Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Newsroom
President Makes Threat To Iran; Terror Advisory From Homeland Security; Mitch McConnell On Impeachment Trial; Foreign Policy Takes Center Stage After Soleimani Strike; Harvey Weinstein Addresses His Pending Criminal Trial; Three Australian Wildfires Merge, Are Now Size Of Manhattan; North Korea Releases Propaganda Video Amid Kim's New Threats. Aired 8-9p ET
Aired January 04, 2020 - 20:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
BIANNA GOLODRYGA, CNN HOST: Now, the president making that threat on the same day that White House officials reportedly warned members of Congress that Iran is expected to retaliate for the killing of its top general within weeks. And the same day, Homeland security officials put out a terror advisory on the potential for attacks from Iran, both conventional and cyber attacks.
Also tonight, the decision to kill that Iranian general, one of the most powerful men in the country. Word tonight that President Trump's aides were surprised that he made that choice.
And also tonight, from the president of Iran, he is making clear that he sees retaliation as crucial because, quote, "If we remain silent against the U.S., it will become bolder and more aggressive." Ominous threats there.
And let's get to all of this with CNN's Jeremy Diamond. Things do not appear to be de-escalating, Jeremy, as the president had said they would. You are in south Florida near the president's Mar-a-Lago resort. This threat tonight from the president to Iran, it is direct and there's no mincing of words.
JEREMY DIAMOND, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: There certainly is not, Bianna. And it is particularly striking, when you put it up against the president's own words in the first day and a half, after ordering that strike that killed the Iranian general. And, also, the words of the president's top advisers who, in the last day and a half, have insisted that the United States is not on the path to war. Insisting, as the secretary of state, Mike Pompeo, did just this morning, that the United States remains committed to de-escalation.
Now, the president's latest tweet is anything but promising de- escalation. The president here tweeting, Iran has been nothing but problems for many years. Let this serve as a warning that if Iran strikes any Americans or American assets, we have targeted 52 Iranian sites representing the 52 American hostages taken by Iran many years ago. Some at a very high level and important to Iran and the Iranian culture. And those targets and Iran, itself, will be hit very fast and very hard. The U.S.A. wants no more threats.
And, Bianna, here, I think it is unquestionable that this is the president issuing the most significant red line of his presidency. Making very clear here that if Iran takes certain actions, if it strikes American citizens or American assets, that Iran will face these 52 targeted strikes by the U.S. military in retaliation. And the president here specifically talking about striking sites inside Iran. That would, undoubtedly, put the United States and Iran on the path to war.
GOLODRYGA: Including cultural sites as well. Will be interesting to hear, from Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, in responding to the president's tweet there. But, Jeremy, the White House we also know was obligated to formally notify Congress about that air strike. They did that today. What is the response?
DIAMOND: They did. This evening, they issued that proforma notification to Congress required under the War Powers Act, basically, requiring the president to notify Congress within 48 hours of entering U.S. forces into hostilities.
That occurred tonight and it is already setting off a lot of debate and a lot of criticism already from Democrats, including the speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi. She issued this statement. She says, this classified War Powers Act notification delivered to Congress raises more questions than it answers. The highly unusual decision to classify this document in its entirety compounds our many concerns and suggests that the Congress and the American people are being left in the dark about our national security.
Now, that statement follows criticism that we have already heard and questions that we have already heard from Democrats in Congress, who have questioned whether or not there was, indeed, specific U.S. intelligence pointing to imminent threats that required the president to take this action and to target the Iranian general, Qasem Soleimani. That is what the administration has insisted.
But, so far, they have not provided the specifics of that intelligence. And those Democrats who have been briefed said that they have serious questions -- Bianna.
GOLODRYGA: Perhaps one of the ramifications of the president constantly bad mouthing and ridiculing his intelligence chiefs. And now, many Democrats are suggesting they may not believe him, when he's supporting them. They need to see that information themselves.
Jeremy Diamond, thank you so much. We appreciate it.
And joining me now is a retired Army Colonel Peter Mansoor. He is also and former aide to General David Petraeus. Colonel, thank you so much for joining us this evening. I mentioned General Petraeus. You know, he called this killing more significant than the killing of Osama Bin Laden, the death of ISIS leader Al Baghdadi. Given that, what kind of response can we expect from Iran? Remember, they declared this an act of war.
COL. PETER MANSOOR (RET.), U.S. ARMY: Well, both sides want to re- establish deterrence. By attacking Soleimani, we're hoping that will deter Iraq -- Iran from committing actions. [20:05:02]
Iran wants to strike back so that the United States feels deterred against doing more actions against its interests. Iran has got to strike back. Otherwise, they are conceding defeat in their strategic competition with the United States.
Now, I think they'll be very careful on how -- on where they strike. If they strike U.S. service members, for instance, with Iranian conventional weapons, that could spark a war. I think it's much more likely they'll use their proxy forces around the Middle East to attack U.S. interests. And it could be U.S. civilians as well as military personnel.
GOLODRYGA: Yes. And we know they have proxies, not only in the Middle East, but throughout the world. And they have used them before in attacking Americans.
It has been reported, Colonel, that the president was given a list of options in response to the escalating violence that we've seen play out over the last few weeks in Iraq. And that actually killing Soleimani was lower on the list. Many people didn't expect him to pick that option. And it only happened after the attack on the embassy. Was that decision in your opinion proportionate?
MANSOOR: It was certainly unpredictable. This president has proven to be that. And that actually may help him going forward as Iran may meter their response not knowing what President Trump will do in retaliation for their retaliation. I think it probably went a bit too high, in terms of the asset that we targeted.
It's akin to Iran killing the head of our U.S. special operations command. And that, obviously, put us on a collision course with Iran, in terms of spilling Iranian blood and, potentially, sparking a war.
So, probably not proportionate. But, on the other hand, certainly not unwarranted, given that Qasem Soleimani was behind the rocket attacks on our bases, on the assault on our -- on our embassy, and the killing of about 600 American soldiers during the --
GOLODRYGA: Right. He's got --
MANSOOR: -- Iraq War.
GOLODRYGA: -- he's got the blood of many Americans on his hands, that's for sure. Not many people are mourning him. We know that the U.S. is sending an additional 3,500 troops to the region. How prepared is the U.S. to protect its forces in the region, in Iraq but elsewhere as well?
MANSOOR: The forces understand that force protection is crucial in this situation. Now, I was brigade commander in Baghdad in 2003, 2004. We got very good at protecting our forces from the types of attacks that came our way. So, I have no doubt that the military forces in the Middle East now are ramped up to a very high security level. And they'll be able to protect themselves. GOLODRYGA: I want to ask you a question on news we're just getting in
to CNN. And that is that a Republican Congressional source, familiar with the Trump administration's decision to strike Soleimani, tells our Jamie Gangel that President Trump did not have to be talked into the strike by advisers, because the killing of an American contractor, the wounding of others, and the subsequent embassy protests, in his opinion, crossed his line. Colonel, the source acknowledged that the president has been reluctant to take military action in this case. But if his personal line was crossed, was he right to act?
MANSOOR: He is the president and he has the right to act. In the -- in the previous attacks that Iran has done against oil tankers, against oil facilities, against our drone, no blood was spilled. And the spilling of blood was a red line and he had to retaliate. Again, Iran is very good at assaulting embassies, as they did in 1979 and again just recently, directing their proxy groups to attack U.S. embassies. It's sovereign U.S. territory.
So, I don't blame the president for wanting to retaliate. And we can debate whether Qasem Soleimani was the appropriate target, but, again, it wasn't unwarranted for him to strike back.
GOLODRYGA: And quickly before we say good-bye, let me ask you what I asked our previous guests. Are we, as Americans, and our allies safer today because Soleimani has been taken out?
MANSOOR: No. I think we're more on a path headed to war than otherwise. And, you know, we are not safer because Iran is going to retaliate. But, having said that, we had to do something to re- establish deterrence, because Iran was continuing to push and attack and assault and hit various facilities in our interests. And until we struck back, they were going to continue to do that.
GOLODRYGA: Well, we are not safer, according to you. These are not reassuring words, but we appreciate you being truthful with us tonight. Colonel Peter Monsoor, thank you.
MANSOOR: You're welcome.
[20:10:00]
GOLODRYGA: Well, word tonight that Iranian authorities will conduct DNA testing on the remains of Qasem Soleimani and all of those who were killed in Friday's air strike. According to a statement, officials say it's necessary to examine the remains before they are buried, because the severity of the explosion caused the victims to, quote, "become entangled."
Meantime, funeral processions are being held in Iraq for Soleimani who was considered by many to be the second most powerful person in Iran. More influential even than the president. Answerable only to one person and that's the supreme leader.
CNN's Senior International Correspondent, Arwa Damon has more.
ARWA DAMON, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Bianna, Iraqis know the cost of war only too well and emotions, right now, are understandably running quite high. There is fear. There is anger. And among some, there are also calls for revenge.
(voice-over): A quiet intensity takes over as the morning procession in Baghdad disperses.
(on camera): The mood is very somber. It almost feels as if it's masking the anger that lies underneath. But when you talk to any number of these people moving through, once they say that they were able to overcome their initial shock, the main feeling that they had was a desire for revenge but also anger. Anger at the United States.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (INAUDIBLE.)
DAMON (voice-over): They will be more mutilated than what they did to Qasem Soleimani and Abu Meti (ph) and Mohandas (ph), Abu Kussain (ph) swears. And the coming days will show that. It's not just Iran that is vowing to retaliate. So, too, are its proxies in Iraq. Proxies that have already proven their ability to kill during the U.S.-led occupation of Iraq.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: (INAUDIBLE.)
DAMON: America just dug its grave in Iraq, Aseva (ph) vows. Her husband and two sons are all part of the popular mobilization forces, mostly made up of former Shia forces whose second in command was killed, along with Qasem Soleimani.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: (INAUDIBLE.)
DAMON: They will be a thorn in America's eye just like it was at the start, she says. This unprecedented American attack is potentially as transformative as the toppling of Saddam Hussein.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (INAUDIBLE.)
DAMON: The map of Iraq has changed, Falsi Akram (ph), a former member of parliament says. The map of the new Iraq will be drawn in the blood of these martyrs. It's hard to find anyone who supports the U.S. in a country that, for decades, has paid a high price for American foreign policy. In Baghdad's Tahrir Square, where anti- government protesters have been demonstrating for months against their leaders and outside interference, there is little love for Iran.
But, right now, there is even less for the United States and the American troops stationed here. The crowd grows, arguing about who bears the bigger blame for Iraq's bloodshed, Iran or the United States. But there is agreement on one point, both need to get out.
UNIDENTIFIEDMALE: (INAUDIBLE.)
DAMON: Iran, get out; America, get out, this man passionately pleads. We are Iraqis. We want to be governed by an Iraqi. An Iraqi. It's our beloved Iraqi. Please understand us. But that's not part of the calculus for Iran or the U.S. This country is an arena to settle scores. (on camera): And, Bianna, and what is perhaps an ominous indication of what is to come. Kataib Hezbollah, the group whose leader was killed alongside Qasem Soleimani, the group that was also the target of the U.S. air strikes on Sunday, is telling the Iraqi security forces to stay away from U.S. military bases. To not allow themselves to become human shields for, as they put it, the American enemy. Another smaller militant group, also backed by Iran, is echoing those calls and saying that the deadline for this is Sunday evening.
GOLODRYGA: Arwa Damon showing us what a precarious situation Iraq faces now with this as well. Our thanks to her and her great reporting.
And a major programming note to tell you about. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, former Mayor Pete Buttigieg, Senator Elizabeth Warren, and House Intelligence Committee chairman, Adam Schiff, will all join Jake Tapper tomorrow. A huge edition. "STATE OF THE UNION" airs tomorrow morning at 9:00 right here on CNN.
And coming up, a legitimate threat or wag the dog? Why some critics are questioning the timing of President Trump's attack on Iran.
[20:14:36]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
GOLODRYGA: So, why now? As President Trump's critics question the timing of his strike on an Iranian general, a CNN KFile review found that ahead of the 2012 election, then private citizen Trump had questioned whether President Obama would try to start a war with Iran to win re-election. Take a listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Our president will start a war with Iran because he has absolutely no ability to negotiate. I believe that he will attack Iran sometime prior to the election, because he thinks that's the only way he can get elected. Isn't it pathetic?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GOLODRYGA: And joining me now, CNN Presidential Historian, Douglas Brinkley. Douglas, we like to say that there's a tweet for everything. I guess there's a video for everything, thanks to the KFile. You know, we've heard this wag-the-dog argument before. The charge was also leveled against President Clinton when he was ordering air strikes against Iraq amid his impeachment. In fact, just -- we want to show you this old front page "New York Times" headline, Impeachment Vote In House Delayed As Clinton Launches Iraq Air Strike.
So, is the criticism that President Trump is now getting about the timing of his strike a fair comparison or no?
DOUGLAS BRINKLEY, CNN PRESIDENTIAL HISTORIAN: Well, it's an obvious comparison. People are making it. But, you know, I think Bill Clinton got an unfair rap with that. It started in 1997 when the movie, "Wag the Dog," came out. The Barry Levinson movie with Dustin Hoffman and Robert De Niro.
And he was struggling with the Lewinsky scandal. And he did -- the U.S. government did strikes in Sudan and Afghanistan. And then, in December, 1998 against Iraq. And so, that term, wag the dog, just became part of American culture.
So, there we are, again. You put that headline up and Donald Trump's about to have a Senate trial like Clinton did. And we do this sort of strike against a major general, Soleimani, in Iran. So, you can see why the comparisons are being made. But I don't believe Donald Trump is wagging the dog any more than I believe Bill Clinton did. They're just trying to do a target of opportunity, at this moment in time.
GOLODRYGA: And can you remind us, because these were the pre-Twitter days, and President Clinton was able to restrain himself a bit more than President Trump during his impeachment, how did President Clinton face those accusations?
BRINKLEY: Clinton told Sandy Berger, his national security adviser, I'm going to get criticized no matter what during the Lewinsky scandal. I'm a pinata being just hammered by Republicans. Let's just do what's right for American foreign policy. In the end, in the Iraqi strikes, I mean, we were trying to get revenge on Osama Bin Laden. And we see the later havoc Osama Bin Laden wreaked on the United States.
So, I think with President Trump here, this is a -- you know, I -- we're dealing with an Iranian government that's been, you know, firing at oil facilities in Saudi Arabia and tankers in the Persian Gulf, and organizing trashing of our embassy.
[20:20:04]
Some kind of response was necessary and I would give President Trump the benefit of the doubt, at this time. However, the criticism is, there is no Trump Middle East strategy. Where is this headed? Things are going to unspool very quickly here. And this so-called deterrent strategy that the United States did may turn out to get us into another major war.
GOLODRYGA: And we have people questioning the intelligence that the administration put out there, suggesting that an attack was imminent, and, thus, that's what led to the killing of Soleimani.
But let me ask you, do you think it's going to be difficult for Democrats to keep Trump's Iran strike out of the impeachment proceedings?
BRINKLEY: Oh, it's going to come up. I mean, you already hear Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders just lambasting Trump right now. You know, Elizabeth Warren. Well, any -- somebody like Elizabeth Warren will bring it up during the impeachment trial. So, it's going to be an issue. But for Biden, who was for the Iraq War of George W. Bush era, this Iraq may be troublesome to him right now, because he has that vote. On the other hand, Joe Biden has foreign policy, you know, credentials. His eight years as vice president, a former head of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. So, it might actually help Biden that he's going to be able to talk in a serious foreign policy way.
But history is going to match what's going on now in Iran and Iraq with Donald Trump's Senate impeachment trial, and it leaves a very confusing and scary January right here. We have a -- Bill Clinton had a 60 percent approval rating during 1998. We have a president now at 40 percent. The public doesn't overwhelmingly trust Donald Trump to operate foreign policy in a -- in a productive and sane way.
GOLODRYGA: So, you're saying it's going to be a rocky year ahead. Douglas Brinkley, I think that's the takeaway I've gotten. We appreciate the walk down history lane.
BRINKLEY: Very rocky.
GOLODRYGA: Thank you so much. Have a great weekend.
BRINKLEY: All right, thank you.
GOLODRYGA: And tomorrow night, CNN's Wolf Blitzer will take a look back at the suspense and drama from, yes, President Clinton's impeachment trial. The CNN special report, "The Trial of William Jefferson Clinton," airs tomorrow night at 9:00 right here on CNN. You don't want to miss it.
We'll be right back.
[20:22:26]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
GOLODRYGA: Democrats in the Senate say the case to call witnesses at President Trump's impeachment trial has only gotten stronger since lawmakers went on break. But some new reporting suggests the White House is trying to keep the public from seeing some of the potential evidence.
According to "The New York Times," the Trump administration is refusing a court order to release 20 e-mails in which White House officials discussed freezing military aid to Ukraine. They're specifically between an aid to acting chief of staff, Mick Mulvaney, and Michael Duffy, a White House official at the Office of Management and Budget, who was in charge of the process to release the aid.
Joining me now, CNN Political Analyst, and staff writer for "The Dispatch," Sarah Isgur; and White House reporter for "Politico," Daniel Lipman.
Thank you, both, for joining us tonight.
DANIEL LIPMAN, WHITE HOUSE REPORTER, "POLITICO": Thanks. GOLODRYGA: Sarah, let me begin with you. We have actually seen some of Michael Duffy's e-mails already. And, in fact, e-mails obtained by just security, for example. He e-mailed an official at the Defense Department back in August, saying, quote, "clear direction from PO TUS to continue to hold."
Now, you can understand why "The New York Times" and other outlets would want to see these e-mails. I mean, this implies a direct link to the president. That's POTUS, right?
SARAH ISGUR, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: And this is why Democrats in the Senate are so interested in having witnesses, like Michael Duffy, there. What I think the White House might be actually fairly clever in doing is without the Articles of Impeachment having been transmitted and without the rules having been agreed to between McConnell and Schumer, they need all the chips in their corner they have to trade.
I think that someone, like Collin, someone like Murkowski, who have been the moderate Republicans who've said they're not sure whether they want to call witnesses or not, are going to definitely want to see these e-mails. And so, it is something they can trade in exchange for not having Duffy testify, for example.
So, I wouldn't be surprised if we see this used as a trade, a chip (ph) down the road by the White House and by Senate Republicans even.
GOLODRYGA: Daniel, do you think this -- do you agree? I mean, do you think this puts more pressure on seeing more of these e-mails? And, in that case, are you going to see Democrats now demanding that we do have witnesses?
LIPPMAN: Yes, you already saw Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer praise the reporting that led to some of the e-mails that we've already seen. And if you actually saw one of those e-mails from Robert Blair, who is Mick Mulvaney's national security adviser --
GOLODRYGA: He predicted.
LIPPMAN: Yes, he said this is going to be a major issue in Congress.
GOLODRYGA: Right. Right.
LIPPMAN: And one of those e-mails from Michael Duffy of OMB, to the Pentagon's general -- you know, one of their top lawyers, said that, I'm glad this is behind us. And when the aid finally got released right as the whistle-blower complaint was made -- being made public. And so, they, clearly, knew this was --
ISGUR: Famous last words.
LIPPMAN: -- yes. They, clearly, knew this was a political hot potato.
GOLODRYGA: Yes.
LIPPMAN: And there were a lot of concerns at DOD they were going to violate the law by holding that money.
GOLODRYGA: I mean, I have a theory. Mick Mulvaney, when he came out a few months ago and said, yes, that it was quid pro quo . Get over it. Deal with it. People were stunned by that. But I have a theory that, perhaps, he knew that we'd be here in a few months. So, why not just come out and admit it back then?
But that's just my theory. He hasn't said that. Let me ask you, Sarah, though. Mitch McConnell has tried to shut down any idea, any perception that Nancy Pelosi is directing the impeachment action, at this point. Let's take a listen to what he said.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. MITCH MCCONNELL (R), KENTUCKY, SENATE MAJORITY LEADER: Let me clarify Senate rules and Senate history for those who may be confused. First, about this fantasy that the speaker of the House will get to hand design the trial proceedings in the Senate, that's obviously a nonstarter.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GOLODRYGA: So, how much longer can we see Nancy Pelosi withhold these articles? And how much leverage, if any, does she continue to have right now?
ISGUR: Well, constitutionally, she has no particular leverage. On the other hand, politically, Mitch McConnell wants to get this over with. He has senators, Republican senators, up for election in 2020 who need this behind them as soon as possible.
[20:30:01]
Donald Trump on the other hand, I think has every incentive to want this to be a show. And so what she's doing by delaying is really driving that wedge between McConnell and the president, potentially. And you can see that in Mitch McConnell's face, this is getting annoying for him.
GOLODRYGA: Yes. He could do without this trial. But you're right. I think the president is itching to have one.
Daniel, you wrote a fascinating piece about the president cutting loose with some unpredictable characters during his Mar-a-Lago holiday, couple of weeks there. We saw Attorney Alan Dershowitz, Eddie Gallagher, remember, he's a disgraced then pardoned navy seal. And what would be a party without Rudy Giuliani?
What does that say to you about their appearances? Because we know this president is all about optics.
LIPPMAN: Well, it says to me that he is much more comfortable and relaxed down at Mar-a-Lago. He doesn't have a million aides who are hovering around him. He doesn't have as many gate keepers who are keeping people who he shouldn't be seen with as much from entering the White House. And it's even, in terms of security, the Secret Service was concerned early on in his presidency because Mar-a-Lago members would just bring in people to the resort to try to meet with Trump for their own personal agendas. And he did not want that.
And remember that Chinese woman who, you know, kind of found her way into Mar-a-Lago and then got arrested?
And so I think this -- she's one of those unpredictable characters I think.
GOLODRYGA: Yes. That is true. And you see the president making consequential decisions. For example, like the strike that took out Soleimani from Mar-a-Lago.
Sarah, what does that say to you about security and being tightly held to just a few top informants and advisers to the president?
ISGUR: Well, and we've seen this before. As Daniel has reported and others, the president likes to make decisions in Mar-a-Lago. He feels very comfortable there. Far more comfortable than I think he feels in the White House. And so I'm not surprised that this decision was made while he was in Mar-a-Lago.
We're also seeing the tweets where he has threatened Iran for threatening America by saying that they have 52 targets of cultural sites in Iran if Iran does anything to retaliate against the United States.
And so you have the Twitter feed, you have a president in his comfort zone and surrounded by friends and allies. And then, you know, the reporters on the outside like Daniel who are always down there reporting so well.
So I think it's an interesting place when the president is in Mar-a- Lago and the decisions, the huge decisions that he does make down there.
GOLODRYGA: Yes. He may be in his comfort zone. But I'm telling you tweets like that, I can't imagine how comfortable his top advisers are tonight.
LIPPMAN: But you also -- you also have the -- you know, when it rains and he can't go to his golf club, then White House advisers get nervous because he is just watching television all day and just tweeting and nothing, and then that --
GOLODRYGA: With his phone in hand.
LIPPMAN: -- creates more problems for them.
GOLODRYGA: That's right. Let's hope for good weather.
Sarah Isgur and Daniel Lippman, thank you so much.
LIPPMAN: Thanks. GOLODRYGA: Well, coming up, the 2020 candidates slammed Trump's decision to take out Iran's top general. Will it change the dynamics of the race?
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[20:35:01]
GOLODRYGA: Well, with just 30 days to the Iowa caucuses, the political ground has shifted dramatically following the death of Iranian military leader, Qassem Soleimani. Foreign policy is now front and center in the democratic race with candidates like Bernie Sanders weighing in on Trump's strike.
CNN's Jeff Zeleny reports.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
JEFF ZELENY, CNN SENIOR WASHINGTON CORRESPONDENT: Beyond a foreign policy suddenly taking stage in the democratic presidential campaign. One month before the Iowa caucuses open the 2020 voting, candidates are fanning out across the state indeed talking about the rising crisis in the Middle East.
Senator Bernie Sanders, for months, has been reminding voters of Joe Biden's vote for the Iraq war in 2002. Of course Mr. Biden renounced the vote a few years after that saying it was a mistake.
The voters we are talking to are saying, look, they are more concerned about the current crisis rather than an old vote. Senator Sanders is pressing that. He's also saying Congress should take action against President Trump.
SEN. BERNIE SANDERS (D-VT), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: If Congress wants the vote to go to war and I will vote against them, but if Congress wants to go to war, let Congress have the guts to vote for war. Do not let this president take unilateral action.
ZELENY: Of course, it was only Bernie Sanders and Joe Biden of all the field of candidates who were in Congress at the time of the last Iraq war vote. But other candidates are reminding voters that they were opposed to the war.
Bianna, it's so interesting. This is the fourth democratic presidential campaign primary in a row where that Iraq vote has been revisited.
Of course, back in the '04 campaign, the '08 campaign, the 2016 campaign, and now in this campaign. But the voters we're talking to, to a person said they are not focused on Joe Biden's old vote. They are focused on this current crisis.
But one thing is clear, experience and judgment are also front and center to this conversation. Joe Biden now is pushing as he has been his experience on the foreign policy front. All polls indicate that he is the strongest contender when foreign policy is concerned. But Bernie Sanders certainly trying to lean into that, erase some of that among some liberal caucus goers.
Bianna, with one month to go before the Iowa caucus, unclear how foreign policy is going to affect this. But certainly this race is very unsettled. Bianna?
GOLODRYGA: And Biden has, thus far, said he's not going to get into a fight with Bernie Sanders. We'll see if that holds.
Jeff Zeleny, thank you.
Well, his case helped trigger the Me Too movement. Now, disgraced movie mogul, Harvey Weinstein, is talking about the impending trial that could send him to prison for decades. What he told CNN is coming up.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[20:40:35]
GOLODRYGA: The trial of disgraced former movie mogul, Harvey Weinstein, starts this week. He's pleaded not guilty to rape and sexual assault charges that could land him in prison for decades, if not, for the rest of his life if he's convicted.
The case centers on allegations from two women but dozens more have accused him of sexual abuse and some of them are expected to testify.
Recently, Weinstein answered questions from CNN via e-mail. This is a big get for CNN. For more on that, I'm joined by CNN's Chloe Melas who worked so hard to get him to respond to your e-mails. I'm stunned that he did. Reading this is just -- why don't you tell us about it? Tell us about how he responded.
CHLOE MELAS, CNN CORRESPONDENT: So it's been months in the making, right? He hasn't really done any press at all. He spoke to the New York Post from his hospital room recently. But really, this is kind of the first time that we've really gotten a look into his life, his mental state on the eve of this looming trial that starts this week, jury selection like you said.
So among the questions I asked him about, you know, has he done any self-reflection? He says he's been in a 12-step rehab program. He said that he didn't want to comment on whether or not he has empathy for any of the accusers.
Now, all the 80 accusers, right? That's the number that we keep hearing. But like you said, the trial only focuses on two. A little bit of what he said, he said the past two years have been grueling and have presented me with a great opportunity for self-reflection.
I realize now that I was consumed with my work, my company, and my drive for success. He also goes on to say this caused me to neglect my family, my relationships, and to lash out at the people around me. Then he goes on to talk about doing meditation, being in rehab, and learning to give up control. He also told me via e-mail that he plans to rebuild his movie business because the Weinstein Company that he founded with his brother that is now no more, he hopes to make movies again here in the U.S.
GOLODRYGA: It sounds like we're on earth and he's somewhere else, because reading his response, it comes across as, oh, I worked too hard and I neglected my family and maybe I had a few affairs. That is not what these women are accusing him of. There are some 80 women. I know this trial focuses on two.
And you sat down with his criminal defense attorney to talk about whatever strategy they have in place. What did she say?
MELAS: I did. So I sat down with her on Friday. Her name Donna Rotunno. And she has recently joined the case in May, because he's gone through a few different criminal defense attorneys. And exactly what you're saying, this is what she said about that. take a listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MELAS: Do you think that he acknowledges that even if he claims he didn't do anything criminal that he does acknowledge that perhaps he did behave inappropriately at times or abused his power?
DONNA ROTUNNO, LAWYER FOR HARVEY WEINSTEIN: Sure. I think that Harvey would be the first one to say he did bad things. He cheated on his wife. He was dishonest about that. He had multiple women that he slept with at different points and he would say that those were bad choices. He's lost everything for those bad choices.
And so, you know, nobody is trying to claim that he's a saint and that he never did anything wrong or that he wasn't, you know, bombastic at work or didn't treat assistants poorly.
But as we've talked about as the defense team, there's a lot of room between treating someone poorly, cheating on your wife, and being a rapist. And that's a large leap to take. And I don't believe Harvey is a rapist. I don't believe the evidence will show Harvey is a rapist.
And so my fear about this case is that what is attempting to happen in this courtroom is that the government is trying to criminalize morality.
[20:45:09]
MELAS: If he is found not guilty of all of the charges, what would be his next move?
ROTUNNO: I think he wants to rebuild and I think he should be given that opportunity. The man is a creative genius. He has made unbelievable films. And I know he would love to go back to doing that. I think it's difficult when you have the creative mind that he has to not have an outlet for that. And I think that he would be ready to go.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MELAS: So keep in mind that this legal defense team tried to move the location of the trial to like Buffalo, a place where maybe people don't know as much about Harvey Weinstein. They are concerned about whether or not they're going to find impartial 12 jurors. And we'll see if that's possible.
But again, they're adamant that he's done nothing wrong other than had affairs, maybe wasn't the guy that you'd want to be friends with or be married to but that he's not a rapist.
GOLODRYGA: It's unbelievable that they think that all that he's done wrong is philandering.
But let's talk about the courtroom setting and who's going to be there specifically. What's that going to look like?
MELAS: Right. Well, 8:30 in the morning Monday is when people will be allowed to enter the courthouse and you are going to see a lot of women from the Me Too movement, Time's Up, many of his accusers. Rosanna Arquette has been very vocal on social media that she will be there.
And you're going to see a lot of them wearing white. There's going to be a press conference Monday morning at 10:00 a.m. Keep in mind also, there's going to be something called Bad Act Witnesses. There are three witnesses that are going to be allowed to testify uncharged acts just to show a pattern of behavior.
So again, you can imagine that the defense team, they're trying to gear up for what those -- who those witnesses are and what they are going to say.
GOLODRYGA: And those witnesses have a lot to say really spearheading this Me Too movement in large part because of the incredible reporting on Harvey Weinstein. And it's equally incredible that you're able to get these comments from him.
MELAS: Thank you.
GOLODRYGA: Thank you so much for being here. I know you're under the weather. You look great though. Thank you. Great work.
MELAS: Thank you. I appreciate it. Thanks.
GOLODRYGA: Well, coming up, the devastating scene in Australia. Thick smoke, red skies, and a fire the size of Manhattan putting people and animals at risk.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[20:50:54]
GOLODRYGA: Thick smoke, red skies, and deadly flames are forcing thousands from their homes as catastrophic wildfires rage across much of southern Australia. And the combination of record high temperatures and strong winds are making dangerous conditions even worse.
On Saturday, three separate fires merged into one giant blaze bigger than the borough of Manhattan.
CNN's Anna Coren is live in Eden in New South Wales, Australia, where a state of emergency is in effect.
Anna, I'm sorry. I don't want to trivialize this. It really looks like you're on the planet mars. It is incredible. And what these people are going through and suffering is immeasurable, as well. Tell us how things are on the ground.
ANNA COREN, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Bianna, we are here in Eden which is on the New South Wales-Victorian border. And the fire that is burning which is why the sky is this orange color is directly across the water.
We understand that a timber mill has gone up in flames. It is right next to a naval ammunitions base. And the fear is that this fire is going to come around and engulf Eden. That is the threat. We heard from police earlier telling residents who decided to stay here in Eden to get out, that they cannot protect them.
Well, there are many residents who are refusing to go. They've actually come here to the wharf, this is where they had to come last night in their cars with their possessions, their dogs, their animals. And people are now seeking refuge on this tug.
They say this is where they will wait it out. This is where they will see out the fire. And so far, there are dozens of people on board. Many children. We're going to head on inside a little bit later. But this is sort of seen as the last resort if you like.
Now people are furious, Bianna. People just feel abandoned, particularly by the Australian Prime Minister, Scott Morrison. Take a listen to what Jenny Robb had to say to me a little bit earlier.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JENNY ROBB, RESIDENT: We feel abandoned. We have exactly what Joy said. We have a facility over there that we store ammunitions for the navy in our little town. We feel like we've just been abandoned.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COREN: You know, the anger is so raw, the fear is raw, and it's understandable, particularly when you're looking at these skies. I mean, it's truly apocalyptic. I've never seen anything quite like this.
But as I say, there are people obviously who are getting out, who are leaving. But there are others, Bianna, who say they are going to stay. But they're saying, where is the military?
The prime minister yesterday announced that 3,000 ADF members were going to be deployed. They're saying, where are they? There's a naval base just around the corner, and they haven't seen one member of the military here.
So these residents are crying out, they need help, and they need it now.
GOLODRYGA: They need it now. Your heart breaks for Jenny Robb.
And just to reminder our viewers what they can see, it's nearly 1:00 p.m. in the afternoon. You'd have no idea what time it is given the background there. People behind you walking around in oxygen masks. It is apocalyptic. And it's Australia. People would expect that there would be precautions and the military there in place at this point already.
I want to tell you, Anna, and your -- everyone there around you that we are following this story closely. And we appreciate your reporting. Thank you so much.
And for those who want information on how you can help the victims of the Australia bushfires, just head to cnn.com/impact.
Well, on a different note, with so much attention on Iran and the Middle East right now, let's not forget a very important situation playing out on the other part of the world and that is North Korea. The president is also facing a flare up in relations with the longtime adversary. And CNN's Brian Todd reports.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
[20:55:03]
BRIAN TODD, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): The New Year brings bold strokes of bravado from North Korea's supreme leader.
As his propaganda arm releases new video of a recent visit Kim Jong-un made to the revered Mount Paektu on a white stallion complete with sound effects of the horse's gallop.
(HORSE THUMPS)
The dictator brashly declared that his country will no longer be bound by his self-declared halt to the testing of his nuclear bombs and long-range missiles. As the world sees fresh video of Kim's officers standing in the water, then Kim posing with his wife, Ri Sol-ju, in a snow-banked stream. We also get an ominous new warning from the despot.
The world will witness a new strategic weapon to be possessed by the DPRK in the near future. What kind of weapon could that be?
BRUCE KLINGER, FORMER CIA ANALYST: Many of us are expecting some kind of ICBM launch, whether it's an existing missile that they have or a variant or, perhaps, even a new ICBM like solid fuel. They could do additional submarine launches. They could do land-based medium range. They could do intermediate range missiles.
They could with an ICBM finally demonstrate that they have a re-entry vehicle capability, that's would protect the warhead as it comes back into the earth's atmosphere.
TODD: Despite the cheerful propaganda of Kim immerging from a photo- op on Mount Paektu with soldiers frantically applauding, analysts say the young leader is likely frustrated that his nuclear diplomacy with President Trump has not paid off for him.
JESSICA LEE, THE QUINCY INSTITUTE: There has been no lifting of sanctions. There has been no progress on ending the Korean War. And there's been no progress in having regular diplomatic negotiations without it being cut short.
And so frankly, Kim Jong-un doesn't have much to show for it right now.
TODD: Venting that frustration, Kim's regime imposed a deadline for more progress toward a nuclear weapons deal with the U.S. to be made by the end of 2019 or else, the regime threatened the so-called Christmas gift to America which many experts believed would be the testing of a long-range missile.
That hasn't come yet. And even with his latest new year's threats, analysts point out Kim did not say he's walking away from diplomacy with President Trump.
LEE: What Kim Jong-un has done by signaling assertiveness and aggressiveness but also leaving the door for diplomacy is to say, look, we want to negotiate as much as you guys do.
TODD: And the president even as Kim's latest threats were trickling in from Pyongyang said he's still banking on his personal relationship with Kim.
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: He likes me, I like him, we get along. I think he's a man of his word. So we're going to find out. But I think he's a man of his word.
TODD: But some believe if Kim tests a long-range missile soon, Trump and his team should no longer be so accommodating.
KLINGER: The U.S. should stop our own self-imposed constraints on military exercises. We've canceled at least 13 exercises. That's degraded U.S. deterrents and defense capabilities.
TODD (on-camera): Analysts say if Kim Jong-un does test a long-range missile sometime soon, a big challenge for the Trump team is going to be to get tough with Kim without overreacting. One way to thread that needle, they say, the Trump team could target Kim with specific sanctions like going after the Chinese banks that launder his money for him.
Brian Todd, CNN, Washington.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
GOLODRYGA: Another foe watching what's transpiring in Iran, that's for sure, very closely. Well, that does it for me on a busy Saturday night. I'm Bianna Golodryga.
Up next, it's the CNN film "Linda Ronstadt: The Sound of My Voice." I can't wait to watch that. Have a good night.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
