Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Democrats Unveil Two Articles of Impeachment; Conflicting Interpretations of IG Report, Shooting in Jersey City; Aired 2-2:30p ET

Aired December 10, 2019 - 14:00   ET

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

BROOKE BALDWIN, CNN ANCHOR: You are watching CNN, I'm Brooke Baldwin, thanks for being with me. Here we are. For only the fourth time in American history, articles of impeachment have been brought against the President of the United States. Today, Democratic leaders in the House unveiled two articles of impeachment against President Trump for, number one abuse of power, and number two obstruction of Congress.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP JERRY NADLER (D-NY): The President, who declared himself above accountability, above the American people, and above Congress' power of impeachment, which is meant to protect against threats to our Democratic institutions as a president who sees himself as above the law. We must be clear, no one, not even the president, is above the law.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BALDWIN: Meantime, White House Press Secretary Stephanie Grisham called the articles quote, "baseless," and said quote, "The President will address these false charges in the Senate and expects to be fully exonerated, because he did nothing wrong." Now, a White House source tells CNN that Grisham meant that the President's case will be made through his attorneys, there are no plans for the President to play a direct role as of now.

Let's kick it off this hour with CNN's Congressional Correspondent Phil Mattingly, live for us there on Capitol Hill. And so, Phil, Speaker Pelosi, you know, introduced this as a solemn day, so take us more inside what's happening on Capitol Hill. Tell us about the moment, and just what comes next in this actual process.

PHIL MATTINGLY, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: So, I think, Brooke, everybody is so in the weeds about how this is often going obviously we've had multiple hearings, we've had a lot of depositions, we've had more pages to read of those depositions than I'd ever like to remember at this point in time, but I think if you take a step back it's important. This is a historic moment this is a moment that will forever change and help define whatever president Trump's legacy will be likely be one of the first or second things mentioned whenever anybody writes about President Trump and his time in office from here on out. So, there's that. I think that's very important to remember as we

continue to move through this process, particularly because of how fast it's gone. Here's the second part, and that is actually what's going to happen going forward. You have the nine-page resolution, the two articles of impeachment, abuse of power, obstruction of Congress. This will soon move to the committee stage. The House Judiciary Committee, where you have seen the last two committee hearings, it will take up and consider these articles. It will be a long, arduous, I would argue probably partisan, very feisty process, as they go through this process. But all this is leading to is a simple fact, and that is that next week the House will vote to impeach President Donald Trump.

I think there's no way around that at this point, it's been in the process that they've been moving towards over the course of the last couple of months, but now it's locked in, now you know the articles that are going to be voted on. And I would say one other interesting element here, there have been so many closed-door discussions that the Speaker and her team, the Chairman, have been having over the course of the last couple of days.

Really listening to members, trying to get a sense of the shape of the articles, what members were working for. One thing I've heard for sure, House Democrats will not whip this vote. In other words, they will not put pressure on their members to vote one way or the other, they will not put pressure on the members to vote yes on one or both articles.

They are letting members vote their conscience, and I think that's an understanding of one the significance of this, one that this is one vote for each member and they need to make it on their own for the betterment of their district or what they think they're going back to politically. But the reality here of the stakes, the history, and that this is happening. We don't know what's going to happen in the Senate, we know there's going to be a trial. It doesn't seem he's going to be removed from office, but in the House it's almost a certainty now that the President is going to be impeached next week, Brooke.

BALDWIN: This is happening, and it's happening next week. Phil Mattingly, thank you so much, and thank you for all of the reading and being in the weeds, as always. Let's dig a little deeper into these two articles of impeachment against President Trump, and the evidence that House Democrats say left them with no choice but to proceed down this path. Elie Honig, CNN legal analyst and of course a former federal prosecutor, and Elie, just first up, let's go through these articles. We have abuse of power, Democrats point to the President's efforts in Ukraine as proof that it occurred. Just first take us back to that July 25th phone call between President Trump and Ukrainian President Zelensky.

ELIE HONIG, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: So the July 25th phone call between Donald Trump and President Zelensky is, and will remain, exhibit A in Democrat's case for impeachment. In that call, we remember, Zelensky says, "I would also like to thank you for your great support in the area of defense." And there he's referring to foreign aid from the United States to Ukraine. Donald Trump responds, famous words, "I would like you to do us a favor though, and I would like you to find out what happened with this whole situation with Ukraine, they say Crowdstrike." That's his first ask, he wants an investigation of this conspiracy theory about the 2016 election. Then Donald Trump asks for a second investigation, he says, "There's a lot of talk about Biden's son, that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great." Now, interesting little tidbit that came out yesterday in the testimony. There's this moment where President Zelensky, at the end of the call, says, "I also wanted to thank you for your invitation to the United States, specifically Washington DC. On the other hand I also want to assure you that we will be very serious about the case and will work on the investigation." And so right there is a good argument, that's a quid pro quo. He says, "I want to thank you for that White House invitation, and on the other hand we are going to be very serious about this investigation.

Now, Democrats will rely not only on Donald Trump's words in the July 25th call, but words that he said once this investigation was underway already. Here's what he said from the lawn of the White House.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: President Zelensky, if it were me I would recommend that they start an investigation into the Bidens.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HONIG: Just in case there was any question about what Donald Trump wanted, he told us again and again. Now, we've also heard from many witnesses over the last several weeks. Bill Taylor told us that Donald Trump established an irregular, informal channel for diplomacy through Rudy Giuliani. Other witnesses told us that Russia, not Ukraine, Russia interfered in the 2016 election. We heard that from Fiona Hill, Alexander Vindman, and other witnesses.

We also learned from the witnesses, several of whom told us this was a quid pro quo, this was a conditional exchange. We heard that from Taylor, Sondland did it himself, Volker proposed a direct quid pro quo by text. We also learned that Donald Trump had that famous restaurant phone call on July 26th, that David Holmes overheard, with Gordon Sondland when Trump asked about the Ukrainian investigations.

And finally, we learned from Fiona Hill that what Donald Trump was having all of these people do was what she termed, memorably, a "Domestic political errand." This was not something in the best interest of the United States, this was a domestic political errand. Now, article two will deal with obstruction of Congress, and Donald Trump himself, early on in this case announced exactly what his view would be about responding to subpoenas from Congress.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: We're fighting all the subpoenas... I have an Article Two, where I have the right to do whatever I want as President.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HONIG: So there it is, Donald Trump gave us his strategy straight. He's fighting all the subpoenas, and indeed we learned yesterday during the hearing that Democrats have served 71 subpoenas or information requests. They have received zero documents, not a single piece of paper from the White House or anywhere else in the Executive Branch. We learned that House Democrats have either subpoenaed or requested testimony from 12 different witnesses, and heard from none of them. Including, the most important ones, Mick Mulvaney, John Bolton, and Mike Pompeo. All three of whom have declined to testify.

So, what happens next in this case? First of all, later this week we will have a vote, likely, in the House Judiciary Committee on these draft article of impeachment. Second of all, next week, likely, the full House will vote on article of impeachment. If they get a majority of the full House, then the President is impeached, and then it's on to the final step which will be a trial in the Senate which we likely will see shortly after the new year. So it's going to be an incredibly important couple of weeks ahead, Brooke, and much to look forward to. Ultimately we will have a Senate trial, I believe in January, and that is going to be a remarkable thing to behold.

BALDWIN: Elie, thank you so much for all of that, and let's just talk through everything. With me now Jennifer Rodgers, she's a former federal prosecutor as well and also a CNN legal analyst. And Guy Smith is back with us, he's a former special advisor to President Clinton during his impeachment case. So Guy, just right into you, you have lived through this on the White House side. What are senior advisors over at the White House today, what are they thinking? What are they feeling?

GUY SMITH, FORMER WHITE HOUSE ADVISOR: Well, based on Stephanie Grisham's thing on Fox a little while ago, they didn't know because they thought there were going to be more. So it shows, still they don't really have their act together. What Trump should be doing today is out celebrating NAFTA, showing the American people that he's working for them. And what's he doing? He's throwing stones on twitter at Chris Wray, at the FBI, and if that continues- Now think about it, when it gets to the Senate these guys are serious about their institution, it's not-

BALDWIN: Who are "these guys"? Members of Congress?

SMITH: The Senate

BALDWIN: Yes, yes they are.

SMITH: They're very serious about the decorum of the Senate. John Corwyn, just the other day, the second leading Republican Senator, from Texas, said, "We're not going to have a three ring circus." And they don't want a three ring circus. And then what we're going to hear from Bolton, Mulvaney, Pompeo. They will end up being witnesses.

BALDWIN: Yeah, yeah, no, but you're right to point out that what those Republican Senators want seems to really drastically contrast with what the President wants. And this whole thing happening during, you know, Christmas trial, not not not going to happen. To you, Elie just went through these two articles, so abuse of power, obstruction of Congress. Which do you think is the strongest?

JENNIFER RODGERS, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Well, it's hard to say. They're both very very strong when you look at the evidence. The stronger in some ways might be the obstruction because it's just so blatant, and it's so simple, it's easy for people to understand. But on the other hand, you don't often see that sort of thing by itself. You kind of have to have the substantive wrongdoing and then the obstruction. So, I don't know, to me they're both very very strong, and I think they go hand in hand. I don't think anyone's going to think of it as article one, article two-

BALDWIN: But you think something's missing?

RODGERS: Well, I would've liked to see the bribery article, because the theory of the first article, abuse of power, that is all well and good, there's no question that this was an abuse of power, the evidence is compelling, but it's equally compelling to me to say that this was bribery, and bribery is also in the Constitution as an impeachable offense. So I would like to see them argue that the change that the President made was a solicitation of bribery, it is under the criminal law, and it is under impeachment as well.

BALDWIN: One more for you just on legal, cause I know you've talked so much about how important it's been for members of Congress to keep this investigation tight, to keep it narrow, and so thus we see the two articles today. They had debated including some of what they found in the Mueller report, chose not to. Was that a good move, legally speaking?

RODGERS: I think there was a good argument to include one of the McGahn articles issues because it was so clean, but ultimately they need to keep the caucus together. There's no question, there's so much evidence here that what the President was doing was wrong, and he continues to push this narrative. I mean, I think they're very smart to continue to say there's a pattern here, and when he's out there saying, "What I did was perfect. I don't have any regrets. China, you should investigate the Bidens." Rudy, two days ago, was over in the Ukraine continuing to push this false narrative that he is a risk, and so that's the smart way to go.

BALDWIN: Okay, Bill Clinton, you're former boss. He actually just weighed in on all things impeachment, so let me just get to this now. He was at an event right here in New York.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

FORMER PRESIDENT BILL CLINTON: Congress is doing what they believe is right. American people will see, is it true, and is it what they say, and is it, then what should be done with it if it's true. Meanwhile, the rest of us should go about our lives. All of us commenting on it won't have anything to do- They should do their job, I'll do mine.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BALDWIN: What do you think, Guy?

SMITH: Well that's what he did during the impeachment, is he kept doing his job and making it clear to the American people that he was working for them. But what he's saying there is that each of the Senators are going to be looking squarely into the history books when they take their (unintelligable)- The two articles are- the strength of them is that it's very simple. Simple question, is it okay to extort a foreign government, invite them into a US election by damaging your political opponent, yes or no? Very simple question. And the Senators are going to have to decide, is it okay. What if that was happening to me? I'm a Senator from Nebraska or Kansas or somewhere, what if that were happening to me? Is it okay in Kansas for that to happen? Of course the answer is no. That is what a Senator is going to have to be faced with.

BALDWIN: Okay. Again, House vote presumably at some point next week. That's the impeachment, and then we're talking Senate and the trial come January. Thank you both so much for that.

I want to pivot now to some breaking news we're getting out of New Jersey. The Sheriff's office in Jersey City is saying that there is an active shooting situation happening there. CNN's Miguel Marquez is with me now. Miguel, what exactly is going on?

MIGUEL MARQUEZ, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: It's unclear right now, but we'll try to track down a bunch of threads that are happening as we speak. Hudson County Sheriff's Office saying that this is an active shooting, not an active shooter situation. So it sounds like this is something that police walked into, disrupted, and then shooting broke out.

We just spoke to our journalist, CNN journalist Taylor Romaine who is down on the scene there. She heard twenty seconds of gunfire in the area, there was a massive police presence in this area of Jersey City, this is near New Jersey City University. Not sort of toward the waterfront, Jersey City just across the Hudson from Manhattan, it's not near that waterfront area, but farther in. Area schools are on lockdown now, no one has been arrested.

What it sounds like, after 1pm or so, these are all unconfirmed reports, but there was a U-Haul, possibly two individuals in that U- Haul, entered a bodega or convenience store there in Jersey City, and as they exited they engaged a police officer. One police officer may be injured, another individual on the scene may be shot, and someone from that scene may have split off or more than one person may have split off to go in different directions.

So not only is scene around Jersey City University being hit by police right now with a massive police presence, but other parts of the city as well, affecting both travel by car or by rail, every sort of way, and schools as well now on lockdown in a much larger area just in event that this spills over into another area. But police now, clearly, throwing everything they have at it to try to figure this one out, and get whoever's responsible.

BALDWIN: Alright, as soon as you get more information there, or Taylor there on the scene gets more information, just let us know and we'll pass it along to the viewers there. Jersey City active shooting situation. Miguel, appreciate it.

Also, coming up Bill Barr doubles down on his claim that the Trump campaign was spied upon, despite the evidence. This as the President goes to war with his FBI director. Plus, gaslighting the GOP. Will the Inspector General's report bring truth back into the nation's discourse? And on this historic day, as article of impeachment are being read against the President, Russia gets a White House visit. Lots to talk about. You're watching CNN, and I'm Brooke Baldwin. We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BALDWIN: Moments ago, Attorney General Bill Barr contradicted the Inspector General of his own department. Barr insisted that the FBI did spy on the president's 2016 campaign despite the fact that the IG just found that there was no evidence of it and that the FBI launched the trump Russia investigation properly. In a just released report Inspector General Michael Horowitz said that not only did he not find evidence of political bias in opening the case but also quote "We found no evidence that the FBI placed any CHSs [confidential human sources] or using UCEs [undercover employees] within the Trump campaign or ask any CHSs or UCEs to report on the Trump campaign." But, here was bill Barr earlier on MSNBC.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ATTORNEY GENERAL BILL BARR: Oh it's clearly spying. I mean that's what electronic surveillance is. I think wiring people up to go in and talk to people and make recordings of their conversations is spying. I think going through people's emails, which they did as a result of the FISA warrant, they went through everything. Their case collapsed after the election, and they never told the court, and it kept on getting renewals from these applications. There was documents falsified in order to get these renewals. There was all kinds of withholding of information from the court and the question really is, what was the agenda after the election that kept them pressing ahead?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BALDWIN: And then Barr added this about this about the IG's report

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BARR: The IG said, "I did not find documentary or testimonial evidence contradicting the explanations that were given, and I accepted them." He is not definitively ruling that there was no bias.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BALDWIN: CNN politics reporter and editor at large Chris Cillizza is here. And so, obviously that is Bill Barr, which is quite stunning in and of itself. Juxtapose that with what we heard from FBI chief Chris Wray, obviously he read it entirely differently. How can you have the two? CHRIS CILLIZZA, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yeah, so even before we get to Wray, one point about how odd it is, Brooke, is the fact that we are talking here about the Justice Department's Inspector General's report. Remember, who is the head of the Justice Department? Bill Barr. So he's contradicting his own employee. But yes, Chris Wray, another very prominent member of the Justice Department, head of the FBI. He has a very different take than Bill Barr on this IG report. Let's listen to that first.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CHRISTOPHER WRAY, FBI DIRECTOR: Well I think there is a number of takeaways that are important. One, that we fully cooperated with this independent review. Two, that we fully accept it's findings and recommendations. Three, that the Inspector General did not find political bias or improper motivations impacting the opening of the investigation or the decision to use certain investigative tools during the investigation.

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: Including FISA

WRAY: Including FISA. But that the Inspector General did find a number of instances where employees either failed to follow our policies, neglected to exercise appropriate diligence, or in some other way fell short of the standard of conduct and performance that we and that I as Director expect of all of our employees.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CILLIZZA: Okay so, Brooke, the important thing there from Wray, I mean it's all important, but the really important thing, no political motivation either for the start of the investigation or for the FISA warrants that led to the wiretapping of former Trump foreign policy aid, Carter Page. That's exactly opposite of what Bill Barr is saying. Remember, Michael Horowitz, the Inspector General did a full report on this. Bill Barr is just talking. But I want to point out one other- he's got a very powerful ally. As you can guess-

BALDWIN: The President of the United States

CILLIZZA: Donald Trump. "I don't know what report current Director of the FBI Christopher Wray was reading, but it sure wasn't the one given to me. With that kind of att-" Okay, just again, let's pause. "...With that kind of attitude, he will never be able to fix the FBI, which is badly broken despite having some of the greatest men & women working there!" This is his- this isn't Jim Comey who he fired in 2017, this is his FBI Director-

BALDWIN: Current FBI Director

CILLIZZA: Who he put in the job. Who is simply saying, let's remember what Chris Wray is saying, all Chris Wray is saying is, "yes, the Inspector General, who works for our department, who was tasked with investigating this, I agree with the conclusions he drew from his report. It's stunning stuff. BALDWIN: Also, I note the word "current" because it'd be like me saying your the current CNN politics editor (unintelligible). You know there was another tweet I wanted to note, just to brief all of you, just to broaden this out, this is a perspective from CNN Global Affairs Analyst Susan Glasser, she tweeted this, "The Trump era in full today: Articles of impeachment, the death of the WTO, the rebranded Nafta deal, a public feud with his FBI director, a meeting with the Russian Foreign Minister for no apparent reason, a presidential campaign rally in a battleground state. And it's Tuesday." I mean she's so right, it's Tuesday. What does Thursday look like?

CILLIZZA: And that's the thing that we- it's hard to put all of this stuff in the right context because you're so close to it. What we do every day, we're so close to it, minute by minute. If you step back, this is enough news, Brooke, for... a week? a month? six months? in a past administration. And I still don't know that we know the cumulative effect on people who aren't us, viewers, people who are consuming this.

How do they take it all in? What matters to them? Is it the articles of impeachment that stands out? Is it the USMCA trade deal? Is it the Trump rally tonight? Is it the meeting with the Russians? Is it a little bit of all those things? That's what we're trying to figure out. That's what the election will help us figure out. But we have not ever, ever seen an information environment like this.

BALDWIN: Thank you sir. Take a breather. You want my water? There you go. Chris Cillizza, thank you. You know we just mentioned Bill Barr. We'll talk about how he and Republicans keep gaslighting Americans coming up, we'll have that conversation. Also in the very same day these impeachment articles are unveiled, Democrats in the White House, as we just mentioned, announced a trade deal. How about that for some timing? Let's discuss that as well, ahead.

[14:30:00]