Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

John Bolton Willing to Testify in Trump Impeachment Trial; President Trump Threatens Iranian Cultural Sites; Iran's Revenge. Aired 3-3:30p ET

Aired January 06, 2020 - 15:00   ET

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

[15:00:01]

BROOKE BALDWIN, CNN HOST: That warning prompting experts to say President Trump could be close to committing a war crime.

But the war of words doesn't end there. Iraq furious at the drone strike, which took place at the Baghdad Airport, a decision that officials say was a slap in the country's dignity and sovereignty. They voted this weekend to oust U.S. troops from Iraq.

So, roughly 5,000 are currently on the ground there as part of a coalition to fight ISIS. And, once again, President Trump is returning the threat, saying that not only will the U.S. issue sanctions if troops are kicked out of that country, but that he will force Iraq to pay billions of dollars for an air base there.

In Iran, the daughter of Qasem Soleimani is warning that dark days lie ahead for the United States, as mourners fill the streets in her father's memory, the anger palpable, as many in the region and elsewhere wondering what Iran could do to take revenge against the United States.

So, with that, let's start with CNN international correspondent Fred Pleitgen there live in Tehran.

And, Fred, I mean, you are there. You are at the center of these tensions. Is there any sense that a response to the United States is imminent, or, as happened in the past, is Iran just playing the long game?

FREDERIK PLEITGEN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Hi, Brooke.

Well, the Iranians certainly are saying that they are going to respond to this drone strike. However, I have been talking to senior commanders, senior advisers to Iran's supreme leader, and they say, look, we're not going to tell you exactly what we're going to do.

But they did say very clearly that there is going to be response. They said it's going to be a military response. And it's going to be, as they said, against military sites. So, certainly, that doesn't bode well. It could be quite dangerous for U.S. forces here, not just in and around Iran, but in the entire Middle Eastern region.

Keep in mind that the Iranians do have proxy forces in a lot of Middle Eastern countries all the way to Lebanon, Iraq, of course, as well Syria, also. So that could be quite a dangerous situation.

A senior adviser to Iran's supreme leader, though, Brooke, telling me flat out Iran does not want a war with the United States. They say they will respond, but they want things to stop there.

Now, of course, that doesn't necessarily mesh with what President Trump is saying, that if the Iranians do respond, that he intends to retaliate in a massive way, if that does happen.

Nevertheless, here, on the streets in Tehran, I was at those giant processions for Qasem Soleimani that happened today in Tehran, Brooke, and the anger there, you're absolutely right, is very much palpable. There were people who were screaming "Death to America."

There were people who were, quite frankly, calling for revenge. I was standing there in the crowd, and people were holding these placards that had two words just written on them, "Harsh revenge." And that's what many people were calling for.

Obviously, Qasem Soleimani, despite the fact that, of course, internationally, he's an extremely controversial figure, here in Iran, he's very much revered among a lot of people because they believe that he did a lot to combat ISIS, and made sure that ISIS didn't make its way over here to Iran.

So, a lot of anger on the streets of Iran, people calling for revenge against the United States, and that anger directed very, very much at the Trump administration and President Trump himself -- Brooke.

BALDWIN: Speaking of President Trump, as you and I are talking, President Trump has called into Rush Limbaugh's radio show. He's speaking right now. He's basically defending this targeted strike, saying it should have been done 10 to 20 years ago. Listen to him.

(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: This should have been done for the last 15 to 20 years, him in particular. He was their real military leader. He's a terrorist. He was designated a terrorist by President Obama.

And then Obama did nothing about it.

(END AUDIO CLIP)

BALDWIN: So, Fred, how will Iran react to that? And just remind viewers why former presidents never took this action.

PLEITGEN: No, you're absolutely -- you're right. Former presidents did not take the action.

The Iranians obviously are going to be quite angry about this. I mean, we have seen today the amount of support that Qasem Soleimani had here in Iran, and then also, of course, among the ranks of the Iranian military as well. And one of the things that also a senior adviser to the supreme leader

was telling me, Brooke, he said, look, Qasem Soleimani is obviously a strong military leader here in Iran, but he certainly isn't the only one.

And they have already found a replacement for Qasem Soleimani. That replacement is already in his office. And that replacement has already said that he will also take revenge against the United States and wants the -- or wants to drive, as he put, the U.S. out of the Middle Eastern region.

So if President Trump is saying that this is something that would stop Iran or deter Iran, the Iranians very much making clear that that's not going to be the case, that the Quds Force, which is a foreign operations wing of Iran's Revolutionary Guard Corps, the most elite force in Iran's military, it's not just one man. It's an organization that's been built up over several decades now.

[15:05:01]

And they certainly have a big footprint in the greater Middle Eastern region. And they say they can continue to operate exactly the way that they have operated before.

And there is obviously a lot of anger at the killing of Qasem Soleimani. But I think another thing that you mentioned at the beginning is also very key, because it's not just that that's enraged people here about the recent moves that President Trump made, especially him saying or tweeting that 52 Iranian sites, as he put it, are in the crosshairs of the U.S., also sites that are important to Iranian culture.

That doesn't go down well with anybody here, because if it's one thing Iranians who are quite divided on a lot of issues can agree on is that this country has a thousands-of-year-old history, a lot of cultural heritage sites.

And it's certainly in no one's interest to have those be in any way jeopardized -- Brooke.

BALDWIN: I'm so glad you brought that up. I'm going to start there with my next guest.

Fred Pleitgen, you are excellent in Tehran. Thank you very much.

Brett Bruen is the president of the Global Situation Room. He's also a former director of global engagement for the Obama White House.

So, Brett, thank you so much for being with me.

And Fred just hit on the significance, the beauty of these cultural sites in Iran. Explain to me why these threats from President Trump to hit these cultural sites would be, first of all, just unlawful.

BRETT BRUEN, FORMER WHITE HOUSE DIRECTOR OF GLOBAL ENGAGEMENT: Well, it violates a U.N. Security Council resolution, which the U.S., in fact, the Trump administration voted for in 2017.

And this was because ISIS was destroying cultural sites, historic sites in Iraq. And it was declared at that time to be a war crime. It has been for many decades against international law for countries to destroy historically important sites.

But this is really crossing a major red line. It is also working against the U.S. interest to try and rally support against what the Iranian regime is doing, because we are threatening something that all Iranians have in common.

BALDWIN: And then also, Brett, you yourself, you were a diplomat for over a decade. We know President Trump likes to use Twitter for his diplomatic announcements.

But he also said that a tweet is perfectly fine, that it's enough to notify Congress about any planned U.S. military action in Iran.

But isn't there just one minor issue, the 1973 War Powers Act?

BRUEN: Well, I think the president is conflating a Twitter war with an actual war.

The rules not only of warfare here in the United States do require the president to go and ask for congressional authorization. Now, the White House is trying to stretch an authorization that was passed for an entirely different purpose, not to go to war against Iran, but to fight terrorism.

And so I think the White House is on very shaky legal ground here. And if we are going to engage in further military action, I think we absolutely have to have both parties, both branches of government on board.

BALDWIN: And when you hear the president announce everything from attacking cultural sites to sanctions to other measures on Twitter, what do you make of that? I mean, is he not endangering our troops and others in the region by telegraphing U.S. plans?

BRUEN: Well, I would say not only endangering our troops, but endangering our own historic cultural sites, because he's putting them on the battlefield.

And I think this notion of reciprocity is lost on President Trump, because everything that he threatens the Iranians or others, the next extremist group will take a cue from and say, President Trump said it, so I can do it.

BALDWIN: Brett Bruen, thank you very much for coming on and all of that.

In Washington, just given this conversation that is swirling, how are Republicans responding to Iran as lawmakers return to Capitol Hill? We know the full Senate is back today. The House returns to session tomorrow.

Jamie Gangel is our CNN special correspondent.

And you are always one text away from an invaluable voice on the Hill, especially Republicans.

What are you hearing from Republican hawks?

JAMIE GANGEL, CNN CORRESPONDENT: So, I specifically spoke to Republican hawks over the weekend and this morning, because the people I spoke to actually support the strike on Soleimani.

These are people who for many years thought this is a bad actor. It might be something to consider to take him out.

BALDWIN: Yes.

GANGEL: So, that said, they are very concerned about the way it was done, the speed, that it felt chaotic, unexpected.

And they're very concerned about, has the White House, has the administration, has Donald Trump really prepared for what comes next?

BALDWIN: Like, do they have a plan? Do they have a strategy?

GANGEL: Do they have a plan?

Is someone ready? We don't know what the Iranians are going to do.

BALDWIN: Right.

GANGEL: Is there a plan for three steps down the road?

[15:10:01]

And the other thing that one source said to me was, they're very worried about Donald Trump's Twitter finger, because it does have an impact in the region when he says something.

BALDWIN: Yes.

GANGEL: And so there is -- when you look at the administration as a whole, there are really a handful of people there, the grownups that we have we have talked about, Mike Pompeo, Defense Secretary Esper, Robert O'Brien, who's relatively new to the job.

There are also a lot of jobs that are empty in the administration. Are they ready to handle whatever comes next? And that's a real concern for Republicans.

BALDWIN: Yes.

I'm also curious, are you getting any answers to why this administration decided to strike Soleimani? Because this is a man who has been -- who the U.S. has been well aware of for years, both in the Bush administration and the Obama administration. They obviously chose was not to take them out.

GANGEL: Right.

BALDWIN: This administration felt differently. Do we know why?

GANGEL: So what our reporting is, is that there were people in the administration, Mike Pompeo, maybe Esper, maybe Milley, who, when they put together the plans, A, B and C, this was one of the alternatives, and they were surprised that President Trump took this option.

BALDWIN: That he took this option.

GANGEL: So, the question is, maybe more, how did they get him there? And I don't think that we really -- we weren't in the room. We don't know for sure.

BALDWIN: Yes.

GANGEL: But I spoke to several Republicans who thought about, what would touch a nerve with Donald Trump? And, yes, we know the contractor was killed.

BALDWIN: Yes.

GANGEL: But they think those pictures of the embassy being attacked really struck a nerve with Trump. It was perhaps presented to him as this could be Benghazi, something that he wouldn't want. He doesn't like being compared to Obama. This will show them that America is different.

BALDWIN: Stay with me. I have more questions for you.

We are also following breaking news on all things impeachment. Former National Security Adviser John Bolton now says he is willing to testify before Congress if he is subpoenaed. So, we will talk through that.

Also, we will take you live to Fort Bragg in North Carolina, as thousands of soldiers have just been given orders to deploy to the Middle East. Hear how their families are coping as the crisis with Iran is escalating.

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[15:17:50]

BALDWIN: Now to the breaking news regarding the pending impeachment trial of President Trump.

John Bolton, his former national security adviser, just stepped into line to possibly become its star witness. He announced just a short time ago -- quote -- "I have concluded that, if the Senate issues a subpoena for my testimony, I am prepared to testify."

Now, if Bolton receives a subpoena, he would be the highest-level administration official to cooperate. And his attorney has foreshadowed just how much Bolton knows about the freeze of military aid to Ukraine.

His lawyer has written that Bolton was -- quote -- "personally involved" in -- quote -- "many relevant meetings and conversations that have yet to be discussed in testimonies thus far." Bolton was reportedly part of the trio of top officials who tried to convince the president to release the Ukraine security funding in late August in the Oval Office.

And, don't forget, remember witness Fiona Hill, when she sat there on the Hill testifying that John Bolton described the pressure campaign on Ukraine as -- quote, unquote -- "like a drug deal" and the president's attorney Rudy Giuliani as a -- quote -- "hand grenade"?

Yes, that's all John Bolton potential.

With me now, CNN special correspondent Jamie Gangel. She's back. Joining her, Elie Honig, CNN legal analyst and former federal and state prosecutor.

OK, I got a lot of questions on this one. But let me just start with...

GANGEL: We have a new hand grenade.

(LAUGHTER)

BALDWIN: We do. We do.

ELIE HONIG, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Yes.

BALDWIN: Why offer this now?

HONIG: I think it's all -- the timing is really important here.

And I think what he's doing is upping the pressure on Mitch McConnell, and potentially on some of those more moderate Republicans, to get on board. Pretty soon, we're going to have to decide. The Senate is going to have to decide, is going to be a real trial? Are we going to have witnesses? Is there going to be real fact-finding, or is this just going to be an empty political whitewash?

And I think John Bolton is savvy enough to realize the clock is ticking. By coming out today, he ups the pressure.

BALDWIN: Before we even get to Mitch McConnell, what -- same question to you. Why do you think he's offering this now?

GANGEL: I have no idea.

(LAUGHTER)

BALDWIN: Love a good honest Jamie Gangel.

GANGEL: But let's take a look at a couple of things. He's writing a book. He has a book contract for $2 million. Maybe someone suggested to him, not a good idea when you're dealing with impeachment, the country to...

BALDWIN: To be cashing in on a book deal.

GANGEL: To be cashing in and not testifying.

Maybe something else changed. Maybe he saw what was happening in Iran. Maybe other people spoke to him and said, you have to do this. We don't know yet.

But, to Elie's point, there is -- this is really tough on Mitch McConnell.

BALDWIN: Talk to me about that.

(CROSSTALK)

GANGEL: Because Mitch McConnell didn't want witnesses. I didn't have to call anyone on this. Everybody -- the phone blew up from Republicans saying, what happened? Why is he doing this? They were shocked.

And, arguably, this puts Mitch McConnell in a very tough position, because he didn't want any witnesses. And how do you say no to John Bolton, if John Bolton saying is, yes, I want to testify?

It also means it opens the door for other potential witnesses to be called.

BALDWIN: When we first saw the news, we thought, no way, Jose.

[15:20:00]

But then you need -- they need 51 votes, right? And there are a couple of moderate Republicans who perhaps could be swayed. I mean, is this in the realm of a possibility?

HONIG: I think it is.

And let's understand, John Bolton is not just the next witness on the block here.

BALDWIN: Right.

HONIG: I mean, he could really be the most important witness. We know already that he was in several key meetings directly with Donald Trump discussing -- not just discussing the Ukraine aid, but trying to get Trump to agree to release it, unsuccessfully.

And if there is one question that overrides all of this, it is, why did Donald Trump withhold the aid? Why? There's very few people who can answer that question. I think John Bolton is one of them.

GANGEL: The other thing is, Republicans have said over and over they would like a firsthand witness, someone who spoke to the press event about this.

We know that John Bolton there was an Oval Office meeting.

BALDWIN: Yes.

GANGEL: Is he a firsthand witness? We don't know yet. What was said in that meeting?

But Republicans have said that this is what they want to hear. I don't know how you don't subpoena John Bolton at this point, especially when you have some vulnerable senators, someone like Susan Collins in Maine, who, either way this goes, whatever she decides to do, it's a no-win situation for her in that race.

BALDWIN: Yes.

GANGEL: But if there's information out there that could really say, this was said or it wasn't said, it makes a big difference to someone like Susan Collins.

BALDWIN: Jamie and Elie, hold tight.

There is more breaking news on this crisis with Iran. We are learning six B-52 bombers are being deployed to be ready for potential operations against Iran. We will talk about what that could mean.

Plus, we are live near Fort Bragg, North Carolina, where thousands of troops have just been given the order to deploy to the Middle East. Thousands more are on standby. I will talk to the wife of one soldier who is 38 weeks' pregnant and does not know if her husband will be there for their baby's birth.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[15:26:54]

(JOINED IN PROGRESS)

SEN. MITCH MCCONNELL (R-KY): ... before being briefed on it, and rushed to downplay Soleimani's evil, while presenting our own president as the villain.

Soon after the news broke, one of our distinguished colleagues made a public statement that rightly called Soleimani a murderer, and then, amazingly, walked that message back when the far left objected to the factual statement.

Since then, I believe all her criticism is directed at our own president.

Another of my Democratic colleagues has been thinking out loud about Middle East policy on social media. Mere days before President Trump's decision, this senator tore into the White House for what he described as weakness and inaction.

"No one fears us," he complained. "Trump has rendered America in the Middle East." But since the strike, a complete 180. That same senators has harshly criticized our own president for getting tough. Ludicrously, he and others on the left have accused the administration of committing an illegal act and equated the removal of this terrorist leader with a foreign power assassination of our own secretary of defense.

Well, here's what one expert had to say about it, Jeh Johnson, President Obama's own former Pentagon, general counsel and secretary of homeland security. Here's what he said.

"If you believe everything that our government is saying about General Soleimani, he was a lawful military objective. And the president under his constitutional authority as commander in chief had ample domestic legal authority to take him out without, without an additional congressional authorization. Whether he was a terrorist or a general in a military force that was engaged in armed attacks against our people, he was a lawful military objective."

That's the former secretary of homeland security in the Obama administration, Jeh Johnson, an expert on these things.

And our former colleague Joe Lieberman, who ran for vice president on the Democratic ticket in 2000, wrote this morning that: "In their uniformly skeptical or negative reactions to Soleimani's death, Democrats are creating the risk that the U.S. will be seen as acting and speaking with less authority abroad at this important time."

That's how a former Democratic senator sees it.

Look, the Senate is supposed to be the chamber where overheated partisan passions to give way to sober judgment.

Can we not at least wait until we know the facts? Can we not maintain a shred, just a shred of national unity for five minutes, for five minutes, before deepening the partisan trenches?

[15:30:00]