Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Trump Lawyers to Deliver Impeachment Defense; Prosecutors Scrutinizing Communications of Paramilitary Extremists; Nikki Haley Breaks with Trump; Former GOP Officials Talk About Forming a Breakaway Conservative Party; Retail Pharmacies to Begin Vaccinating Americans Today. Aired 9-9:30a ET

Aired February 12, 2021 - 09:00   ET

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

[09:00:05]

POPPY HARLOW, CNN ANCHOR: Good morning, everyone. It's Friday. Another big day ahead. I'm Poppy Harlow.

JIM SCIUTTO, CNN ANCHOR: No, question. And I'm Jim Sciutto.

In just about three hours, former President Donald Trump's defense team will take the stand to rebut the very thorough case for incitement presented by House impeachment managers. They painted Trump as a dangerous leader who unleashed a violent mob on the Capitol and crucially who could do it again if he is not convicted.

The former president's lawyers will have 16 hours maximum to make their case, but they are expected to use just a fraction of that time. The trial could be over as soon as tomorrow. We're learning that they will argue that Democrats, in their words, glorified violence and that the trial itself is unconstitutional.

So will that argument work? Some of Trump's allies are already skeptical of his defense team. Others are, in fact, partnering with him.

HARLOW: That's right. If they can believe it, Senators Cruz, Graham and Lee, who promised, pledged to be impartial jurors, actually met with Trump's lawyers late last night to discuss strategy. We'll have more on that in a little bit.

This morning, President Biden spoke to reporters about the trial. Here's what he said.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOE BIDEN, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I'm just anxious to see what our -- what my Republican friends do, if they stand up.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HARLOW: Will the Republicans stand up, he asks? While the trial consumes the Senate, President Biden is really laser focused on fighting this pandemic, and there is big and good news to share with you this morning. President Biden now says the U.S. will have enough COVID-19 vaccine for 300 million Americans by the end of July.

That is huge. We'll get into it all in a moment. Let's begin, though, with the impeachment trial. Lauren Fox is on Capitol Hill.

Good morning, Lauren. It's really interesting because if the defense doesn't take up the whole day today, then what happens?

LAUREN FOX, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, essentially they want to keep things short and sweet. And there's a reason behind that, Poppy. They feel like they are winning right now. And the reason they feel like that isn't because they gave grand or convincing arguments in their opening a couple of days ago. It's because they have not seen any evidence that there are 17 Republican senators willing to break away at this moment.

What you're going to see today on the floor is both of those top lawyers, both David Schoen and Bruce Castor, making the case that Democrats have used similar language to Trump that Trump used on that January 6th day before the insurrection. Of course, we should note that nothing Democrats have said have ever led to something like we saw at the Capitol on January 6th.

But they are also going to argue that this case the Democrats laid out didn't tie Trump's words directly to the events of that day and said they're going to argue that the president just meant them as this metaphorical discussion about fighting, not something that he literally was demanding his followers to do.

If they wrap in the next couple of hours, this trial will begin at noon. We expect that they could go three to four hours. What you can see after that is senators will have about four hours to ask questions. It's unclear if they would use all of that time. At the end of that, then the House managers and again the former president's defense team would have an opportunity to make their closing arguments. And then, of course, that final vote on whether or not to convict Trump.

Now the question before the senators is whether or not he's guilty, but again, we just haven't seen evidence that there are going to be 17 Republicans. The vote needed to make sure that he could never run for office again.

SCIUTTO: Well, any Republican vote above one would be record-breaking, right, because Romney's vote in the first impeachment was the first time a senator of the president's party voted to convict.

Lauren, I know this is not a legal proceeding. It's a political proceeding. That's the nature of impeachment. But when Senators Cruz, Graham and Lee, who are jurors in this trial, meet with Trump's defense team last night, one, is that kosher? Two, what were they doing in there?

FOX: Well, essentially what we understand is they were just going over this case. That's what Senator Ted Cruz said on FOX News last night. But I think one thing to keep in mind about this is these were members who have clearly made up their minds already. Yes, you are right. A lot of senators going into this trial have said, I am an impartial juror.

This has been especially the case for Senator Bill Cassidy, a Republican from Louisiana, who changed his vote on that constitutionality question just a couple of days ago because he said I went in with an open mind, I listened to the arguments and I came away thinking differently about this question than I had a few weeks ago when I'd taken the vote before. That's the view that a lot of senators believe is the right one to take.

You are supposed to be an impartial juror. Of course these three senators clearly their mind was already made up when they're meeting with the former president's defense team.

SCIUTTO: Lauren Fox on the Hill, thanks so much.

Well, joining us now, David Gergen, former presidential adviser to four sitting presidents, and Shan Wu, former federal prosecutor and defense attorney.

[09:05:03]

Good to have you both on.

David, I wonder if I could begin with you just for the history here because it is oft repeated that it is extremely unlikely that there are 17 Republican votes along with Democratic votes to convict. But any vote above one from a Republican would break the record, right? If I have the history right, Mitt Romney's vote to convict in the last impeachment was the first time a senator of the president's party voted to remove.

So would five or six, a handful of Republicans, in your view, be historically significant?

DAVID GERGEN, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: It's significant. If you think about it from Donald Trump's point of view, the first paragraph of his obituary, regardless of what else he may do in life, he's going to include the fact that he's the only person in American history who has been found, you know, impeachable twice. Twice. And now we have -- we do have some Republicans breaking away.

At the same time, Jim, I don't think we ought to get overly enthusiastic about what we're seeing. Here are these managers -- House managers presented a compelling case. I think everybody was shocked by some of the film we saw. Mitt Romney being, you know, hustled away, might have been killed out there. Vice President Pence, you know, they were yelling about hanging him. He was only 60 steps away.

All that sort of thing. But this whole process still wreaks of hypocrisy. It wreaks of hypocrisy. This is a -- you know, we had in the beginning McConnell said, no, you've got to wait until after the inauguration in order to have the trial. You have to be beyond the inauguration. Now the McConnell line is, it's too late. You can't impeach somebody after he's no longer president. You've got a party that says it's pro cops and they've got people up there on Capitol Hill gouging out the eyes of the cops. You know, these are their people going after the cops. So you -- in

case after case you see that Republicans are saying one thing, but they're doing another. And I think it's going to -- they clearly, Republicans are going to clearly win the conviction issue. But I think at great expense to the reputation of their party. The reputational expense is high.

HARLOW: We'll talk more about the push from some to create a different Republican Party, a center-right party, in a little bit.

But, Shan, from a lawyer's vantage point, which you are, and a good one at that, you actually think the weakness in the Democrats' case here has been a lack of witnesses. Why? Why do you think the video didn't go far enough, and who would you have called?

SHAN WU, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Well, the video certainly was very helpful. It was visceral and visual just the way they needed it to be. But there's no substitute for live witnesses when you have a jury trial, and although it's not a courtroom trial, it's still a jury there. And it would have been great to have live witnesses who could speak to the mindset of Donald Trump.

We know his mindset from his public statements but if there were people with him as he was watching the riot happen and, you know, we've heard some press reports that he was happy about it. In fact, he was even puzzled, supposedly, that other people weren't as happy about it. That would have been very damning evidence that's very hard for the jurors in the Senate to overlook. So that could have been helpful.

SCIUTTO: Yes. Listen, you know, we talk a lot about political calculations by Republicans. That was a political calculation by Democrats, right, that a long trial with witnesses was not in their political interest. Right? Get on to Biden's agenda.

Shan, quick question to you. The argument that Trump's lawyers will make today apparently is, hey, look at all the violence that happened last summer in Democratic-run cities and attempt to equate that violence and the comments of Democratic leaders, talking about the George Floyd protests, et cetera, as exactly the same as the president's incitement or alleged incitement on January 6th.

Legally, your response to that argument?

WU: Legally that's really preposterous. If this was a courtroom trial, no judge would allow that in. It's completely irrelevant. It would be like somebody is on trial for murder and they want to bring in a lot of evidence of other murders saying look how bad those things were. It really is completely irrelevant and prejudicial.

From a factual standpoint, I see why they're doing it and actually it's totally distinguishable. I mean, with the Black Lives Matter movement, look at Trump's response. He sent federal marshals across the country to deal with that. He couldn't even call out the National Guard in D.C.? So weak argument.

HARLOW: What do you think, David, that this does to the institution and to just the process of impeachment going forward? How have these two impeachments changed perhaps how America will handle future presidents?

GERGEN: You know, it's a good question, Poppy. Look what's happened with the filibuster. We gradually started lowering the bar for how hard it is to go launch a filibuster, and now it's used all the time as a form of governing, nongoverning really.

[09:10:07]

And it -- what you worry about here is that in the future there's going to be almost like -- trigger-like sense on a party to say, something going wrong over here in the executive branch and they want to impeach somebody. At least they can impeach him. They may not get to conviction but they can bring him down. What you don't want to see is sort of a wanton use of the impeachment power. It ought to be rare, very rare and meaningful.

SCIUTTO: Rare and meaningful. Yes. Well, listen, we will see the historical consequences. Shan Wu, David Gergen, thanks so much to both of you.

New court records show exactly what kind of extremes President Trump's supporters were considering on January 6th. According to the Justice Department, paramilitant, that's right, paramilitant extremists communicated about training, even bringing caches of weapons to Washington across the Potomac by boat on that day.

HARLOW: Unreal. During searches, investigators have also found planning materials, including bomb-making documents.

Let's go to our colleague and national security correspondent Josh Campbell.

Wow is all I have to say about what they have found.

JOSH CAMPBELL, CNN SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: That's right. Everything that we're learning from these court records as prosecutors continue to build their cases against these defendants that allegedly took part in that January 6th insurrection is just so chilling when you look at what they are laying out here. The level of planning that went into, especially members of this militant group, the Oath Keepers.

Again prosecutors laying out in these court records not only things that they found during some of their searches physically such as planning material, bomb-making material and the -- or bomb-making instructions and the like, but they also talk about some of the communication that these people engaged in prior to the event, talking about wanting to possibly conduct citizens arrests at the Capitol.

In one case, this defendant named Jessica Watkins had allegedly talked about trying to put together some kind of paramilitary training type program that would include war games, riot control, search and rescue operations. Just this chilling level of detail in the planning that went into this. Of course, Watkins is also the defendant that prosecutors say discussed her incitement by President Trump. They wrote in court documents that as the inauguration grew nearer,

Watkins indicated that she was awaiting direction from President Trump. Her concern about taking action without his backing was evident in a November 9th text in which she stated, I'm concerned this is an elaborate trap. Unless the president himself activates us, it's not legitimate. So chilling court records.

Those details also, this level of information we're hearing about the direction that they thought they were taking from the president, this finding its way not only into court records but obviously front of mind as this second impeachment trial of Donald Trump continues.

HARLOW: Josh Campbell, thank you for that reporting, very much.

Well, ahead, Nikki Haley making quite a break from her former boss, Donald Trump. She says in a new interview the president, quote, "Let us down and shouldn't have -- and we shouldn't have listened to him." But why now? Is this all about politics for Haley? We'll discuss.

Plus, this morning President Biden hopes to have, quote, "almost everybody" in the United States vaccinated by sometime this summer. How that could actually happen, ahead.

SCIUTTO: Yes. Amazing. 300 million by the summer. And despite mixed messaging from the Biden administration, the CDC is set to release guidelines on exactly how to reopen schools safely. We know that's a question for a lot of you like it is for us. We'll have new details ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:15:00]

JIM SCIUTTO, CO-ANCHOR, NEWSROOM: This morning, as former President Trump's defense team prepares to make their case in just hours, there are growing concerns from Republicans over the direction of their own party and whether Trump will run again in 2024, including, Poppy, from someone very powerful in the party.

POPPY HARLOW, CO-ANCHOR, NEWSROOM: Very powerful, and not outspoken about Trump before. We're talking about Nikki Haley; the former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, former South Carolina governor, and very possible 2024 presidential contender. She is breaking with the former president. This is in a brand-new interview with "Politico", this is part of what she says about the potential for another Trump run. "I don't think he is going to be in the picture. I don't think he can. He's fallen so far. We need to acknowledge that he let us down. He went down the path he shouldn't have, and we shouldn't have followed him, and we shouldn't have listened to him and we can't ever let that happen again."

With us to discuss that and his own decisions on the party, Ambassador Richard Haass, also president of the Council on Foreign Relations. Ambassador Haass, it's very good to have you. We'll get to your decision in a moment, but I wonder what your reaction is to this from Nikki Haley and now. She had many chances before, but now? RICHARD HAASS, PRESIDENT, COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS: Look, better

late than never. I think the real question is whether she decides to set up shop and what you might call a halfway house, distancing herself from President Trump, but not quite going all the way. And I think more important, Poppy, the day will come when the question is not just what she's against, vis-a-vis Trump, but what is she for? What is her definition of the future of conservativism? What is her sense of direction for the future of Republican Party and implicit or explicit in that will be where she breaks with Donald Trump her view of America and the world.

[09:20:00]

Her view of immigration. Just go down the list. We'll see where she -- where she comes up.

SCIUTTO: You know, the place where the party writ large has not broken with the president is on the big lie, right? At least, definitively. You have not had a widespread statement from the party that the election was won by Joe Biden, and on this point, Nikki Haley's answer was really inexplicable, in my view, because she's pressed on this. Her answer is, well, Trump believes. He believes the lie in effect. He believes that he lost the election. He believes he's following that oath in his oath of office. This would be different if he was being deceptive. I mean, it's a remarkable definition of deceptive to say that if you believe a lie, you're therefore not being deceptive here. But I mean, can the party truly move on from Trump if there's not a definitive statement that it's a lie? He didn't have the election stolen from him.

HAASS: Short answer is, no, and they've got to, one, say that flat out. And second of all, they've got to level with their voters and say we lost. And here's why we lost. And here's the lessons to be gleaned in going forward, here's what we have to stand for. When a Republican is willing to do that, then we'll know we've turned the corner.

HARLOW: Richard, you made public this week a decision you made six months ago, and that is to -- after 40 years as a proud member of the Republican Party, switch to no party affiliation. I'm interested in what would bring you back to the party.

HAASS: It's a good question. Look, I'm a small "c" conservative. I believe in a limited role of government in the economy. I do believe the United States ought to play a meaningful role in the world. I do believe in immigration. You know, I got a long list. Obviously, I believe in the rule of law. Character matters. I supported, you know, Ronald Reagan, both presidents Bush, I worked for them all. I actually became a Republican in some ways because of Margaret Thatcher, her standing up for principle. So, when I see a Republican Party that is willing to do those things, I would consider it. When it's willing to stand up for the rule of law at home, the United States play a large active role in the world again, being a force for good and for stability.

Protecting the rights of America, making the American dream something other than a dream. Making the American dream a reality for all Americans, regardless of race, regardless of whether they are immigrants. It's a -- it's a list. And quite honestly, if the Republican Party one day does that, great. The Democratic Party does that, great. If a third party does that, great. And you know, for me, quite honestly, party is secondary. What really matters most is the principles and the policies on which a certain politician, what he or she advocates.

SCIUTTO: Richard, I wonder, is it possible we're underestimating the move so far away from Trump within the party? I mean, it will often be said, no chance that you get 17 GOP votes to convict. But the fact is, any vote above one will be historic, right? Because Mitt Romney is the only senator of the president's party to vote to remove. If you have five or six, that would be a move forward. You had ten Republicans in the house vote to impeach. You had 11 Republicans in the house vote to remove Marjorie Taylor Greene, perhaps something of a coattails Republican to this president from committees. I mean, I just wonder in your view, is the movement away from the party more substantial than discussed?

HAASS: I think the only way to answer that question is not whether there's a move away from Donald Trump, the person, but whether there's a move away from Trumpism and all the things that he came to represent. And when that happens, it will be meaningful. What worries me is you could have a Republican Party that essentially embraces Trumpism and they'll say, well, he went too far. He got it wrong with January 6th and the rest. But basically, what he stood for is good. If that happens, then I don't think we've made an awful lot of progress. So to me, again, the real question is how does the Republican Party decide to define itself? What are its core principles, what are its core policies, what are its priorities? What's its appeal to a broader range of Americans? So --

SCIUTTO: Yes --

HAASS: That will be defining.

SCIUTTO: It's a good point, right? Because on the substance, that's what's more lasting. Ambassador Richard Haass, always good to have you on.

HAASS: Thanks, Jim. Thanks, Poppy.

HARLOW: Sure.

SCIUTTO: All right, so some good news this morning. We were happy to see this, I'm sure you may be. Three hundred million Americans vaccinated by the end of July, says President Biden. Biden says we will have enough doses in this country to make it happen. So what about delivery? How retail pharmacies could play a crucial role. That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:25:00]

HARLOW: Well, today retail pharmacy giants like CVS and Walgreens begin administering coronavirus vaccines as part of this federal program. The White House is allocating 1 million doses to about 6,500 of those pharmacies across the country. This as President Biden works to speed up the rollout across the nation.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOE BIDEN, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: It's never been done before. And our hope is that we'll be able to buy at the end of the Summer, everybody have -- almost everybody, 300 million shots in people's arms. But it's going to take time.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCIUTTO: Three hundred million by the Summer. That would be enormous. CNN senior medical correspondent Elizabeth Cohen joins us now. So, Elizabeth, the expanding access points, really crucial here. I mean, pharmacies, for one, is where many of us get our flu shots, right? Tell us how this plan looks for your vantage point in meeting Biden's ambitious goal of getting 300 million shots into arms by Summer time.

ELIZABETH COHEN, CNN SENIOR MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT: Jim, it really could.