Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Full House To Hold Vote On Impeachment Articles Against President Trump; Senator Lindsey Graham States He Has Made Up His Mind On Trump Impeachment Charges; North Korea Claims To Have Conducted Recent Missile Tests To Pressure U.S. In Negotiations; President Trump Claims Tentative Trade Deal With China; Divers Working To Recover Bodies After Volcano Eruption In New Zealand; President Trump Meets With Personal Attorney Rudy Giuliani During Impeachment Proceeding; Democratic Presidential Candidate Elizabeth Warren Criticizes Candidates Joe Biden And Pete Buttigieg On Campaign Trail; Army To Play Navy In Annual Football Game; President Trump Tweets Criticism Of Climate Activist Greta Thunberg. Aired 2-3p ET

Aired December 14, 2019 - 14:00   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:00:21]

MARTIN SAVIDGE, CNN HOST: Hey there. Thanks for joining me. I'm Martin Savidge in for Fredricka Whitfield. Happy Saturday.

With President Trump one step closer to impeachment, the battle lines are being drawn one day after the House Judiciary Committee voted to advance two articles of impeachment along party lines. The focus now shifts to the full House which expects to vote on impeachment as soon as Wednesday. If that is passed, President Trump will be just the third president in U.S. history to be impeached, the Senate trial likely to begin in January.

But we know that the president is already plotting his defense. He has set up a campaign Christmas rally and he is hoping for a longer Senate trial with witnesses. But his fellow Republicans in the Senate now seem to be aiming for a different strategy.

CNN International Anchor, Becky Anderson, host of "CONNECT THE WORLD," spoke with Lindsey Graham, who had a lot to say about an impeachment trial of President Trump.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

BECKY ANDERSON, CNN INTERNATIONAL ANCHOR: Is it OK, ever OK for an American president to ask a foreign leader to investigate a political rival?

SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM, (R-SC): I think being a political rival is not a -- you can't ever be asked questions. Now, Joe Biden is a dear friend. I've traveled all over the world with Joe Biden. He's running for president on the Democratic side. I think he'll do very well. The bottom line is, his son was receiving $50,000 a month from a gas

company run by the most corrupt guy in the Ukraine, and about two months after they raided the gas company's president's home, they fired the prosecutor. Yes, I think it's OK to talk about this kind of stuff. This thing will come to the Senate, and it will die quickly.

ANDERSON: There's a debate ongoing about how a trial should be held in the Senate, including whether to have live witnesses. You don't support live witnesses. Why?

GRAHAM: I want this to end as quick as possible for the good of the Senate, for the good of the country. And I think the best thing for America to do is get this behind us. We know how it's going to end, so we can focus on the problems we talked about today. If you don't like President Trump, you can vote against him in less than a year. It's not like a politician is unaccountable if you don't impeach him.

So I think impeachment is going to end quickly in the Senate. I would prefer it to end as quickly as possible. Use the record that was assembled in the House to pass impeachment articles as your trial record. I don't want to call anybody.

I don't need to hear in Hunter Biden. I don't need to hear from Joe Biden. We can deal with that outside of impeachment. I don't want to talk to Pompeo, I don't want to talk to Pence. I want to hear the House make their case based on the record they established in the House, and I want to vote.

ANDERSON: The Senate has a constitutional duty in holding this trial and comprehensively evaluating the case, agree?

GRAHAM: No, it doesn't say that in the Constitution. It says that the Senate will -- I am trying to give a pretty clear signal I have made up my mind.

(LAUGHTER)

ANDERSON: I wasn't in any doubt at this point.

GRAHAM: I'm not trying to pretend to be a fair juror here. I'm telling you right now, if Mueller had found something against Trump, I would have been his loudest critic, and I told the president to his face. What I see happening today is just a partisan nonsense.

ANDERSON: You have voiced strong opinions about this impeachment, but you are, along with the rest of your Senate fellows, jurors. Is it appropriate to be voicing your opinion even before this gets to the Senate as a trial?

GRAHAM: Well, I must think so because I'm doing it.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

SAVIDGE: And our thanks to Becky Anderson for asking some really good and pointed questions there. With me now, Margaret Talev. She is the politics and White House

editor for "Axios" and a CNN political analyst. Also joining me is Lis Wiehl, a former federal prosecutor. And thanks to both of you for being here. Margaret, I'm going to start with you. The president says that he would prefer a long trial with lots of witnesses, and he's even hinted that he would like to testify. Is the president going to be OK with a short trial and no witnesses, then?

MARGARET TALEV, SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT, BLOOMBERG NEWS: Well, Mitch McConnell and Lindsey Graham are taking great pains and extensive lengths to make sure that he is preemptively OK with it by explaining in the public forum how they intend to proceed and why they intend to proceed that way.

[14:05:01]

And I think they're doing that for two reasons. One reason why is because to some extent their institutionalists and would like to preserve some decorum in the Senate and their ability to arrange these things as they see fit. And the other reason why is they're actually not sure that if the president got what he said he wanted and had a whole three-ring circus, reality TV show, that it would be better for him. I think they have calculated what he needs and what will be good for him is to be acquitted and get on with the election campaign, and they're trying to make sure that's what happens.

SAVIDGE: Lis, what do you make of the strategy of not calling any witnesses? Would it be a good legal and political decision for the Republicans and the president?

LIS WIEHL, FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR: Well, President Trump is posturing, much like any criminal defendant in a criminal trial does. They make pre-motions, pretrial motions, they want to call witnesses, have a lot of exhibits. And then once it get to trial, they realize if they put on all these witnesses, the witnesses are going to be cross-examined, they're going to open up the trial to all of those witnesses. They realize that to do so brings them into much peril, opens up a Pandora's Box.

So I think this is just like that. This is a lot of posturing. When it gets down to it, President Trump doesn't want to bring all these witnesses in. That would open him up to bringing in people like Ambassador Bolton for the Democrats. And that's the last thing the president wants.

And that's what you hear with Lindsey Graham here saying, who, by the way, as is rightly pointed out, is a juror in this case. Can you imagine any other trial where you have a juror who is saying, I have made up my mind, and he's signaling to all the other jurors in this case, I've made up my mind, go ahead with me? It's just a pollution of the jury pool that in any other case in this country you would never have that happen.

And then you have the floor person of this juror, Mitch McConnell, if you will, going to the White House, basically the defendant's house, and preparing a trial with the defendant? I mean, whenever would that ever happen? It certainly didn't happen in the Clinton impeachment, which I was involved in.

And there you had the Democrats and the Republicans coming together to make up the rules. And by the way, here you have some of the same Republicans who in the Clinton impeachment said, the Republicans said this process is fine. That was a fine process. Here are the same Republicans saying, the process doesn't work.

And by the way, those same Republicans who said the process was fine there when they liked the Starr report, who started out with Whitewater investigation, Travelgate, remember all that, and that went nowhere, until Linda Tripp went to Kenneth Starr and said, by the way, there is this intern at the White House who is having an affair with the president. And then there came a whole new investigation. Those same Republicans --

SAVIDGE: Not to interrupt, but I want to bring in Becky Anderson, because we've had her standing by and we finally managed to get the signal to work. And Becky, you're the one that, of course, did this interview with Lindsey Graham. And a lot of revealing stuff in there, especially about he is apparently going to throw away any ability to be impartial here. What else did he tell you?

ANDERSON: Well, lest anyone think that the international audience, particularly that one here at the Doha Forum today, but anyone around this region, isn't interested in the impeachment inquiry, let me tell you, I cannot overstate how eager this audience was to hear about what was going on and Lindsey Graham's thoughts. And it was an audience from all over the region and, indeed, all over the world.

So I also put it to Lindsey Graham, what he thought the world should know about Donald Trump. Let's remember, he wasn't always Donald Trump's greatest admirer. He's a staunch ally now, of course. So I wondered whether he thought the world misunderstood the U.S. president. Have a listen to this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GRAHAM: He's very curious. He asks a lot of questions. He wants to know how things work and what makes people tick in the world. How have I come to be so close? We play golf. We have a lot of fun. He's trying to sell me a condo all the time.

ANDERSON: So you no longer believe, as you did during the 2016 campaign, that Donald Trump is a shallow, race-baiting xenophobic, a religious bigot, and a complete idiot when it comes to Middle East policy?

GRAHAM: Good question.

(APPLAUSE)

GRAHAM: I said all of those things. Clearly, I wasn't a fan of his campaign, right. But here's the way it has to work. When you lose, accept it.

(END VIDEO CLIP) [14:10:03]

SAVIDGE: That's pretty fascinating.

ANDERSON: I don't think that he is under any illusion, though, that Donald Trump thinks he's going to lose going forward, nor does he think that Donald Trump would accept any loss going forward.

I think perhaps the great couple of lines that came out of what we talked about today, and this was a very wide-ranging discussion, ostensibly, and this is a veteran of U.S. Middle East policy, and ostensibly Lindsey Graham invited here to the Doha Forum in Qatar to talk about roiling region. And we did. We talked about Turkey and Saudi Arabia. He had some harsh words for both of them. We talked about Iran and we talked about Syria.

But on the issue of impeachment, he said, and I quote, "This thing will come to the Senate and it will die quickly, and I will do everything I can to make it die quickly." And I think that's what I took away from, certainly the discussion that we were having about impeachment today. It's pretty clear where Lindsey Graham stands.

SAVIDGE: Yes, hard to be more blunt. Becky Anderson, thank you very much. We greatly appreciate that interview.

Margaret, let me bring it back to you. You have Senator Graham saying today that he isn't trying in any way pretending to be a fair juror, and you've got Senate Majority Leader McConnell saying that he's coordinating the impeachment trial with the White House. So are the Republicans running the risk of just being perceived as they're not interested at all with holding a fair or thorough trial, or is it all just about politics?

TALEV: Martin, I think it's fair to say that if Lindsey Graham were on the other side of this, if he were a Democrat or if President Trump were a Democratic president, you probably wouldn't be hearing the same rhetoric. I think that's a fair guess to make.

But who is going to be the arbiter of this? This is not a criminal proceeding. This is not a court system. This is ultimately a completely political arena. And so there are two jurors for whether you're approaching impeachment the correct way, and one is the public.

And Senator Graham has calculated that for his own reelection purposes, the public in South Carolina is going to be with him. And then there is how the rest of the Republican Party, or the controlling party, which in the Senate is the Republican Party, how the party deals with it. The Republican Party has made a decision to stand behind this president, not to fracture, as they did, in Richard Nixon's case so many years ago.

And so from both -- and then there's the courts. And even the Democrats have calculated that the amount of time it would take to challenge anything in the court could backfire on them politically and wouldn't get anything resolved in time to change the outcome of facts in Congress. And so what you have is a totally legitimate question about whether

this is the appropriate way to handle impeachment and what the impeachment in the Constitution aims at, whether tradition supports pursuing it this way. But then there's the question of who is going to hold you back? Who is going to say no, you can't do that? And right now, nobody is going to say he can't do that.

SAVIDGE: There's no referee here.

TALEV: No.

SAVIDGE: Margaret Talev and Lis Wiehl, thank you very much for joining us.

Coming up, how about this, a possible truce in America's war, trade war, that is, with China. What we're learning about the deal, just ahead.

Plus, Rudy Giuliani lashing out at Democrats amid the impeachment probe, but what was he doing in Ukraine? We have the one-on-one interview.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:17:13]

SAVIDGE: We are following developments out of North Korea today. State-run media says that the country has once again successfully tested what it called a nuclear deterrent at a missile site. North Korea won't say exactly what it tested, and South Korean officials so far have been unable to confirm any specifics. The facility was supposed to have been closed under the agreement President Trump said he had with dictator Kim Jong-un.

Jamie Metzl is with me. He's a former National Security Council member in the Clinton White House and a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council. Good to see you, Jamie.

JAMIE METZL, SENIOR FELLOW, ATLANTIC COUNCIL: Nice to see you.

SAVIDGE: Does the U.S. think that these tests are related to improving long-range missiles? And the reason I bring that us is because these are missiles that could already reach parts of the U.S., right?

METZL: Obviously that's the case. North Korea is establishing its deterrent. It has a very active missile program. The goal is to be able to have ICBMs, long-range missiles, and short-range missiles that can threaten the United States and its other regional neighbors. And the idea that President Trump had an agreement with Kim Jong-un is just ridiculous, unfortunately.

SAVIDGE: And so what do you Kim Jong-un is trying to accomplish right now, besides, of course, the science of testing?

METZL: He's trying to deliver a message, the agreement that I think Kim thought he had or could get, was a lot of concessions from the United States in exchange for some nominal, superficial changes by the North Koreans. And without sanctions relief, I think Kim is saying, well, we're going to go back to more trouble.

And that's why there have been these threats of a Christmas surprise. Nobody knows what it is. It could be an intercontinental ballistic missile launch or test. It could be potentially a nuclear test. And so North Korea is ramping up its provocations because President Trump has shown that troublemakers get attention. And when you have such a weak president as Trump, it incentivizes Iran, North Korea, and others to see what they can get.

SAVIDGE: It wasn't that long ago, of course, whether President Trump was hailing his relationship with Kim Jong-un. And I'm wondering, do you think we're at a complete breakdown of all of that? Is there any of it left?

METZL: Well, I think those announcements of a breakthrough were a total scam. The North Koreans never agreed to any meaningful denuclearization. When President Trump was meeting with Kim Jong-un and giving the North Koreans concessions for free, including the presidential meeting and the suspension of U.S.-South Korea military exercises, of course that was a great deal for the North Koreans.

[14:20:01]

And so there never was a deal. And President Trump certainly was interested in the television spectacular of a meeting, but there hasn't been the kind of follow-through, there hasn't been the kind of painstaking diplomacy that would be required to do a deal. This is going to be extremely difficult. But in many ways President Trump has been the Neville Chamberlain of the North Korea crisis, and now we're paying the price.

SAVIDGE: I should point out that other presidents have not had a great deal of success when dealing with North Korea either, especially when trying to curb their nuclear program.

METZL: Absolutely. There has been failure after failure. And the question is not was the U.S. policy failing. It was. The question is whether the behavior and actions of the Trump administration have helped or hurt. They certainly haven't helped.

SAVIDGE: I don't want to let you go without asking about China and the moment we have now where President Trump says that he's reached a phase one deal with China. And some see it as a truce in the trade war. Although Wall Street didn't seem to necessary believe the president's words, had very mixed results on Friday. How big a breakthrough do you really think this is?

METZL: It's not much as far as I can see, although I haven't seen the full text of the -- or the text of the agreement, because China needs American agricultural products. They certainly need our pork. They need our soybeans. They're already importing those items. And if you're China, the best deal you can get is turn America into a country of farmers and China into a country that's investing in the technologies of the future.

And so the big game, and certainly I've praised President Trump in the past for creating greater leverage on China through these tariffs, but tariffs aren't an end in themselves. They need to be a means to an alternate end. And that end has to be a structural change in the way the Chinese economy operates and China-U.S. economic relations.

And so if China gets tariff relief in exchange for buying primarily more agricultural products and maybe some liquefied natural gas, maybe it eases some economic issues, but it doesn't address the fundamental challenges that the United States is facing now and will increasingly face from a China that's seeking to be the world's dominant country by 2050. So this is a big, big deal, and unfortunately, again, President Trump talks tough in the beginning, but then everything peters out with concessions as all of these processes drag on.

SAVIDGE: Many of these that have been hurt by this trade war may wonder whether it was worth everything they sacrificed. Jamie Metzl, thank you very much, good to talk to you.

METZL: Nice to talk to you.

SAVIDGE: Up next, more than a dozen people killed when a volcano erupts in New Zealand. Inside the dangerous recovery mission that went on for hours.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:26:56]

SAVIDGE: Divers are working to recover the bodies of two people who remain unaccounted for after a devastating volcano eruption in New Zealand. Police announcing overnight that one more victim died in the hospital while being treated for severe burns. At least 16 deaths already confirmed as the first victim is formally identified as a 21- year-old Australian woman. CNN's Will Ripley has more on the careful and emotional process of identifying the bodies that have been recovered.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

WILL RIPLEY, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Sending prayers for the dead. The Maori community of Whakatane, New Zealand, give a traditional blessing as boats return to shore with six victims from the White Island volcano eruption.

The operation to retrieve them was launched at first light Friday using helicopters, small boats, and a naval vessel, a dangerous mission carried out by eight military officers working in soaring temperatures, wearing seal protective clothing and breathing masks to protect them from the toxic gases still flowing from the volcano. The team spent four hours on the island running off the remains. They're still searching for two more bodies, one believed to the water. The prime minister today thanking the team for their heroism.

JACINDA ARDERN, NEW ZEALAND PRIME MINISTER: They carried out their role with dignity and respect for those who have been lost. There was, of course, a huge amount of courage still required to do what they did today.

RIPLEY: The retrieval operation comes five days after the volcano erupted on the island, causing plumes of steam, ash, and rocks to pour out on to the crater where dozens of tourists were enjoying a day trip. At least 16 people are dead or presumed dead and dozens more are being treated for life-changing burns.

Frustrations have been mounting that the remaining bodies left on the island had not been brought home sooner. The families of those brought back now at least will have some relief that they can begin to say goodbye.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: These families are just so appreciative, so ecstatic, so overwhelmed and overjoyed to know that they've got their loved once are we them.

RIPLEY: Will Ripley, CNN, Whakatane, New Zealand.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

SAVIDGE: Up next, 2019 versus 1998, what members of the House Judiciary Committee said about impeaching President Trump compared to President Clinton.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:33:26]

SAVIDGE: New today, a source tells CNN that President Trump's lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, did in fact meet with his president during his visit to the White House yesterday. That visit came just days after Giuliani returned from a mysterious trip to Ukraine, and on the same day the House Judiciary Committee voted to impeach the president.

CNN's Jeremy Diamond is at the White House. And Jeremy, what more can you tell us about Giuliani's trip to Ukraine, and what exactly was he doing in the White House?

JEREMY DIAMOND, CNN WHITE HOUSE REPORTER: As you said, Martin, as the House Judiciary Committee was preparing to vote on two articles of impeachment against President Trump, the president was meeting with his attorney, Rudy Giuliani, who of course has found himself a central player in this at the heart of this impeachment process now.

According to "The New York Times," Rudy Giuliani was there in part at least to brief the president on his recent trip to Hungary and Ukraine where he met with Ukrainians. Some former Ukraine officials who have previously provided him information, some of that political dirt about Joe Biden and this Burisma company. Of course, many of those allegations against Joe Biden completely unsubstantiated.

But this shows very clearly that neither the president nor his personal attorney, Rudy Giuliani, are backing down in the face of this impeachment inquiry. In fact, it appears that they are digging in. Rudy Giuliani has been reported to have said that he learned more than he could have ever hoped during this trip to Ukraine. And clearly, he is still very intent on continuing to try and dig up dirt on the president's political opponent, namely the former vice president, Joe Biden.

But Martin, I think what's more interesting here is what it says about President Trump, and that is the fact that the president clearly here is unapologetic in the face of this impeachment and not backing down.

[14:35:07]

In fact, it appears that he is going to be pursuing a much more defiant path as he prepares for the likelihood that he will become the third president in American history to be impeached, and as he faces this trial in the Senate.

SAVIDGE: Yes, in other words, he's trying to project he's not bothered, not bothered at all. Jeremy Diamond, thanks very much for that.

Five members of the House Judiciary Committee that also voted to impeach President Clinton are still there today, three Democrats and two Republicans. Here's CNN Chief Political Correspondent, Dana Bash.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

DANA BASH, CNN CHIEF POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: Democrat Jerry Nadler in 2019.

JERROLD NADLER, (D-NY) HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE CHAIRMAN: Serious abuse of power.

BASH: Sounds a lot like Republican James Sensenbrenner in 1998.

REP. JIM SENSENBRENNER, (R-WI) HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE: Obstructed and abused power.

BASH: Sensenbrenner now argues Democrats wanted oust Trump since his election.

SENSENBRENNER: And they haven't liked him since the beginning of his term.

BASH: Like Jerry Nadler said then about the GOP and Bill Clinton.

NADLER: There are clearly some members of the Republican majority who have never accepted the results of the 1992 or 1996 elections.

BASH: This time the allegations are obviously quite different, but worth noting, another significant difference, which party is being impeached and which party holds the gavel. Five members of House Judiciary, the committee that voted to impeach President Clinton, are still there now, three Democrats, Nadler, Sheila Jackson Lee, and Zoe Lofgren, and two Republicans, Sensenbrenner and Steve Chabot.

Do you feel like this is deja vu in reverse? REP. STEVE CHABOT, (R-OH) HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE: Well, when I was

involved in this two decades ago, I really never dreamed that we'd see it again.

BASH: In your opening statement back in December 10th, 1998 -- it's so weird it's almost to the day -- you said, allowing the president's actions --

CHABOT: -- the president's actions to go unpunished would gravely damage the office of the president, our judicial system, and our country.

BASH: It's what Democrats are saying about this president right now, almost to the word.

CHABOT: They're saying it, but I think the facts are different.

BASH: Very different. What is similar, the palpable solemnity of the moment.

SHEILA JACKSON LEE, (D-TX) HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE: I come bearing feels of somberness and sadness.

I'm reminded of my time on the House Judiciary Committee during the 1990s impeachment and as well a number of federal judges. I was guided then not only by the facts but by the Constitution and the duty to serve this nation.

BASH: And tensions very high.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Let's slow down a bit here.

NADLER: Gentleman, the gentleman --

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Let's slow down a bit.

BASH: In 1998 Nadler warned against any impeachment backed by one party and opposed by another.

NADLER: Such an impeachment would lack legitimacy, would produce divisiveness and bitterness in our politics for years to come.

BASH: Is it fair to say that this impeachment, in your words from back then, will produce divisiveness and bitterness in our politics for years to come?

NADLER: I think what puts bitterness and divisiveness into our politics is the conduct of the president who questions the patriotism of people who don't agree with him, who calls political opponents human scum.

BASH: In 98 Democrat Zoe Lofgren predicted the GOP would suffer for impeaching Bill Clinton.

REP. ZOE LOFGREN, (D-CA) JUDICIARY COMMITTEE: For those who are out to get the president, shame on you. But beware, next election the voters will be out to get you.

BASH: Again, roles are reversed.

CHABOT: If I were a Democrat I'd be worried about it. And I think Zoe's comments back there could be probably coming out of the lips of a Republican right now.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

SAVIDGE: And our thanks to Dana Bash for that very, very insightful.

Up next, the gloves are off between Elizabeth Warren and Pete Buttigieg. The Democratic presidential candidate is trying to stand out with the Iowa caucuses right around the corner.

And don't forget, two best friends, one epic night, ring in the new year with Anderson Cooper and Andy Cohen. New Year's Eve live begins at 8:00 on CNN.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:42:58]

SAVIDGE: In the lead-up to the 2020 election, so far in the Democratic race Senator Elizabeth Warren is attacking Joe Biden, Biden is going after Pete Buttigieg, and Buttigieg is taking a jab at Senator Warren. But at the end of the day, who is actually winning over the voters to be the Democratic nominee. As CNN's Abby Phillip reports, it's not just a fight for votes. It's a fight for what the Democratic Party stands for.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

JOE BIDEN, (D) PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: If you can't bring the country together, we're in real, real, real trouble.

ABBY PHILLIP, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: In the 2020 race, some Democrats are pitching themselves as healers.

MAYOR PETE BUTTIGIEG, (D-IN) PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: I am running to be the president who can do that, who can gather up those pieces and bring the American people together.

PHILLIP: While others present themselves as fighters.

SEN. ELIZABETH WARREN, (D-MA) PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: When I got into the race for president, I knew what I'd be fighting for. I knew who I'd be fighting for.

PHILLIP: With just 52 days to go before voting starts, candidates are in a fierce debate about what America will need in a post-Trump world.

BUTTIGIEG: What we need to do right now is galvanize, not polarize.

PHILLIP: Buttigieg taking a jab at Senator Elizabeth Warren. BUTTIGIEG: We will fight when we must fight. But I will never allow

us to get so wrapped up in the fighting that we start to think fighting is the point.

PHILLIP: Biden echoing that message, criticizing the progressive candidate's approach on health care.

BIDEN: These guys are saying no, no, my way or the highway.

PHILLIP: Warren hit back in a major speech in New Hampshire, and without naming them, targeted Biden.

WARREN: Unlike some candidates for the Democratic nomination, I am not counting on Republican politicians having an epiphany.

PHILLIP: And Buttigieg.

WARREN: We know that another calls the people who raise a quarter-of- a-million dollars for him his, quote, national inverts circle. And he offers them regular phone calls with special access.

PHILLIP: As Elizabeth Warren has stalled in the polls, she's upped her criticism of her more moderate rivals.

[14:45:03]

WARREN: I'm not betting my agenda on the naive hope that if Democrats adopt Republican critiques of progressive policies or make vague calls for unity, that somehow the wealthy and well-connected will stand down.

PHILLIP: Biden insists Warren is wrong, telling donors at a fundraiser that if we can't unify the country, you all ought to go home now because nothing is going to happen except by executive order.

And despite their very different approaches, voters do tell me that they are deciding between Elizabeth Warren and Pete Buttigieg, a progressive and a more moderate candidate. That's one of the reasons why we've seen the attacks between these two heating up in recent.

Pete Buttigieg also said in a recent interview that Elizabeth Warren is offering purity tests to other candidates like him on the issue of fundraisers. That's a reference to the fact that as a senator, Elizabeth Warren raised money in a traditional way from big dollar donors and then transferred some of that money over to her presidential account.

Abby Phillip, CNN, Washington.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

SAVIDGE: Thank you, Abby, very much.

Just ahead, it's considered one of the greatest rivalries in all of sports, and fans are pulling out all of the stops. At the Army-Navy game, we're with the tailgaters next. (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SAVIDGE: President Trump landing in Philadelphia just moments ago for the 120th edition of America's game.

[14:50:03]

The president set to watch Army take on Navy for the commander in chief's trophy, and of course for bragging rights. CNN's Coy Wire has more on how the most patriotic rivalry in all of sports is dividing military families this afternoon.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

COY WIRE, CNN SPORTS CORRESPONDENT: Yes, Martin, we're here in Philadelphia for the 120th Army-Navy game, and we are here at the class of 85's tailgate for Army West Point.

(CHEERS)

WIRE: But something is askew because we have Paul Cal (ph) here, he's wearing a Navy jersey. That's because his son Eric (ph) plays for the Naval Academy. You're a brave soul coming to this tailgate. How do you feel about your son out there representing our nation today?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Very proud of him. As my wife says, they all take the same oath on graduation day. And right here, I'm still with all of my brothers and sisters, class of 85, for excellence we stride.

(CHEERS)

WIRE: Now I have to ask you, you're one of the organizers here of this Army tailgate. What's it mean to see your brother there wearing a Navy jersey?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We love Paul every day except for today.

(LAUGHTER)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We'll like him again later tomorrow.

WIRE: There we go. And that is what that game is all about. At the end of the day everyone respecting one another, despite their differences. We'll be sharing Eric and all of the midshipman and cadets out there. We're going to send it back to you with a rocket. Take it away, Lorraine (ph).

(CHEERS)

SAVIDGE: We want to go from Coy to the locker room now of the Army as there is President Trump shaking hands and greeting the players. Just trying to listen to see if there was anything really substantive being said. But otherwise, there is the president, commander in chief, as he presumably is wishing them well. I would think he's probably going to do the same thing for Navy, but you never know.

We'll be right back after this.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SAVIDGE: Checking top stories. The Pearl Harbor commander says there is no known motive in the December 4th shooting according to a message obtained by the "Honolulu Star Advertiser." Gabriel Antonio Romero, an active duty U.S. Navy sailor, opened fire at the Pearl Harbor Navy Shipyard, killing two people and wounding a third. The Navy said there were no disciplinary charges of any kind pending against Romero, and that he was assigned to armed watch at the time.

Outrage over a spree of pardons by ousted Kentucky Governor Matt Bevin as lawmakers call on federal and state prosecutors to investigate the pardons, including one for a convicted killer whose family raised campaign money for the governor. Senator Mitch McConnell calls the pardons completely inappropriate.

The showdown over President Trump's financial records and tax returns is headed to the Supreme Court. The court announced late Friday and it will review the case. At issue, can a president face legal action while in office? Lower court judges who earlier ruled against Trump grounded their decisions on decades old Supreme Court precedent that would allow a president to be subpoenaed or sued.

At 16, she is the youngest person to be named "Time's" Person of the Year, and, at 16, she's also been attacked by the president of the United States twice. After being honored by the magazine, the president said she has an anger management problem, telling her to chill.

CNN's John Avlon has a reality check.

JOHN AVLON, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: The president of the United States attacked a kid on Twitter. We shouldn't have to remind you that that isn't remotely normal or presidential or kind. But it may also be envious, because it's not the first time Trump's targeted 16- year-old Swedish climate activist Greta Thunberg who just beat out Trump to become "Time's" Person of the Year.

It's an honor the president has always been obsessed with. And when "Time" wouldn't put him on its cover before he became president, he hung this fake cover at his golf properties. And his campaign just did it again for fundraising and trolling purposes.

But Trump's not the only one who can't quit thinking about it. Ever since her plea for the planet at the United Nations, the inter-webs have had Greta on the brain, from this amazing Greta Thunberg death metal remix --

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

(MUSIC)

(END VIDEO CLIP)

AVLON: I love that. To this satirical Greta Thunberg helpline. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: If you're a grown adult who needs to yell at a child for some reason, the Greta Thunberg helpline is here to tolerate you.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: She's making the end of the world sound like it's the end of the world.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

AVLON: Exactly. Everyone is talking about Greta, except for the folks who usually scream bloody murder whenever a kid gets dragged into a grown up debate, like when a law professor tried explaining the Constitution to lawmakers like this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: While the president can name his son Barron, he can't make him a baron.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

AVLON: OK, that may have been ill-advised. The president's kids should be off-limits. But it's a pun, people. And the collective conservative pearl clutching was really about playing the victim to distract from what the professor was saying.

When it comes to social media, perhaps the president should listen more to his own wife who once said, "When children learn positive online behavior, social media can be used in productive ways and can affect positive change. They must choose their words wisely and speak with respect and compassion." Here's a crazy idea. Maybe the president should try to lead by example, or have a plan to solve the climate crisis rather than attacking a kid who cares enough to stand up and speak out.

And that's your reality check.

SAVIDGE: Thank you, John.

We have much more just ahead in the Newsroom, and it all starts right now.

ANA CABRERA, CNN ANCHOR: You are live in the CNN NEWSROOM. Great to have you with us on this Saturday. I'm Ana Cabrera in New York. And we are on the cusp of something that has only happened twice before in our country's history, the impeachment of a president.