Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Sanders Tops New CNN New Hampshire Poll 3 Days Before Primary Vote; CNN Poll: Sanders Leads As Buttigieg Sees Momentum In New Hampshire; Key Impeachment Witness Vindman Fired From White House Job. Aired 12-1p ET

Aired February 08, 2020 - 12:00   ET

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

[12:00:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

FREDRICKA WHITFIELD, CNN HOST: Hello again everyone. Thank you so much for joining me this Saturday. I'm Fredricka Whitfield. There's breaking news in the race for the White House. We have a new CNN University of New Hampshire Poll that released just moments ago and it shows Senator Bernie Sanders with a 7 point lead, just three days ahead of the New Hampshire primary.

He's followed by former South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg, former Vice President Joe Biden and Senator Elizabeth Warren. Both Sanders and Buttigieg are coming off strong showings in the Iowa caucuses and other candidates are taking notes.

Last night during the final debate before the New Hampshire primary, many candidates went on the offensive, taking aim at Buttigieg's lack of Washington experience.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOE BIDEN (D) PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Mayor Buttigieg is a great guy and a real patriot. He's - he's a Mayor of a small city who has done some good things but has not demonstrated he has ability to and we'll soon find out, to get a broad scope of support across the spectrum including African-Americans and Latinos.

SEN. AMY KLOBUCHAR (D-MN) PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: We have a newcomer in the White House and look where it got us. I think having some experience is a good thing.

TOM STEYER (D) PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: We need people with experience. That's why I'm worried about Mayor Pete.

MAYOR PETE BUTTIGIEG (D-IN) PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: We need a perspective right now that will finally allow us to leave the politics of the past in the past. Turn the page and bring change to Washington before it's too late.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WHITFIELD: CNN's Ryan Nobles is on the campaign trail in New Hampshire so Ryan, Senator Bernie Sanders seems to be in a strong position, heading into Tuesday's primary.

RYAN NOBLES, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yes, he really does Fredricka and I know that the Sanders campaign in particular knows that this is going to be a close race but what our poll is showing us today is that both he and Pete Buttigieg appear to be breaking away from the rest of the pack and that's not a surprise given both of their strong showings in Iowa last week.

And let's take a look at the numbers again. So Sanders right now according to our poll, a 7 point lead with likely New Hampshire primary voters ahead of Buttigieg at 21 percent. Look at Joe Biden's numbers. He's now at 11 percent, pretty far back behind those two in the top tier and then a pretty disappointing showing right now for Elizabeth Warren as well.

She's only at 9 percent at this point and then Tulsi Gabbard, a bit of a surprise at 6 percent and then you go down to Amy Klobuchar who was hoping to have a bit of a bounce back in New Hampshire and is now only at 5 percent. So that's where the numbers stand right now.

But if we dig in even a little deeper into these numbers Fred, we learn a little bit more about these candidates as well. In fact which Democrat do you think has the best chance to win the general election and this is a strong number for Bernie Sanders.

The respondents to this poll telling us 29 percent of them, almost 30 percent, almost a third of the respondents say that they believe that Bernie Sanders can win the general election. Electability has been a very difficult burden on Sanders. There's been a lot of particular moderate Democrats that have knocked his chances as to whether or not he could win the general election.

And he seems to be turning the tide on that opinion. Joe Biden's still strong in that department with 25 percent. Pete Buttigieg at 14 percent. You notice that Michael Bloomberg shows up at 3 percent and this is well. He hasn't really competed yet and won't really until Super Tuesday.

Now finally, I want to show you one more statistics from this poll that we took and we should also note that this poll was taken before the debate last night so the debate that happened last night did not influence the results of this poll at all and this is an interesting question.

Which Democrat would you not vote for under any circumstance and look who comes in first place in this? The former Vice President Joe Biden at 17 percent. Elizabeth Warren at 16 percent. Bernie Sanders at 11 percent and again this is an encouraging number for Sanders because one of the knocks on him is often that he can be polarizing even within the Democratic Party and these numbers reflect that he is perhaps changing that perception as well.

So across the board, this is a very impressive poll for Bernie Sanders. We should know Fred, it should be an impressive poll for Sanders. Across the board, New Hampshire has always been a strong state for him. He's of course from nearby Vermont. He won the state by a wide margin back in 2016. This is a state that

he is really counting on as he heads into the primary season but these have to be encouraging numbers for him and his campaign. We should also point, very good poll for Pete Buttigieg as well.

He's shown some resilience here and there certainly appears to be some momentum behind his campaign particularly with the moderate wing of the Democratic Party.

[12:05:00]

If these poll results are right Fred, it looks like it could be a showdown between Sanders and Buttigieg heading into the vote on Tuesday night. Fred.

WHITFIELD: All right, just three days away. All right, thank you so much, Ryan Nobles, appreciate that. All right, meanwhile Senator Amy Klobuchar is hoping to build off her strong debate performance from last night.

CNN's Kyung Lah is covering the Minnesota senator as she campaigns in New Hampshire.

KYUNG LAH, CNN SENIOR NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well Fredricka, Senator Klobuchar needed to have a strong showing in this debate with the New Hampshire primary, just three days away and the moment that she chose to talk about is something that had been bothering her for many weeks.

It's something she talked about on the campaign trail especially in Iowa. It's a comment that Pete Buttigieg had said about the Senate impeachment trial and the senators who were involved in the trial. Here's what Senator Klobuchar said on the debate stage.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KLOBUCHAR: You said it was exhausting to watch and that you wanted to try to turn the channel and watch cartoons. It is easy to go after Washington because that's a popular thing to do. It's popular to say and makes you look like a cool newcomer. I just - I don't think that's what people want right now.

We have a new comer in the White House and look where it got us.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LAH: During the debate, she also took aim at Bernie Sanders. The question that was posed on the debate stages, whether or not any of the candidates felt uncomfortable having a democratic socialist AKA Bernie Sanders lead the ticket.

Senator Klobuchar raised her hand after the debate in the Spin room she explained why she did it.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KLOBUCHAR: I don't know. I think sometimes people don't want to piss other people off on the debate stage and I think I have a job and that is to make the case to our Democratic Party and to independents that vote with us and are increasingly voting with us, that I have different views than Sen. Sanders even though we get along, I have different views.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LAH: So did these attacks, all these comments, her performance, did they work? Her campaign tweeted that she had raised $1 million already. Her campaign manager tweeting as far as her performance, "Amy Klobuchar nailed it." Fredricka.

WHITFIELD: All right, thank you so much, Kyung Lah. All right, joining me now to discuss Jeff Mason, Reuters White House correspondent and Alexi McCammond, political reporter for Axios. Good to see both of you.

All right so Jeff, let me begin with this new poll. You know Sanders with a solid lead in New Hampshire ahead of Tuesday's primary. However Buttigieg you know not only surging 6 points to second place but he also seems to be eating into Biden's core support groups.

The poll shows Buttigieg is gaining ground among older voters and moderate conservative voters you know at Biden's expense. So how big of a deal is this?

JEFF MASON, REUTERS WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Well, I think it's got to be very concerning to Vice President Biden and it's probably one of the reasons that he suggested last night in the debate that he might get another gut punch in New Hampshire.

Clearly, there are some voters who are beginning in the moderate lane of the Democratic Party, who are beginning to fall in with Pete Buttigieg and deserting Vice President Biden so that's got to be concerning to him with Senator Sanders clearly.

He's got to be pleased that he's still ahead in New Hampshire and is - and is doing very well there and it certainly looks like it's going to come down to those two.

WHITFIELD: All right so Alexi, what about you know, in primary races where ethnic diversity is in greater numbers among the electorate? You know, Buttigieg has not pulled above the single digits, particularly among African-American voters, since getting into the race whereas Biden has held a strong hold on that demographic.

But does Biden, you know have anything to fear here in terms of losing black support while Buttigieg you know, continues to pique people's interest.

ALEXI MCCAMMOND, POLITICAL REPORTER, AXIOS: I don't think we've seen a pulled yet that show African-American voters are ditching or shying away from Joe Biden after a bad performance in Iowa and a potentially upcoming poor performance in New Hampshire.

That's going to be the really interesting dynamic of this race especially as we seen Sanders and Buttigieg emerge as two front runners in these early states so far well.

I'm curious to see whether and how someone like Sanders who is polling better with black and brown voters than Buttigieg performs in Nevada and South Carolina and whether or not but Buttigieg heads into those states and doesn't perform as well as we've seen him in Iowa and New Hampshire.

I mean when you talk to senior advisers from his team, they'll tell you that polls show communities of color are disproportionately affected at higher rates than others by the Trump presidency and they say that that means that voters of color put a greater emphasis on electability and that will bring them over to put Buttigieg's side.

That is something remains to be seen in places like Nevada and South Carolina. I don't think that's a terrible argument but there's more to courting those voters and listening to their fears and concerns and hopes and dreams than just simply looking at polling and electability.

WHITFIELD: So Jeff last night, you know, former vice President Joe Biden you know said that he expects to take a hit in New Hampshire after his poor performance in Iowa. Take a listen.

[12:10:00]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BIDEN: I took a hit in Iowa and I'll probably take it here. Traditionally, Bernie won by 20 points last time and usually it's the neighbouring senators that do well. It doesn't matter whether it's this one or the next. I've always used the first four encounters, two primaries and two caucuses as the starting point.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WHITFIELD: All right, Jeff you know, a little raise there for competitors and also lowering expectations. What's behind that?

MASON: Well, I think lowering expectations is spot on. He at one point had said he was confident he was going to win in Iowa and then obviously came in fourth place and now in New Hampshire the polling is showing that he's not going to be at the top either.

So he's lowering expectations for sure but also saying that he's - he's looking at playing the long game and he's not the only person on that stage and off the stage, if we think about Michael Bloomberg, who are in a long game for this democratic nomination.

So he's wanting to play down not only expectations about his performance there but the importance of doing really well in the first couple of states. He's looking more long term and they're trying to reassure not only voters but also his donors who are concerned about his performance in the first couple of states.

WHITFIELD: And Alexi, you know, Buttigieg, seems to be riding pretty high right now. I mean this impressive you know, polling numbers for him. His performance at the Iowa caucuses but then he is also challenging you know the Iowa caucuses with these inconsistencies, he says how does this benefit him?

MCCAMMOND: Well, it benefits him in the sense that he is publicly calling for more transparency and accuracy at a time when I think voters around the country, not just in Iowa are still confused about what happened, especially after these rules changes, let's not forget were introduced to address issues of transparency in confusion from the 2016 Iowa caucuses.

But there is a slippery slope there for Buttigieg given the very narrow margin between himself and Sen. Sanders from the Iowa caucus, a recanvas could result in something like Senator Sanders surpassing Buttigieg but I think at the end of the day, if they care about the future of democracy as they all say in the future of the country then it's a good thing to call for public - to publicly call for more accurate results.

WHITFIELD: OK, and then we're looking at some live pictures right now. Michael J. Fox there who is you know, promoting Pete Buttigieg there in New Hampshire and Jeff, you know I wonder you know, for Pete Buttigieg you know, can - is he running the risk or can you run the risk of being a little too confident?

MASON: Well, that's a good question. I think it's probably for any candidate in a race like this. It's never good to become too confident because you never know what's going to happen next and we've seen that throughout this these last several months.

Vice President Biden came in as the early front runner and now after the first votes, that position has changed so you don't want to be over confident. You also don't want to peak too early. Pete Buttigieg seems to be peaking at a pretty good time but it is and I think it's important to emphasize this, it's still early.

There's been one nominating contest. The caucus in Iowa. We've got New Hampshire coming up. There are several more states and there's the big super Tuesday and you've got that Michael Bloomberg factor coming as well having not really competed or not at all competed in these early states but putting all of his money, both figuratively and literally on super Tuesday.

WHITFIELD: Yes and what is that Bloomberg factor that you see like you said, he's putting a lot of money in to ads. You know he is not really a blip on the radar as it pertains to you know Iowa or potentially even New Hampshire.

But what's the motivation that you see as to why he really is in the race? If it's not delegate - delegate count that he seems to be you know worried about or garnering, what's his role here?

MCCAMMOND: Well, I think his team is certainly focused on earning as many delegates as it can and that's in part why they feel so confident about skipping or looking past the first four early states because they point to the fact that you know Iowa has only 41 delegates instead of something like 4000.

But you know, his team will say publicly and privately in different variations that they're willing to spend whatever it takes to beat Donald Trump. I truly believe that it's his mission. We have seen that as much in reporting that says that even if he isn't the nominee or if he drops out of the race, he'll continue to pay his staff.

And I think that's because he's looking at the way the Democratic National Committee is a little bit anaemic right now and he's trying to create a parallel, if not bigger sort of unofficial infrastructure for Democrats that will ultimately help the eventual democratic nominee be more competitive with President Trump in the states that they should be competitive with President Trump.

Places like Florida, Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, North Carolina. These states that don't have a lot of emphasis in the early voting states because they're simply not part of that calendar process but states that Bloomberg and his team know will be crucial to winning the election because it really comes down to the electoral college and not the popular vote as we all know.

WHITFIELD: All right, Alexi McCammond, Jeff Mason, good to see you both. Thank you so much.

MCCAMMOND: Thank you.

WHITFIELD: All right and tomorrow morning on CNN's State of the Union, Jake Tapper is joined by Senator Bernie Sanders, former Mayor Pete Buttigieg and DNC chairman Tom Pero. Lots of questions coming their way.

[12:15:00]

That's tomorrow morning 9 ET right here on CNN. All right, also coming up here, political pay back. President Trump dismissing two key impeachment witnesses just days after his acquittal. How the administration is defending the controversial decisions plus disturbing new details about the coronavirus including the first American death.

I'll talk with a doctor who is on the front lines of fighting the disease in New York City and then later $650 hotel rooms and a $17,000 cottage. The shocking new report about how your taxpayer dollars are being spent.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[12:20:00]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. BERNIE SANDERS (D-VT) PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: - role in saving this planet and our campaign is about ending a racist and broken criminal justice system that has more people in jail.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WHITFIELD: All right, live pictures right now at Dover in New Hampshire, three days ahead of that primary race there in New Hampshire and there you see Sen. Bernie Sanders. All right, so in the aftermath of his impeachment acquittal, President Trump is cleaning house and purging those who spoke out against him.

On Friday, Trump fired two prominent witnesses who testified during his impeachment inquiry. Lieutenant Colonel Alexander Vindman, the top Ukraine expert at the National Security Council as well as Gordon Sondland, the U.S. ambassador to the European Union.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

LIEUTENANT COLONEL ALEXANDER VINDMAN, FMR TOP UKRAINE EXPERT, NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL: It was inappropriate. It was improper for the President to request him, to demand an investigation into a political opponent - opponent, especially a foreign power where there's at best dubious belief that this would be a completely impartial investigation.

GORDON SONDLAND, THE U.S. AMBASSADOR TO THE EUROPEAN UNION: Was there a quid pro quo? As I testified previously, with regard to the requested White House call and the White House meeting, the answer is yes.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WHITFIELD: Vindman's attorney issued a statement, blasting the firing, writing in part, "There is no question in the mind of any American why this man's job is over, why this country now has one less soldier serving it at the White House. LTC Vindman was asked to leave for telling the truth. His honor, his commitment to right frightened the powerful."

All right, joining me right now Congress Raja Krishnamoorthi. He is a Democratic congressman from Illinois and a member of the House Intel and Oversight committees. Good to see you, congressman. So let me begin by getting your reaction to the President firing these two key witnesses who testified against the President in the impeachment inquiry.

REP. RAJA KRISHNAMOORTHI (D-IL): I thought it was disgraceful. It was clearly retribution for them telling the truth and also a signal to others to discourage or deter or prevent them from doing the same.

But what I've learned through this whole episode is that the timber or quality of the character of our public servants is extremely high and they are going to come forward and speak the truth and tell us and the American public about wrongdoing when they see it.

WHITFIELD: So during his testimony, Lieutenant Colonel Vindman, a decorated war hero and Purple Heart recipient drew applause when he talked about how his family fled the Soviet Union, when he was a child, how he assured his father that he would be all right because he was telling the truth. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And it would worried if you were putting yourself up against the President of United States. Is that right?

VINDMAN: He deeply worried about it because in his context, there was - there was the ultimate risk.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And what do you have confidence that you can do that and tell your dad not to worry?

VINDMAN: Congressman, because this is America. This is the country I've served and defended, that all my brothers have served and here right matters.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Thank you Sir. Yield back.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WHITFIELD: So earlier in our interview, Congressman, you said you knew you believe the firing with the signal to others and then you know, we're just reminded about you know, Vindman and what his father even feared.

But that you know he was still going forward with telling his truth so what specifically do you think the message is that the President is sending out by these firings?

KRISHNAMOORTHI: Well, it's the same type of message that he tried to send by slandering and seeking retribution against the whistleblower which is, if you work in the Trump administration or work in any part of the executive branch and you say anything negative about the President or you come forward to tell the truth, there will be negative consequences for your career.

The problem is for the President, is that when he did this previously with regard to the whistleblower, the opposite of what he intended to happen actually occurred which is that, a parade of people came forward at that point.

From Marie Yovanovitch to Bill Taylor to Fiona Hill and the list goes on and on because I really do believe that these folks put their country above their careers and that's something that unfortunately the President doesn't understand.

WHITFIELD: So the President also - I mean, he didn't stop at Vindman and Sondland but Vindman has a twin brother who also worked in the Trump administration in the National Security office. He too was let go.

Robert Ray, one of the attorneys who defended the President during the impeachment trial defending these firings, last night here on CNN. Listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ROBERT RAY, PRESIDENT TRUMP IMPEACHMENT ATTORNEY: Is it really in anybody's interest under the circumstances to have the both of them there or either one of them there? I

[12:25:00]

You know, I just - before we jump on the revenge bandwagon, it just seems to me, it's sort of time for everybody to move on.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WHITFIELD: So what is it if it's not revenge?

KRISHNAMOORTHI: Well, it's clearly revenge and I don't think everyone should move on. I don't think we should just kind of wipe it under the rug. I think that this is a classic instance where you know basically revenge in this case meant not only negative consequences for Lieutenant Colonel Vindman's career but also for the career of his brother, a loved one, a family member.

This is something that you would see in an authoritarian regime, not what should be happening here and I also believe that again this will trigger a backlash. Not what the President is intending but it will send the opposite message to others to buck up and tell the truth.

WHITFIELD: Well, you know, all of them in the White House are serving at the pleasure of the President so if the President says he wants to dismiss someone, whatever the circumstances, is there anything you or you know your fellow members of Congress can do?

KRISHNAMOORTHI: Well, I think that we have to look at the authorities and the law in this. One interesting thing is that the Deputy Secretary of Defense wrote a letter to Senator Schumer in December, in mid-December assuring him that there would be no reprisals against Lieutenant Colonel Vindman or anyone else in the employee of the U.S. Department of Defense who came forward and testified.

Obviously in my humble opinion, this particular episode is a violation of that assurance and there's going to be some interesting questions, I'm sure, that are asked of the Department of Defense when they come to the Senate or to the House for either appropriations request, confirmations or permission to adjust or modify programs which they routinely do.

So they are going to be grilled and perhaps there would be consequences there as well.

WHITFIELD: All right, Congressman Krishnamoorthi, always good to see you.

KRISHNAMOORTHI: Thank you so much.

WHITFIELD: Thank you so much for joining me. All right, coming up next, more than 700 deaths and counting including one American. The coronavirus spreading drastically over the past few days and now there are serious questions about China's response.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[12:32:07] FREDRICKA WHITFIELD, CNN HOST: An American has now died in China from the coronavirus. The U.S. Embassy in Beijing says the 60-year-old died in the city of Wuhan, the epicenter of the outbreak. China suffered its deadliest day so far in the outbreak, reporting 86 deaths Friday, and bringing the total number of fatalities to 722. There are more than 34,000 confirmed cases worldwide.

CNN has also just learned that some 800 Americans were evacuated on flights from Wuhan on Friday and have been returned to the U.S.

Joining me right now, Dr. Syra Madad, the senior director of the Special Pathogens Program at the New York City Health and Hospitals. Good to see you.

So, let me get your reaction to the spike in deaths in China. How concerned should everyone be?

DR. SYRA MADAD, SENIOR DIRECTOR, SPECIAL PATHOGENS PROGRAM AT NYC HOSPITAL SYSTEM: It's very unfortunate. And I think just within the next 24-hour time frame, the novel coronavirus which has started just six weeks ago will exceed the number of deaths we've seen in SARS which was over a nine month time frame. So it is certainly a global, you know, issue and we need to have more eyes on this.

WHITFIELD: So I spoke with Congressman Ami Bera last hour, you know, he led hearings on the coronavirus on Capitol Hill this week, and he cautioned that the quarantine process that is being used in the U.S. and around the world may not be as effective as he had hoped. Is there concern for you as well?

MADAD: Well, these types of measures certainly historically don't seem to be very effective, and they lower the risk, you know, they lower just, you know, general American public and around the world in terms of risk communication, people are less apt to actually provide information if they are infected. So, you know, only time will tell if this has been very effective or not.

WHITFIELD: OK. Well, then to the information issue, Congressman Bera also expressed concerns about that, you know, the flooding of misinformation. And sometimes that is just as harmful if not more so. So where are you on, you know, I guess the cacophony of information that's out there, but it's difficult for people to discern what to believe, what not to believe particularly because of social media.

MADAD: That's right. It's very difficult. We are not only responding to the actual outbreak happening at the global scale, but this contagion of misinformation that people are just feeding into. And there's a number of different reports that obviously are a false or rumors, and people need to look at the facts, they need to look at public health agencies, you know, that actually are reputable to get their information, and to be able to share it, not through rumors. This is a time for unity and the time for science, not for, you know, folks to just go about their way and, you know, present false information, creating more fear and hysteria.

WHITFIELD: So you're right in the center of the preparedness effort in New York. What can you reveal about what is being done?

MADAD: So I think generally on a national scale, we need to brace for potential pandemic situation, given obviously the trajectory of this outbreak. You know, health systems around the world need to look at, you know, look at their search planning, their pandemic planning, look at the staffing stuff in space and begin planning for a potential long-term impact.

[12:35:06]

WHITFIELD: You've been reporting on several cruise ships, you know, in Asia that are essentially under quarantine, and one here in the U.S. that was checked, cleared by the CDC. Are we at a point where we -- you know, people should be considering, you know, whether cruise, you know, cruises or even any other kind of close quarter activity should be at least temporarily halted?

MADAD: So per the CDC, the rest of the general American public is still low, but certainly this is global concern that we are monitoring very closely from a city, state, and local and global standpoint. So certainly right now, you know, go about your way as you normally would, but certainly continue to look at the developing epidemic as it is unfolding.

WHITFIELD: All right, Dr. Syra Madad, thank you so much.

MADAD: Thank you.

WHITFIELD: All right. Still ahead, pricey payments. A new report finds the Trump administration spent nearly $500,000 on hotel rooms and the president's companies are cashing in on your tax dollars.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[12:40:15]

WHITFIELD: All right, welcome back.

So CNN recently learned that the White House is actively working to keep information about the president's travel costs from going public. And a new report sheds some light on exactly why that could be.

CNN's Tom Foreman has more on how taxpayer dollars are flowing straight to the Trump Organization.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

TOM FOREMAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Hotel rooms at $650 per night for dozens of stays. Close to $400 a night for dozens more, and a whopping $17,000 a month to use a three-bedroom cottage. Those are bills for Secret Service agents lodging at Trump properties during presidential travels, according to a new the Washington Post analysis of available public records. And the Post says the documents collectively show more than $471,000 in payments from taxpayers to Trump's companies. The Trump Organization says that's total nonsense. We provide rooms at cost, and for anyone to suggest otherwise is not only inaccurate but an outright lie. Eric Trump once claimed the same thing about when his presidential father travels to the family's properties.

ERIC TRUMP, DONALD TRUMP'S SON: It saves a fortune because if they have to go to a hotel across the street, they'd be charged in 500 bucks a night whereas, you know, we charge them like, you know, 50 bucks.

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Vacation, if you want vacations, you're not really in the right business.

FOREMAN (voice-over): Of course, there was a time on the campaign trail when Donald Trump said he'd hardly leave Washington at all if elected.

TRUMP: I promise you, I will not be taking very long vacations if I take them at all.

FOREMAN (voice-over): But that was then. Now between golfing, visits to golf courses, and simply time away from D.C. as the Post puts it, he spent more than 342 days, one-third of his entire presidency at his own clubs and hotels and charges the government for it.

TRUMP: I'm not looking for credit, but I give up my salary. I get zero.

FOREMAN (voice-over): The president often bragged about how he does not accept a salary, and about all he does during frequent trips to his Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida or as he calls it the winter White House.

TRUMP: Well, I like working.

FOREMAN (voice-over): But getting to the bottom line cost for taxpayers is tough. The Secret Service is woefully behind in its public reporting of expenditures for tailing Trump so much so the Post notes the nearly half million price tag we mentioned covers only a fraction of the cost for a fraction of the time Trump has been in the office and out of it on the road.

(on camera) For all of that, the Secret Service sent CNN a statement saying they used resources judiciously, can't discuss details of how they protect the president, and that seems to suit team Trump just fine. Indeed, the administration is resisting congressional demands for better reporting of costs until at least after the next election.

Tom Foreman, CNN, Washington.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

WHITFIELD: All right, so let's bring in Jonathan Wackrow, a former Secret Service agent and CNN law enforcement analyst. Jonathan, good to see you.

JONATHAN WACKROW, CNN LAW ENFORCEMENT ANALYST: Nice to see you, Fred.

WHITFIELD: So is it the case that, you know, options are limited for the Secret Service, I mean, because after all, they do have to stay near wherever the president is.

WACKROW: Yes. No, you're absolutely right, Fred. I mean, listen, we're talking about this reporting, $650, you know, a night for a room is really shocking. But really when you look at it, you have to look at it two ways, both objectively and subjectively. Objectively is $650 a night or whatever the cost is to the Secret Service, is it appropriate, and the answer is yes. Why? Because it fits within their operational and administrative guidelines, it serves a security need.

And listen, at the end of the day, it's market rate. It's not like they're being overcharged. When I was with the Secret Service, I had, you know, charges that were in excess of a thousand dollars a night with some protectees.

Again, the Secret Service with the president and because of the extensive cost that is being expended, they're actually operating at the lower end of their operational tolerances when it comes to expenditures at Trump properties. So I just want to be very realistic here. The Secret Service is not going out in overspending at Trump properties, they are being judicious in their fiscal responsibility to spend the minimum amount that's possible to make sure that their operational security needs are met. The rest of the footprint and security apparatus is off site, they're staying somewhere else.

When you look at this subjectively though, I mean, again, it doesn't paint a good picture just as Foreman's reporting was just a moment ago, the president says I'm not taking vacations, I'm not going to do this. We charge -- you know, Eric Trump said we only charge $50 a night. I mean, that's just not true.

WHITFIELD: Yes.

WACKROW: So again, it's really the optics here of how you interpret that $650 a night.

[12:45:02]

WHITFIELD: So the Washington Post, you know, also reports -- says -- saying that the president has spent at least 342 days at Trump-owned properties since he entered the White House. So, you know, what would be the typical frequency of Secret Service traveling with the president?

WACKROW: Well, listen, I mean, this president has thrown out typical years ago, there's nothing typical about President Trump and the way this administration operates, and the way that he travels. I think that the way you have to look at this is, you know, what is the Secret Service role. Secret Service cannot dictate how much the president can travel or where he can stay. So they're -- as you said in the intro, we're kind of bound here by the president's, you know, determination of where he wants to go. And this goes to what I said before in the past, the costs associated with protection I feel are being politicized. The Secret Service doesn't have control over where he goes. All we can do is put forth best in class security program around.

WHITFIELD: The criticism that is out there is less about criticizing the Secret Service and more so about the choices, the decisions the president is making which thereby impacts the Secret Service. And then trying to keep that information from going public.

WACKROW: Well, that's exactly it, Fred, but I mean, the Secret Service is getting dragged in this -- into this political fight. What's the end result? What are you going to do? Is Congress going to tell the president not to travel? Are they going to cut back the budget of the Secret Service?

So right now, we are caught in this, you know, horn locked in this battle of Secret Service expenditures at Trump property. You know, what are we going to do to get out of this?

WHITFIELD: All right, we'll leave it there for now. Jonathan Wackrow, always good to see you. Thank you so much.

WACKROW: Hey, thanks, Fred.

WHITFIELD: All right, up next, angry and unapologetic. President Trump lashing out after being acquitted. The reason for the rant and the rare message he had for his family coming up in today's reality check.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[12:51:33]

WHITFIELD: All right, following his acquittal in the Senate, President Trump remains defiant despite his impeachment in the House. In fact, the only apology the president seems willing to give is to his family. The president has resorted to hurling insults and firing key impeachment witnesses.

Here is CNN's Senior Political Analyst John Avlon with the reality check on Trump's non-apology tour.

JOHN AVLON, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: It's supposed to be a solemn occasion, the impeachment and acquit the president of the United States. And here is how Bill Clinton handled it.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BILL CLINTON, FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I want to say how profoundly sorry I am for what I said and did.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

AVLON: And here was Donald Trump.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) TRUMP: It was all (INAUDIBLE).

(END VIDEO CLIP)

AVLON: So to all the Republican senators who have that Donald Trump has learned lessons from impeachment, well, not so much. But this was totally predictable. Donald Trump famously hates apologizing. Apologies are seen as a sign of weakness and admission of guilt. It's a lesson from Roy Cohn, the infamous lawyer to John McCarthy and the Mob who mentored Trump in the 70s and 80s.

Roy Cohn had a simple code, always attack, never apologize. And Trump learned the lesson well, it is core to his combative approach to politics. And Alec Baldwin (INAUDIBLE) on SNL.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ALEC BALDWIN AS DONALD TRUMP, SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE: I deeply apologize.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Are you trying to say apologize?

ALEC BALDWIN AS DONALD TRUMP: No, I would never do that. What I am doing is apologizing.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

AVLON: So the day began with President Trump at the National Prayer Breakfast. And the writer Arthur Brooks spoke about Jesus' teaching that we should love all our enemies. Well, Trump took to the podium and literally said, Arthur, I don't know if I agree with you, and then proceeded to question the faith of Nancy Pelosi and Mitt Romney.

After that, all eyes were on the speech Trump was scheduled to give at the White House in safe space of partisan supporters. It was angry, very strange, aggrieved, and very, very strange even by Trump standards. So despite all of the evidence, the president stuck insistence that he was the real victim in all of these.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: We went through hell unfairly. Did nothing wrong. I picked up a phone call that was a totally appropriate call, I call it a perfect call. And they brought me to the final stages of impeachment.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

AVLON: But the real choice (INAUDIBLE) were left for his political opponents.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: It was evil, it was corrupt, it was dirty cops, it was leakers and liars, bad people. My opinion it's almost like they want to destroy our country.

(END VIDEO CLIP) AVLON: This went on without notes for more than an hour, almost as long as his state of the union address. And Trump's patent had moves of deny, deflect, and project were on full display as he rumbled. But there's a method to the madness, Trump's feelings and alternative facts will be amplified by allies and partisan media and social media until the supporters believe they're real. And this is how the president drives disinformation while dividing the country and politically profits from polarization.

So the man dubbed "Teflon Don" doesn't want our country to have his common set of facts because the facts are so often not on his side. But as with the original "Teflon Don", John Gotti, the mob boss also represented by Roy Cohn, Trump tries to deflect misdeeds by invoking family. And for them he offered that rarest of things, an apology.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: I want to apologize to my family for having them have to go through a phony rotten deal by some very evil and sick people.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

AVLON: Well, the word was there, even if the spirit was not. And that's your reality check.

WHITFIELD: All right, thanks so much, John Avlon.

[12:55:04]

All right, still ahead, OSCAR weekend is here, and as Hollywood honors its best and brightest, a new movie is shining light on life before the Me Too era. I'll talk with the director of the new movie, "The Assistant", coming up.

And the world has watched their every move, now CNN presents the story of the world's most famous royal family, "The Windsors: Inside the Royal Dynasty". That premieres Sunday, February 16th, 10 p.m. right here on CNN.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)