Navy SEAL Eddie Gallagher's Trident pin." Trident signifying his being a SEAL.

"This case was handled very badly from the beginning. Get back to business." And it appears, Congressman Brown, that the Pentagon will follow this directive.

So first, just your thoughts on the Commander-in-Chief inserting himself here.

BROWN: Sure. First of all, I think this is tantamount to unlawful command influence. The President certainly has the right to overturn a Court Martial conviction. He has the right to overturn an administrative proceeding.

[14:25:09]

BROWN: In this case, one that could strip Chief Gallagher of his SEAL Trident. The President ought to wait until after the administrative proceedings take place.

So first of all, I think it's tantamount to unlawful command influence. I was an Army JAG officer. I worked at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces in the early days of my legal career. We've got to let the system work.

And in these particular cases, the system does work. Mr. Gallagher was acquitted on a number of offenses, but he was found guilty of basically a violation, Uniform Code of Military Justice as well as the law of war.

And what the President's actions do, it undermines discipline and morale, and it calls into question the fairness of the Uniform Code of Military Justice. I think it's wrong of the President do it. It's irresponsible as a Commander-in-Chief and I would ask, I would implore the President, please defer to the service components, in this case, the Navy, to do the right thing.

BALDWIN: Congressman Anthony Brown, thank you so much. Nice to have you on.

BROWN: Thank you, Brooke.

BALDWIN: Coming up, the very real impact of President Trump's lies. CNN explores the effect it has on foreign policy, business and national culture.

Plus, first on CNN, the alleged misconduct of a former F.B.I. lawyer uncovered in a Justice Department review of the 2016 Russia investigation.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)