Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Newsroom
Kobe Bryant Remembered; Trump on Trial; Mar-a-Lago Security Breach; Coronavirus Outbreak. Aired 5-6a ET
Aired February 01, 2020 - 05:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[05:00:00]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JOHN ROBERTS, SUPREME COURT CHIEF JUSTICE: We are adjourned.
WOLF BLITZER, CNN HOST (voice-over): We're watching history unfold in the U.S. Senate. They have just defeated a motion to allow new witnesses to appear before the trial of the president of the United States.
SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM (R-SC): The president will be acquitted in a bipartisan manner.
SEN. CHUCK SCHUMER (D-NY): This country is headed towards the greatest coverup since Watergate.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Public health officials are on edge as a novel virus first identified in Wuhan, China, continues to spread throughout the world.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The coronavirus presents a public health emergency in the United States.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (INAUDIBLE) out of Lower Merion High School, Kobe Bryant.
LEBRON JAMES, LOS ANGELES LAKERS FORWARD: In the words of Kobe Bryant, Mamba out. But in the words of us, not forgotten. Live on, brother.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(MUSIC PLAYING)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE (voice-over): This is NEW DAY WEEKEND with Victor Blackwell and Christi Paul.
VICTOR BLACKWELL, CNN ANCHOR: Good Saturday morning to you. President Trump is expected to be acquitted on two articles of impeachment on Wednesday. Before the final vote though, both sides get to present their closing arguments.
CHRISTI PAUL, CNN ANCHOR: The U.S. is imposing a 14 day travel ban on all visitors from China. This is because the number of coronavirus cases have jumped to 12,000 worldwide.
The L.A. Lakers paying tribute to Kobe Bryant and his daughter, Gigi, and the seven other people who died in Sunday's helicopter crash in a pre-game ceremony last night was that memorial. We'll bring that in a little while.
BLACKWELL: Before the big vote for the president, he has to deliver the State of the Union address this week.
PAUL: CNN's Kaitlan Collins has more.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: The latest we're hearing from White House officials is they have pretty much resigned themselves to the fact that when President Trump delivers his State of the Union on Tuesday night, he is not going to be an acquitted president yet.
They have been hoping for the last several weeks, despite the House impeaching him, despite the Senate trial that's been going on and whether or not they would have witnesses or not, they felt good about the fact they thought the president would be acquitted by the time he delivered the State of the Union address on February 4th and he'd be able to walk into the House Speaker's Nancy Pelosi's turf and have his vindication of being acquitted.
They pushed all day, telling Republicans they wanted the vote on Tuesday the latest. Now they realize, after these new negotiations going back and forth between the Republicans and Democrats, that won't happen.
According to what sources tells us, the president spoke with Mitch McConnell before he introduced that resolution to place that acquittal vote coming on Wednesday the day after the State of the Union. And we're told the president did sign off. Maybe his mood about this has changed different than what his aides were feeling.
When the president does give the State of the Union address, the White House today, when they were briefing reporters, would not say whether he'll mention impeachment. They said the date could shift potentially because of the vote coming a day after.
But according to a Republican senator who spoke with the president, he's intent on moving full steam ahead with delivering that State of the Union address on Tuesday night. Now the big question will be what he says -- Kaitlan Collins, CNN, the White House.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
BLACKWELL: Thank you, Kaitlan.
"The New York Times" is reporting new details from the unpublished manuscript by John Bolton. It says President Trump asked Bolton to aid his pressure campaign on Ukraine in early May of 2019 and that Pat Cipollone was in the room when the request was made. PAUL: The White House is denying "The New York Times" story.
Democratic senator Chris Murphy says Bolton should be called to testify before the House since he won't be a witness in the Senate impeachment trial.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. CHRIS MURPHY (D-CT): He's no hero. He could have testified before the House of Representatives. He didn't have to contest that. He wasn't currently working in the White House.
Fiona Hill testified. She's not in jail today so no reason he had to wait until his book was written in order to tell this story.
Yes, the House should bring him before the body. I don't think the proper forum for his story coming out is his book release. One way or the other, at least the House has to get him back before the body.
But the story he seems to be telling is entirely consistent with all the facts we've heard already. And so it appears from what we know that he's telling the truth.
[05:05:00]
MURPHY: He could have told that truth back in November or December. If he had, we might be in a different place than we are today, with only a couple of Republicans willing to vote with us on anything as we move this process forward.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BLACKWELL: With us now former federal prosecutor and CNN legal analyst Shan Wu.
Let's start here with Pat Cipollone, "The New York Times" reporting Cipollone was in the room when the president asked for that help to pressure Ukraine for the investigations. We've watched him for two weeks now in the Senate trial.
What is Cipollone's exposure?
SHAN WU, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: His exposure as we've been hearing about is a couple of ethical, legal ethical rules.
One is the question of, can a lawyer be a witness?
The second is, can a tribunal meaning the court or Senate in this case and also a rule about being truthful to others.
So the first one everyone has been up in arms about because it seems like he's a lawyer but turns out to be a witness. He can probably skate on that one because that's really, he wasn't actually presented as a witness. That rule is really meant to avoid a conflict where the lawyer tries to play both the role of witness as well as being the advocate. Candor and truthfulness, shakier ground for Cipollone. He can argue he
didn't actually misrepresent anything. He didn't actually say, I was not a witness to it. But that's a little bit shakier if he were to face a bar complaint. They would be very carefully perusing what he did say and didn't say.
And certainly, were we in a courtroom, no judge would be very happy with him holding this back and concealing it from them.
PAUL: A couple of things about Bolton, a lot of questions about his intention at this point because, if he has real solid evidence, people are wondering, why would you not bring this up when it matters in a trial as opposed to putting it in a book?
And we're wondering if that's the case, if he's more concerned about a book than he is about a real consequence here.
What is his credibility factor?
WU: I think it's pretty evident that he's both concerned about his book sales as well as coming forward with telling what happened. Probably bears a bit of a grudge. That does hurt his credibility.
Certainly the president's team will be saying that he's a disgruntled employee. But he's not in a jury trial, where you could really question that credibility. And the jury is in more of a vacuum they are not sure what else is going on.
In the court of public opinion, if what he's saying has the ring of truth, it's still going to be damaging to the president. But to borrow a phrase from the defense team, he has mixed motives.
BLACKWELL: What stops Bolton from showing up on "STATE OF THE UNION," the show not the actual address on Tuesday, "STATE OF THE UNION" tomorrow or any of the other Sunday shows before the Super Bowl interview with the president, before the statements on Monday, the vote on Wednesday, "STATE OF THE UNION" and telling his story.
What prevents him from doing that?
WU: Nothing prevents him from doing that. The White House indicated they would try to stop it if they had the heads up for it. They could go to court to get an injunction to stop him. There's questions about whether they've finished reviewing his book. Obviously they will take a long time to review that to make sure there's no classified information, a delay tactic.
An interesting point to think about here, Bolton is an old-time government public servant. Although he is very opinionated and a little bit rogue at times, it's somewhat against his nature not to give any warning and show up on a talk show.
I think the White House will get warning if he wants to go on a show. They would have time to try to run to court to do something, although I think at the end of the day, they would have an uphill battle on that argument. PAUL: Senator Murkowski, everybody was watching what she would do in
terms of her vote for witnesses.
"Given the partisan nature of this impeachment from the very beginning and throughout, I've come to the conclusion that there will be no fair trial in the Senate. I don't believe the continuation of this process will change anything. It's sad for me to admit that, as an institution, Congress has failed."
Where does it leave the Senate, where does it leave the House?
These are elected lawmakers. They are supposed to be in charge of oversight. They are supposed to be the people we elect for accountability.
What power do they have now?
If he's acquitted at the end of the day. That's not happened yet.
[05:10:00]
WU: Her statement is really hard to understand, frankly. I mean it seems kind of ridiculous. She's talking about Congress' failure, the lack of a fair trial that she's a part of ensuring that there won't be a fair trial.
I think the House managers, the Judiciary Committee, Intelligence Committee, they did what they are supposed to do. They saw something they had to investigate and went ahead and did that.
And in that sense our system worked. In the big picture sense, the system is working. It came to the Senate. It's a political body. Republicans have the majority. And they quashed it.
From a moral sense, I think it's very troubling that, in my view, they didn't have the courage to stand up and look at the truth, call things as they actually were and I think they will pay for a penalty for that in the elections.
And that's also a part of the system as well. I think the institutions will survive. A very troubling message sent to President Trump. Once he's acquitted, he'll feel he has a blank check to do whatever he want.
PAUL: How powerful are those institutions?
WU: The power of the institutions goes to how long they continue to exist. And ours have continued to exist. They've weathered a lot of ups and downs. This is a very difficult situation because you have a president who is really not bound by normal guardrail systems.
And there's a lot of dangerous things he has done and he may do. And the only thing the institutions and we can do is to continue to press he be held accountable. I think the institutions are there. I don't think that they are acting in a very powerful way right now for checks and balances. BLACKWELL: Listen to something we heard from deputy White House
counsel. This is part of the argument to witnesses that was successful. Here's what Mr. Philbin said.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
PATRICK PHILBIN, TRUMP DEPUTY COUNSEL: Now to say that while fairness demands that this body has to do all that work, that sets a new precedent as well. It changes, it would change for all the future the relationship between the House and the Senate and impeachment inquiries. It would mean the Senate has to become the investigatory body.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
"Change for all the future."
You think it's valid?
WU: No. That's just a bunch of smoke and mirrors he's doing there. The investigation was properly done by the House. And the Senate is trying the case. And in a trial you can recall witnesses, you can recall evidence that's been introduced during the investigation and you can have new ones come in.
It doesn't transform them into doing the House's job. That's nonsensical stuff he's throwing up to give Republican senators to have more of a hook to hang their coats on.
PAUL: Always good to have you here. Thank you, sir.
WU: Good to see you.
BLACKWELL: Marie Yovanovitch has now retired from the State Department after more than 30 years of service. The former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine is a central figure, you know, in the impeachment trial.
PAUL: In May, she was removed from her post in Ukraine after a targeted campaign against her led by Rudy Giuliani. President Trump called Marie Yovanovitch "bad news" on July 25th on a phone call with the leader of the Ukraine. The president told an aide to get rid of her. She testified back in November.
BLACKWELL: We're hearing from some Republican senators the explanation for why they voted against potential witnesses and their vote against convicting president. Senator Marco Rubio said sometimes the president should stay in power even if he does engage in impeachable conduct.
PAUL: And for the first time since the crash that killed Kobe Bryant, the Lakers honored him at home. It was an emotional night at the Staples Center. We'll have more.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) JAMES: As I look around this arena, we're all grieving. We're all hurt. We're all heartbroken. When we going through things like this, the best thing you can do is lean on the shoulders of your family.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(MUSIC PLAYING)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[05:15:00]
(MUSIC PLAYING)
PAUL: A woman is in custody after shots were fired outside of the president's Mar-a-lago resort.
BLACKWELL: Police say the woman was behaving erratically. At one point she was standing on top of her car. When they approached her, she sped off in what turned into a police chase along the island.
The woman drove at dangerously high speeds on the wrong side of the road, they say. They say she was headed towards Mar-a-Lago, where she breached two security checkpoints that were set up for the president's arrival and that's when Secret Service fired their weapons. Officers say that no one was hurt.
PAUL: The suspect was arrested. She faces several charges, including assault on a federal officer. The incident is still under investigation but police say it is not terrorism related.
So Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell seemed to have kept his troops in line. Some say Republican senators, voting mostly along party lines mostly, to block calling any witnesses in President Trump's impeachment trial.
BLACKWELL: Some GOP senators are attempting to explain their vote against witnesses.
Here's this from Florida senator Marco Rubio.
"Just because actions meet a standard of impeachment does not mean it's in the best interest of the country to remove a president from office."
With us now to discuss Errol Louis, political anchor for Spectrum News.
Good morning to you. Let's stop there. What Rubio is saying that, you know, it would be worse to get rid of him, although what he's done is, as the framers wrote, as Hamilton wrote, is an infraction against the people, against society.
ERROL LOUIS, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: That's exactly right. What senator Rubio and a number of his colleagues have done is going to have implications that I'm not sure we're going to have to wait very long to see, frankly. It's not about some future president. It's about what happens right now.
[05:20:00]
LOUIS: Not just the really hard, scary things like whether or not we're going to have more foreign interference in the next election but even routine business like getting a response.
Victor, put aside everything else about it, there was an impeachment article about obstructing Congress. So once -- if armed with the knowledge that he can simply obstruct Congress, simply ignore requests for information that are duly issued by Congress, senator Rubio may have a hard time getting answers to routine business.
How much did that weapons system cost?
What's the new policy going to be in a certain area of social services, for example?
He's no longer entitled to any kind of answers and that's what that answer he gave means. Just because the White House has committed misconduct, has obstructed Congress, has invited foreign interference in our elections, we don't have to do anything about it.
You know, look, you empower somebody to misbehave in that way, the consequences are very easy to see. I think we'll see them sooner rather than later.
PAUL: Senator Lamar Alexander called it inappropriate and improper. Ben Sasse said, "Let me be clear, Lamar speaks for lots of us."
We have the Marco Rubio statement. Senator Lisa Murkowski saying, quote, "As an institution, Congress has failed."
A lot of people yesterday were saying will Republicans come out and acknowledge this? They have now acknowledged it.
What does that acknowledgement mean, however, when you look at their votes?
LOUIS: In the end it means very little, not only because it did not change their votes but because the White House never asserted any of the excuses they are now making for him. That cute and clever bit of wordsmithing by Lisa Murkowski, the senator from Alaska; Marco Rubio from Florida; the White House specifically rejected all of that.
Remember the president keeps saying the phone call was perfect. The actions were perfect. The impeachment, even the inquiry was utterly illegitimate and unconstitutional. That's the extreme position that the White House took and has never wavered from.
So they are now making excuses the president never wanted, explicitly rejected and I don't expect the president ever, ever to say any of the things that his defenders are now saying. So I think they will find themselves really pretty far out on a limb when they go back and talk to their constituents about what they did and why they did it. BLACKWELL: Senator Lindsey Graham, Senator Kennedy of Louisiana and I
just want to go back to the fall, October and November and this is what they said then about what would be troublesome or probably impeachable and we compare that to what we know today. Let's watch.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You are reminded if more come out you could support impeachment?
SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM (R-SC): Sure. I mean, show me something that is a crime. If you could show me that Trump actually was engaging in a quid pro quo outside the phone call, that would be very disturbing.
SEN. JOHN KENNEDY (R-LA): What I am telling you is that if it can be demonstrated that the president asked for and had the requisite state of mind, that the president asked for an investigation of a political rival, that's over the line.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: OK.
KENNEDY: But if he asked for an investigation of possible corruption by someone who happens to be a political rival, that's not over the line.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: So over the line, does that mean impeachable?
KENNEDY: Yes. Probably.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BLACKWELL: Now how do you reconcile that with not only the vote that's coming Wednesday but the vote that happened yesterday, that if you don't get the evidence, you don't get the witnesses to determine if the line has been crossed, how can you know?
How can you get any truth?
LOUIS: It's very interesting. I think those quotes actually explain the votes that were taken yesterday and the votes that are likely to be taken Wednesday, which is to say they knew, Senator Graham, Senator Kennedy and others, they knew if they asked John Bolton or other key witnesses to provide testimony under oath about what they know, it would have provided all of the information that they just, in that hypothetical interview, said they would need in order to lean towards impeachment and removal.
So knowing that's what was standing outside the door they said we're not going to open that door, not take any more witnesses, not take any more testimony. The reality is this now becomes the first out of 15 prior impeachments in U.S. history, where there were no witnesses, where there were no documents that were brought in.
So it sort of speaks for itself. It's breathtaking in a way because they've gone on the record so often saying, gee, if you bring me this information I might have to make a hard choice. And then the information comes forward in the form of John Bolton and other interferon and they say let's call this off, let's not have a trial, let's not hear the information, let's cast a vote and get out of town as quickly as we can.
[05:25:00]
PAUL: Tuesday President Trump is giving his State of the Union address, the day before what's expected to be an acquittal vote in the Senate.
How much weight is now on the State of the Union for him in terms of the content, in terms of his tone?
LOUIS: Look, a great deal. The State of the Union is probably the peak of the president's ability to reach everybody. We always talk about social media. This is the main event. The entire world will be watching what President Trump has to say.
He'll frame it precisely because he's in such close coordination with the Republican majority in the Senate that he'll frame it as, when that vote is cast tomorrow, I will be completely acquitted, that this was all a sham. This was all a farce and so on. He'll frame it that way on Tuesday.
Mitch McConnell, the next day, will vote in lockstep with his Republican majority to provide that and that will be their story that they take into the fall elections.
PAUL: Errol Louis, always good to have you here, sir.
LOUIS: Thank you.
BLACKWELL: Next week is set up to be one of the wildest weeks of political events in recent history. We'll see if they are consequential. Iowa caucus is Monday. Same day both sides will give closing arguments in the president's impeachment trial.
PAUL: Tuesday the president gives his much anticipated State of the Union address. On Wednesday the final impeachment vote is in the Senate. And on Wednesday and Thursday, CNN holds its Democratic presidential town halls for New Hampshire. Big week.
BLACKWELL: Very big week.
All right. Health officials, worldwide scrambling to stop the spread of the coronavirus. At least one U.S. state is implementing a mandatory quarantine order that has not been used in 50 years. We'll tell you about that.
(MUSIC PLAYING)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[05:30:00]
(MUSIC PLAYING) BLACKWELL: The number of confirmed cases of the Wuhan coronavirus may
soon reach 12,000. Officials in China say there are now 11,791 cases in Mainland China alone; 259 people have died. Australia, Hong Kong, Vietnam, Taiwan have all announced new cases this morning.
PAUL: Here in the U.S., coronavirus is being considered a public health emergency now. Seven cases of the virus have been confirmed. It's important to note, no one has died here in the U.S.
Starting at 5:00 pm Eastern on Sunday the U.S. is imposing serious travel restrictions on people coming from China. Again that's happening tomorrow. CNN chief medical correspondent Dr. Sanjay Gupta has more.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
DR. SANJAY GUPTA, CNN CHIEF MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT: We now know in addition to this being a public health emergency of international concern, the United States is now calling it a public health emergency within this country as well.
Something has now happened that hasn't happened in 50 years at the federal level which is a mandatory quarantine for those 195 passengers that came straight from the epicenter of this outbreak in Hubei province.
What this quarantine means, for 14 days, which is believed to be the incubation period of this virus, these passengers will be kept at this Air Force base. They will continue to be screened over there. Their temperatures will be monitored to see if they are developing any symptoms, at which point they may be checked to see, if in fact, they have the infection.
This hasn't happened in 50 years. So it gives you some idea of how significant the United States public health authorities are taking this particular issue. The Secretary of Health described these actions like this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ALEX AZAR, U.S. HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES SECRETARY: The risk is low of transmissibility, the risk of contracting the disease is low but our job is to keep that risk low as much as we can by taking appropriate preventative steps.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GUPTA: Again, the risk is low to the general public. Some of these actions he says are to keep that risk low.
Now one of the things that often comes up and has been discussed a lot how does this compare to other things, for example, flu?
We know the flu, for example, in this country already this particular season, has killed more than 8,000 people and there have been millions and millions of infections. When you look at this virus now around the world you're seeing close to 10,000 people who have been infected and obviously 200 or so people who have died.
The numbers really are very different. But with a novel virus we simply don't know how things will progress. It's a brand new virus. There are still lots of unknowns. There are some things we learned over the last few days.
For example, we learned people can be entirely asymptomatic, have no symptoms and still be carrying the virus. We also saw one case, seems to suggest someone could pass on the virus before or after they've had any symptoms.
So all this new data is sort of guiding these decisions we're seeing at the federal level, guiding something that hasn't been done in five decades in this country, again in an effort to keep the risk low. Back to you.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
PAUL: The Chinese government says it's doing all it can to take on the coronavirus but there are people who are questioning that.
BLACKWELL: People living on the front lines of the epidemic or going around state-run media to tell a different story. CNN's David Culver reports from Beijing.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
DAVID CULVER, CNN CORRESPONDENT: These are the images Chinese state media CCTV broadcast across the country, rapid construction of not one but two hospitals slated to open next week with capacity for 2,600 patients.
Scenes of a nation mobilizing in its fight against the deadly coronavirus. On the flight TV newscast, the host praising the ruling Communist Party for the massive containment effort that's underway.
Rotating articles on Friday on state-run agency Xinhua website reassure readers of the efforts to keep supplies flowing.
One headline reading, "China has full confidence, capability to control epidemic."
People in Wuhan portray a desperate reality to CNN, describing life threatening shortages of medical supplies.
DORA JIANG, CORONAVIRUS PATIENT'S NIECE: It's really difficult. It's really emotional for me.
CULVER (voice-over): Dora Jiang video chatted with us from Germany. She said it took four days for her 72-year-old uncle in Wuhan to get his test results. They came back positive.
JIANG: I don't think it's because they really want to control the numbers. But I think it's more about the capacity.
CULVER (voice-over): Before the official state news outlet began to report the dangers of the virus, people in China turned to social media for the truth. This lawyer turned citizen journalist in Wuhan has been posting the problems he's encountered.
[05:35:00]
CULVER (voice-over): Saying it's lack of face masks, hazmat suits, gears (ph) and the most important thing is lack of testing kits. You can't get confirmation if there's no testing kit. The only thing you can do is to be a suspect case and wait at home.
A stark contrast with how the ruling Communist Party's official newspaper, the "People's Daily" covered the outbreak. Their front page story on January 24th, a Lunar New Year speech made by President Xi, in which he made no mention of Wuhan's lockdown that was ordered hours earlier.
On national TV, Xi said he's personally directing the effort and releasing information in a, quote, "transparent and responsible manner."
CULVER: But some Chinese media outlets known for a more independent streak have exposed the disturbing truths of this outbreak.
CULVER (voice-over): The publication, "The Paper," ran this video, showing one suspected patient, who apparently had no choice but to quarantine himself in his own car. These images posted on the "People's Daily" Weibo account shows medical personnel in Wuhan hospital, making masks and hazmat suits out of trash bags.
Similarly disturbing images shared across Chinese social media fueling concern that the actual number of people infected is greater than the official count, that conditions for medical staff are increasingly dire and that this outbreak is far from under control -- David Culver, CNN, Beijing.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
PAUL: David, thank you.
We'll keep you posted as we learn more today.
President Trump's impeachment trial is resuming Monday after Senate Republicans vote no to witnesses and documents. The president won't be cleared of the charges before he takes the stage, though, for his State of the Union address. CNN political commentators Anna Stewart and Maria Cardona with us next to break it all down.
(MUSIC PLAYING)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(MUSIC PLAYING)
BLACKWELL: President Trump's impeachment trial will resume on Monday but the House managers, the president's counsel will have two hours for their closing arguments each. The Senate will hold final vote on Wednesday.
[05:40:00]
BLACKWELL: The president is scheduled to deliver his State of the Union address, that's Tuesday night, the night before.
PAUL: Overnight the Senate voted to block subpoenas for witnesses and documents. GOP senators Susan Collins and Mitt Romney were the only Republicans to join Democrats in pushing to extend the trial.
BLACKWELL: With us now to discuss, Democratic strategist Maria Cardona; Republican strategist and former Ted Cruz communications director, Alice Stewart.
Ladies, good morning to you. Let's start here with senator Marco Rubio. I want to read for you the most controversial element of his statement that he posted on Medium.
"Just because actions meet a standard of impeachment does not mean it is in the best interest of the country to remove a president from office."
Alice, first to you, do you agree?
ALICE STEWART, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: I don't agree that this has led to, resulted in actions for impeachment. Obviously the Democrats disagree. The reality is, look, I think the actions the president took on that phone call were inappropriate but I don't believe it's risen to the level of impeachment.
(CROSSTALK)
BLACKWELL: This is more than just a phone call. We're learning from the manuscript from John Bolton as reported by "The New York Times" the request came from the president in May. We know that the funding was not released until the second week of September.
So just holding it to that one five-page summary of a call is much broader than that, is it not?
STEWART: It is at this point but looking at the information that we gleaned from House hearings and House information did it not reach the two articles of impeachment that they put forth.
And that's exactly the reason why the Republicans in the Senate said, all right you have not met the congressional threshold for impeachment, we don't need to hear more information and we're going to move forward with this.
And ultimately they would rule to -- they will rule to acquit. If they wanted to hear from John Bolton they should have issued a subpoena and fought it in court. If they wanted to hear more information they should have put it forward.
There's three clear things that come (sic) out of this. The Senate's job is to process and hear the testimony presented by the House. The House claimed their information was overwhelming but now they say they want more witnesses.
(CROSSTALK)
BLACKWELL: Alice, we know that John Bolton said that, if you subpoena me I will sue. Now he says if you subpoena me I will appear. So that's a difference between what the House was facing and what the Senate is facing.
Maria, let me put the question to you. We heard the nuanced spin from Alice on what she disagrees with.
But do you agree with Marco Rubio?
MARIA CARDONA, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: That statement, Victor, is breathtaking. It's hypocrisy, it's ridiculousness and frankly in how much it's a slap in the face of democracy, our founding fathers and the Constitution.
Let's pair that with the argument that Alan Dershowitz was making a couple of nights ago, where he essentially said that any president who takes an action in the interest of his re-election is an action in the interest of the country and, therefore, unimpeachable.
Between that and what Marco Rubio said and the vote that the GOP Senate took last night, Victor, the Republican Party has given birth to the American dictator. And that should bring shivers and fear into the hearts of every single American.
They have traded long-term demise for short-term expediency. It will have a long-term, harmful effect on the Republican Party, especially the senators facing tough re-election in swing states, frankly, as well as this president.
BLACKWELL: Polling shows that, the latest poll coming from CBS News just yesterday, shows that the president's approval rating is still at 43 percent. When you go to independents, 44 percent of the respondents think this impeachment saga had no impact on the president politically.
Let me come back and play something, though, as you talk about the impact on Republican senators. This is Senator Kennedy out of Louisiana, 83 days ago. Right?
This was the senator criticizing the process in the House and specifically on witnesses and who should be called and who should be heard and what would be fair. Let's play John Kennedy.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. JOHN KENNEDY (R-LA): Both sides ought to be able to call their witnesses in front of God and country and the American people. And then let the American people decide. And the president and his counsel should be allowed to participate. Now I think that would be fair. I will happily judge the evidence.
(END VIDEO CLIP) [05:45:00]
BLACKWELL: Alice, reconcile that with his vote to block witnesses.
STEWART: The key phrase there is both sides should be allowed to present witnesses. Which means if Democrats want to call John Bolton and others in the administration then Republicans should be able to call Hunter Biden and Joe Biden and even Adam Schiff. Here's the thing that's really important to remember --
(CROSSTALK)
BLACKWELL: But the vote was to allow no witnesses.
STEWART: OK. There have been witnesses. Here's the --
CARDONA: Not in the Senate.
STEWART: There certainly have. There were over 12 witnesses that testified in the House. That information was transported to the Senate and it's the Senate's job to review and take a look at the testimony from the witnesses --
BLACKWELL: You know that's not the same thing as having testimony, having witnesses in the Senate, he said he wanted to hear and have people present their case before God and country both sides. And the president's counsel, they could have presented a resolution to try to get whomever they wanted to testify. But the vote was for no witnesses.
STEWART: To be clear they had witnesses. They had witness testimony that the House put forth.
CARDONA: Not the same the thing.
STEWART: That's the information that the Senate used to reach this ultimate conclusion.
BLACKWELL: Maria, quickly to you. Respond to that.
CARDONA: Sure. It's not the same thing because there has been no other trial during an impeachment in the Senate without witnesses. And the fact that Republicans turned their back on wanting to learn more information about what happened, I think, is all the American people need to know about a Republican Senate, who has become complete and total puppets of this American president, again, giving birth to an American dictator.
BLACKWELL: Maria, who is surprised by this outcome?
I want you to listen here to Speaker Pelosi. This is April of 2018.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. NANCY PELOSI (D-CA): Impeachment is a very serious matter. It is, as it happens, it has to be a bipartisan initiative. (END VIDEO CLIP)
BLACKWELL: It was a bipartisan in the House. It's not bipartisan in the Senate.
Was an impeachment proceeding in an election year with the full understanding that there would be no conviction in the Senate the right decision?
What about censure?
We know there's a majority of senators, when you count the 47 Democrats and the additional Republicans we heard from, who say that what the president did was wrong, it was inappropriate.
Should they have focused on censure instead of impeachment?
CARDONA: I don't think so. I think what the Democrats did and I think it was very brave and bold of them to do so because they put country over party, because you're right. It is a very difficult vote to take.
What they did is they put their oath of office before their own political interests. Look, what Pelosi said, I think, was true in terms of wanting to hope that the Republican Party would also put country over party. We have seen now that's completely impossible.
When she saw that Republicans were going to be ostriches and stick their heads in the sand and look the other way through the actions of a corrupt president, she and the majority of Democrats understood they would be the ones to step up to the plate and take on their oath of office and be true to it and respect the Constitution and what our founding fathers wanted to do.
(CROSSTALK)
STEWART: Victor, Pelosi in the beginning didn't just want to it be bipartisan but overwhelming. Ultimately it was not bipartisan or overwhelming.
CARDONA: The evidence was completely overwhelming and Republicans have taken a slap in the face to the truth.
BLACKWELL: Wrapping it there. Maria Cardona, Anna Stewart, thank you both.
Quick break. We'll be back.
(MUSIC PLAYING)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[05:50:00]
(MUSIC PLAYING)
BLACKWELL: The Lakers returned to the Staples Center last night with an emotional tribute to Kobe Bryant.
PAUL: Here's CNN's Sara Sidner.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
SARA SIDNER, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: From the moment that fans entered the Staples Center on this first game since learning of the death of Kobe Bryant and his daughter, along with seven others, this entire place was emotionally charged.
(MUSIC PLAYING)
SIDNER (voice-over): This is the Laker Nation grieving a Laker legend. It began with the spotlight on the empty jerseys never again to be filled by the man who made those numbers mean so much to so many. The sound of "Amazing Grace" was ushered in to throngs of fans.
It was a night of raw emotion, a night to throw away the script and throw on the commemorative T-shirt everyone received and console each other. LeBron James took the lead.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JAMES: I got something to bring down. They asked me to stand on court or whatever the case may be. But Laker Nation, man, I would be selling y'all short if I read off (INAUDIBLE) straight from the heart.
SIDNER (voice-over): It's the first time James has spoken publicly about Bryant since the deadly helicopter crash that took nine lives, including Bryant's 13-year-old daughter, Gianna.
JAMES: The first thing that comes to mind, man, is all about family. And as I look around this arena, we're all grieving. We're all hurt. We're all heartbroken.
But when we going through things like this, best thing that you can do is lean on the shoulders of your family.
SIDNER (voice-over): The Laker family observed 24.2 seconds of silence. Then Boyz II Men sent emotions soaring with the national anthem.
[05:55:00]
SIDNER (voice-over): As the Lakers starters took to the court, a show of solidarity. Fans donned the commemorative T-shirts...
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I have no words.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: A lot of emotion.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It's a lot.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It's just a lot.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Kobe Bryant. SIDNER (voice-over): And the players answer to one name.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: From Lower Merion High School, Kobe Bryant.
SIDNER (voice-over): Then it was game on. But it wasn't business as usual. In the midst of the joy of the game, halftime brought a reminder of our collective human frailty.
(MUSIC PLAYING)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Once again this fan base expressing their devotion to their beloved Kobe Bryant.
SIDNER (voice-over): The final buzzer brought disappointment to the Lakers.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You can see the emotion on the faces of all the players.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The entire memorial before the game was tough for me. Tough to hear his voice and just have to come to the realization that you're gone. So it was tough for me.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It was very emotional. You know guys were teared up going into the jump off. And you just felt it the whole night.
SIDNER (voice-over): But LeBron James ended with a revelation about Kobe Bryant, words to comfort the aggrieved.
JAMES: Felt like these last three years was the happiest I've ever seen him, just be able to with his daughters and his family.
SIDNER: The Lakers coach and LeBron James acknowledging this was an extremely difficult game, filled with emotion, hard to concentrate but they tried to get the job done. They just weren't able --
(AUDIO GAP)
