Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

First-Hand Look At Iraqi Air Base Targeted By Iran; Iran Admits Shooting Down Passenger Plane By Mistake; World Leaders Demand Full Investigation Into Iran's Missile Strike; Shifting Stories Raise Doubt Over Justification Of U.S. Strike; GOP Sen. Collins Working On Deal To Call Impeachment Witnesses; Prince Harry And Meghan Markle Stepping Back From Royal Duties. Aired 11a-12p ET

Aired January 11, 2020 - 11:00   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:59:55]

FREDRICKA WHITFIELD, CNN ANCHOR: Good morning, everyone and welcome.

I'm Fredricka Whitfield.

CNN now getting an exclusive first-hand look at one of the Iraqi military bases that was hit by Iran earlier this week. The attack came just days after President Trump ordered a drone strike that killed Iran's top military commander, Qasem Soleimani. There were no U.S. casualties, but damage to the Al Assad Air Base appears to be extensive.

CNN Senior International Correspondent, Arwa Damon is the first journalist granted access to that base in western Baghdad. And here she is with a look at the damage. Arwa?

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

ARWA DAMON, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: These used to be living quarters. This is where the troops would sleep, at least one of the areas. There's almost nothing left. Nothing that was salvageable we were told.

The crater itself impacted over here and it was one of ten impacts that happened.

Being here, it's truly extraordinary how anyone managed to survive this. There were no casualties. when you look at the destruction and then hearing all of the stories of the close calls, of the heroics.

What we are now learning is that there was advanced warning to a certain degree. They knew something was going to happen, they just didn't know what. And about 11:00 p.m. at night, those that were able to go to the bunkers, went to the bunkers.

But there were still troops that were out manning posts, that because of the security situation, they had to stay at. So people were beginning to take shelter at around 11:00 p.m. And then at 1:34, that's when the first impact happened.

A lot of those who we are talking to are saying that it was unlike anything they had ever imagined. Of course, on the one hand the training does kick in, but at the end of the day, this is a terrifying experience.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

WHITFIELD: All right. That was Arwa Damon reporting from Al Assad Air Base in Iraq. We'll have much more of her exclusive reporting throughout the day.

And right now, Iran now is taking the blame, admitting it mistakenly shot down a commercial airplane, killing all 176 people on board. The news confirming what many suspected after Ukraine Airlines flight 752 crashed on Wednesday. Iran calls it a disastrous mistake caused by human error.

The admission follows days of denials from the Iranian government and now President Hassan Rouhani is promising to prosecute those responsible following a full investigation.

The flight bound for Ukraine crashed shortly after take-off out of Iran just hours after Iran have launched a barrage of missiles at the two military bases in Iraq that we told you about at the beginning of this broadcast. And that those bases housing U.S. troops, and the attacks overall were retaliation for the U.S. strike that killed Iranian Commander Qasem Soleimani.

We have a team of reporters in the region. CNN's Frederik Pleitgen is live in Iran for us.

So Fred-- this was a shocking admission coming from Iran. What else is Iran saying and that it's willing to prosecute or pledging to prosecute those responsible? What does it mean by that exactly?

FREDERIK PLEITGEN, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, I think the Iranians are saying that they're going to have a full investigation of what was going on.

Quite interesting to be on the ground here though -- Fredricka because basically, you're absolutely right, the Iranians had been saying, or had been denying that they have shot down this plane for the past couple of days. And now that they're admitting that they shot it down, they're coming out with a lot of informational details about what essentially happened on that early morning.

They say that because they had just conducted that strike on that base that we just saw Arwa at, that they were expecting the United States to retaliate. And they say that their air defense systems were essentially on a war footing. They said they saw a lot of activity by American aircraft near their borders -- near what they call sensitive sites. And they believed at least at some point that cruise missiles were on their way to Iran.

Now as far as this particular surface-to-air missile battery is concerned that shot down that plane, from what we hear from the head of the Revolutionary Guard Air Defense Forces, he says that the plane took off and then the plane was going towards what they say was a sensitive Revolutionary Guard area. And because of its height and because of its pitch, the head of that surface-to-air missile battery misidentified it as an incoming cruise missile.

Now apparently the head of that surface-to-air missile battery then tried to radio up the chain of command and asked for permission or asked whether or not he was supposed to shoot it down. They say he couldn't reach anyone at the top of the chain of command and that he essentially had ten seconds to make that decision and then fatefully made the decision to mistakenly shoot that plane down, obviously with all the devastating consequences with the people on board and obviously now that international backlash as well.

[11:05:04]

PLEITGEN: Interesting also is that the Revolutionary Guard commander says that they wanted planes -- all civilian air traffic to be grounded after they conducted that strike on those bases housing the Americans but they said that that never made it through the chain of communications and therefore civilian air traffic was still going out of that airport and other airports here in Iran as well.

And you're absolutely right. The Iranians now saying they want to prosecute those who are behind it. Obviously this caused some big backlash here in Iran. In fact there are some protests going on right now at a university here in central Tehran, which had several people who were on that flight and who were killed on that flight. People there also demanding accountability -- Fredricka.

WHITFIELD: Fred Pleitgen -- thank you so much.

All right. Meanwhile, it's even bigger than the reaction from Iran, the international community is demanding more answers into that missile launch that took down that commercial Ukrainian plane.

CNN's Chief International Correspondent, Clarissa Ward is in Kiev, Ukraine with the latest. So Clarissa -- this was a Ukrainian Airlines flight but the black boxes are being sent to France. Why?

CLARISSA WARD, CNN CHIEF INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, essentially it was the country that everybody could agree would be a neutral party in forensically going through the contents of those black boxes.

Iran had initially wanted to examine them inside Iran but a number of other countries, including Ukraine, made it clear that that would not be acceptable. So those black boxes will now head to France to be analyzed.

We have heard from the Ukraine president today, Volodymyr Zelensky. Up until this point, Fredricka -- he had been very sort of tight-lipped in refusing to point any fingers to say categorically what Ukraine's theory was as to what had happened to the flight. But now we saw a much more forceful statement from him saying essentially that the investigation must continue in an unfettered manner, that the bodies must be returned here to Ukraine. And also talking about the demand for compensation for the families of this senseless tragedy.

We also have heard today from Ukrainian Airlines, who had been somewhat criticized for their decision to go ahead and fly despite, you know, obvious tensions that were going on and the fact that a battery of ballistic missiles had just been shot over into U.S. bases in Iraq.

They went to great pains to say that they did nothing wrong, that they had been given absolutely no information to support the idea that there was any reason why they shouldn't fly. They put up a sort of, you know, slide show to explain the corridor they took and really that they took pains to ensure the security of all of those on board.

We know now as well that President Zelensky should be speaking with the Iranian President Hassan Rouhani in any moment now, essentially. And certainly this doesn't feel like a victory for anyone here in Ukraine. But I would say there's a certain relief in having some clarity now in knowing what took down this plane and what caused the death of all these poor, poor civilians -- Fredricka.

WHITFIELD: And while, you know, that relief is bittersweet, are there any demands that are being made from, you know, Ukraine of Iran now that Iran has taken responsibility?

WARD: Well, the prosecutor general's office has come out and sort of changed the category into which they put this investigation. They're now saying that they are looking into willful killing and aircraft destruction.

What they're basically doing there is teeing up along the road some kind of a judicial process that would ultimately give people compensation for the loss of life. The vast majority of people on that plane were actually not Ukrainian but there were nine Ukrainian crew members, two Ukrainian civilians also who were on board -- so 11 total. Not to mention the cost to the airline of the plane -- Fredricka.

WHITFIELD: Yes. And there's the graphic showing the variety of places in which those passengers and crew originate -- Afghanistan, Germany, U.K., Sweden, Canada and Iran.

Clarissa Ward -- thank you so much.

All right. With me now Retired Brigadier General Mark Kimmitt, former assistant Secretary of State in the Bush administration where he oversaw Middle East policy; and Peter Goelz is a former managing director of the National Transportation Safety Board and a CNN aviation analyst. Good to see both of you.

So General -- you first, you know, Iran's military first denied it was a missile that took down that passenger jet on Wednesday. And then over a period of days it continued to deny that until everyone saw extraordinary video. And now an admission.

But didn't Iran know likely from the very beginning that it was responsible?

BRIG. GEN. MARK KIMMITT, FORMER ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF STATE: I think they did. I mean, the fact is a quick inventory of their equipment would show they were missing two missiles so there's . little doubt that they knew early on.

WHITFIELD: Inventory and an order, right? Or a directive of some sort?

[11:10:03]

KIMMITT: Well, they had all the weapons on weapons release, so there's certainly little doubt that once that radio came back on from that young commander who was on the ground, he no doubt communicated to the chain of command that he had shot two missiles.

WHITFIELD: And then Peter -- what's typically the coordination between managing air space for civilian and military traffic?

PETER GOELZ, CNN AVIATION ANALYST: Well, I mean the air carriers all bear the ultimate responsibility for their aircraft. Now, they rely heavily on the civil aviation regulatory agencies to tell you whether this is safe.

Across the globe today there's probably more than a dozen areas of conflict where aircraft are advised to be careful or to avoid. In this case, I think there is going to be some culpability on the part of the Ukrainians for letting that plane take off hours --

WHITFIELD: What do you mean? You're saying that it is likely that the Ukrainians knew about the threat or that they may have even been informed about this Iran being at the ready and took the risk anyway?

GOELZ: Well, I believe people were well aware that missiles had been fired on Iraq. And we knew that and it was reported virtually live.

And I think that the idea of taking off with a civilian aircraft in a theater of war that was active has got to be looked at very carefully.

WHITFIELD: So General -- Ukraine, you know, has expressed, you heard our reporting from Clarissa Ward that people are feeling some relief because, you know, the truth is out and they know what caused it. But do you classify this as an accident, you know, in the fog of war? Or do you see it, as Clarissa was telling us, the Ukraine government is looking into whether this was willful killing?

KIMMITT: No. I'm absolutely certain this was just a mistake. But I think it's also important that we recognize that this newfound honesty on the part of the Iranians was not because they knew they were about to get found out.

There's a larger political issue here which is simply that the Iranians knew that if they continued to lie and continued to try to stonewall this, there would not only be concern on the international community that they couldn't be trusted on a relatively straightforward issue like this, that they couldn't be trusted under any nuclear agreements as well.

So I think their honesty wasn't out of mercy. I think their honesty was out of politics and diplomacy.

WHITFIELD: So then Peter -- now with this admission, is it as important to retrieve all of the wreckage pieces? Because reportedly some, you know, very sizable pieces of the wreckage were either looted or confiscated. And does it matter as much now that there's an admission from Iran?

GOEL: Well, I think we have the critical parts, which is the radar track, the data recorder and voice recorder, and probably, you know, 75 percent to 80 percent of the aircraft. We'll be able to figure out and analyze exactly what happened.

But I think the General is correct. Yes, the Iranians were pushed to this admission and in part because of the hard work of the reporters on the ground. I don't think they were used to this kind of scrutiny and examination of their decision making.

WHITFIELD: And of course, in the day of age of video captured on cell phones. I mean ordinary --

GOELZ: Absolutely.

WHITFIELD: -- folks who saw something strange and, you know, started rolling.

GOELZ: Yes.

WHITFIELD: All right. Peter Goelz, Mark Kimmitt -- Brigadier General -- thank you so much.

All right. Still ahead -- changing narratives. The Trump administration claims the U.S. was in imminent danger of an attack from Iran but offers zero proof. Was there really an imminent threat?

And a crack in the GOP? Senator Susan Collins said she's working with a small group of senators on a possible deal to call witnesses in the impeachment trial in the Senate of President Trump.

[11:14:07]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

WHITFIELD: All right. We're following breaking developments out of Afghanistan now. Two U.S. service members were killed today and wo others wounded, after the car they were traveling in struck an explosive device. This was in the Kandahar Province, where we're told the service members were conducting operations as part of NATO's resolute support mission.

So far, they have not been identified and we'll bring you more information as this story develops. And now shifting explanations on the decision to target Iran's top general, Qasem Soleimani. President Trump is now claiming Soleimani was planning to attack four U.S. embassies posing a so-called imminent threat. However, the White House is struggling to provide proof or a clear and consistent definition of what exactly that means.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JAKE TAPPER, CNN HOST: When you say the attacks were imminent, how imminent were they? Are we talking about days? Are we taking about weeks?

MIKE POMPEO, U.S. SECRETARY OF STATE: If you're an American in the region, days and weeks -- this is not something that's relevant

If you're looking for imminence, you need to look no further than the days that led up to the strike that was taken against Soleimani.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Can you clarify the attack Soleimani was planning? Was that days or weeks away?

MARK ESPER, U.S. SECRETARY OF DEFENSE: I think it's more fair to say days for sure.

ROBERT O'BRIEN, WHITE HOUSE NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISER: The strong evidence and the strong intelligence and unfortunately we're not going to be able to get into sources and methods at this time, but I can tell you it was very strong.

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: We did it because they were looking to blow up our embassy. We also did it for other reasons that were very obvious. Somebody died, one of our military people died. People were badly wounded just a week before.

He was looking very seriously at our embassies and not just the embassy in Baghdad.

[11:19:56]

POMPEO: There is no doubt that there were a series of imminent attacks that were being plotted by Qasem Soleimani. We don't know precisely when and we don't know precisely where but it was real.

We had specific information on an imminent threat, and those threats included attacks on U.S. embassies -- period, full stop.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: So you were mistaken when you said you didn't know precisely when and you didn't know precisely where?

POMPEO: No, completely true. Those are completely consistent. I don't know exactly which minute. We don't know exactly which day it would have been executed.

TRUMP: I can reveal that I believe it would have been four embassies.

(END VIDEO CLIP) WHITFIELD: All right. Hard to believe that was a week ago -- the Soleimani killing by that U.S. drone

CNN's Kristen Holmes is joining me right now. So Kristen -- how are officials explaining the kind of mixed messages coming, you know, from the Secretary of State, the White House, the President?

KRISTEN HOLMES, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well Fred -- as you just showed, it's not just mixed messages, it's really contradicting statements. And the administration is facing a lot of backlash now, a lot of pressure to describe exactly what the threat was and how imminent it was.

And I do want to note here, this is not just pressure from Democrats, it's really pressure from lawmakers on both sides of the aisle.

So let's start with the last thing President Trump said about the four embassies. This is the first time that we've heard this. Saying the threat was to four embassies and he also says later in the interview it could have been not just embassies but it could have been military bases as well.

Here's why there's a lot of questions about that. Not only, as I said, is it the first time we're hearing this, but two, lawmakers were briefed by President Trump's top officials this week on what the threat was, what the imminence of the threat was, and they say that they never heard this, that this never came out of anyone's mouth.

So why wouldn't they tell them this during this briefing behind closed doors when they were trying to get lawmakers back on their side?

And the other big question again is the imminent factor. Was this this necessary at this moment? You have heard all of those top administration officials saying it was anywhere from days, to it could have happened immediately, to we didn't know exactly when it was going to happen.

Why is that important? Well, the administration is saying that they didn't have time to brief Congress, that they didn't have time to get congressional approval for this strike because this looming attack was imminent.

So again, reading a lot of questions here and the lawmakers, Republicans and Democrats, trying to get to the bottom of it.

WHITFIELD: All right. Kristen -- we're also learning that the U.S. was planning to target another Iranian military official on the same day Soleimani was killed. What can you tell us?

HOLMES: So, Fred -- this is very interesting and raising a lot of questions. Again, that kind of compound what we just talked about. Essentially we have learned from sources that the U.S. Had targeted unsuccessfully another top Iranian military official, this time in Yemen. It was set to be the same attack as the day of Soleimani, like you said, but was not successful. Now, these sources are not giving us any sort of details on what this mission actually looked like other than it happened and it did not work out. But this is why it's raising questions. If the problem was solely Soleimani, this man here, this bad man who had planned these imminent attacks, why are we also looking at other top officials in the Iranian military? What does that mean? Is there any sort of imminent threat there?

Lots and lots of questions. And the more information that we're finding out about the events surrounding this attack, the more question marks that are being raised right now -- Fred.

WHITFIELD: All right. Kristen Holmes, thank you so much at the White House. We will check back with you throughout the day.

All right. The President's Republican line of defense may be cracking. Senator Susan Collins of Maine says she's working with her GOP colleagues to include witnesses in the upcoming impeachment trial of President Trump. A live report next.

[11:23:45]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

WHITFIELD: All right. Welcome back.

As House Speaker Nancy Pelosi prepares to send over the articles of impeachment to the Senate next week, Republican Senator Susan Collins of Maine said she's now working on a deal to include witnesses at the impeachment trial.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SENATOR SUSAN COLLINS (R), MAINE: I am working with a group of Republican senators and our leaders to see if we can come to an agreement on some language that would be in the initial resolution setting out the parameters of the trial in the Senate that would include an opportunity for the house to call witnesses and the President's counsel to also call witnesses.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WHITFIELD: Democrats have submitted a list of four witnesses they would like to testify at the trial. One of them is John Bolton, the President's former national security adviser who says he will testify if subpoenaed by the Senate. But the President is saying he would likely invoke executive privilege to block Bolton's testimony.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

LAURA INGRAHAM, FOX NEWS HOST: Why not call Bolton? Why not allow him to testify? This thing is bogus.

(CROSSTALKING)

TRUMP: I would have no problem other than one thing, you can't be in the White House as president of the future -- I'm talking many future presidents -- and have a security adviser, anybody having anything to do with security, and legal and other things --

INGRAHAM: Are you going to invoke executive privilege?

TRUMP: Well, I think you have to for the sake of the office. I would love everybody to testify. I like Mick to testify. I like Mike Pompeo to testify. I like Rick Perry to testify.

I want everybody. But there are things that you can't do from the standpoint of executive privilege, you have to maintain that. So we will see where it all goes.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

[11:30:01]

WHITFIELD: All right. With me now David Swerdlick, an assistant editor for "The Washington Post" and a CNN political analyst; and Meridith McGraw, a White House reporter for Politico. Good to see both of you.

All right. Meridith, you first -- So Bolton says he will testify if subpoenaed. And the President, as we just heard him, said he would invoke executive privilege to block his testimony.

So I mean it continues to beg the question, you know, if there's nothing to hide, you know, blocking testimony kind of screams what are you hiding? So how might this battle play out? The President says you can't have your, you know, national security people out there talking. But there have been many circumstances in which they speak.

MERIDITH MCGRAW, WHITE HOUSE REPORTER, POLITICO: Right. President Trump said he wants to prevent Bolton from testifying, in order to prevent future national security advisers or people close to the President perhaps revealing information that they don't want out there that could, you know, affect a diplomatic relation -- things like that. And so he said he would invoke executive privilege.

And we'll have to see what happens in Congress. Of course you mentioned Senator Susan Collins says that she's looking at getting some other Republicans on board to potentially call for witnesses and potentially, you know, subpoena Bolton to have him come testify in front of Congress

Now that could also potentially set up a lengthy court battle between the White House over this, further stretching this impeachment battle.

WHITFIELD: So, David -- that Senator Collins would say yes, we're working on, you know, new language that might create opportunities, you know, for witnesses, including, she said, you know, the President counsel's list of witnesses.

You know, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has refused to endorse the idea of witnesses, particularly the witnesses that the Democrats have requested, those four. And others like Senator Lindsey Graham say it shouldn't even be on the table. So when Senator Collins says she's working with other Republicans and she says and other leaders, you know, how much leverage might she and this group have to try and create I guess a plan that Mitch McConnell would be on board with?

DAVID SWERDLICK, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Yes. Good morning -- Fred.

The short answer is not much. Look, Senator Collins is an experienced legislator. You never say never but Senator McConnell doesn't want the trial to get squirrely so he doesn't want witnesses. The White House doesn't want witnesses or they would have let these witnesses testify in front of the House.

And then when you come back to Senator Collins, I think clearly she is talking to other members on both sides of the aisle. But when push comes to shove in key moments, she has gone with the party line.

A decade ago, Democrats thought she might vote for the Affordable Care Act, she voted with Republicans. Most recently Democrats thought she might vote against the Kavanaugh nomination, she voted for it.

(CROSSTALKING)

SWERDLICK: I think on the one --

WHITFIELD: So this could be just a show then?

SWERDLICK: Yes. Yes.

WHITFIELD: I mean because she said --

SWERDLICK: Yes, in a word yes, it is a show.

WHITFIELD: == she gave a little bit more detail about, you know, working on language that there would be witnesses and witnesses that the President's counsel might.

So I mean to say that and then not really mean it, that would be --

SWERDLICK: It's not that I don't think she means it -- Fred. It's that I think she's obligated as someone who's seen as a moderate to try and be seen as a broker while she's facing re-election, a reasonable thing for her to do. But the bigger forces at play are what the White House wants, what the majority leader wants and where we're headed with this.

Republicans -- we know the end game here, Republicans are almost certain to not vote to remove the President. So the question is why would the Republican caucus go along with a trial that veered away from that goal?

WHITFIELD: So, Meridith, doesn't some of that answer lie in the fact that new information has come out in the last three weeks in which the House Speaker has been holding these articles of impeachment?

There have been reports about you know, withholding emails, of course. It's John Bolton who's now saying he's willing to testify. Didn't that kind of change things a little bit? Doesn't that apply some pressure, even on Mitch McConnell, to take those things into account?

MCGRAW: Speaker Pelosi's office and the Speaker herself would say that, you know, withholding these articles of impeachment has worked in their favor politically. Bolton said he would testify if he did have to face a subpoena and then new revelations have come out.

But Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, the White House, their argument is that if President Trump is such a danger to the office of the presidency, why wouldn't House Speaker want to just expedite this process so that they could, you know -- and share the articles of impeachment themselves.

So Democrats on one hand, Republicans on the other, they both see that it's working in their favor politically, although in different terms.

[11:35:01]

SWERDLICK: Yes.

WHITFIELD: Meridith McGraw, David Swerdlick -- thanks to both of you. Appreciate it.

SWERDLICK: Thanks -- Fred.

MCGRAW: Thank you.

WHITFIELD: All right. Straight ahead to Iowa we go where a new CNN poll shows a tight four-way race in the final weeks before the Democratic caucuses. The state of the race next. (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

WHITFIELD: All right. Welcome back.

Hard to believe but we're just now days away from the final debate ahead of the Iowa caucuses. Senator Bernie Sanders gaining traction on his Democratic rivals as we hit the final stretch in the Hawkeye state. Senator Sanders sitting atop a virtual four-way tie in a new CNN/Iowa poll but that's well within the margin of error.

[11:39:53]

WHITFIELD: CNN's Kyung Lah joins me now from a very chilly Davenport, Iowa, where caucus goers, you know, they brave through all that weather. They are hardy, just like you are, and they've got just now 23 days, you know, to really solidify their pick for candidate. So what are you hearing from voters?

KYUNG LAH, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, first of all, this is just another beautiful day in Iowa. That's what they will tell you. But when you sit down and actually have a conversation about politics and where they are, those four names are the ones that do come up the most.

Those top four in our polls -- really any coffee shop, any breakfast place you go to, those are the people that the candidates -- that voters here are talking about.

There's something I want to point out is that wen you delve a little bit further, when you and take the time to chat with some of the Bernie Sanders supporters, what they will tell you is that they feel far more passionate about him. That they are less likely to change their mind, and that there really is going to be very little that's going to deviate them from caucusing from him.

Here's what a few of them told us.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

LAH: What have you thought about what he said in regards to Iran?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I support what he, said honestly. I feel like -- I don't know, I feel like war is a cheap tactic of distraction in this particular case. And so I feel like anybody who's willing to stand up against that is somebody that I want to support.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I knew exactly how he would respond to something like this. He's very anti-war. He always has been. I'm very anti-war. I appreciate what he's doing there.

They were trying to pass the War Powers Act. And I'm proud of what he's done to lead that fight.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I think it's the number one goal of the Democratic Party is to beat Trump. That's my number one goal. So if this isn't the election for Bernie, it's not.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LAH: And she's saying that's only if he's not the nominee. I want to take a look at that electability very quickly here -- Fredricka.

Look at this graphic. You can see that beating Trump was so important to people, much more important to Iowa caucus goers in November than it is today. That margin today, Fredricka, is starting to shrink which may help play into Sanders' rise now topping this CNN poll.

WHITFIELD: Wow, all right. Very fascinating stuff. Kyung Lah -- thank you so much.

So it is the last debate before the first vote and it's only on CNN. The top Democrats head to Iowa for a live CNN debate in partnership with the "Des Moines Register". It is taking place Tuesday, 9:00 p.m. Eastern, right here on CNN.

All right. Still ahead -- millions of people across the country are bracing for crippling weather as tornadoes, flooding rains, ice storms, all of that moving across the eastern side of the country. We'll have details on who is in the path of these storms next.

[11:42:49]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK) WHITFIELD: All right. This breaking news for you now.

Puerto Rico has been rattled by another aftershock. A magnitude 5.9 earthquake hit in the same area where an earthquake hit Tuesday, killing one person, destroying homes and leaving most of the island without power for days.

More than 200 smaller earthquakes have hit the island in the past two weeks. A tsunami warning was issued earlier today but any threat from it appears now to have passed.

And at least 80 million Americans are in the crosshairs of a triple storm threat today. Severe weather already claiming at least three lives in Louisiana. Police say one man was killed after a tree fell on his home in Oil City. An elderly couple also found dead after strong winds demolished their mobile home in Bowser Parish. Missouri, Arkansas and Oklahoma -- each reporting at least one confirmed tornado overnight.

CNN's Allison Chinchar joining me now from the CNN Weather Center. So what else can people expect today

ALLISON CHINCHAR, AMS METEOROLOGIST: Yes. You had over a hundred total storm reports from yesterday. That number is likely going to continue to grow in the next 24 hours, because the same system still exists. It's just shifting off to the east.

You can see the main line stretching from Michigan down to Louisiana. You have active, severe thunderstorm warnings up and down portions of Tennessee and areas of Mississippi but that line just now starting to cross into Alabama and will continue to push off to the east, taking with it the potential for severe weather.

So things like damaging winds, tornadoes and very large hail in excess of golf ball size is still possible for cities like Birmingham, Montgomery, Atlanta, even places like Chattanooga.

Now here's a look, you have already started to see some pretty significant amount of power outages. Right now over 200,000. But you may see those numbers start to spread off to the north as we go into the evening hours.

And that's because we have the other side of the storm, which is the winter aspect. Looking at some of this, you have some pretty heavy snow coming down right now across portions of Kansas City, snow headed into Springfield, Missouri.

Look, you even have some snow showers to the north and west of Dallas, Texas -- that's how cold that air is behind this system as it slides east.

The other concern is going to be ice. That's the main concern for areas of Michigan, which just now are starting to see that transition in some places from rain to freezing rain. That's why you have ice storm warnings not only in Michigan but also portions of upstate New York as well as Maine. And you also have winter storm warnings in a lot of the other places that will get some snow. The ice is going to be a big concern for Michigan. As we mentioned also upstate New York and Maine, some of these areas could get as much of an inch of ice -- Fred.

[11:49:56]

CHINCHAR: The problem there is not only does that cause travel concerns but that much ice will likely bring more powerlines down as well as trees.

WHITFIELD: Horrible scenario there. Allison Chinchar -- thanks so much.

All right. Coming up, the story everyone is talking about, Harry and Meghan saying they're, quote, "stepping back" as senior members of the royal family. How this could play out, next.

But first, in this week's "Wonder Musts", there's more to Washington state than Seattle. In fact its capital is great town to spend a weekend eating, drinking, and finding waterfalls.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

MARK VOLOYKOVICH (PH), LOCAL AUTHOR: Olympia is the greatest little town that a lot of people haven't visited yet. Olympia is halfway between Portland and Seattle, the state capital

A short distance from downtown are three beautiful waterfalls, all part of some waterfall park.

The Monarch Sculpture Garden, fantastic. It's free and it's great for kids.

SHINA WYSOCKI (PH), CHELSEA FARMS: My parents started Chelsea Farms about 30 years ago which is a clam, oyster and Gooey Duck farm. My brother and I opened the restaurant three years ago.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yum.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Of course, the raw oysters draw a lot of people in.

Each oyster is an expression of the bay that it's grown in, so all the bays have different flavors. Gooey duck is the world's largest burrowing clam.

If I were coming to Olympia and I were going to eat one thing, I would eat the gooey duck because there are very few places that you can get Gooey that's fresh. And it really is super Pacific Northwest.

HEATHER RINGWOOD, WHITEWOOD CIDER COMPANY: We are one of Olympia's first cideries. And Olympia's tiniest, probably. Our Teeny Tiny Taproom is 192 square feet on the inside.

Just taste the (INAUDIBLE) -- winery tasting room, so we have a place to serve our ciders. It's tiny but it's cozy.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

WHITFIELD: Welcome back.

The House of Windsor is in uncharted territory and still reeling from Harry and Meghan's shocking announcement that they are stepping back as senior members of the royal family. But it may not be so simple for the couple to bow out.

Queen Elizabeth and Prince Charles have reportedly told their aides to reach a workable solution with the Sussexes at a pace that's agreeable to the couple and the U.K. government.

Meantime, Oprah Winfrey is responding to reports that she helped counsel the couple on the matter, telling "People Magazine" "Meghan and Harry do not need my help figuring out what's best for them. I care about them both and support whatever decisions they make for their family", end quote.

CNN's Max Foster has more on the fallout.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

MAX FOSTER, CNN ROYAL CORRESPONDENT: Theirs is a life governed by royal protocol. But with this week's bombshell announcement, Prince Harry and wife Meghan make it clear they want to set their own rules.

The couple defied the queen when they issued a statement on Wednesday saying they will pull back from their duties as senior royals. CNN understands she had asked him not to speak out.

The palace, at first blindsided, today swung into action. Officials acting for the Queen, the Prince of Wales and the Duke of Cambridge are holding crisis talks about what to do. A source telling CNN they wanted quote, "workable solutions" within days.

But the decision by Prince Harry and Meghan, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, raises more questions than answers. The couple make no mention of giving up their royal titles. They say they'll continue to do work for the monarchy, and support their patronages. But they want to become financially independent.

They say they will give up funding from the sovereign grant, money from the British government, and try to earn their own income as many minor members of the family do.

One potential and significant source of income -- the royal brand. They have applied for a trademark for the name "Sussex Royal", which if approved, they could stamp of scores of items and services from books and clothing to educational materials and social care.

But there is a risk of being accused of monetizing the very monarchy from which they are trying to distance themselves. And critics of the couple point out their security will still be funded by the taxpayers.

They also hope to keep their official residence, Frogmore Cottage, in Windsor.

VICTORIA MURPHY, ROYAL COMMENTATOR: Will people accept the premise that they are appearing on the world stage as HRH's working royals, and then also going off and acting autonomously, taking a private income with a private venture?

FOSTER: If the family can't agree on a new role for the couple going forward, the Sussexes may be forced to consider resigning their royal roles altogether.

Max Foster, CNN -- Buckingham Palace, London.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

WHITFIELD: Hello again everyone. Thank you so much for joining me. I'm Fredricka Whitfield.

All right. We begin with an exclusive new look inside the Iraqi military base struck by Iran. That retaliatory attack followed a tumultuous week filled with a whirlwind of developments.

[11:59:51]

WHITFIELD: Last week we learned that President Trump ordered a U.S. drone strike, killing Iran's top military commander, Qasem Soleimani. Days later, on Wednesday, Iran vowing harsh revenge attacked two Iraqi military bases that were housing U.S. troops.