Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Measles Warning; Iowa Caucus Nears; Impeachment Stalemate. Aired 3-3:30p ET

Aired December 25, 2019 - 15:00   ET

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

[15:00:35]

KATE BOLDUAN, CNN HOST: Hello, everyone. Top of the hour. I'm Kate Bolduan, in for Brooke Baldwin today. Thank you for joining us for a special Christmas edition of CNN NEWSROOM.

And the clock is ticking, not just to the end of the year, of course, but also to the beginning of the Senate impeachment trial for President Trump.

And Senator Mitch McConnell is feeling the heat from the White House -- from the White House all the way to the House of Representatives.

And that is where we begin, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi once again making it clear she has no intentions of handing over those articles of impeachment to the Senate at this moment, unless and until McConnell makes it clear how the trial will proceed.

In a new letter to her Democratic colleagues, Pelosi calls the impeachment vote inspiring, but also says this quote -- "It now remains for the Senate to president the rules under which we will proceed. We can then appoint managers." Those are the managers who make the case the prosecution, if you will, in the Senate trial.

Meanwhile, President Trump, who has repeatedly called the entire impeachment process a hoax and a sham, is looking to McConnell to deliver what Trump views as a fair trial, the president noting -- and I found it surprising -- that any final decisions on the trial rest with the majority leader, says President Trump, the man who says the only opinion that matters is his own.

CNN's Boris Sanchez is in West Palm Beach, Florida, for us this morning -- this afternoon.

Boris, what are you hearing from the president today?

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Kate, a message of unity coming from President Trump on Christmas.

The president saying that the United States should foster a culture of deeper understanding and respect, and that Americans should exemplify the traits of Jesus Christ.

Of course, this comes only about 24 hours after the president went on a rant about impeachment, criticizing House Speaker Nancy Pelosi with unique vitriol, suggesting that she hates Republicans, and that she hates people who voted for him.

It also comes just a few days after he called her crazy. Despite that, the president, in a much more somber tone last night, take a look at what he said alongside first lady Melania Trump, about American troops stationed overseas.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MELANIA TRUMP, FIRST LADY: Americans across this land are grateful for all the men and women in uniform who keeps us safe, our military, our police and everyone in law enforcement.

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: We say a special prayer for those military service members stationed far from home. And we renew our hope for peace among nations and joy to the world.

On behalf of the entire Trump family, we wish everyone a joyous and merry Christmas and a very happy, happy new year.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: Now, Kate, notably, the president was asked about the House speaker last night as he was returning from church to a Christmas Eve dinner at Mar-a-Lago.

Reporters asked him if he prayed for how Speaker Pelosi. Remember, the president criticized Pelosi, mocked her for saying that she prays for his success and for his health. The president declined to answer, except to say that we're all going to have a great new year -- Kate.

BOLDUAN: Boris Sanchez, thank you so much. We really appreciate it.

So, despite President Trump's claims that Republicans are united in the impeachment fight -- and they largely are -- there are a handful of senators who may be making the White House and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell nervous.

One of them is Alaska's Republican Senator Lisa Murkowski. She's a moderate who very memorably did not vote with the Republicans on Brett Kavanaugh's Supreme Court confirmation, you will recall.

Today, she is now voicing concern about McConnell's vow to coordinate to be in lockstep with the White House when it comes to impeachment trial strategy.

Listen to Senator Murkowski.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. LISA MURKOWSKI (R-AK): In fairness, when I heard that, I was disturbed.

To me, it means that we have to take that step back from being hand in glove with the defense. And so I heard what Leader McConnell had said.

I happen to think that that has further confused the process.

For me to prejudge and say, there's nothing there, or, on the other hand, he should be impeached yesterday, that's wrong. In my view, that's wrong.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BOLDUAN: Joining me right now, Samantha Vinograd, CNN national security analyst, and CNN political analysts Doug Heye and Josh Rogin.

Thanks, guys. Thanks all for being here.

DOUG HEYE, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Thank you.

BOLDUAN: So, Doug, what do you make of Lisa Murkowski saying -- is saying right now about being disturbed by the coordination that she's hearing between McConnell and the White House?

[15:05:07]

She knows that her every word is being watched. So what is she saying here?

HEYE: Sure.

Look, there are two very different views on how you view impeachment, regardless of whether you think the president did anything wrong or not. One is, is this really a trial, or is this a political act and -- that we're going through?

And, ultimately, I think it's going to be a political decision. It's going to be a political process. Impeachment isn't a legal tool. It's a political tool to ultimately, in theory, at least, remove a president.

Lisa Murkowski had some problems with what Mitch McConnell said. She views that differently. Where she ultimately comes down on this may be the ultimate question.

And, meanwhile, I think we all know what the result of this is going to be, regardless of what any individual Republican senator does.

BOLDUAN: Right.

HEYE: And, ultimately, that's entertainment. That's what Donald Trump -- he wants to produce a TV show, and this will be a big, dramatic TV show, which I think we expect will have a grand finale for Trump, that will allow him to declare a big, beautiful exoneration, regardless, again, of whether you think the president did anything wrong or not.

BOLDUAN: And, Josh, Murkowski also is saying in this interview that she thinks McConnell has further confused the process by acting in total coordination, as he has put it, with the White House. Do you get a sense of what she actually means here? JOSH ROGIN, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: Yes, I think there's a genuine

conflict of interests between setting up a fair trial and working hand in glove with the White House.

And this is a conflict that a lot of people have pointed out, but very few Republicans have acknowledged. She's just acknowledging it. Now, I would say that's a very long way from her breaking with her leadership to side with the Democrats on the rules.

BOLDUAN: Right.

ROGIN: I don't see that happening. I don't see that happening at all.

I think she's just being honest that it's a corrupted process, if the process if the defense works with the jurors. But that's what we're going to have. That's what McConnell is going to do. And whatever leverage Nancy Pelosi thinks she has, I think, will not be enough to peel off the four Republicans they would really need to institute the rules that they think are right.

So it's a lot of messaging. In the end, what we're going to have is, the president making the terms, McConnell falling in line, and his caucus falling in line behind him.

BOLDUAN: So you have the process. And, look, the process is important when you're talking about something as historic is this, yes.

But there's also the undercurrent of all of this, what is important and where this -- is where this all began, which is with interference in the election in 2016, Sam.

I mean, there was $425 million that were put in the latest -- in this recent spending bill that is being allocated for election security. But there is, I would argue, very little known about what, if anything, is different, has been changed since '16 to 2020.

SAMANTHA VINOGRAD, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: Well, something has changed, which is that the president of the United States is knowingly propagating Russian propaganda and really actively participating in Russia's disinformation campaign, Kate.

That is a big difference from 2016, when we had an administration that was focused on election security. And, look, this should be a great time to think about an actual election security bill.

There is a bill moving in the Senate that was voted out of committee, but President Trump has already said that he has a lot of problems with it. Senate Majority Leader McConnell has really thrown cold water on previous attempts to move forward with election security.

But as much as the legislature may try to do, Kate, we have to think about what the executive branch is doing from the Oval Office. And until President Trump is willing matter...

BOLDUAN: No matter what protections are put in place.

(CROSSTALK)

VINOGRAD: Correct.

And it's both the disinformation campaign related to Ukrainian interference in 2016, his really obfuscation on Russia's role in election interference going forward, and his casting doubt as well on the results of elections, both in previous cycles and going forward.

So the president of the United States should not be an active participant in election insecurity. And that's a point that we're at right now.

BOLDUAN: So there's also kind of an interesting element, if we get back -- I don't know -- let's call it, Doug, like the chess game of strategy that is playing out with the trial.

It's a fascinating opinion piece that was just put out, kind of on this -- maybe the inside strategy that may be at play. You coming from the inside, you tell me what you think. This is from a former press secretary for Democratic Congressman Jerry Nadler, writing in an opinion piece that Democrats should actually, looking ahead at the Senate trial, should embrace the idea of having someone like Hunter Biden testify.

And let me read why he says -- why he says this should be a -- should happen.

"There is no real downside for Schumer. Democrats needn't worry about the younger Biden or anyone else's testimony helping Trump."

And he goes on to say: "Schumer and the Democrats should therefore agree to the witnesses that Trump claims he wants. If they do so, both Republicans and the president will have to explain why they are now reversing course and not making them testify."

[15:10:00]

Is that a double loop-de-loop back -- actual backflip, or what do you think of it?

HEYE: Or a Triple Lindy.

I think, so often, we focus on who's really playing chess, or are they playing three- or four-dimensional chess? Donald Trump doesn't play chess. He plays checkers. And if everybody else thinks he's playing chess, and he plays checkers, it gives him an advantage. He's making very simple moves, very simple decisions.

Sometimes, these aren't complicated things that we make overly complicated, and then we ascribe to some strategy that the White House has, where, really, they're being straightforward.

And this is exactly what we saw with the Mueller report. As long as Donald Trump is not found guilty, and he's not going to be, he's not going to say just that he wasn't found guilty. He's going to blow this up to a big, beautiful exoneration, the biggest exoneration in our nation's history.

It's what he did with the Mueller report that he said exonerated him, even though it didn't, and the rest of us had to catch up to that conversation. Donald Trump is playing checkers here.

BOLDUAN: Josh, what do you...

(CROSSTALK)

BOLDUAN: Yes, I want to get your take, because do you think -- I mean, from what you hear from Democrats, do you think the Democrats think they have nothing to lose with a move like that? I mean, what does it mean for Joe Biden?

ROGIN: No, I -- listen, I don't think Trump is playing chess or checkers. I think he's playing Hungry Hungry Hippos, OK?

(LAUGHTER)

ROGIN: And he's just...

BOLDUAN: Don't bash that game.

(CROSSTALK)

ROGIN: And I get why the president wants a circus, right? A circus is a circus. It's good for him. Everyone gets confused. We end up talking about Hunter Biden. That's not good for the Democrats.

There's no way that's good for the Democrats. They should not want that. They're calling for real witnesses. Right? We're going to have a trial of the president where the five people who actually know what happened will never be heard from? Does that make any sense?

The things that Pelosi is calling for are reasonable. Let's have the people who know what happened talk about what happened. OK? And once we start going off to Hunter Biden, what's next, the CrowdStrike guy, Diamond and Silk? It's going to be just as crazy.

And of course that's good for the president. That's bad for the Democrats. And I think McConnell thinks it's bad for Republicans too.

But, like we said before, I guess Trump is going to have his way as long as the Republicans refuse to stand up to him.

BOLDUAN: I mean, Sam, what do you think of the possibility?

VINOGRAD: I think it's ridiculous. I mean, Josh raises the fact that this is bad for Joe Biden. We have to look at both why this is bad for impeachment and why this is bad for our election going forward.

With respect to impeachment, this will turn the Senate floor into circus. Hunter Biden has nothing to do with the trial of the U.S. president. We can go round and around with Republican talking points about how the president was focused on anti-corruption in Ukraine. That has been discounted so many times, Kate.

With respect to the 2020 election, President Trump would like nothing better than to continue spreading conspiracy theories about the Bidens. And what would be a great way to do that? Having Hunter Biden on the Senate floor and having House managers -- potential House managers like Jim Jordan and Mark Meadows go after him tweet, whatever he says, misconstrue it, and really use that as a campaign ad for President Trump for 2020.

BOLDUAN: Guys, thanks so much. We really appreciate you all coming in today.

VINOGRAD: Thanks, Kate.

(CROSSTALK)

BOLDUAN: Thank you.

HEYE: Merry Christmas.

BOLDUAN: Merry Christmas.

Coming up: The new year marks the final sprint to Iowa. But is the message from the Democrats running for president the message Midwestern voters want to hear?

Plus, there's a new health threat to travelers in at least five airports -- what you need to know next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[15:17:24]

BOLDUAN: We are exactly 40 days from the Iowa caucuses, the first chance Democrats have to make their pick for who should eventually face President Trump.

And Joe Biden is getting a boost, at least in terms of endorsements, just getting the nod from California Congressman Tony Cardenas, making it Biden's 32nd endorsement from a sitting member of Congress or governor. And no other Democrat running has more than 13.

So what does the race look like as we head into the new year?

Let me turn to my good friend CNN senior political analyst Ron Brownstein, who is also a senior editor at "The Atlantic."

It's great to see you, Ron.

RON BROWNSTEIN, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: Happy holidays, Kate.

BOLDUAN: Thank you, too.

So, what do you think? We ask this often. And I truly want your opinion on this. What do you think of the endorsements game this cycle? BROWNSTEIN: Well, it's never been a huge, I think, driver of voting

behavior.

But it is a kind of a useful measure of where the party thinks its best bet is. And the fact that Biden has the most endorsements is probably kind of parallel to his consistent lead in the polls on who has the best chance of beating Trump.

And Biden goes up and down in the horse race, and doubts about him kind of ebb and flow, but he has consistently led when Democratic voters are asked, who has the best chance of beating Trump? And that's usually what, I think, drives the endorsements above all.

BOLDUAN: Looking at Iowa, what are you watching most closely as they kind of enter this final sprint to the caucuses?

BROWNSTEIN: Well, I mean, there's really two answers that question.

What are you watching in Iowa? And then, even more important, what are we thinking about how Iowa will affect the rest of the board?

BOLDUAN: Right.

BROWNSTEIN: People talk about different analogies for what presidential primaries are.

This is the 10th one I have covered, and I have come to think of it more like billiards than anything else, because each shot then resets the whole table for whatever comes next.

And in the last four Democratic -- contested Democratic races, the winner of Iowa has won the nomination, even when New Hampshire went a different way. It was Gore in 2000, Kerry '04, Obama '08, and Clinton '16.

What's different this time, though, and why Iowa may not be quite as significant as we have seen in the past is because all of those earlier winners were able to then go on and run really well with African-American voters.

And we have the possibility this time that an Iowa winner, either Pete Buttigieg or Elizabeth Warren, are both struggling with African- American voters and also Hispanic voters.

And if that, in fact, plays out, it's not clear to me at all that Iowa will be as influential as it has been in the past. Within the race itself, we're kind of back to the future. We're kind of back to the pre-Obama division of the Democratic Party between what I liked to call in the '90s and 2000s the wine track and the beer track.

I mean, you have Buttigieg and Warren running best among college- educated white voters, Buttigieg on the more moderate side, Warren on the more liberal, and then Sanders and Biden kind of duking it out for blue-collar voters and, in Biden's case, older voters.

[15:20:12] And that's kind of the division in Iowa. But we will see, again, how much it matters, whether it matters as much down the road as in the past.

BOLDUAN: Right.

BROWNSTEIN: It won't, unless the winner can, I think, also make inroads with the black community.

BOLDUAN: And going one step further kind of on this is -- one thing that we have seen over and over in presidential politics is, the economy can be the whole game in the end of how people vote.

BROWNSTEIN: Yes.

BOLDUAN: People largely believe the economy is going well right now. But do you see that directly transferring into support for President Trump at this moment? You have dug into this.

BROWNSTEIN: Yes, look, that's why this election is on a knife's edge, because there's a powerful tailwind for President Trump, in that more people are expressing optimism about the economy.

In the CNN poll, and we have gone from two-thirds of the country saying the economy is excellent or good this summer to three-quarters now. But the headwind that he faces his doubts about his behavior, his values, all the kinds of issues that come up in the Ukraine scandal and his response to it.

While the share of the country saying the economy is excellent or is good has gone up 11 points in the summer, his approval rating has gone up over only three points over that same period.

And it underscores this big contrast. If you go back to '04, 90 percent of the people who said the economy were excellent or good voted for the incumbent president, George W. Bush. In '12, same thing, roughly 90 percent of the people who said the economy was excellent or good voted for Barack Obama, as the incumbent president.

In the new CNN poll, the latest CNN poll -- the polling unit ran the numbers for me -- among the voters who say the economy is excellent or good, Trump is only pulling 55 percent, 35 points lower than Bush or Obama. Joe Biden polls 40 percent among voters who say the economy is excellent or good.

When people say there's no consequence for Trump's behavior, that he gets away with everything, look at that gap between economically satisfied voters on this president and previous presidents, and there you will see, I think, very precisely the cost of his behavior.

And that's why this election is on the knife's edge, despite an economy that would have most presidents cruising toward reelection.

BOLDUAN: I think that's a really fascinating bit to watch as the year continues -- as the new year begins and the race continues.

It's great to see you, Ron. Thanks for coming in.

BROWNSTEIN: Yes, merry Christmas. Yes.

BOLDUAN: Thank you.

Coming up next: a measles scare adding to already hectic holiday travel, multiple U.S. airports now warning, travelers may have been exposed.

What you need to know, that's coming up.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[15:27:07]

BOLDUAN: So traveling home for the holidays may have been a little rough, but now that Christmas is here, the weather forecast across much of the United States is looking pretty calm.

(WEATHER UPDATE)

BOLDUAN: So there's also this: Health officials are warning the public about a possible measles exposure from holiday travelers.

Airline passengers infected with measles may have put others at risk in Texas and Southern California.

Here's CNN national correspondent Athena Jones.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

ATHENA JONES, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): This holiday week could come with an unwanted and dangerous surprise: measles.

Authorities say people infected with the highly contagious virus traveled through at least five airports in recent days, and may have exposed others to the disease, just the latest in a string of similar incidents this year now happening at the busiest time to travel.

[15:30:00]