Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Deadly Naval Base Attack; Interview With Rep. Ami Bera (D-CA); Democrats Drafting Articles of Impeachment. Aired 3-3:30p ET

Aired December 06, 2019 - 15:00   ET

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

[15:00:00]

BROOKE BALDWIN, CNN HOST: We continue to follow this breaking news out of Pensacola, Florida, on this deadly shooting at the U.S. Naval air station there.

A Saudi military member who was training at this facility was the one who shot three people to death. He has also injured at least seven others, including two officers, before sheriff's deputies killed the shooter.

Florida's governor moments ago saying Saudi Arabia must answer for these killings.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GOV. RON DESANTIS (R-FL): Given that this was a foreign national in the employ of a foreign service is -- and there will be time to do this, but obviously the government of Saudi Arabia needs to make things better for these victims.

And I think that they're going to owe a debt here, given that this is one of their individuals.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BALDWIN: CNN's Natasha Chen is there in Pensacola for us. CNN's Josh Campbell and Andrew McCabe, CNN contributor and former FBI director, also are with me.

But, Natasha, you're there, so I just want to start with you.

This Saudi national, he was apparently training in aviation. He had a handgun. You're not supposed to have weapons on base. Can you just tell me more about what we know about him?

NATASHA CHEN, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Sure, Brooke.

So, we know that he opened fire at a classroom building on base. And like you said, he was not supposed to have that handgun. Now, he did exchange shots with two deputies, who then killed him. These two deputies took a shot each, and they are among those injured at this point. And so we had a press conference here right at the base of this bridge

just about an hour ago, when they were talking about the heroics of people in uniform, both with the Navy and the local sheriff's office, who really jumped into action.

And the sheriff was saying that even those who were injured, even while wounded, still tried to help others. So, really, he says a lot of lives were saved today because of that.

He also made a point that because this person is a foreign national, there are going to be things about this investigation that cannot be shared, as one typically would. So he asked everyone to be patient and to trust the process, but that there may be a lot of questions that we cannot answer.

One question I did ask of the officials here was to talk more about the background of this military training of foreign nationals. Perhaps a lot of people did not know that this even happened here on base. So here's what the captain said about that training.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CAPT. TIM KINSELLA, COMMANDING OFFICER, NAVAL AIR STATION PENSACOLA: We have an international trading syllabus. We have students from several different countries that come here.

They learn aviation. They become naval aviators while they're here. It's something that we have been doing for quite a while, and it's with our partner nations. It's important that the cross-pollination, cross-training that we do with our allies is something that's -- that we have done for a long time.

I mean, in World War II, we had Royal Air Force folks that were training here. There's always been international students training here, because it's a good place to train and it's a good-quality training.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CHEN: And he said there are a couple of hundred foreign national students like that here on base in Pensacola.

And we do also know that the sheriff's office and others have visited victims' families in the hospital, some of those victims still undergoing surgery, Brooke. And so we're just trying to be patient here and waiting for information, which we know may be limited because of the nature of this case.

BALDWIN: Right. Natasha, thank you very much.

Andy McCabe, let me turn to you.

We know FBI is taking the lead on this investigation, motive still too early to tell. The word terrorism has already started being bandied about by some. Isn't it too premature?

ANDREW MCCABE, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: It is, Brooke. It's far too premature.

And really for that -- for that designation, that qualification, we'd really need to look to the FBI to make it. To make that kind of -- that statement, the FBI is looking right now in great detail at every aspect of this person's life.

So, first and foremost, they're looking to see if there's any information in our holdings, in our intelligence holdings about this person prior to the event. That's probably unlikely here, because he's someone who was invited to come train with our military. So there probably was not preexisting derogatory information about him, or he wouldn't have passed the security checks.

They're looking at everyone he came with, everyone he interacted with here in Pensacola. They have gone back, no doubt, to the Saudi government and requested extensive background information about him and his family and his associates.

So I'm sure they're looking at his, what we call facilities, his phone numbers, his e-mail accounts that he may have used, social media accounts that he may have used, to figure out, who is this person, and why did he do what he did?

And then, of course, the overarching concern here is, is he connected, could he possibly be connected to other people who directed him in this activity, who supported the activity, or who may be planning it at other locations?

BALDWIN: Do you know -- we were talking to Barbara Starr last hour, who covers the Pentagon and military. And she was saying the fact that he was one of these international students apparently training in aviation, that there is this ongoing relationship with U.S. military bases and folks from overseas, and how this is a highly valued relationship and program.

[15:05:07]

I'm curious what you know about that. Let's just start there. What do you know about that?

MCCABE: Well, it is an incredibly important program to our nation for basically three reasons.

Militarily, it gives us the opportunity to train a like-minded cadre of military officers around the country who we are -- or -- I'm sorry -- around the world, who we can then rely on in times of conflict and who we know have similar training.

Diplomatically, it draws our nations closer together, so those countries like Saudi Arabia that are very important to us internationally, it builds a commonality there. And I should say, economically, this is one of the...

BALDWIN: Forgive me, Andy, let me interrupt you.

Right now, let's listen to the president. (JOINED IN PROGRESS)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: ... warriors who were killed and wounded in the attack that took place just recently, just this morning in Pensacola, Florida.

The king said that the Saudi people are greatly angered by the barbaric actions of the shooter, and that this person in no way, shape or form represents the feelings of the Saudi people, who love the American people so much.

So that was just given to me by the king of Saudi Arabia. And I can tell you, it's a horrible thing that took place. And we're getting to the bottom of it. All of the investigators are there now. And they're studying it very closely, and a terrible thing. And our condolences go to the families and to everybody involved, including the wounded.

We have some badly wounded people also. And we have to extend our condolences to them. And we will be working with them all very closely. So, I just wanted to let you know that was from King Salman.

And, today, we are here to talk to...

BALDWIN: OK, so condolences not only from the president of the United States, Andy McCabe, but he also was reading some condolences from the crown prince, King Salman, over in Saudi Arabia, as this shooter, who is now deceased, was a Saudi national.

You were saying -- you were making a point, though, on how important that these -- the international relationship, the training around the world is. Go on.

MCCABE: Yes.

So, just to say, economically, this is one of the reasons why our allies around the world are anxious to purchase our military hardware, because it comes with the opportunity to then train with our military to learn how to use those things.

We're talking about jet fighters and aviation equipment. So it's very important to us on many levels. And it's an incredibly positive program and one that we have gotten a lot of goodwill and relationships out of.

BALDWIN: All right. Andy McCabe, thank you for that.

Let's go to Josh Campbell now.

And, Josh, you're there in Hawaii. I mean, this is now the second attack involving a military facility in just a matter of days. There was one at Pearl Harbor first. Are you talking to service members. How are they feeling? Are they on edge?

JOSH CAMPBELL, CNN LAW ENFORCEMENT ANALYST: Well, if you look at the commonalities here, Brooke, as you mentioned, you have two attacks on a Navy installation within the span of one week, which is obviously concerning.

There are still questions about whether there's any type of connectivity, perhaps whether the second incident may have been inspired by the first incident. That -- we have no indication yet that that is the case. This might end up being a coincidence.

But, nevertheless, that is something that military and law enforcement personnel will be looking at as far as that commonality and what actually motivated this person there in Florida to conduct this attack.

I can tell you, in talking to law enforcement sources, this is now a global investigation. We know that the FBI has assumed federal jurisdiction there in Pensacola. When people think about the FBI, they think about a domestic law enforcement entity, but the FBI also has a very sizable international presence.

I just got off the phone with a law enforcement source who says that the FBI's office there in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, is now engaged with local officials trying to gather as much information as they can about that shooter.

And as of this point, they have not landed on the determination that this is terrorism. But that remains part of this investigation. And just, Brooke, as you mentioned, on a personal note, I mean, this is the new normal, to be covering to shooting simultaneously in the United States. This is just where we are.

BALDWIN: That's where we were a couple of months ago. And it's where we are again.

Josh Campbell, thank you for that in Honolulu.

As the deadline looms for the president on impeachment, new CNN reporting is just in on anxiety among moderate Democrats over how leadership is handling this. We will explore that.

And we went through the video archives of the last Senate impeachment trial back in the late '90s. See what could be a preview for this current president.

And another solid jobs report today. Hear what's behind the boost and what this means for the president politically speaking.

You're watching CNN. I'm Brooke Baldwin. We will be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[15:14:49]

BALDWIN: Welcome back. You're watching CNN. I'm Brooke Baldwin.

Decision day at the White House, where President Trump and his staff must decide if they will take part in the House Judiciary Committee hearings on impeachment. The next hearing is set for Monday. [15:15:01]

But over the course of this weekend, Democrats will huddle together as they draft the official articles of impeachment.

So let's go to Lauren Fox. She's our CNN congressional reporter. And Rachael Bade is a congressional reporter for "The Washington Post" and a CNN political analyst.

But, Lauren, I want to start with you, because there is a bit of a split, is my understanding, in the Democratic Caucus over what should be included in these articles. Should they stay focused tightly on Ukraine? Do they widen it out and incorporate Mueller?

Speaker Pelosi says she won't push any members to vote for impeachment, but you're learning some moderates are getting a little anxious. Tell me more about that.

LAUREN FOX, CNN CONGRESSIONAL REPORTER: Well, exactly, Brooke.

Basically, a lot of the moderates are arguing behind closed doors amongst each other that the reality is, they are the ones who are going to bear the brunt of the political cost of whatever decisions Democrats make in terms of how to structure their articles of impeachment.

So some of the frustration has been how closely held the discussions about how those articles should be structured have been. Basically, their argument is, they want to keep them very narrowly focused. They want to ensure that the reason that they all came out in support of impeaching the president in terms of the investigation was the fact that they wanted to talk about this issue related to Ukraine.

The concern is, if you start broadening this out, if you start bringing in Mueller, that that becomes more politically tenuous for them when they're running for reelection. Many of these members, more than 30 of them, won in districts that the president won in 2016.

They have to go home and convince some constituents who are pretty reluctant to vote for a member who supports impeaching the president. So they want to feel comfortable about how they're doing that. So they're concerned about just how little has been communicated to them about how that process of writing the articles is going -- Brooke.

BALDWIN: OK, some anxiety. Lauren, thank you.

Rachael, you and your colleague write about Speaker Pelosi's unease with impeachment, something confirmed by member of her caucus who told you -- quote -- "Pelosi is juggling chain saws and kittens and doing it seemingly with perfect composure."

That was from Congressman Jared Huffman. "It would be hard to characterize this as anything but reluctant. This is not where she wanted to be even a couple of months ago."

So, Rachael, with the full House vote just days away, does she still have any doubts?

RACHAEL BADE, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: Yes, it's really interesting to see sort of the evolution of Pelosi on impeachment.

She was the senior Democrat, most senior Democrat in the country, really pushing back on impeachment for the past nine months, trying to sort of kill it, or at least make sure it didn't boil over and she was never forced into it.

And now she's the one out there selling the pitch and saying Trump needs to be impeached because he has upended checks and balances. Now, she would say and her allies would say that what Trump did on Ukraine was so egregious that she had to move and she had to change her position.

But I think the most interesting thing is what hasn't changed with Pelosi. And that is this sort of innate skepticism she has about impeachment, which you can see when watching her. She doesn't think it's a political winner. She doesn't think it's going to resonate with voters.

And you can tell by watching her. She talks -- she wants to talk about pocketbook issues. She wants to talk about prescription drugs. She wants to talk about voting rights. And that just tells you again that these are the issues she thinks are going to help keep her majority.

She hasn't thinking impeachment is going to help at all. And she would honestly be -- rather be talking about anything but impeachment, but she has become this reluctant impeachments saleswoman.

BALDWIN: But she has to. She has to, as she has pointed out, because of the founding fathers and the good of the country.

Playing it forward, Rachael, just to the Senate, what's the latest you're hearing from the Senate side as they prepare for trial next month?

BADE: Yes, it's interesting to see.

Senate Republicans, they have a lot of meeting and sort of conversations they still need to have, because they're not all on the same page about how they're going to defend the president. You have a lot of Senate Republicans who want to have a serious trial, who want to sort of look at these allegations, bring in potentially some of these witnesses that were interviewed in the House to actually go through these allegations.

These are particularly moderate Senate Republicans, who privately have concerns about what Trump did with Ukraine. But there's a whole 'nother constituency of Senate Republicans who are close with the president, who want to do a totally different type of trial, a trial that very much diverts attention away from the allegations of the president and focuses it instead on his political adversaries, like Joe Biden, like Adam Schiff, subpoenaing the whistle-blower. And so Senate Republicans are very much divided on how they're going

to do this, which I think is why they're talking about it in pretty much every lunch they have, and trying to meet with the White House frequently.

I think it's going to be a potential problem. And I'm not sure exactly how it's going to play out at this point. But there's definitely divisions that you can see right now in the Senate.

BALDWIN: Yes. We know how the House Republicans feel about how the Senate Republicans should do it. But that's the huge question mark, as far as what those Senate Republicans end up choosing to do.

Rachael Bade, you are so good. Thank you so much.

BADE: Thank you.

[15:20:01]

BALDWIN: Democratic Congressman Ami Bera of California joins me now. He's a member of the House Foreign Affairs and Science, Space and Technology committees.

So, Congressman Bera, welcome, sir.

REP. AMI BERA (D-CA): Brooke, thanks for having me on.

BALDWIN: So, your colleagues are now drafting these articles of impeachment.

And by this point, as lawmakers, you should know what you want included. So where do you stand on including the Mueller report?

BERA: You know, I think we ought to keep it narrowly focused to what the investigation really looked at. And that was Ukraine.

And I think that the Intelligence Committee really has proven the charges of abuse of power and certainly proven obstruction of Congress. So I think those are two pretty solid articles.

BALDWIN: So that's a no. That sounds like a definitive no, Congressman, on widening it to Mueller. Am I hearing you correctly?

BERA: That's probably where I sit right now.

I probably wouldn't start introducing additional reports. Clearly, I have read the Mueller report. And there are impeachable charges in there.

BALDWIN: Which dropped eight months ago. So is it probably -- probably feel this way, or I feel this way?

BERA: I feel that way. I feel we ought to keep it focused narrowly.

BALDWIN: OK. You also lead the effort to help vulnerable Democrats in swing

districts. And we have already heard from a couple who are against adding Mueller. I'm curious what you're hearing from maybe more moderate Democrats, what they prefer, whether it's multiple articles, so then they have the opportunity to maybe vote no on some and use that as cover?

Are you hearing any of that?

BERA: No, not a whole lot

I don't think we should play politics with this. This is one of the most important votes and consequential votes that we're taking. And I think we ought to keep it narrowly focused on the investigation at hand, what the hearings were about, what the public's been watching.

And I think that's how a lot of the more competitive Democrats members feel.

BALDWIN: And then how about that tweet from the president about how he's daring you, he's daring your party to impeach him, to impeach him now?

He's raising a ton of money off of this, Congressman Bera? What do you make of the fact that the president is openly embracing this historic condemnation?

BERA: I don't pay a lot of attention to the president's tweets.

And it clearly looks like they're looking at this from a political lens. I think we're looking at it from the oath we took to the Constitution. And, again, I don't find pleasure that we're going down this path of impeachment, but we took that constitutional oath, and we have got to do what we have to do.

BALDWIN: But the president's daring you to impeach him. You don't have any comment to that?

BERA: Well, the president dares us to do a whole bunch of things. I think we're doing what our job is, and upholding the Constitution of the United States of America.

BALDWIN: OK.

Final question, Congressman. And that's just jumping ahead to the Senate and January. There are a number of House Republicans who are demanding that the Senate Republicans have the former vice president, have Joe Biden testify.

Do you think the Senate Republicans will have him do so?

BERA: I would hope the Senate Republicans understand the gravity of the situation, and that this is not about Joe Biden. This is about what the president of the United States, Donald J. Trump, did, if he abused power, if he has obstructed Congress, and whatever other articles are out there. BALDWIN: Congressman Ami Bera, thank you, sir.

BERA: Thank you. Be well.

BALDWIN: President Trump on track to become just the third president in U.S. history to be impeached. The last time the White House and Congress found itself in this unique political place was over 20 years ago.

Bill Clinton would eventually be acquitted and stay in office. But before that, and after a four-year special counsel investigation that began to look into possible financial crimes, and then ended with Clinton's affair with Monica Lewinsky, the then president faced two articles of impeachment, one for perjury, and the other for obstruction of justice.

CNN legal analyst Joan Biskupic is in Washington.

And, Joan, you covered the Clinton impeachment trial. I have been wanting to pick your brain. What are some of the moments that really stood out to you then?

JOAN BISKUPIC, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Well, first, Brooke, it was unlike anything any of us had ever seen, because the Senate wasn't sitting as a legislative body. And it wasn't sitting as a regular criminal court. It was something quite different that, as you noted, had only been seen once before in history before the Clinton impeachment trial.

So, in come on the very first day the House managers to deliver the articles of impeachment. And I think there were 13 House members who walked from their side of the Capitol over to the Senate side to deliver the charges against President Clinton.

And then all 100 senators were there. Do you know that -- how often does that happen? They're sitting at their small wooden desks. They take an oath to do impartial justice.

[15:25:01]

Then they come up to an oath book, sign it to -- as a formality. And then this trial went on for five weeks from early January to mid- February, and presiding over all of it was Chief Justice William Rehnquist, who many people had not seen on TV, because, of course, the Supreme Court forbids cameras.

And I think you might have some sound of him being sworn in.

BALDWIN: We do. We do. Let's watch.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. STROM THURMOND (R-SC): Do you solemnly swear that, in all things appertaining to the trial of the impeachment of William Jefferson Clinton, president of the United States, now pending, you will do impartial justice, according to the Constitution and laws, so help you God? CHIEF JUSTICE WILLIAM REHNQUIST, U.S. SUPREME COURT: I do.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BISKUPIC: That was Strom Thurmond there.

BALDWIN: What kind of role did he play?

BISKUPIC: Well, that's a great question, because it's already a point of controversy over how involved and how much he might determine what would happen in an impeachment of Donald Trump.

He took his role as being more ministerial than substantive. He kept the trains running, kept the schedule. He would decide motions, but he didn't do anything that actually steered it one way or another for against President Clinton.

And that's the way he understood it from, frankly, some history that he had written on impeachments. He was an amateur historian. So he saw it as something that was the Senate's show, and the Constitution itself says the Senate would have the sole responsibility for a trial.

So what would happen each day is, Majority Leader Trent Lott would come to the floor and say, this is what's going to happen with witnesses. This is what's going to happen with the timing. Each side shall have the same amount of minutes to present, the House managers and then President Clinton's private lawyers who were defending him.

And then Chief Justice Rehnquist would rule on mainly procedural motions. And if he were to rule on evidence, though, and he has that authority, and Chief Justice John Roberts would have that authority to rule on evidence and witnesses, the chief then could be overturned by a majority of the Senate.

It never came to that in 1999, Brooke.

BALDWIN: I just -- I think we should continue to go back and look at those moments from '98-'99 and talk to you and keep picking your brain. I want to know about the moment of acquittal.

We will have you back. Joan Biskupic, for now, thank you so much.

BISKUPIC: Thank you, Brooke.

BALDWIN: Thank you.

As for Rudy Giuliani, no one can seem to figure out what the heck he's doing. As he is globe-trotting for dirt on political rivals, he's literally doing the thing that the president is being potentially impeached over. So we will discuss this.

Also ahead, Michael Bloomberg, now a candidate for mayor (sic), says his Democratic rivals would get eaten up by the president.

That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[15:30:00]