Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Royal Separation Drama; Interview With Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA); Shifting Explanations on Iran Strike; Trump Calls for Senate to Dismiss Impeachment Charges. Aired 3-3:30p ET

Aired January 13, 2020 - 15:00   ET

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

[15:01:03]

BROOKE BALDWIN, CNN HOST: Welcome back. You're watching CNN. I'm Brooke Baldwin.

New details coming in on the impeachment of President Donald Trump. Of course, this is the week Washington has been talking about for so long. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is expected to turn over those articles of impeachment to the Senate within the next couple of days, which would then clear the way for the Senate to begin its historic trial.

But despite the president supporting a trial just last week, and even arguing for a trial that would include the Democratic House leaders prosecuting him, he's now suddenly changing course. He's calling for the Senate to flat out dismiss the case against him.

CNN's Kaitlan Collins is at the White House.

And, Kaitlan, you have some new reporting about the president's impeachment defense. What do you know?

KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Well, Brooke, essentially, the president's defense team thought that they were not going to have this much time for prepare to prepare for the trial.

But given the fact that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has taken so long to get ready to send those articles of impeachment over to the Senate, they have had a lot more time that they had initially scheduled for and thought that they were going to get.

Now that the days are getting shorter and it seems like this trial is inevitable, that it's going to start any day now, they say that they're prepared to move on to this next phase. The White House counsel, Pat Cipollone, was here at the White House all weekend in meetings getting ready for this, as was President Trump, who was on a different second floor of the White House.

He was inside the residence. That's when he was firing off tweets saying he wants that outright dismissal of the trial. And we're told by sources that the president spent the weekend on the phone discussing what this trial was going to look like and saying he wanted that quick dismissal, while Pat Cipollone was preparing the defense, which they do not expect is going to be any kind of an outright dismissal.

Now, the questions are still going to be who exactly it is on the Hill presenting for the president. We know that Cipollone is expected to take the lead, but the president has also pushed for Jay Sekulow, his outside attorney, who was here at the White House for several days last week, to have a really big role in this.

That's what he's told people, because he's confident in the way that Jay Sekulow has made arguments on television, in front of courts, and he wants him to have a big role in defending him.

But, Brooke, there are still questions about other attorneys who could join the president's team. One of those is Alan Dershowitz, who we're told by multiple sources the president has pushed for to come on the team. But no final decision has been made about that yet.

And, essentially, as one person described it to me, it'll be up to Dershowitz if he does join, because the president has made clear he wants him on the team, though there have been questions raised about his connections to people like Jeffrey Epstein by the president's allies, saying, maybe it's not such a good idea.

Another attorney, Trey Gowdy, is someone who is not expected at this time to take any kind of a public-facing role, though he once was going to be on the president's impeachment team. He was only there for about 24 hours before they announced he couldn't join because of those federal lobbying rules for former lawmakers.

If he does join, he's more likely to play a role behind the scenes in the background or on television, not exactly on Capitol Hill defending the president.

And, Brooke, of course all of this comes is there are still big questions about if the House members are going to be up there defending the president, the president's most ardent defenders that he wants there. But some people like Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell have said, maybe it's not such a good idea to appeal to those more moderate Republican senators that they need on their side.

BALDWIN: We will start to get some of these questions answered and see who represents whom in the coming days.

Kaitlan, thank you for that.

We want to pivot now to Iran.

And it seems, the more time goes by, the more confusion there is about what led President Trump to authorize that drone strike that killed Iran's top general, Qasem Soleimani. Initially, President Trump said that it was an imminent threat against diplomats and military personnel. Recently, the president revealed Soleimani, responsible for hundreds of American deaths, was targeting four U.S. embassies.

Throughout, President Trump's top diplomatic and intelligence officials have struggled with the specifics on what the president is pushing. Listen for yourself. This is what Defense Secretary Mark Esper said

over the weekend regarding the threats on those four embassies.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MARK ESPER, U.S. DEFENSE SECRETARY: Well, the president didn't say there was a tangible -- he didn't cite a specific piece of evidence.

What he said is he probably -- he believed, could have been...

MARGARET BRENNAN, HOST, "FACE THE NATION": Are you saying there wasn't one?

[15:05:01]

ESPER: I didn't see one with regard to four embassies.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BALDWIN: And then, later, the defense secretary seemingly changed the story to CNN.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ESPER: What the president said with regard to the four embassies is what I believe as well. And he said he believed that they probably, that they could have been targeting the embassies in the region. I believe that as well, as did other national security team members.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BALDWIN: Brett Bruen is back with us today. He served as director of global engagement in the Obama White House.

And so, Brett, how troubling is it that the administration can't seem to get the story straight?

BRETT BRUEN, FORMER WHITE HOUSE DIRECTOR OF GLOBAL ENGAGEMENT: Yes.

And with all due respect, Brooke, to the president's keen intuition and clever insights, this is about real intelligence. We're talking about the safety of American diplomats, American service men and women.

This isn't about making bets or beliefs. We have got to get back to a place where we're dealing with facts and real information. And I think it's concerning that the president has played so fast and loose with the truth on this.

BALDWIN: Your own experience, Brett.

I mean, I was reading your piece over the weekend. You were this diplomat in the Middle, East Africa, Latin America for 12 years. You know what it's like to be posted to countries in crisis.

Can you just tell me a little bit more about that, experiencing being shot at firsthand?

BRUEN: Well, I can share with the audience that, when we talk about threats against American embassies, it actually has a very real impact on diplomats and their families, how they move around between work and home and go out too.

The president just putting this out there, as though there are serious, imminent threats against our diplomats, has a real psychological effect on those serving in countries abroad.

BALDWIN: We have more to talk about. Let me hit pause on this conversation for now. Brett Bruen, stand by.

Want to get to some breaking news on a tragedy we covered extensively last month.

Just in the last hour, the U.S. attorney general, Bill Barr, and the FBI announced that a deadly December shooting at the Pensacola Naval Station was in fact an act of terrorism.

A Saudi Air Force 2nd lieutenant killed those three American sailors in the shooting spree before he was shot and killed. The gunman had been participating in a flight training program at the Florida military base. And investigators say they were able to uncover several instances of extremist behavior online by this individual and evidence.

The suspect even visited 9/11 Memorial here in New York ahead of his shooting spree.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

WILLIAM BARR, U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL: This was an act of terrorism. The evidence shows that the shooter was motivated by jihadist ideology.

During the course of the investigation, we learned that the shooter posted a message on September 11 of this year stating, "The countdown has begun."

During the Thanksgiving weekend, he then visited the 9/11 Memorial in New York City. He also posted other anti-American, anti-Israeli and jihadi messages on social media, including two hours before his attack.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BALDWIN: Let's go straight to Jessica Schneider. She's at the Justice Department.

And the obvious question is, would any of this have popped up during the vetting process?

JESSICA SCHNEIDER, CNN JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: That is something that the Pentagon is now looking at. They announced these renewed vetting procedures, enhanced vetting procedures in the wake of this December 6 attack that killed three U.S. soldiers. So the attorney general was asked about that. Was anything -- were there any red flags about this particular Saudi national?

The attorney general didn't reveal that there were any red flags, but we now know that this is something that the Pentagon is looking at, because there are thousands of these international students who are at U.S. military bases around the country working side by side with Americans.

So the attorney general really laying out all of the findings here, really publicly for the first time, concluding that this was an act of terror.

And it turns out, Brooke, there were a lot of signs that weren't immediately seized upon, the fact that this Saudi national visited the 9/11 Memorial over Thanksgiving weekend, posted anti-American messages on social media, including one two hours before the attack.

So, as a result of this broad review here, Brooke, it -- not only about the motivations by this gunman, but the attorney general announcing today that the U.S. is expelling 21 Saudi nationals who have found to have had some tie to extremist ideology. Also, some have come in contact with child pornography.

So those 21 will be expelled immediately. But the review continues, as well as those heightened vetting procedures by the Pentagon for those thousands of others who are here in this country -- Brooke.

[15:10:05]

BALDWIN: Jessica, thank you for the update, Jessica Schneider in Washington.

Still ahead here on CNN, Senator Bernie Sanders on the defensive after sources tell CNN that, back in 2018, he told Senator Elizabeth Warren that a woman can't win the election. We will have a member of the Sanders campaign join us live.

And the queen issues a statement after the royal family holds this emergency meeting today, a meeting Meghan Markle didn't actually physically show up to. She called in. Why did she do that? What does that say? We have those details ahead.

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BALDWIN: We're back on this Monday afternoon. You're watching CNN. I'm Brooke Baldwin.

[15:15:03]

Let's talk about the fighting between the Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren camps, getting even more personal.

Sources are telling CNN that Senator Sanders and Senator Warren met at Warren's apartment in Washington in December of 2018. The longtime friends agreed that, if they faced off against one another in the upcoming presidential campaign, the gloves would stay on, that they would not attack one another.

Senator Warren told Senator Sanders why she would be a strong candidate against Trump, but, according to sources, Senator Sanders responded that he didn't believe a woman could win the election.

And that is now getting massive pushback from Senator Sanders himself.

In a statement to CNN, he said this: "It is ludicrous to believe that at the same meeting where Elizabeth Warren told me she was going to run for president, I would tell her that a woman couldn't win. It's sad that, three weeks before the Iowa caucus, and a year after that private conversation, staff who weren't in the room are lying about what happened.

"What I did say that night was it Donald Trump is a sexist, a racist and a liar who would weaponize whatever he could. Do I believe a woman can win in 2020? Of course. After all, Hillary Clinton beat Donald Trump by three million votes in 2016."

Let me bring in Democratic Congressman Ro Khanna. He is a co-chair of the Sanders 2020 campaign.

So, Congressman Khanna, a pleasure, sir. Welcome.

REP. RO KHANNA (D-CA): Brooke, great to be on.

BALDWIN: So I read the -- I read the statement. Senator Sanders says it's ludicrous, he never would have told Elizabeth Warren a woman couldn't win. But the Warren campaign has yet to shoot this down.

You know the man. Did he say these things to Elizabeth Warren?

KHANNA: Every time he has talked to me about Senator Warren, he's talked with utmost respect.

He has absolute conviction that she would beat Donald Trump. He's talked with admiration about the coalition he's -- she's building.

And here's the reality. There are many Elizabeth Warren fans on his campaign, including me. So I don't think that there is going to be any daylight between progressives at the end of the day. We want to see a progressive nominee. We want to see a Democratic nominee beat Donald Trump.

BALDWIN: As I pointed out, Congressman, Senator Warren has yet to comment on our story today. So she has yet to dispute any of our reporting.

Why would she or anyone from her team make this up?

KHANNA: Well, I can't speak for what her campaign is going to say.

I can't speak for House Democrats. We're going to be coming out with a press conference, people who are supporting Joe Biden, people who are supporting Senator Warren, and people who are supporting Bernie Sanders, and say that we're going to unify the day we have a nominee, all of us are going to get behind that nominee.

And I think that people are going to be far more unified this time around than ever before in any Democratic campaign. We understand the threat Donald Trump poses and how we have to work together.

BALDWIN: I want to come back to this point of unity in a second.

But I do want to ask you, Congressman Khanna, did you have any -- have you had a conversation with Senator Sanders about anything relating to that December 18 meeting he had in Elizabeth Warren's apartment? Do you know anything about the substance of that conversation?

KHANNA: No, the conversations I have had with Senator Sanders is, how are we going to stop the war in Iran? How are we going to make sure that the president doesn't escalate the violence?

And that's why we have a bill to defund any offensive action in Iran. Senator Sanders is focused on the issues, how do we improve lives, Medicare for all, free public college, infrastructure. And that's what this campaign ought to be about.

(CROSSTALK)

BALDWIN: But do you know anything about that specific conversation, just yes or no?

KHANNA: I do not. I do not.

BALDWIN: OK.

Going back to your point about unity, adding to all of this, Politico reporting just over the weekend on the Sanders campaign talking points, telling volunteers to say that Elizabeth Warren supporters are -- quote -- "highly educated, more affluent people who are going to show up and vote Democratic no matter what" and that -- quote -- "She's bringing no new bases into the Democratic Party."

I want to play something for you and I will get your opinion, but this is how both Warren and Sanders responded to that.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. ELIZABETH WARREN (D-MA), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: I was disappointed to hear that Bernie is sending his volunteers out to trash me.

Democrats want to win in 2020. We all saw the impact of the factionalism in 2016. And we can't have a repeat of that.

SEN. BERNIE SANDERS (I-VT), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: We have hundreds of employees. Elizabeth Warren has hundreds of employees.

And people sometimes say things that they shouldn't. You have heard me give many speeches. Have I ever said one negative word about Elizabeth Warren?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BALDWIN: Congressman Khanna, did the Sanders campaign tell its volunteers to go out and speak ill of Senator Warren, yes or no?

KHANNA: Senator Sanders never did. No one senior on the campaign did.

And, in fact, most people recognize that Senator Warren was the lead on the bankruptcy law. She actually connects with working families. So anyone who's calling her elitist doesn't know what they're talking about.

BALDWIN: Someone close to the Sanders campaign was asked if this kind of thing would happen.

[15:20:02]

And this is what they told Politico -- quote -- "We were never told to go negative or contrast with other candidates. Bernie would let us know when it was OK. So, if that's happening, he is aware."

What would you say to that person?

KHANNA: Well, I don't know who it is. It's an anonymous quote.

What I can tell you is that, from the campaign chairs, to the campaign manager, to the senator, everyone speaks with Senator Warren with extraordinary respect.

I mean, I have worked with Senator Warren. She's one of the leading advocates for working families and the middle class.

And here's what's happening. People are afraid that we're going to have one of the most progressive nominees as president. And so there's a lot of attacks. But both Senator Sanders or Senator Warren would be extraordinary progresses. And most of us on both campaigns really respect the other side.

And so we shouldn't let stories like this divide the progressive movement.

BALDWIN: These two are the best representations of the progressive wing of this party, when you look at this crop of candidates. So how is it going to look if these two decide to go after one another tomorrow night on the debate stage?

KHANNA: I would be very surprised if they did. They have genuine respect for each other.

But, more than that, they agree on the policies. They both agree that we need Medicare for all. They agree we need free public college. They agree we shouldn't be getting into wars in -- overseas.

So are there differences? Yes, there are differences in terms of certain style and certain policies, but they agree on far more than they disagree with.

The real contrast is, do we want a progressive vision for this party, or do we want the status quo?

BALDWIN: Congressman Ro Khanna, thank you very much.

KHANNA: Thank you.

BALDWIN: Thank you.

Make sure to tune in tomorrow night for CNN's presidential debate, the Democratic presidential debate. It's the last Democratic debate before the Iowa caucuses. Tune in at 9:00 Eastern right here on CNN.

The royal crisis continues, the family holding an emergency summit today, after Prince Harry and Meghan Markle made the decision to step back from their royal duties. Meghan Markle decided to attend over the phone. We have new details ahead.

And new CNN reporting just in on the shifting story by the Trump administration over the intelligence that led to the killing of that Iranian general.

So, stand by for that.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[15:27:07]

BALDWIN: It looks like the queen of England is finally coming to terms with Megxit.

Today, the royal family met for a high-stakes meeting to discuss their future after Harry and Meghan made the jaw-dropping decision to step back from their royal duties.

Following the meeting, the queen released an official statement, writing in part -- quote -- "Although we would have preferred them to remain full-time working members of the royal family, we respect and understand their wish to live a more independent life as a family, while remaining a valued part of my family."

We are told Princes Charles and William also attended today's meeting, whereas Meghan Markle dialed in a la conference call-style.

Here to discuss all things royal is our CNN royal commentator and expert Victoria Arbiter.

And so first just on the queen's statement. You noted that she refers to them by their first names.

VICTORIA ARBITER, CNN ROYAL COMMENTATOR: Yes, Brooke, that was incredibly striking.

And it really jumps out at you, because it's so unusual.

BALDWIN: Tell me why.

ARBITER: The British monarchy is steeped in formality and tradition and precedent.

And, normally, in any other circumstances, they would be referred to as their royal highnesses the duke and duchess of Sussex, particularly coming from the queen.

And yet this refers to Harry and Meghan. Now, this can be interpreted two ways. First of all, we have a grandmother here, not just the head of state. She talks about wanting to maintain them as valued members of her family.

But, also, it could perhaps indicate the roles that Harry and Meghan are going to have moving forwards. Does this mean that they are actually going to be private citizens, as opposed to having one foot in the royal family and one foot outside?

BALDWIN: This meeting today -- we have a saying here about dialing it in. She really dialed in, which instantly one might think, oh, my goodness, this is not only the queen, it's her grandmother-in-law, and she's not physically showing up with baby Archie in tow.

How disrespectful? What say you?

ARBITER: At first, I was like, ooh, oh, goodness. I'm not sure how appropriate that is.

BALDWIN: Yes.

ARBITER: But I think, too, there's more to it. There's always more to it, right?

Now, I think Harry probably said, I have got this. She knows Harry has got their best interests at heart. There's something to be said when blood family members can go at it, no holds barred, without worrying about another member of the family that's in the room that perhaps doesn't know their ways in quite the same way.

It's Harry, Charles, William and the queen that really needed to hammer out these details. Perhaps too many cooks, if Meghan had been there as well. So, yes, she dialed in. We're not sure if she was there for the whole phone call. We're not sure how much of an input she had.

But she knows that Harry would have been fighting for what it is they want, not just what the family wants.

BALDWIN: Right. So perhaps Harry said, honey, this is my family.

ARBITER: I have got this.

BALDWIN: I have got this. (LAUGHTER)

BALDWIN: I have heard that before.

So what about the -- you mentioned his brother. How is their relationship? So much has been reported over the last couple of days.

ARBITER: I think what's become readily apparent is that this is a fractured relationship.

And I think that is where a huge amount of sadness lies. Harry and William have always been incredibly close. We in the U.K. have watched these brothers grow into fine young men. They have always had each other's backs.

Years ago, Harry said William is the only person he can truly he talk to, because he's the only person who truly understands him.

And yet here we are, where, clearly, there have been a number of issues. I think the queen's hope, after having this meeting

[15:30:00]