Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Day Two of the Impeachment of Donald J. Trump; Interview with Senator Bob Casey (D-PA) on the Impeachment Trial; House Managers and Trump's Legal Team Set to Begin Second Day of Impeachment Trial Deliberations; Alan Dershowitz: We Could Never have Witnesses Without Hunter Biden; Three Cities on Lockdown as Deadly Virus Kills 17 in China. Aired 9-9:30a ET

Aired January 23, 2020 - 09:00   ET

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

[09:00:08]

JIM SCIUTTO, CNN ANCHOR: Good Thursday morning to you. I'm Jim Sciutto.

POPPY HARLOW, CNN ANCHOR: It's another big day. Good morning, everyone. I'm Poppy Harlow. Day two, officially.

Democratic House managers today will continue to make their case to try to remove the president. Hours from now they are set to focus on abuse of power and push for more witnesses -- for any witnesses and more documents.

SCIUTTO: So who exactly is their target audience? Not just the American public and not just the entire Senate but particularly those four Republicans that it would take to cross the aisle and vote to allow those witnesses, allow new evidence. On that point, Minority Leader Chuck Schumer says that Democrats are making, in his words, "gains every day." Are they?

HARLOW: Yes, that's the key question. Are they really?

So let's go to Capitol Hill. Let's begin again this morning with our congressional reporter Lauren Fox.

So, Lauren, let's just begin with what people should expect today.

LAUREN FOX, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, it will be more presentation from the House managers. Democrats making that case and focusing on abuse of power. The first article of impeachment that they passed over in the House chamber last month. Now what I will tell you from the presentations yesterday is that this is about making the case to moderate senators who they need to cross the aisle, vote with Democrats to get people like John Bolton, the president's former National Security adviser, and Mick Mulvaney, the president's acting chief of staff, to come and testify on Capitol Hill.

Now we won't see that test until next week because we have more presentation today from House managers. Then again tomorrow we expect. Then the White House will have to make their defense. That will likely start on Saturday. They then have Monday or Tuesday to do that. And then, of course, we will get into a question of witnesses until early or mid-next week.

SCIUTTO: So we've seen a lot of senators out of their seats during these proceedings. We thought that the rules were they had to stay in their seats.

HARLOW: Right.

SCIUTTO: Are they breaking the rules?

FOX: Well, essentially, Jim, if you talk to party members on both sides they will tell you it's very difficult when you have several hours where you're supposed to be in your seats to keep sitting there, stay focused. So essentially they are getting up and walking around. Now I just heard Sheldon Whitehouse say on our air a few minutes ago that, you know, he has no problem if members are standing in the back and talking quietly amongst themselves.

But I will tell you that this is from John Cornyn who is a Republican senator. He said, quote, "Certainly senators are struggling to try to see why we have to sit there. Sit hearing the same arguments over and over and over and over again."

Remember, this case is one that they feel like they're very familiar with. They feel like for most of them, their minds are made up. Democrats think that the president should be removed from office. Most of the Republicans think that this is not an impeachable offense. So that's where they are. That's why they say it's so hard to keep in their seats -- Jim and Poppy.

HARLOW: It is their job, but --

SCIUTTO: Yes.

HARLOW: All right, Lauren Fox, thanks very much.

SCIUTTO: And a lot of them have said going in, you know, they're going to keep an open mind. They're going to do their jobs but we already know everything.

HARLOW: I mean, can you --

SCIUTTO: Yes.

HARLOW: By the way, can you imagine jurors leaving in a trial, trial, like we know trials?

SCIUTTO: That might be against the law.

HARLOW: That doesn't happen.

Joining us to discuss, CNN national security and legal analyst Carrie Cordero and Susan Hennessey. Susan, also congrats on your new book out this week, titled "Unmaking

the Presidency." So let's begin with you. How effective, Susan, do you think that the argument that the Democratic House managers made yesterday was and did you see holes that you think they need to fill in today?

SUSAN HENNESSEY, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY AND LEGAL ANALYST: No, I really think it was an overwhelmingly effective argument. And keep in mind, we saw both Justin Amash and then Senator Kennedy actually make the observation that for a lot of senators in the room, that was probably the first time that they were hearing some of that information because members of the Senate have not necessarily been paying very, very close attention to what's been going on.

So I do think that what we saw was a really effective, comprehensive, you know, sort of bringing together of what happened and how strong the evidence already is. You know, while clearly pointing to here are the areas of which we could learn even more. Here's why we need additional witnesses to fully tell this story.

Now I don't think that that necessarily is going to be something that changes the minds of Republican senators in terms of that final vote. You know, we've seen the strategy from the president's legal defense team to kind of throw out lots and lots of different arguments, sort of a buffet style so Republican senators can choose whatever defense feels most comfortable to them. So we really are seeing two very different strategies play out in parallel that have nothing to do with one another.

But just in terms of making the case, establishing the facts that we know occurred and the case for the idea that the president has abused his office.

SCIUTTO: Yes.

HENNESSEY: I think they did make a very effective case yesterday.

SCIUTTO: And Senator Lindsey Graham shaked Schiff's hand yesterday afterwards and say good job, seeming to acknowledge at least they've made their case from their side.

Carrie Cordero, from a legal perspective, you hear that quietly many Republicans will say, OK, yes, we're not comfortable with the president's behavior here but it doesn't meet the standard, doesn't rise to the level of high crimes and misdemeanors.

[09:05:12]

It reminds me of the debate 20 years ago with Clinton's impeachment that, you know.

HARLOW: Yes.

SCIUTTO: Acknowledged bad behavior, but many said didn't meet that standard. From a constitutional standpoint, and I know there are different opinions on this, what's your view? Has that case reached that standard?

CARRIE CORDERO, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY AND LEGAL ANALYST: Well, I think the House managers are building that case. Part of what they're trying to do in these three days of oral presentations, where they are making their lengthy opening arguments is they are trying to lay out why they think the standard is met.

The Senate really has the flexibility to determine whether or not they think the conduct that's being described meets a constitutional standard. The House managers suggest that that should be beyond a reasonable doubt and that this standard is met in terms of the facts that they are presenting. But it really -- the Senate gets to determine whether or not the conduct is impeachable. And

this is not like a criminal trial where there are elements of a statutory crime and the prosecutors can take facts and pit them against each element of the crime. It's a more subjective analysis which is why it's so important that the senators take their oath seriously, that they are listening, particularly if, as Susan says --

HARLOW: Yes.

CORDERO: And has been suggested, that some of this information might be new to some of the senators. So it's so important that they listen and that they really are thinking about the facts and that then they really seriously consider whether additional witnesses and documents would be beneficial to their consideration of the case.

HENNESSEY: I do think we have to keep in mind this idea that, you know, if the president of the United States is using his foreign policy powers to essentially turn foreign governments into opposition researchers, if this does not rise to the standard of an impeachable offense, it really is difficult to even comprehend what would be an impeachable offense? And so this argument, you know, we can argue over whether or not the evidence actually establishes the facts sufficiently.

But the argument somehow that what we are seeing probably the gravest allegation of presidential misconduct in the history of the republic, without exaggeration. To suggest that that somehow would not meet the standard of impeachment, that just to me seems, you know, sort of -- it defies belief.

HARLOW: Given the fact, Carrie, that we know Dershowitz's argument on the constitutional side that he says there is not an underlying crime here, and, you know, granted he said it didn't matter during the Clinton impeachment if there was or not, but hindsight being 20/20, given that that's going to be the main argument from him, would it have been prudent to have included -- for Democrats in the House to have included bribery, for example, which is so clearly laid out?

CORDERO: Well, if you accept the argument that we haven't heard from Alan Dershowitz yet in the actual proceedings. So we'll wait to see what he argues actually before the Senate versus what he argues on television appearances. But if he were to make that argument, the issue is that there really is not historical precedent for requiring there be a violation of a crime. So if senators want to accept his argument, then one could say, well, sure, maybe they should have included it.

But that is if they would have included it just to head off that argument that sort of assuming that that's a requirement. And it's not a requirement. I mean, most constitutional scholars all agree, I think I even read in the opinion pages of "The Wall Street Journal" this morning that that editorial page agrees as well that the violation of a statutory crime is not required.

SCIUTTO: And you see that with a lot of the impeachments that took place in the Senate of sitting judges as well. Again, historical record.

HARLOW: Yes. Good point.

SCIUTTO: Carrie Cordero, Susan Hennessey, thanks to both of you.

Ahead, two senators serving as jurors in this trial. We're going to speak to them. Their reaction to the Democrats' opening arguments.

Plus, a member of the president's legal team will also be here. Robert Ray says he does not believe impeachment witnesses are appropriate.

HARLOW: And entire cities in China on lockdown. Quarantined. We're talking about millions and millions of people impacted as fear grows by the minute over the spread of coronavirus. Nearly 600 cases confirmed so far.

[09:10:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

HARLOW: All right. Welcome back. So it's day two of opening arguments in the impeachment trial of the president. In just a few hours, House impeachment managers are going to resume making their case trying to get the president removed.

Joining me now is one of the jurors in the trial, Democratic Senator Bob Casey of Pennsylvania.

So nice to have you.

SEN. BOB CASEY (D-PA): Poppy, good to be with you. Thank you.

HARLOW: Let's talk really big picture here because one thing that I do think is striking is that through all of this, right, through all of the House investigation, the public hearings, now the beginning of the Senate trial, the president's approval rating has not budged. It has not gone down. It's actually gone up.

I think we can pull it up. September, 39 percent, January, 43 percent in terms of national approval of the president. Why do you think that is?

CASEY: Well, Poppy, I'm not sure. I guess I'd leave the analysis to the political scientists, but I do think that one thing that's clear to me at least, or at least seems to be indicative of where we are is that I think the American people are paying attention to this trial. It's a different process than they're used to when they turn on their television set and watch a hearing from Washington.

It's obviously, longer presentations. But I think the American people have become engaged, and they are hearing, many for the first time.

[09:15:00]

And I think there's probably senators that for the first time are hearing the full scope of the evidence about how the president solicited the interference of a foreign government in our election and basically was asking a foreign government to do his political work for him.

HARLOW: You know, on the issue of witnesses, where -- which is where these house managers are really trying to get those sort of Republicans on the fence, right? They need four of them to vote yes to have these witnesses. On that issue, you do have public opinion on your side. Not only do you have 69 percent of Americans who want to --

CASEY: Right --

HARLOW: Hear from witnesses in the trial. You have 69 percent of independents and 48 percent of Republicans. My question to you, senator, is how do you move -- what is the trigger, the mechanism, et cetera, for moving that public opinion to actually sway the votes of those four Republicans in your favor?

CASEY: Well, I think that's -- well, that remains to be seen in terms of how the presentation by the house managers two more days or at least the equivalent of two more days.

HARLOW: Yes --

CASEY: And the other evidence, how that -- how that impacts their thinking. But I would hope that Republican senators would want to hear from what would in essence be a couple of Republican witnesses. I don't know of anyone who has been under oath who has made the case for the president's position. But I thought one of the most compelling parts of manager Adam Schiff's testimony or presentation yesterday was his recounting of that episode where ambassador -- National Security adviser Bolton is talking to Bill Taylor, the top guy in Ukraine, a Vietnam veteran, a decorated veteran.

And Taylor expresses concerns, Bolton says send a classified cable to Secretary of State, Pompeo. And he said, wouldn't you like to read what was in that cable because it's a contemporaneous account of what Bill Taylor was concerned about with regard to Ukraine? I was just looking at the house Intel report, and he said, quote, "this is Taylor testifying."

Quote, the "Russians, as I said in my deposition, would love to see the humiliation of President Zelensky at the hands of the Americans." We should have access to that document. I think Republicans would want to have that access as well.

HARLOW: On the issue of access of documents and specifically of witnesses, one of the president's lawyers, Alan Dershowitz, just made this case last night. Listen to it, and then we'll talk about it on the other side.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ALAN DERSHOWITZ, DEFENSE ATTORNEY FOR DONALD TRUMP: The first witness I'd call is the witness about whom the conversation took place. So, of course, you could never have witnesses here without Hunter Biden being a central witness. But there are going to be witnesses, there have to be witnesses on all sides. And I think the Democrats will rue the day that they sought witnesses because their witnesses will probably be blocked by executive privilege or at least by court proceedings involving executive privilege.

But the Republican's witnesses like Hunter Biden, there'd be no basis for blocking their testimony.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HARLOW: He says your witnesses would be blocked. They'd call Biden, Hunter Biden would not be blocked, and you guys would rue the day. Is he right? Is that a gamble you're willing to take?

CASEY: Well, Poppy, I think people watching the trial across America, you don't have to be a trial lawyer to know that when you have an inquiry that's a trial, and you want a fair trial with witnesses, the witnesses have to be relevant to the charges. So, Mr. Bolton is relevant because he had conversations with the president, in essence, he was in charge of national security for the president.

And Mr. Mulvaney, of course, is a relevant witness because he is the acting and was the acting Chief of Staff at the time. And also had -- was running the Office of Management and Budget. And the two -- Mr. Duffy and Mr. Blair. So relevant witnesses make a lot of sense. I thought it was really startling and frankly, insulting that the Republicans voted against a measure of -- a motion to let the Chief Justice make the determination about relevance.

You would think that with Republicans having a Chief Justice appointed by a Republican president, they would at least be willing to give Chief Justice Roberts that authority to -- so we want relevant witnesses, not some distraction --

HARLOW: Yes --

CASEY: Or some side show.

HARLOW: Senator Bob Casey, we'll have you back, thanks for your time this morning.

CASEY: Thanks, Poppy.

HARLOW: You got it. JIM SCIUTTO, CO-ANCHOR, NEWSROOM: Yes, interesting about that amendment being voted down about letting the Chief Justice make that decision on relevance.

HARLOW: Well, because it's Roberts, they don't know --

SCIUTTO: Yes --

HARLOW: Which way it's going to go.

SCIUTTO: Exactly. Millions of people in three cities on lockdown now. China trying to contain the deadly Coronavirus outbreak that has spread throughout Asia and has now reached the U.S. We're going to have a live update ahead.

HARLOW: We're also moments away from the opening bell on Wall Street. The Coronavirus is impacting global markets. Take a look at futures this morning, a little bit in the red, mostly flat as investors are very concerned about the outbreak.

[09:20:00]

Chinese stocks had their worst day in more than eight months, obviously as a result of this. Goldman Sachs warning the outbreak could put a dent in oil prices as well. They also say jet fuel prices will decrease the most because of the likely decline in air travel to that region.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:25:00]

SCIUTTO: Authorities in Beijing have now canceled all large-scale Chinese new year's celebrations in an effort to contain the growing spread of the deadly Coronavirus. It's a big travel time of year on par, probably even greater than Christmas time here.

HARLOW: Yes, it's a very good point. So far, this virus has killed 17 people, infected nearly 600 living in five different countries, including some in the United States. Let's go straight to our David Culver, he joins us now from Beijing. And David, as I understand, you were just in Wuhan, you are back. What can you tell us in terms of what you saw and what authorities are doing to try to contain the virus.

DAVID CULVER, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Hey, there, Poppy and Jim. Yes, it was rather an unnerving phone call that we got around 3 O'clock in the morning our time. And it was essentially saying, look, this lockdown is going into place. You're going to need to find a way out, and that may be by train, that may be by air or by car.

You've got to figure out some way logistically to get out of there. And so, ultimately, we decided that the train would be the most efficient and reliable way. And we went there realizing hundreds of other folks had the same idea. That they needed to get out. Locals from Wuhan, there were families there gathering all their luggage. As you mentioned, this is a holiday season. So, they were trying to be

together hopefully for a celebratory mood. That didn't pan out, so they had to figure out a way to get out of the city before that 10 O'clock deadline took place. And once that came in, it was interesting to see because we were told by actually some contacts on the ground there in Wuhan that the paramilitary essentially came out in front of the rail station and locked it from there, and said no one is going to be leaving.

They're still allowing folks to come in at some portions, but it's mostly containing folks from leaving.

SCIUTTO: Wow --

CULVER: The big development out of here, though, has been how this has expanded, Jim and Poppy. This is now 20 million people we're talking about impacted by these restrictions because it goes beyond just Wuhan now. It goes to some surrounding cities within Hubei Province.

HARLOW: Wow --

SCIUTTO: Just imagine a U.S. city say we're being blocked from --

HARLOW: Three times the size of New York, right?

SCIUTTO: Yes --

HARLOW: Yes --

SCIUTTO: The origin story of this, David, is alarming. Tell us about it.

CULVER: Yes, it is, and it's a bit bizarre too, because it's all centered around this seafood market. And we went to that market. And if you drive by it today, it is completely shuttered, it's heavily- guarded, and even as we stepped out to try to get a few exterior images of it, we were quickly ushered away. Security came up to us and asked us to get out of there, even asked us at one point to delete the video. We were able to get out and share that video in our reporting.

But it was the source, according to some Chinese scientists that came down to snakes. That's what they're saying. And they say they were able to map that through genetic coding, and ultimately, they say that's what was the epicenter, if you will, of this.

SCIUTTO: Goodness, eating snakes. Wow, David Culver, we're just seeing the beginnings of this --

CULVER: Yes --

SCIUTTO: Thanks very much. Back here as Democrats allege the president is obstructing their investigations. The president seems to brag about withholding material from Congress. We're going to have a member of the White House's legal team live on the air, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:30:00]