Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Historic Second Impeachment Trial Against Trump Begins Tomorrow; Dems to Unveil $3,000 Child Benefit as Part of Biden Relief Plan; President Biden Says Time to Reopen Schools; U.K. Variant Spreading Rapidly Throughout the U.S.; Vaccines to be Administered at CVS and Walgreens; Trump's Lawyers Lay Out More Details of Defense Strategy; Futures Higher As Democrats Face Critical Week for COVID Relief; Vaccine Urgency Growing As COVID Slams Chicago's Latinx Community. Aired 9-9:30a ET

Aired February 08, 2021 - 09:00   ET

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

[09:00:00]

POPPY HARLOW, CNN ANCHOR: Good morning, everyone. We're glad you are with us this Monday. I'm Poppy Harlow.

JIM SCIUTTO, CNN ANCHOR: And I'm Jim Sciutto.

We are now one day away from the former President Trump's second impeachment trial. Just minutes away from getting more details on how his legal team hopes to defend him. They will deliver a new pre-trial brief by 10:00 a.m.

Also this morning, 100 U.S. senators who lived through that deadly insurrection on the U.S. Capitol are now preparing to take on their role as jurors.

Can Democrats tap into the rage, the fear, felt by those lawmakers on January 6th, convince enough Republicans to convict the former president for inciting the riot, or at least to consider it? We'll see. Right now it does not look likely.

House impeachment managers are facing a new deadline today to file their own final pre-trial brief on the Republican charges that the trial itself is unconstitutional because Trump is no longer in office.

POPPY HARLOW, CNN ANCHOR: There is also a lot going on, on Capitol Hill this morning. We're following the latest on the $1.9 trillion rescue package. Later today House Democrats will also unveil a separate bill, legislation that will give millions of struggling families at least $3,000 per child if they are below a certain income level.

We'll dive into the economic impact of that measure, and this virus and its variants that still have a very firm grip on this nation.

Let's begin, though, with our colleague Lauren Fox. She joins us on Capitol Hill for more on what to expect ahead of tomorrow's Senate trial.

Good morning, Lauren.

LAUREN FOX, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Good morning, Poppy. That's right. Negotiations still ongoing between Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell and the majority leader Chuck Schumer as to what this trial is even going to look like. How long it's going to be going on, and, of course, whether or not there are going to be witnesses.

Like you noted, there are going to be two pre-trial briefs that will be filed today. The first one coming at 10:00 a.m. from the former president's defense team. The other coming at noon from the Democratic House managers. That's going to give us more of a clue as to what the arguments will be on the Senate floor in upcoming days.

Now tomorrow this trial is going to begin at 1:00. And we don't expect that it's going to end with Trump being convicted. We know that there are not 17 Republicans right now willing to take that step. But you can expect that on the floor of the Senate, the House impeachment managers, Democrats, are going to be making this argument that Trump played a crucial role in the events of January 6th, and not just on the day of the insurrection, but before that, with all of his arguments casting doubt on the results of the election, both before November 3rd and after the results that election came in, finding that he did not win. So that's going to be the thrust of what is going to happen on Capitol Hill in the next couple of days, but again, how long this trial lasts is anyone's guess -- Jim and Poppy.

HARLOW: Laure, thank you for that preview. It all gets under way a little over 24 hours from now.

We turn now to a plan that Democrats have that say will help in their fight to lift millions of children out of poverty. Today leaders in the Democratic Party will unveil a bill that would give families making under $150,000 as a couple or $75,000 individually at least $3,000 per child.

SCIUTTO: Jessica Dean is on Capitol Hill with more.

So, Jessica, this is a key provision in President Biden's broader COVID relief plan. It's interesting to me because Mitt Romney has his own child benefit plan as well. I wonder, is this an element of a broader stimulus that might get bipartisan support?

JESSICA DEAN, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, that's certainly, Jim and Poppy, what Democrats are hoping that these direct payments to American families could garner bipartisan support. You went through some of it. But let me lay it out for you.

What this bill would do is it would put $3600 in the pockets for Americans, with children -- for every child aged 0 to 6 years old, and then $3,000 for every child from 6 to 17 years old. And what would be different about this, we know about the child tax credit. It usually goes on your taxes at the end of the year in the form of a credit. This would be going direct payments monthly to families. The argument being that giving families that direct payment makes it

easier for them to pay their bills and get things done for their children that they need throughout the year versus the way that it is done right now, so this would be for single parents who make $75,000 or less or couples who make $150,000 or less a year. Then it would be phased out after that. So that's how it would work. Those payments would start in July and then be phased out right now with this bill after a year.

Now again this is a key part of this COVID relief package because President Biden and his team do believe that there should be money going directly to families and children. They want to lift children out of poverty with this money. You mentioned Senator Mitt Romney has a separate bill and proposal that he has put together. These are two different things.

[09:05:03]

But again, Jim and Poppy, House Democrats unveiling this legislation today hoping that they can get support around it. But again as they have indicated they are happy to go alone on this if they have to.

SCIUTTO: Yes. Yes, and perhaps put Republicans in a position of voting against, you know, provisions like this that the public polling shows are very popular.

DEAN: Sure.

SCIUTTO: Jessica Dean, on the hill, thanks very much.

In a new interview, President Biden is pushing for schools to reopen safely, promoting his sweeping nearly $2 trillion rescue package hitting back at the previous administration's handling as well of the pandemic.

HARLOW: Let's get to our colleague John Harwood, he joins us at the White House this morning.

Good morning to you, John.

JOHN HARWOOD, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Hey, Poppy. Look, President Biden has been consistently critical of President Trump for what was left behind when the Biden administration took over. He did this in his interview yesterday saying the situation is a lot more dire. They had less of a plan. They had less of a skilled vaccination rollout. But the president also dealt with the biggest vulnerability in his message so far.

The president's critic of President Trump has been he wasn't following the science the way that I will as president. President Biden says he will follow science. Well, his CDC director Rochelle Walensky has said that schools can reopen even if teachers are not vaccinated. Not formal guidance from the CDC. But offered that opinion. That squeezes President Biden, puts him at odds potentially with teachers unions, which have been much more cautious in their approach.

Here's how President Biden dealt with that question.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

NORAH O'DONNELL, CBS NEWS ANCHOR: Do you think it's time for schools to reopen?

JOE BIDEN, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I think it's time for schools to reopen safely. Safely. You have to have fewer people in a classroom. You have to have ventilation systems that have been reworked. Our CDC commissioner is going to be coming out with science- based judgment within I think as early as Wednesday as to lay out what the minimum requirements are.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HARWOOD: So it's going to be fascinating to see what that formal guidance is from the CDC. Whether it's different from what Rochelle Walensky said the other day. Remember, there is tremendous appetite among parents to resume in-person schooling and the longer the Biden administration resist that, the more political difficulty they're going to face. So Wednesday is going to be a key day.

HARLOW: It would also be really notable if she changed her position, if the CDC changed her position, John, on what she said pretty definitive earlier.

HARWOOD: That's right.

HARLOW: Yes. OK. John, thank you very much for the update.

Health experts fear the recent decline in COVID cases could be temporary, yikes, that's because at least three variants of the virus are now circulating in this country. And the strain that originated in the U.K. is so contagious experts now think, Jim, it's probably going to become the dominant variant here.

SCIUTTO: Yes. And relatively quickly, perhaps as soon as next month.

CNN's senior medical correspondent Elizabeth Cohen, she's been following this.

So, Elizabeth, I mean, do we know the answer to the question, is it just more transmissible or also more dangerous?

ELIZABETH COHEN, CNN SENIOR MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT: We don't completely know the answer to that, Jim. We know that there are concerns that the U.K. variant is more dangerous. The scientists in the U.K. have some data certainly that points in that direction. What we do know more is -- or what we know more about is the transmissibility. And let's take a look at that data.

We know that these variants appear to be 35 percent to 45 percent more transmissible than earlier strains. That is not good news. That is considerably more transmissible. That means that the number of cases with these variants double every seven to 4 10 days. This is according to new research that has come out just recently. Also -- just today actually. And that means -- what we know right now

is that there are 610 documented cases of the U.K. variant found in the U.S. but, and this the a huge but, there are likely many more than that. It's just that we haven't found them yet because the surveillance system in the U.S. is not great.

Now, let's take a look at why these appear to be more transmissible. It appears some preliminary evidence suggests that they bind more tightly to ourselves and also that they're stickier. There are changes in the spike protein. Those are the little red spikes that come out of the virus whenever you see it in that image.

And they seem to be stickier and stick to ourselves, and again, that is not good and you know we're really sort of learning as we go here. I don't think anyone expected these variants and they didn't expect them to be this much more transmissible -- Jim, Poppy.

HARLOW: Before you go, there are the biggest pharmacies in the country. CVS, Walgreens, getting vaccines either today or tomorrow, I think. Can you explain how that will change the game for everyone? I assume the same rules still apply in terms of age requirements, et cetera?

[09:10:01]

COHEN: Right. So each state has its own requirements. And one Walgreens executive said to me, Elizabeth, it's like having 50 different countries. Each state has its own rules. And the Walgreens and the CVS or whatever pharmacy have to obey the rules in each of those 50 countries as it were. So Walgreens, CVS and other pharmacies have been doing vaccinations for quite a while now.

The difference here is now there's a federal program that's going to be giving more doses. So let's take a look. This federal program that is going to new this week is going to be one million Moderna doses spread around the country to 6,500 pharmacies, and CVS plans on starting their vaccinations February 11th and Walgreens expects to start theirs on February 12th. They're not the only ones. There are other pharmacies, too, but obviously these two giants have a big chunk of the share.

And if you take a look, we have a map that shows where CVS will be having them and in what states Walgreens will be having them. If you thought -- when you heard me say one million, if you thought, wait a minute, one million for the whole country? You are not the only one. One million is not much. There needs to be much more going out. One million is certainly a start. But it's really not much considering what a huge country this is.

SCIUTTO: No question. We know you'll stay on top of it. Elizabeth Cohen, thanks very much.

Still to come this hour, former President Trump's second impeachment trial kicks off tomorrow. But could he face additional criminal charges outside of impeachment? HARLOW: Also, Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen says the United States

could return to full employment by next year, that is if Biden's $1.9 trillion stimulus is passed, it remains far from a sure bet. And CDC data show Hispanic and Latino residents contracted coronavirus at nearly twice the rate of white people in this country and how the challenge of getting vaccines to that hard hit group. How one city is making it happen.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:15:00]

HARLOW: Minutes from now, former President Trump's legal team will lay out in a more detail document, their approach to his defense in the impeachment trial, this starts tomorrow. This as house impeachment managers prepare to make their case to the American people and the 100 senators turned jurors.

SCIUTTO: Tomorrow marks the start of Trump's second impeachment trial in just over a year. No president has ever faced that before. Joining us now, former counsel to house Democrats during President Trump's 2019 impeachment, Ambassador Norm Eisen and Republican election lawyer Ben Ginsberg.

Thanks very much to both of you. Ben, I wonder if you could just look at both cases. The case in 2019 and the case in 2021. Do Democrats have a better case to convict now based on the evidence and the law than they did then?

BEN GINSBERG, ELECTION LAWYER: I think they do, Jim, because this was something that the senators actually saw in front of them, and they certainly believe that the actions of the rioters was completely wrong. What they have to do is to be able to tie Donald Trump to the actual orders to break into the Capitol or his inability to refusal to send help during the afternoon.

And so, I -- the first case had a phone call by President Trump that everyone knew about and that they could work off of. In this case, they don't have the communication that is direct on those two points. We have a lot of words and a lot of actions by them that's compelling, but they're still lacking the direct link in this second case.

HARLOW: Ambassador Eisen, "The Washington Post" noted something fascinating this morning. They write, "court documents show that more than two dozen people charged in the attacks specifically cited Trump and his calls to gather that day and describing on social media or conversations with others why they decided to take action by coming to Washington. My question to you is, does that matter? Does it matter that they think that? Is that enough to prove a causal link?

NORM EISEN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Good morning, thanks for having me back. I think it does matter. I think that the totality of the evidence including what those insurrectionists reasonably perceived helps bridge the gap, I think comfortably bridge the gap as a matter of fact. The law that then was referring to. You have Trump whipping these people into a frenzy for months, telling

them the election was stolen and, therefore, the democracy was stolen. You have his fighting words, including we fight and we fight and if you don't fight, you won't have a country left.

SCIUTTO: Yes --

EISEN: Then he said on the 6th, you're going to see that video again and again. And then you have the actions that result from those words, the insurrection. You have the people's reasonable understanding of what Trump meant, and then said you have his inaction, reportedly, he was cheering on the insurrectionists. And finally, this weekend, we saw a tape when he called them off. They said, oh, why are you leaving? Because Trump told me to. So I think the totality of the evidence comfortably gets you there. Political courage is another question --

SCIUTTO: Yes, Ben, Republicans have largely leaned on process arguments against this trial, right? Saying it's unconstitutional because he is no longer in office. I mean, that's a question where, you know, there's disagreement. But let me ask you this. Once that process argument is lost, I mean, the trial is going forward. Can Republicans lean on that same argument in voting to acquit?

[09:20:00]

Don't they by duty have to then listen to the evidence and either reject or accept the evidence as evidence of high crimes and misdemeanors?

GINSBERG: Well, they do have to listen to the evidence. They will listen to the evidence. But the truth of the matter is, this is a very political process, more than a legal process. And so, it depends what the 50 Republican senators think, and there is nothing to stop them from invoking the lack of constitutionality to acquit on impeachment.

So, the gap that Norm talked about is I think real. But the real question is how it is -- how the 50 senators are impacted by those arguments. And that's why I say I think there needs to be a direct link to Trump rather than the argument that Norm set out to get them to convict.

HARLOW: So, Ambassador Eisen, I mean, I read last week what the Trump legal team put forward. We'll get much more detail on that in their updated brief in about half an hour. But the three big things that struck me from it. You know, you can't try the president now and certainly you can't convict him, they say, because he's a private citizen.

The second is, look, he was exercising his First Amendment right which I know you have some issues with that argument. But this was striking to me, at the end of their pre-trial brief, they wrote, he was stating, quote, "opinions" and therefore was not trying to subvert the results of the election. What do you make of their opinion argument?

EISEN: Well, it's nonsense. Like so much that Trump drives his lawyers, including sometimes otherwise and previously respectable lawyers to say. He also, you can say, was stating an opinion when he had the conversation with the Ukrainian president that got him impeached the last time.

Can do us a favor, though? The fact that you couch something as an opinion, that also breaks the constitutional standard of a high crime and misdemeanor, breaks the law, causes an insurrection, is absolutely no insulation when you're being tried for a constitutional high crime. And I have to add one other thing, all three of those arguments are nonsense.

Just this weekend, one of the most distinguished, besides Ben, one of the most distinguished conservative legal commentators, Chuck Cooper --

SCIUTTO: Yes --

EISEN: Who was our adversary in the first opinion -- in the first impeachment, defending John Bolton, he broke with the Republicans to say enough is enough.

SCIUTTO: Yes --

EISEN: This is not -- instead, the next president can't be tried, big piece in the "Wall Street Journal". So those arguments are poppycock.

SCIUTTO: Ben, on the opinion argument, how can his lawyers divorce the expression, call it an opinion, from all the actions that he took prior and post-January 6th, right, to actually overturn the election, right? I mean, he was pressuring state election officials, et cetera, right? I mean, how do you disconnect the opinion from those actions?

GINSBERG: You can, and what Donald Trump shows during the whole course of the election was making the false charges about fraudulent elections. And it goes up to this now it's an opinion. That is a nonsensical argument. I agree with Norm about that.

But it is why his lawyers need to stick solely to the constitutional argument, because if they make the Republican senators defend Donald Trump on the fraudulent elections, where his opinions as to the crowd were much, if anything, beyond the constitutional one, then Republican senators get really nervous and start thinking about voting to convict.

HARLOW: Good to have you both. I know you will be back this week and maybe next as this all happens. We appreciate it very much.

EISEN: Thank you.

HARLOW: Ahead for us, coronavirus has hit the Latinx community disproportionately hard. We're going to take you to Chicago ahead to neighborhoods where healthcare workers are really working around the clock to vaccinate specifically this community.

SCIUTTO: And we are moments away from the opening bell on Wall Street. Futures are higher -- you can see there this morning. Investors feeling optimistic about the prospects for a new COVID relief package. This as the Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen says that if the president's stimulus plan is approved by Congress, the U.S. could return to full employment by next year. More on that coming up.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:25:00]

HARLOW: Welcome back. In Chicago, COVID has hit the Latinx community incredibly hard. New data show there have been more Latinos infected with COVID-19 in the city than their white counterparts and their black counterparts combined.

SCIUTTO: Officials there are now sounding the alarm as Chicago's vaccine efforts ramp up. Here is CNN's Omar Jimenez.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

OMAR JIMENEZ, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Silvia Trejo(ph) answers yes, but knows it's more complicated than that. Even as her husband and son became sick with COVID-19 last Summer.