Return to Transcripts main page

The Situation Room

Sen. Chuck Schumer's New Demand For New Documents; Impasse On Negotiations On Senate Impeachment Trial; Sen. Dan Kildee (D-MI) Is Interviewed About The Senate Impeachment, New Evidence And Nancy Pelosi; Trump Mocks The Use Of Windmills To Generate Power; DOJ Argues Courts Should Stay Out Of McGahn Testimony Fight; Boeing CEO Forced Out After Disastrous Year; Source: Expect New Hardline Approach From North Korea. Aired 5-6p ET

Aired December 23, 2019 - 17:00   ET

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

[17:00:00]

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN HOST: Happening now, at an impasse, Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell slams House Speaker Nancy Pelosi for holding on to the articles of impeachment against President Trump calling her strategy absurd. But McConnell isn't ruling out the possibility of calling witnesses once the impeachment trial gets going.

Ninety minutes later -- the top Senate Democrat ramps up his push for new witnesses and specific documents after newly revealed e-mails show a White House official made contact with the Pentagon within 90 minutes of President Trump's phone call with Ukraine's leader in July. Could the author of that e-mail be called to testify?

Ousted -- Boeing demands and receives the resignation of its CEO -- the dramatic show of no confidence after the grounding of a popular airliner following deadly crashes and an embarrassing failure of Boeing's new spacecraft.

And Kim's Christmas gift. Has North Korea's brazen dictator orders rocket engine tests and meets with his top generals? A source says the North Koreans are about to unwrap a new hard line approach to the U.S.

I'm Brianna Keilar. Wolf Blitzer is off today. You're in "The Situation Room."

We're following the political jockeying over President Trump's upcoming impeachment trial. Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer issuing a new demand for specific documents after the release of what Schumer calls explosive e-mails raising questions about the timing of President Trump's freeze of aid to Ukraine and his demand for political dirt on Joe Biden.

Also today, Republican Leader Mitch McConnell said negotiations about the impeachment trial are at an impasse right now, but he wouldn't rule out the possibility of calling witnesses.

Congressman Dan Kildee of Michigan, a member of the House Democratic leadership is standing by to take our questions and our correspondents and analysts have full coverage of the day's top stories.

Let's begin with CNN Congressional Reporter, Lauren Fox. Lauren, tell us, will Democrats get the witnesses and the documents that they want?

LAUREN FOX, CNN CONGRESSIONAL REPORTER: Well, Brianna, if Republicans have anything to say about it, they won't be. Majority Leader Mitch McConnell making it very clear today that he and Chuck Schumer the top Democrat in the Senate, are at an impasse when it comes to their negotiations over which documents to get and witnesses would be part of the Senate trial.

They have yet to come to any kind of agreement and what we're told is that McConnell is not getting ready to cave. Here is what he said about what he expects from an impeachment trial.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. MITCH MCCONNELL (D-KY): Well, we need to do is to listen to the arguments, have a written questioning period and then decide whether we need witnesses or not. We haven't ruled out witnesses. We've said let's handle this case just like we did with President Clinton. Fair is fair.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

FOX: And Nancy Pelosi, of course, still hanging on to those articles of impeachment. She tweeted earlier this morning, arguing that she will not be sending them over until she sees what kind of structure the Senate impeachment trial will have, Brianna.

KEILAR: And she's still holding off on that so, is this something that's going to be helping Democrats?

FOX: Well, Republicans will tell you that they are not in any hurry to have a Senate impeachment trial to begin with. Therefore, if Nancy Pelosi thinks that she's going to get leverage out of this, their argument is that is simply not the case.

But still, you are seeing today Chuck Schumer sending a letter to his colleagues, Republicans and Democrats, arguing that they need to see a very specific list of documents whether it comes from the OMB, the White House or the Pentagon.

KEILAR: All right, Lauren Fox, thank you so much.

Now, let's go to CNN Chief White House Correspondent, Jim Acosta. And Jim, these newly released e-mails are raising a lot of questions.

JIM ACOSTA, CNN CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: They really are, Brianne. And even though President Trump has already been impeached and is spending the holidays down in Florida, critical new information is still coming to light in the Ukraine investigation.

Democrats are seizing on these new e-mails that show the administration mandated that a freeze be placed on military aid to Ukraine just 90 minutes after Mr. Trump hopped off the phone with the leader of that country. This discovery could be the latest obstacle to get a trial going in the Senate.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

ACOSTA (voice-over): Playing golf down in Florida, President Trump is teeing off on Democrats who are still holding up an impeachment trial in the Senate tweeting, "House Speaker Nancy Pelosi gives us the most unfair trial in the history of the U.S. Congress. And now she is crying for fairness in the Senate and breaking all rules while doing so. She lost Congress once, she will do it again."

But Democrats aren't ready to give the president a mulligan pointing to new administration e-mails discovered by the Center for Public Integrity. In the e-mails budget official Michael Duffey orders a hold on military aid to Ukraine roughly 90 minutes after Mr. Trump had his infamous phone call with the leader of that country.

Duffey writes, "Based on guidance I have received and in light of the administration's plan to review assistance to Ukraine, including the Ukraine security assistance initiative, please hold off on any additional DOD obligations of these funds pending direction from that process."

[17:05:03]

He goes on to say, "Given the sensitive nature of the request, I appreciate your keeping that information closely held to those who need to know to execute direction." Democrats now want Duffey to testify.

SEN. CHUCK SCHUMER (D-NY): If there was ever an argument that we need Mr. Duffey to come testify, this is that information. This e-mail is explosive. A top administration official, one that we requested, is saying stop the aid 91 minutes after Trump called Zelensky and said keep it hush-hush. What more do you need to request a witness?

ACOSTA (voice-over: In a statement, an administration spokeswoman insisted the freeze was in place before Mr. Trump's call saying, "The hold was announced in an interagency meeting on July 18th. To pull a line out of one e-mail and fail to address the context is misleading and inaccurate."

MARCH SHORT, CHIEF OF STAFF OF VICE PRESIDENT PENCE: So yes, there was a delay. There is nothing new in these e-mails about the timing truly, Chuck. There was a lot of e-mails and back and forth exchanges about timing this. The aid was released.

ACOSTA (voice-over): The president is also playing defense with the key part of his base, evangelical voters, after the publication "Christianity Today" doubled down on its criticism of Mr. Trump as an immoral leader writing in a new post, "It is one thing to praise his accomplishments; it is another to excuse and deny his obvious misuses of power."

Republicans see the criticism as an outlier among the Trump faithful. A group of evangelical leaders released its own letter slamming "Christianity Today" saying, "Your editorial offensively questioned the spiritual integrity and Christian witness of tens of millions of believers who take seriously their civic and moral obligations."

The president was also keeping his eye on younger conservatives at the Turning Point USA conference over the weekend, but Mr. Trump also spun up some major falsehoods when he mocked the use of windmills claiming they contribute to climate change and that almost none are produced in the U.S.

Wrong on both counts as wind is one of the cleanest sources of energy and creates American jobs.

PRESIDENT TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I never understood when -- and I know windmills very much. I've studied it better than anybody. I know it's very expensive. They're made in China and Germany mostly, very few made here, almost none. But they're manufactured tremendous, if you're into this, tremendous fumes, gases are spewing into the atmosphere.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

ACOSTA (on camera): And the White House is praising Saudi Arabia's decision to sentence five people to death in the killing of journalist Jamal Khashoggi. A senior administration official said it was an important step in holding Khashoggi's killers accountable.

But human rights groups and some critics in Congress are accusing the Saudis of continuing to cover up Khashoggi's death especially whether the crown prince was actually behind the journalist murder. Brianna, here we are. We still don't have all the details as to what happened to Jamal Khashoggi, Brianna.

KEILAR: All right. Jim Acosta, thank you so much. The CIA certainly believes that the crown prince is behind it. Joining us now, let's talk about Democratic Congressman Dan Kildee of Michigan. He's on the Ways and Means Committee and he's also a member of House Democratic leadership. Sir, thanks for joining us.

REP. DAN KILDEE (D-MI): Thank you.

KEILAR: I want to talk about this newly-revealed e-mail which Chuck Schumer says proves there is this need for more documents and witnesses. As you are very well aware, House Democrats decided they didn't want to fight this out in court before proceeding.

They didn't want to fight it out to get documents and testimony. They wanted to move quickly. So, how long are Democrats willing to wait for this new evidence?

KILDEE: Well, I think that is a decision that the Speaker is obviously going to have to make, but it is important evidence and it ought to be given a chance to be fully heard and fully vetted.

You know, we thought we had -- we clearly had enough information to move forward with these two impeachment articles, but that does not mean that all new facts that are uncovered are exempt from any inquiry. And that seems to be what senate Republicans want to imply that no

matter what the president does or what we learn more about this particular case, that can't just be ignored because it happens to come up after we have voted on impeachment.

This is an important set of facts and I think it helps paint a clearer picture of what the president did and how he came to the conclusion that he was going to try to withhold this necessary military aid in order to exact a promise of an investigation of one of his political opponents.

That is the core of the abuse of power claim. And I think it has to be fully vetted and fully understood and I hope that that is considered by Senator McConnell.

KEILAR: Do you expect Speaker Pelosi will turn over the articles of impeachment to the Senate ultimately?

KILDEE: Yes. I think ultimately, but I do think, first of all, she is right. We don't -- the House that is, we're not bystanders to the Senate process. We're a part of the Senate trial.

[17:10:01]

We appoint managers to prosecute the case so we have a stake in how that process will move forward. And we have to know how that process is framed in order to properly prepare the case that we'll put forward and the managers that we'll submit to present the case. So, we have a clear stake in this. But it does beg the question, what is Mitch McConnell afraid of?

KEILAR: But what leverage --

KILDEE: Is he afraid that --

KEILAR: What leverage do you have if you say the articles are going over to the Senate anyway and Mitch McConnell is basically saying that is not really leverage as he sees it? He doesn't really want to have the trial. What leverage do you have if you're saying, well, we're going to turn them over anyway.

KILDEE: Well, I'm not sure how much leverage there is, but doesn't it seem as though the Constitution ought to be the leverage that Mitch McConnell would be concerned about. The Constitution says he has to conduct this trial.

And, you know, he can be concerned about the pressure that Nancy Pelosi is putting on him, but he ought to be more concerned about whether or not he's going to uphold the oath to office that he swore.

The leverage ought to be, the long view of history and whether or not he's going to be seen as a person who put on a joke of a trial or somebody who did his job, listened to the evidence, fully vetted the facts.

Even though he said he's not bias, that doesn't mean he should prevent those facts from being presented to the Senate even if they come to light after the House has voted.

He's going to have to answer to history and I think the way he's conducting himself right now, history is going to take a dim view of the way he's approaching this.

KEILAR: I understand what you're saying about the measure should be the Constitution and it should be what the judge of history will be, but what does that have to do with Speaker Pelosi deciding to or deciding not to hand over these articles of impeachment?

I mean, is she not going to hand them over unless she gets a firm guarantee from Mitch McConnell and new witnesses will be called and why do you think he'll actually comply with that?

KLILDEE: Well, because we don't want to -- first of all, in terms of the House and I think where the Speaker is, she doesn't want to submit the articles to a sham process.

And if he doesn't feel any pressure to do the job in a way that the constitution required him to do, there is nothing we can do about that. But I do accept the point. There is limited leverage that we have as long as he's willing to not do his job.

We just think that if this moment, as we're going into the holidays, before transmitting the articles over to the Senate, we have to have some clarity as to what the process will be and then let the public and perhaps other senators weigh in with Senator McConnell on this question and perhaps there will be a change of heart.

He's already given some indication that he might be open to witnesses. So it obviously seems to be working to a certain extent. And I've heard him say that he wants to use the same process that was used for the Clinton impeachment.

That is nonsense. Is he willing to require President Trump to submit to a videotape deposition? That is what happened during the Clinton impeachment? If he's willing to play -- if he wants to play by the same rules, maybe we could have a conversation about that.

But what he's trying to do right now is everything he can to shelter Donald Trump from scrutiny. And I don't think the public is going to ultimately accept that.

KEILAR: Do you think the public, even as Speaker Pelosi said she doesn't want this to look political, do you think you're in danger of the public thinking it's political?

KILDEE: Yes, I think -- I mean, I do think that the president and people around him and others have done a good job of framing it that way. And I think the environment that we're in right now causes a lot of folks to just conclude that everything is political.

But that is not always the case. And just because people think that doesn't mean we should shy away from, you know, taking care of our responsibilities. When I swore an oath on January 3rd of the beginning of this term, I

didn't swear an oath to public opinion or to the polls. I swore an oath to the Constitution. And I just wish that Senator McConnell and those around him would take the same approach.

KEILAR: I understand what you're saying about that, but if you swore an oath to the Constitution, taking actions that don't seem political might help Democrats succeed in that effort more, don't you think?

KILDEE: Well, I think there are two questions, whether they seem political or are characterized by people as being political, that's an easy thing for people to do.

But I think what the Speaker is trying to do is make sure that the trial itself is not a sham, that it is not a joke. That it is not some sort of a rush job where Leader McConnell simply brings up the case, moves for dismissal and they move on.

We want to make sure that the facts are presented and while we are preparing the case and determining who the managers will be, I think it is entirely legitimate for us to say to senator McConnell, let us know what this will look like.

[17:15:03]

Let us know what the trial will look like so that we could properly prepare ourselves for that. I don't think that is too much to ask.

KEILAR: Congressman --

KILDEE: And I don't think that's inherently political. I think that is just us doing our job.

KEILAR: Congressman Dan Kildee, thank you.

KILDEE: Thank you Brianna.

KEILAR: We appreciate it. And up next, will Democrats get the documents and witnesses they want for President Trump's impeachment trial?

Later, new hints about what maybe North Korea's Christmas gift to the U.S.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KEILAR: Senate Democrats today renewed their demands for documents as well as witnesses for President Trump's upcoming impeachment trial.

[17:19:57]

And the demand comes after newly-revealed e-mails show the White House budget office moved to freeze Ukraine aid within 90 minutes of the president's July phone call with Ukraine's president.

Let's talk about this now with our experts and our analysts. So Dana, Senate Democrats at this point in time have -- they want four impeachment trial witnesses to come. How likely is it that they're actually going to be hearing from any of these folks that you see on the screen?

DANA BASH, CNN CHIEF POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, long-term, pretty unlikely. But in the short-term, meaning getting an agreement from Republicans before a trial even starts, highly unlikely.

But assuming that they agree in some way, shape or form to start the trial and do it along the lines of what happened in 1999, 21 years ago, during Bill Clinton's impeachment, they likely could have votes on whether or not to bring any and all of those witnesses before the Senate trial.

And that is going to be really fascinating to see how it breaks down because there are so many -- a handful of Republicans up for re- election, it will be that very year, 2020, who are going to face a lot of pressure to be able to go home and say, I did what I could to find all of the facts.

So, it will be individual votes on all of the witnesses assuming they get this far. And to say -- to go back home and say no, I voted no, I don't want to hear from John Bolton will be hard to do and Democrats only need four, assuming none of the ranks break.

KEILAR: Which would put a lot of Republicans you would think ultimately in the position of voting to hear from people than not hearing from them and still voting not to impeach the president.

SARA MURRAY, CNN POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: Right. And you know, look, if you are just someone who wants transparency, you want to know what your government is doing, you should want to hear from these people. You should want to hear from people like Mike Duffey who sent the e- mail 90 minutes after the phone call with Zelensky.

You should want to hear from John Bolton, someone who was involved in these discussions. You should want to know all of the facts if you're making a decision that is as grave as whether to remove the president from office.

But I think there are a lot of members of the Republican Party right now in the Senate who are much more concerned about the power the president wields on twitter than they are about figuring out exactly what happened in this situation.

KEILAR: Because let's talk about Michael Duffey. He's a political appointee, OMB official. He's on this list of witnesses the Democrats want to see and he's the one who actually ordered that freeze on Ukraine just 91 minutes after the president's phone call with the Ukrainian president Zelensky ended.

Yes --

KEILAR: What all do you want to know from this guy?

PHILIP MUDD, CNN COUNTERTERRORISM ANALYST: So why don't we talk to a witness. We get to read some e-mails. We get to see maybe telephone records. I'm sort of watching this with some humor because the Senate is theoretically going to conduct an investigation.

And any investigation you would like to see the technical information, e-mail, phone records. That gives you the who was involved, when did this happen, what did they discuss? The why, typically you're going to get from a human being.

So, I'm loving watching investigators here say let's get to the bottom of this without people who can actually give you motive. No FBI or CIA official going into investigation would ever say I'd like to conclude the investigation on the most somber thing the Senate can do to review impeachment, but I don't want to talk to anybody that could give us motive.

KEILAR: But Senate Republicans say -- sorry -- that they don't want to investigate, that that's not their job. That the House was supposed to investigate and they decide whether or not it's to go forward and find him guilty or not guilty.

MUDD: Which in theory makes sense, but I'd go back to them and say you prefer to vote without knowing what happened.

KEILAR: And Shawn, to that point, House Democrats wanted to move along quickly which is why they didn't wait to see how the court action played out, right, because it would have taken so long. They did forego that opportunity.

But now they're trying to push Republicans into this position of highlighting the fact that maybe they don't really want to know the full truth.

When you look at this and how this would go down in history, like this, how would it be in terms of reflecting on Republicans for not wanting these answers?

SHAWN TURNER, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: I mean, look it speaks volumes to how much Republicans actually want to get to the bottom of this. You know, the idea that you would ask the courts to come along now and say, look, the president has been impeached and it is already done.

Now, you don't need to answer this question of whether or not we need to hear from the witnesses. It really feeds into this idea that this White House understands that there are still something to hide here.

You know, look, when we look at what these recent e-mails tell us about when the president made the decision to freeze the funding here, that tells us, as I've said earlier, that tells us that there are still facts despite the fact that we have all of these evidence and that we know so much about what the president did and why he did it.

That tells us there are still more gaps that need to be filled in. So, what will history say about this? History will say exactly what we're saying today. This White House, this president, this administration is still trying

to hide the facts here. But even if they succeed in doing that, even if they succeed, there is still enough evidence here for this president to be convicted in the Senate even though we don't know that that will actually happen.

[17:25:06]

KEILAR: Dana, you had a really interesting interview with the chairman of the Senate Republican Conference, Roy Blunt. You pressed him about the president's call and this is what he told you. Let's listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. ROY BLUNT (R-MO): The president and the Secretary of State and the retired lieutenant general who is a foreign policy adviser all feel like that call was within the bounds of --

BASH: What do you think? What does Roy Blunt think?

BLUNT: You know, I think I've never been very happy with any of the Ukraine decisions since the Russians invaded Crimea. We told President Obama in December of 2015 to provide lethal aid, which he never did. You know, I'm never been happy with the way any of this has been handled regarding Ukraine.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KEILAR: You've covered Roy Blunt for years. You speak Roy Blunt fluently I would say. Tell us, what do you think of that?

BASH: I think he's not -- he's a lot like a lot of his Senate Republican colleagues. And even some in the House who think it was a terrible idea. He didn't say that. These are -- this is my interpretation.

He was being incredibly careful. He is a member of the Senate Republican leadership. Others who are more free to say what they think have said, you know, from Mitt Romney to Marco Rubio to others.

But back to what Sarah was saying before about the president's twitter feed, the minute any Republican stepped out and said, yes, it wasn't great, but he shouldn't be impeached, you know, they got a back of the hand on the president's twitter feed.

KEILAR: All right everyone, stand by for me. I do want to hear what you think of President Trump's comments attacking, of all things, windmills.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[17:31:30]

KEILAR: We are back now with our experts. And let's talk about something the President said, and he really did go there. President Trump tilting at windmills.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I never understood wind, and I know windmills very much. I've studied it better than anybody. I know it's very expensive. They're made in China and Germany, mostly. Very few made here, almost none.

But they're manufactured tremendous -- if you're into this, tremendous fumes. Gases are spewing into the atmosphere. You know we have a world, right? So the world is tiny compared to the universe.

I've seen the most beautiful fields, farms, fields, most gorgeous things you've ever seen, and then you have these ugly things going up.

If you own a house within vision of some of these monsters, your house is worth 50 percent of the price. They're noisy. They kill the birds.

Do you want to see a bird graveyard? You just go, take a look. A bird graveyard? Go under a windmill someday.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MUDD: True.

(LAUGHTER)

KEILAR: The President cares about birds? I mean -- OK, that aside, just -- just fact-check the whole thing.

BASH: But what about the world?

KEILAR: Fact-check the whole thing.

BASH: Well, as you know --

KEILAR: I'm so confused.

BASH: As you know, I am a windmill expert. No, I'm joking.

KEILAR: Yes, you are, Dana Bash.

(LAUGHTER)

BASH: I'm not, but luckily --

KEILAR: It's a new beat we've added to your repertoire.

BASH: It sounds we might need that beat. Luckily, our friends at cnn.com did a fact-check, Zach Wolf and others, and a couple of things.

One is it is true that windmills kill birds, I have learned. But apparently, birds, I -- actually, I'm going to go there. Apparently, birds do also suffer from electrical wires, so it's -- it is unclear how much more they suffer from windmills.

In terms of the value for your house, he says it goes down 75 percent, other times he said 50 percent. Apparently, the experts say home values do go down but not that much. And things he's said in the past about causing cancer and other issues, that is dubious.

But he is obsessed with windmills because he was in a very long -- I think like a 10-year lawsuit with his property in Scotland against the U.K. government because they wanted to build windmills, and he thought it was an eyesore. So that is why he says he is an expert on windmills.

KEILAR: Birds? The bird part's mostly true.

(LAUGHTER)

KEILAR: The house price part is like half true, and the other part's like really not true.

BASH: I'm glad I'm entertaining you, Phil.

KEILAR: Well, you've --

MURRAY: Interestingly, Phil --

KEILAR: You have heard this a long time.

MURRAY: Oh, my God, he's been talking about this on the campaign trail forever.

BASH: Exactly.

MURRAY: He's really obsessed -- it's just like one of the riffs that he goes off on, and we're like, OK, we're doing the windmill thing today, listen up.

(LAUGHTER)

MURRAY: Which is interesting because --

TURNER: Yes.

MURRAY: -- there's another riff. You know, he talks about how he's seen the -- all these birds that are dying, but there's another riff which is about building the walls.

And it's like, they say you can't build the walls because of the marshland and because of the frogs and the toads and the reptile. And he's not worried about any of those animals dying from building a wall in the southern border, but he's very worried about the birds and the windmills.

These are all campaign riffs if you're at a Trump rally.

KEILAR: He's -- you know, he's specific, Shawn --

TURNER: Well, look, Brianna, the --

KEILAR: -- about some animals and not others.

(LAUGHTER)

TURNER: Yes. And you know, the real problem here is that, you know, the President has doubled down -- doubling down on the unfortunate but true fact that, you know, when you reach to the far end -- far areas of the Internet and you find these really bizarre, obscure sort of conspiracy theories, it's unfortunate that there are a lot of people out there who will believe them.

[17:34:59]

Even -- and the President's real issue here is that even if there's a little bit of truth to these things, he makes them seem much larger and much more significant than they actually are. And so, there's just this -- just this idea that, you know, look, you know, I -- I hear this from members of my family who get these conspiracy theories in their hair -- in their head, and I have to say, you know that's really not true.

But when they hear it from the President of the United States, well, they immediately start calling me up and saying, yes, it actually is true. But it's not. So, you know, look, I -- you know, it's kind of funny that he does this, but there is a real danger here when the President -- when people start believing that whatever he says is true.

And there are still people out there who do, unfortunately. They just don't seek information to really understand that this is, for the most part, nonsense.

KEILAR: Well, I mean, sure it is troubling. And, Phil, we're laughing because it's kind of nuts. But, at the same time, you hear something like this, and it's almost an out of body experience. Like, is this really happening? Is this really what the discussion or the speech is about?

MUDD: Well, I mean, I think there's a couple of pieces. I -- you know, this is almost a Christmas gift to me as a national security guy. We could talk about North Korea, Iran, murder and Saudi Arabia. We can talk about --

KEILAR: Can you talk about Don Quixote?

MUDD: We could talk about --

KEILAR: I mean, we would be remiss if we did not touch on that.

MUDD: We could talk about health care. What do we talk about?

TURNER: Yes.

MUDD: We could talk about the New England Patriots, which is a national security issue. We've got to talk about windmills. I do think -- I think Dana and the others are right that this is about him facing legal issues at a golf course about windmills.

BASH: Yes.

MUDD: There's also a different issue. That is, the tough guy, Mr. Bone Spur, talks about coal, talks about oil. These are tough guy issues. These are denim issues, really middle America issues. Talks about stuff that's important to America.

Windmills are seen as sort of East Coast liberal. So I think there is a political dimension to -- beyond what I agree is the primary issue that -- which is I'm going on the stump and I'm saying I'm coal and oil. I don't do windmills. I don't do stuff like North Korea and Iran. I do coal and oil.

KEILAR: It's definitely coast -- coastal Scotland. Definitely coastal.

MUDD: Yes, that's right.

KEILAR: All right, you guys. Thank you so much.

Coming up, Boeing is shaking up its top management after the deadly crashes involving its airliners. And later, an ominous hint about North Korea's long-promised Christmas gift to the U.S.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[17:41:52]

KEILAR: We're following new legal wrangling over congressional Democrats' efforts to hear from a prominent former member of the Trump administration. Let's bring in CNN crime and justice reporter Shimon Prokupecz on this.

And this is really this power battle between the President and Congress on full display yet again. What are -- what's the possibility of the outcome here?

SHIMON PROKUPECZ, CNN CRIME AND JUSTICE REPORTER: It is really is, Brianna. I think you put it perfectly there when you say this legal wrangling.

And really, what you have here is members of Congress fighting with the White House through the courts, trying to continuously get information. A lot of the federal judges, so far, that they have faced have said the President is not immune from this kind of scrutiny and that the President should turn over information, that certain people should testify.

All of this, eventually, is probably going to wind up in the Supreme Court. But the relevance of all of this, of course, is the precedent -- the precedent here for Congress.

They want to prove a point that the White House should not be immune from the scrutiny that it now finds itself under with members of Congress, that they should be able to get certain pieces of information.

Some of the federal judges have sided with members of Congress on this. And really, at the end, where this is all going to likely wind up is probably the Supreme Court.

And they're looking for very important information here, certainly on the Don McGahn front. You know, he was one of the most important witnesses in the entire Mueller investigation, and members of Congress want to hear from him.

KEILAR: If they do hear from Don McGahn, the former White House Counsel, in impeachment hearings in the House side, is it possible there could be more articles?

PROKUPECZ: So certainly, it is possible, and I think the lawyers for members of Congress are arguing that that is a possibility.

Politically, no one probably feels that that is going to happen, but, of course, the members of Congress, they want to keep their legal options open here. In fact, in the court filing, this is how they explain it.

What they say is that if McGahn's testimony produces new evidence supporting the conclusion that President Trump committed impeachable offenses that are not covered by the articles approved by the House, the committee would proceed accordingly.

So it is possible. And then they go on to say that including, if necessary, by considering whether to recommend new articles of impeachment.

You know, and I guess, in many ways, the whole point of this is that they need to keep this argument going. They -- no matter what, you know, we can have the Senate trial.

And even after then, they still want to be able to hear from Don McGahn. They still want to be able to have access to information that is now being tied up in the courts because the White House, because the administration, is continuing to refuse to release a lot of this information.

KEILAR: All right, Shimon, thank you so much for that report.

Today brought a major shakeup at Boeing. The airline maker forced out its -- airplane maker forced out its top executive after a disastrous year of crash investigations involving its 737 MAX jet.

I want to bring in CNN Business Editor-at-Large, Richard Quest. Richard, tell us, what is the main reason that he is gone?

RICHARD QUEST, CNN BUSINESS EDITOR-AT-LARGE: It was time. He was becoming more of a liability than an asset. We always knew he was going to have to go. The question -- it's not a question of if, it was when.

And I think the final straw was this latest spat that Boeing had behind the scenes with the regulator, the FAA, when Boeing, according to the FAA, was being seen to pressurize them to get it back in the air, the 737, and numerous little snipes from the FAA reminding Boeing.

[17:45:08]

We had one today when Boeing -- when, you know, they acknowledged that Muilenburg was going. Right at the end of their statement, there was a little bit that said to Boeing, and when you start behaving, basically, you start providing us data and you start following proper rules of transparency.

So I think what happened here was that the board basically said enough is enough. We know he's going. It's a liability at the moment. It's time.

KEILAR: This is a brand that is in crisis, Richard. I mean, people just have so little faith after all that's gone on. What would a new CEO have to do to turn things around?

QUEST: Stabilize the ship, basically. The first thing they've got to do is get the MAX back in the air, and they do that by providing the data that the FAA is seeking and having the transparency that's being demanded.

Thereafter, they need to convince customers -- that's airlines -- that the plane is not toxic, that they can still buy the MAX and passengers won't balk at flying it.

And thereafter that, longer-term, you've really got to look at what were the systemic issues that led Boeing to deviate so greatly from its own principles in terms of pilots come first, redundancy in machinery, you know.

But here is one point to remember, Brianna. It's not a case of a company just going away. Remember, there are thousands, thousands, of Boeing planes in the air at the moment. They have to be serviced. There are many more on order.

There's the triple sevens. There's all the other aircrafts, the seven-eights, that are being manufactured and delivered. So Boeing has literally -- pardon the pun, it has to fix the airplane while it's flying.

KEILAR: Wow, it is a lot. It is quite an undertaking. Richard Quest, thank you so much for following that.

And coming up, troubling new signs North Korea's dictator is preparing for a more aggressive and dangerous new year.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[17:51:41]

KEILAR: This past weekend brought some ominous new signs from North Korea. CNN Correspondent, Will Ripley is following the latest developments from Hong Kong. Tell us the latest, Will.

WILL RIPLEY, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, what we know is that the North Koreans, according to a source of mine, are not planning a launch, a long-range missile launch, right around Christmas. Because there's been a lot of speculation about that Christmas gift that Kim Jong-un promised.

So what is the gift? A new hardline policy when it comes to dealing with the U.S.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

RIPLEY (voice-over): North Korean leader Kim Jong-un meets with his military's top brass over the weekend, ordering them to bolster the overall armed forces of the country, discussing the sustained and accelerated development of military capability.

CNN obtained new satellite images showing increased activity at this facility tied to North Korea's intercontinental ballistic missile program. Not one but two apparent engine tests, according to South Korea, at this known launch site, sparking speculation of a bigger test to come.

But not so fast. Chances of a highly provocative launch like an ICBM or a nuclear test, very low, a source familiar with North Korea's position tells CNN.

North Korea cryptically promised a Christmas gift for the U.S. if the year ended without a diplomatic breakthrough. The most likely Christmas gift from North Korea, the source says, a new hardline approach in dealing with the U.S.

Negotiations seen as a waste of time. Kim taking a wait-and-see approach on dealing with President Trump. Perceived, the source says, as politically vulnerable as he moves into an election year.

TRUMP: He likes sending rockets up, doesn't he? That's why I call him Rocket Man.

RIPLEY (voice-over): When President Trump revived his old nickname for Kim, North Korea returned the rhetorical fire, calling Trump's comments the dotage of a dotard, which means old, senile, lunatic.

Former national security advisor John Bolton told AXIOS, President Trump's approach on North Korea has failed to slow Kim's nuclear program.

Three face-to-face meetings -- in Singapore, Vietnam, and the Korean demilitarized zone -- yet Washington and Pyongyang remain deadlocked over sanctions and denuclearization.

The source familiar with North Korea's position telling CNN, denuclearization is off the table and the bar to return to talks is significantly higher.

On the week before Christmas, this appeal to Pyongyang from President Trump's point man on North Korea.

STEPHEN BIEGUN, UNITED STATES SPECIAL REPRESENTATIVE FOR NORTH KOREA: Let's get this done. We are here, and you know how to reach us.

RIPLEY (voice-over): Last-ditch diplomacy hitting an all too familiar dead end.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

RIPLEY: Just because North Korea is not planning to launch an ICBM around Christmas, my source says, doesn't mean that they won't do it in 2020, an election year for President Trump.

The North Koreans keenly aware there's already a lot of pressure on the President, Brianna. Could they add to that pressure in the coming months after they analyze all the data from these recent tests? We'll just have to wait and see.

KEILAR: All right, we'll be waiting with you. Will Ripley, thank you for that report.

And coming up, Democrats renew their demands for more documents ahead of President Trump's impeachment trial. Will they get what they want?

[17:54:57]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KEILAR: Happening now, deadlocked. As the impeachment trial impasse deepens, we are following new demands and partisan maneuvering by Senate leaders. Are Democrats any closer to getting what they want?

Explosive. That's how the top Senate Democrat is describing newly released e-mails revealing exactly when U.S. aid to Ukraine was frozen. Does it bolster the case for removing the President?

Power struggle. The Justice Department is waging a multi-front legal battle, arguing the House no longer needs grand jury secrets or key testimony from the Mueller investigation. Will the courts buy it?

[17:59:55]

And Klobuchar one-on-one. CNN talks to the 2020 Democrat onboard her campaign bus in Iowa. The Senator is trying to cover new ground as she stakes her presidential hopes on the heartland.

We want to welcome our viewers in the United States and around the world.