tv CNN Tonight With Don Lemon CNN November 6, 2019 11:00pm-12:00am PST
that tops his recent predecessors, who all but one were two-term presidents. going to be a big deal in 2020 for conservatives. by confirming scores of conservative judges to lifetime appointments on federal courts across the country, president trump will have a fingerprint on legal cases for generations to come. so be on the lookout. you may see the impact of that and soon. thank you for watching. "cnn tonight" with d. lemon starts right now. >> i think we've talked about that before. that's probably going to be the lasting legacy, one of the longest lasting legacies of this president. and it shows you that elections do have consequences. you know, when people say, oh, they're all the same. everybody does the same thing, not really. appointing those judges is a very big deal. >> and he's nowhere near done.
>> no. >> if he wins another four years, he's already ahead of everybody. >> yeah. >> and they were all two-term presidents. he may get another supreme court nominee. he may get two. it's one of the reasons that mcconnell has been so accepting of him, and that's why the news today, don, the breaking news from "the washington post" is so interesting because so many have so much invested in his success. for the attorney general to say, i'm not putting out a statement that you did nothing wrong in ukraine, that's a big deal. >> well, that's why when i speak to trump supporters on the air and i say -- they say they don't like the antics. how do you put up with it? we don't like it. we put up with it because of the judges, and that's the reason. >> and some say economics. some say muscular foreign policy. a lot of people feel that the system needed to be shaken up. but judges, that is the longest lasting value of political benefit a president can bestow. >> i'm not judging you, but as i was walking in here, someone said you made a crack about me. and i said chris cuomo would never, ever do that. >> what? >> yeah. >> that's crazy talk. fake news. >> especially not about weight if you looked in the mirror lately. >> what? no. i'm not about looks. i love you for who you are, don lemon.
this is "cnn tonight." i'm don lemon. we have some breaking news for you tonight on the president's attempts to put together a defense as the impeachment investigation heats up. "the washington post" is reporting tonight that he wanted the attorney general bill barr to hold a news conference declaring that he hadn't broken any laws with that infamous ukraine phone call. here's what sources are saying. they're saying that barr declined. we've got a lot more on this story. you want to stay tuned for that because it's very interesting once we put it all out there for you. and it comes as the president is speaking in louisiana tonight, my home state, at one of his increasingly frequent campaign rallies. we're getting reports that large numbers of people are leaving the rally as the president keeps talking. and he sure seems to have
elections on his mind in the wake of gop defeats in kentucky and virginia last night. >> i didn't run in 2018, but people forget. we picked up two seats in the senate. they never want to talk about that. we picked up two seats. they never talk about it. and don't forget, in 2016 people came from the mountains and the valleys and the rivers and the oceans. they came from all over. the democrats said what the hell is happening? where are these people coming from? >> well, all of this, you know, this president's defensiveness about the election, his response to the impeachment investigation, all of it is about -- well, this won't be a shock to you, right? his ego. this is all about his ego, his enormous ego. pretty clearly on display tonight. and speaking of the investigation, what we have learned today is major, and it comes from bill taylor. bill taylor is a top american diplomat in ukraine. you remember his detailed opening statement connecting the dots of the -- let's call it what it is -- a shakedown of ukraine. well, he made it crystal clear in his testimony released today, and i quote. he said, that was my clear understanding. security assistance money would
not come until the president of ukraine committed to pursue the investigation. well, the investigation of joe biden and his son is what we're talking about even though there's absolutely no evidence that either did anything wrong. and the investigation of that debunked conspiracy theory about a dnc server. and bill taylor clearly lays all of that at the feet of the president's personal attorney, rudy giuliani. the transcript of the testimony mentions giuliani more than 40 times. but this says it all right here. quote, i think the origin of the idea to get president zelensky to say out loud he's going to investigate burisma -- remember that's the company that joe biden's son was on the board of, burisma -- in the 2016 election, i think the originator, the person who came up with that was mr. giuliani. question -- and he was representing whose interest? answer -- president trump. and going on to lay out exactly what the shakedown of ukraine
was about. another quote here. as i understand the reason for investigating burisma -- again the company that he was on the board, joe biden's son -- was to cast vice president biden in a bad light. question: that would be the domestic political gain? answer: yes. question: to cast vice president biden in a bad light? answer: right. question: and the political campaign would be what political campaign? answer: a political campaign for the re-election of president trump. and you probably didn't see this coming, did you? the greenland connection to all of this. yep, greenland. remember when the president started a feud with denmark over his fixation with buying greenland? remember that? it wasn't so long ago, about 100 news stories ago, though, right? remember it actually happened. it turns out bill taylor had trouble putting together a meeting of top-level cabinet officials with the president to
discuss ukraine because everybody was spinning their wheels on greenland. quote, i think this was also about the time of the greenland question, about purchasing greenland, which took up a lot of energy in the nsc. question: okay. that's disturbing for a whole different reason. answer: different story, different story. and here's where things get really strange. when the president got his ego bruised by the whole greenland thing and canceled his planned visit to denmark and poland, he sent the vice president, mike pence, in his place. pence met with ukraine's president in warsaw on september 1st, and the u.n. ambassador gordon sondland talked privately to a ukrainian aide right after that meeting telling him that ukraine wouldn't get $400 million in money, military aid, until they ponied up and
announced that the investigation of the bidens that the president wanted. well, that's a bombshell sondland dropped when he revised his previous statement. hmm, interesting. there's more to come here from bill taylor, public testimony. one week from today, one week from today, mark your calendars on live tv, right? and if you think what we've read in the transcripts is explosive, just imagine hearing him say it for himself on live television. we know who spends hours every morning in executive time watching tv. so it is no surprise that the white house is bracing for a world of trouble from those public hearings and worrying the president will be obsessed. well, like he isn't already. >> the word impeachment, to me it's a dirty word. so they come up with this impeachment nonsense. it's all a phony deal, this whole impeachment scam. they're pursuing the insane impeachment. impeachment.
impeachment. impeachment. impeachment. impeachment. >> he's not already obsessed? and then there is today's episode of graham v. graham v. graham. senator lindsey graham tying himself up into knots trying to defend the president. >> what i can tell you about the trump policy toward the ukraine, it was incoherent. it depends on who you talk to. they seem to be incapable of forming a quid pro quo. >> okay. you bungled a bank robbery, but aren't you still a bank robber? that's the best that he can come up with? they weren't smart enough to come up with a quid pro quo? remember it was just two weeks ago that the senator claimed to be open minded about that. >> are you open-minded if more comes out that you could support impeachment? >> sure. i mean -- i mean show me
something that is a crime. if you could show me that, you know, trump actually was engaging in a quid pro quo outside the phone call, that would be very disturbing. >> does lindsey graham have like a twin brother that he didn't tell us about, didn't inform each other what they said? then yesterday he said he wouldn't even read the transcripts. >> do you plan on reading these transcripts that have been released? >> no. i'm not even interested in the whole concept here. i don't know how firm i can be. >> hmm. in the face of mounting evidence of the president's pressure campaign on ukraine, the latest gop talking point is demanding to unmask the whistle-blower. number one son, don junior, trying to out the whistle-blower today, and lindsey graham really working overtime in his defense of the president, saying this on fox news tonight.
>> the whistle-blower needs to be named, and we need to be able to cross-examine that person for any bias. >> hmm. that after senator rand paul took to the stage with the president monday and said this. >> i say tonight to the media, do your job and print his name! and i say this to my fellow colleagues in congress, to every republican in washington, step up and subpoena hunter biden and subpoena the whistle-blower. >> hmm. he could always put it out there himself. i mean if you want to. it wouldn't be the right thing, but why don't you do it instead of asking other people to do your dirty work. but here's the thing. the identity of the whistle-blower is just a red herring at this point, okay? we've moved way past that. we've got hours and hours of
testimony, and then there's more to come. the whistle-blower's identity is besides the point, and it's all about the facts. remember, facts first. stick to the substance, not the process. substance. what are the witnesses saying? is it true? is it not? facts first. the public hearing set to begin next week, and today we've got the order of those witnesses to come. why are they up first? what will they say? we've got that next. these folks don't have time to go to the post office they use stamps.com all the services of the post office only cheaper get a 4-week trial plus postage and a digital scale go to stamps.com/tv and never go to the post office again.
o♪ ozempic®! ♪ oh! oh! (announcer) people with type 2 diabetes are excited about the potential of once-weekly ozempic®. in a study with ozempic®, a majority of adults lowered their blood sugar and reached an a1c of less than 7 and maintained it. oh! under 7? (announcer) and you may lose weight. in the same one-year study, adults lost on average up to 12 pounds. oh! up to 12 pounds? (announcer) a two-year study showed that ozempic® does not increase the risk of major cardiovascular events like heart attack, stroke, or death.
oh! no increased risk? (announcer) ozempic® should not be the first medicine for treating diabetes, or for people with type 1 diabetes or diabetic ketoacidosis. do not share needles or pens. don't reuse needles. do not take ozempic® if you have a personal or family history of medullary thyroid cancer, multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if you are allergic to ozempic®. stop taking ozempic® and get medical help right away if you get a lump or swelling in your neck, severe stomach pain, itching, rash, or trouble breathing. serious side effects may happen, including pancreatitis. tell your doctor if you have diabetic retinopathy or vision changes. taking ozempic® with a sulfonylurea or insulin may increase the risk for low blood sugar. common side effects are nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, stomach pain, and constipation. some side effects can lead to dehydration, which may worsen kidney problems. i discovered the potential with ozempic®. ♪ oh! oh! oh! ozempic®! ♪ (announcer) if eligible, you may pay as little as $25 per prescription. ask your health care provider today about once-weekly ozempic®.
dana-farber cancer institute discovered the pd-l1 pathway. pd-l1. they changed how the world fights cancer. blocking the pd-l1 protein, lets the immune system attack, attack, attack cancer. pd-l1 transformed, revolutionized, immunotherapy. pd-l1 saved my life. saved my life. saved my life. what we do here at dana-faber, changes lives everywhere. everywhere. everywhere. everywhere. everywhere. the transcripts of closed-door testimony released today and throughout the week paint a stark picture of president trump and his lawyer, rudy giuliani's attempt to shake down the ukrainian government to get an investigation into joe biden and his family. but the transcripts are really just the beginning. public hearings are set for next
week with bill taylor, the top u.s. diplomat in ukraine, state department official george kent, and marie yovanovitch, the former ambassador to ukraine. these hearings will give the american people the chance to hear directly from all of them on live tv. so let's discuss now with congressman denny heck. he's a member of the house intel and financial services committees. appreciate you joining us. thank you, sir. >> you're welcome. >> first let me ask you about this "washington post" story that broke tonight. the president was looking for cover from the attorney general, bill barr, on the ukrainian call, and barr declined to give a press conference on that. what do you think? >> i was stunned. i mean he has not hesitated whatsoever heretofore, that is attorney general barr, to leap into the fray and provide a defense even where one isn't warned. i'm painfully reminded of what he did within seconds of receiving the mueller report to cast it in the light he did before he probably even had time to actually read and digest it. so i was taken aback by it. perhaps it is a measure that he
sees of the gathering storm clouds on the horizon, and he's being just a tad bit cautious here. but frankly i'm not terribly trusting of attorney general barr, so we'll see. >> yeah. you know, these public hearings are really -- they're so important. we've now had at least five witnesses testify privately that president trump tried to shake down the ukrainians for personal gain. what is the story that's emerged from the testimony, and how will you lay that out to the american people, congressman? >> the story is that the president tried to shake down the ukraine for help in his domestic political contest. look, the truth of the matter is that most americans aren't going to have an opportunity, don, to watch all of these hearings. i hope they do. i hope they'll make an effort. but if they can only watch one, i hope they watch ambassador taylor, who is up first, because frankly, first of all, he's a patriot. he's a west point grad and a vietnam veteran and a career-long diplomat of noteworthy accomplishment. secondly, he more than the rest really ties it all together. now, they all corroborate one
another's testimony and the fact pattern that is here. and by the way, i would frankly suggest to you there is more evidence gathered thus far to suggest that the president did shake down the ukraine and threaten to withhold military assistance, creating an increased vulnerability among our strategic partner than there is evidence to support the idea that the sun will come up in the east tomorrow. i think we're way beyond that. thirdly, i think what they're going to hear from ambassador taylor is a pretty good, brilliant construct of why it is that the ukraine is important to america's national security and why they are a strategic partner and an ally in our effort to check the malign intent and aggression of russia. >> speaking of ambassador taylor, his transcripts from his testimony released today. let me just read from his transcript. that was my clear understanding. security assistance money would not come until the president committed to pursue the investigation, meaning the
president of ukraine committed to pursue the investigation. i observed that in order to move forward on the security assistance, the ukrainians were told by ambassador sondland that they had to pursue these investigations. so why is he up first? why is he the first witness? >> i don't know. i think perhaps that's a decision the chair made because he had a particular ringside seat in which he saw how all of this came together and does tie it together so well. but there may be another factor here, don. it's not talked about much, but it's worth noting. ambassador taylor kept contemporaneous notes for all of these phone calls. so the truth of the matter is that incredibly powerful opening statement that was released to the public, that was based on his reference to his note-taking and in fact even his testimony before us during the deposition was based on his contemporaneously taken notes. so this is almost as good as a video recording of what went on during that whole sordid affair. >> how concerned are you about
public opinion and getting your case across to the public? that's very important to you, right? >> well, of course it is. >> well, i wonder because, you know, you see the president and all of his supporters saying, read the transcripts. read the transcripts, and most of them have not read the transcripts. but if you read them, it appears to me for most rational people, if you read that transcript, it does not exonerate the president. >> i was thinking about getting my own t-shirts made up that said "please do read the transcripts" because i think of all the evidence that's been brought forward, and it's a mountain of evidence. the single most incriminating one, of course, is the memorandum of call between president trump and president zelensky in which he uttered those ten famous words" i would like you to do us a favor, though". >> though, yeah. thank you, congressman. i appreciate your time. >> you're more than welcome, sir. democrats winning big elections this week, but everybody is focused on 2020. a new poll finds a tight four-way race for the top.
♪when you pine for the sunshine of a friendly gaze.♪ ♪for the holidays you can't beat home sweet home.♪ the united states postal service goes the extra mile to bring your holidays home. that's what happens in golf nothiand in life.ily. i'm very fortunate i can lean on people, and that for me is what teamwork is all about. you can't do everything yourself. you need someone to guide you and help you make those tough decisions, that's morgan stanley. they're industry leaders, but the most important thing is they want to do it the right way. i'm really excited to be part of the morgan stanley team. i'm justin rose. we are morgan stanley.
so a new poll of likely democratic caucusgoers in iowa shows that elizabeth warren, pete buttigieg, bernie sanders, and joe biden in a tight four-way race. iowa will mark the first major contest for democrats with caucuses slated for february 3rd. joining me now is the former new orleans mayor, mitch landrieu. i love having you on. >> how are you? it's nice to be here. >> the team says, i don't know when y'all talk that louisiana stuff. we have no idea what you're
talking about. >> they can't understand us. it's our own personal language. >> so you've seen this iowa poll? >> i just saw it. >> what do you think? what's your biggest takeaway of the poll? >> first of all, we're moving into another phase of the campaign. we'll have, i think, two more debates. national polls have shown biden leading with warren catching up to him. now you're moving into the state-by-state races, so that's an interesting poll because iowa tends to be a bellwether sometimes. but of course every election is different. you may see this turn into a four-way race that goes all the way through super tuesday. i think it just depends. >> what did you think of last night's big victories? >> well, i don't think you can paint it any other way than it was a big night for the democrats. i think virginia, a southern state that's been kind of teetering on purple to blue, really kind of moved in that category. but those were state elections. i don't know what reflection it's going to have on the federal. kentucky -- >> were you surprised?
>> yeah, i was surprised for a couple reasons. first of all, the governor was an incumbent, and it is always hard to beat an incumbent. >> even if he's disliked. >> that's correct. that's a state where president trump ran, i think, plus 25. so a democrat came in and not only won a red state, not only beat an incumbent governor, but that's mitch mcconnell's state. and so i thought it was pretty ominous. now, mississippi went as expected. then of course we have louisiana in a couple of weeks. and my expectation is that governor edwards is going to win that race although it's going to be very close. >> should anybody -- john bel edwards? >> yeah. >> you said governor edwards. >> oh, i know. i'm sorry. well, we had another one. governor john bel edwards is the incumbent. again, because he's the incumbent, he's got the advantage. but louisiana now is a fairly red state. the president was in louisiana today, so he's trying really hard just like he did in kentucky, but he lost in kentucky. >> here's something else that stands out. half of likely democratic caucusgoers, 52%, said they might change their minds before the caucus on february 3rd. do you think the base is hedging its bets?
you think they're aware of some of these concerns? >> oh, i think there's no doubt about it. i think everybody is focused on the fact that they want to beat president trump. but this has been a very competitive democratic primary. there are a number of very strong candidates. you did see it in the polling numbers. but as i said, we're going to move from a national race into a state by state race starting in february. and the dynamics could change. this is a very volatile situation across the country. i don't think it's going to play out as people expect it to, but it's hard to even know what to expect at this moment given the impeachment, given all of the other stuff that's going on. >> let's continue to talk about this, but also let's bring back in what happened in kentucky and elsewhere because there are some worried republicans after what happened with andy beshear. he declared victory in the ruby red state, as we said, of kentucky. republican shelley moore capito calls it a wake-up call for the party, calling specific attention to the gop's losses of suburban voters. suburban voters are critical at any point, but what about 2020? >> well, they're always critical. whoever the swing voters are in an election are the ones that ultimately decide it. so president trump has a very solid base, you know, that evidently has not gone anywhere unless something dramatic happens in the impeachment process that we haven't seen
yet. and then it is clear that his negatives are really, really high. so the battle is for the people that are in the middle. there's a little trick here because you have to secure your base before you can get to the middle. so i know that's what the fight in the democratic party has been about. it's a little bit too quick to say that just because you lost kentucky that that's going to have ramifications on the federal side. but the republicans clearly would have wanted to be in the win category last night. and this indicates that when democrats show up, when they go out and talk to rural voters, when they talk to farmers, when they talk to people that are in the manufacturing community that have lost their jobs because the president didn't honor their word when the farmers are getting hit because the president's trade war with china, they're not as married to political parties as those of us that are in it. they just want the person that's going to help their lives be better and help their kids' lives be better than them. so they're hope to giving people
a chance. >> what about this whole idea that it's got to be a centrist, it's got to be a moderate? >> well, i don't know that it has to be anybody in particular. but the person who is best suited to beat donald trump -- there are a lot of different ways you can do that. i happen to come from the centrist, what i call the radical centrist, the reality wing of the democratic party. i would argue that you can't just secure your base, but you have to make sure you're going to represent everybody. remember, you're running for president of the united states. >> right. >> not for president of the democratic party. >> yeah. >> so i would argue that there are other people that have a stronger argument, but the voters are going to decide that themselves in the next couple months. >> so i can't wear a hat or t-shirt on tv unless and until. you see what that says? >> lsu, go tigers. >> it's a purple pen. >> i love that. >> i keep it right here. >> big game this weekend. >> they're going to beat 'bama. >> big game this weekend. >> go tigers. >> the presidential race is important but the lsu-alabama game, that's important too. >> thank you, mayor. >> thank you. >> always a pleasure. >> great to see you. roger stone is on trial and all sorts of secrets are being revealed, like the three phone calls between stone and donald trump on the day the dnc was hacked, and there's more. where we all want more energy. but with less carbon footprint. can we have both? at bp, we're working every day to make energy that's cleaner and better.
and we see possibilities everywhere. to make energy that's cleaner and better. geico would like to take a moment to say thank you to our military service members at home and abroad for all their hard work and sacrifice. we all sleep easier knowing you're out there keeping us safe. and on a personal note... sfx: jet engines ... i just needed to get that off my chest. thank you. geico: proudly supporting the military for over 75 years. anna, do you yes! those plans? i just wanted to show you something i've been wor... ♪ james r. and associates. anna speaking... ♪ james r. and associates. anna.
and of course, fowler. it takes a village to raise to build a bridge. to throw a baseball... to throw yourself into the unknown. to lose fear, to create hope. we believe that it takes a village of over 200-thousand dedicated, passionate, driven medical and non-medical professionals to deliver on our belief in total health for all. we are kaiser permanente. thrive. roger stone's trial for
allegedly lying to congress and obstructing its investigation getting under way today. prosecutors announcing that the former white house chief strategist steve bannon will testify against the longtime trump ally. they also plan to call rick gates. rick gates is a former top trump campaign aide. let discuss, shimon prokupecz, elie honig. shimon, what are the key things we are learning today? >> certainly, don, right out of the gate in the opening statements from prosecutors, they laid out their motive, why they believe roger stone lied. and as much as donald trump is obviously not present in this trial, he's not going to appear here, he's not going to be a witness, he is a big part of this trial. and prosecutors wanted to make that clear. they say the reason why roger stone lied, why he lied to members of congress during this investigation, was because he wanted to protect the trump
campaign. he wanted to protect donald trump. they also revealed that they're going to be calling some big witnesses, steve bannon, a man that they call the ceo. they told the jurors this was the senior man on the campaign, that he was the ceo of the campaign and that roger stone and he were emailing. roger stone and he were talking. then as you said, rick gates. rick gates is going to come in as well. and then the other big reveal here today was that we learned from the first witness, a former fbi agent who worked on the mueller team and was responsible for the roger stone investigation -- she said that on the day that it was reported, once news started getting out that the dnc had been hacked, roger stone and then-candidate trump were communicating. there are phone calls between them, at least three going back and forth where roger stone is calling trump, trump is calling him on his cell phone, and even on his home phone. a key part of that is to show that there was contact, that there was constant contact
between roger stone and people inside the campaign. >> okay. so let's stop here, elie and just say if people had known that during the mueller investigation, that roger stone and the president had talked three times, if that news had broken then, and also about the dnc hack, that would have been huge news, right? >> yeah, i think so. i'm not a big believer in coincidences. prosecutors generally don't believe in coincidences. the fact that they talked about the hack -- well, the fact they talked on the day of the hack i think is really pretty compelling. >> the day the news broke about the hack. >> right, the day the news broke on the hack. one of the big questions that we'll learn in this trial is who within the trump campaign -- because the indictment says senior trump campaign officials talked to roger stone about getting information from wikileaks about what was coming. and also was donald trump part of that because there is a paragraph in the indictment that says senior campaign officials were directed to tell roger stone to get in touch with wikileaks. who was the "were directing" person? was it donald trump?
we may find out. >> this is all -- it's all really crazy. >> it sure is. >> it's all really nuts. have you ever seen this much legal wrangling in your lifetime when it comes to an administration and the presidency? >> i've seen circuses at trial before, but i think shimon may be covering a new type of circus here with the kind of witnesses we're going to be seeing. >> shimon, is the prosecution's case calling into question this answer president trump gave robert mueller about his campaign and the wikileaks -- and i quote -- i do not recall discussing wikileaks with stone, nor do i recall being aware of mr. stone having discussed wikileaks with individuals associated with my campaign. can you explain that? >> well, it's a very convenient answer there from the president, and we now know why -- certainly this tells you why the lawyers for the president didn't want him sitting before the mueller team, because they could have pulled out the phone records and said, well, here we have that on the day that it was revealed that the dnc was hacked, you and roger stone were talking. there are other instances during
the entire wikileaks thing, as they're threatening to push out more emails, where roger stone is contacting donald trump. so they could have confronted him with this information and said, well, how do you not recall? we have these records that indicate that you called. they certainly spent the day -- the opening statement was from a mueller prosecutor really going through painstaking detail of all the phone calls, and you can certainly see where they're going. they're inferring that the contact between roger stone and donald trump was all about wikileaks and what he was doing to try and help the campaign by getting a hold of some of these emails. so, yes, you have to wonder. you have the mueller prosecutor here talking about this. so clearly they don't believe the president's answers. he didn't necessarily lie. he says, i don't recall. so he protected himself. his lawyers protected him there.
>> i'm glad you said that. that phrase, i do not recall, is doing a lot of work there. but what happens if the evidence shows that the president lied under oath in the mueller investigation because those answers, even though he didn't do it in person, those written answers, that's under oath, right? >> it is, yeah. if he lied in those answers, it is chargeable. the problem is right now, a, he's the sitting president. and doj policy -- it's not necessarily the law, but doj policy is not to indict a sitting president. b, you have bill barr as attorney general, so that ain't going to happen. but as we heard from a court this week reiterated the president can be charged with a crime after he leaves office. whether that would actually happen is another question, but that could be the consequence. but as shimon said, the "i do not recall" does a lot of work there, and he say it was just a failure of memory. >> there's a difference between mueller was federal, is that right? >> yes. >> then is that considered state? >> this is a federal trial. mueller was also federal. now, there's a separate
question. could a state prosecutor charge him? this would be a federal crime, though, because he would be lying to federal investigators, fbi agents. >> so the sdny is considered -- >> sdny is federal as well. >> federal as well. okay. that means that -- >> it's all under barr's umbrella. >> okay. gotcha. shimon, the prosecution plans to call on steve bannon, as you mentioned, and rick gates. prosecutors say that in the summer of 2016, while wikileaks started to release the hacked data, stone emailed bannon, writing, quote, trump can still win, but time is running out. i know how to win, but it ain't pretty. i mean that is pretty damning. can you help us connect the dots? what does the prosecution want out of bannon? >> yeah, and bannon's response was, let's talk asap. bannon was interested in what roger stone was doing here, and so he's going to talk about how roger stone was offering help, offering wikileaks help, claiming that he had an intermediary, someone who was working as a middle man to get to julian assange in the embassy in london, at the ecuadorian embassy.
there was a lot of talk of that today, about how roger stone was reaching out to everyone on the campaign, senior-level people, rick gates, steve bannon, the president himself, saying, hey, i can get you help. i can do what you need me to do. and that is what steve bannon is going to do. he's going to come in and talk about his communications with roger stone, at one point being angry at roger stone. it's going to be a really big day when steve bannon comes in. >> i'll bet. elie, i was asking that just because the idea of pardoning someone. people always ask me, and i say he's not going to be dragged out of the white house in handcuffs. someone is going to pardon him. people say, oh, it's state charges, but these are not. >> these are federal charges. he can pardon pretty much anybody he wants. >> thank you. i appreciate it. jane fonda has been getting arrested pretty much every friday lately, and president trump is taking notice tonight. >> and they arrested jane fonda. nothing changes. i remember 30, 40 years ago.
these folks, they don't have time to go to the post office they have businesses to grow customers to care for lives to get home to they use stamps.com print discounted postage for any letter any package any time right from your computer all the amazing services of the post office only cheaper get our special tv offer a 4-week trial plus postage and a digital scale go to stamps.com/tv and never go to the post office again!
we're oscar mayer deli fresh your very first sandwich,m... your mammoth masterpiece. and...whatever this was. because we make our meat with the good of the deli and no artificial preservatives. make every sandwich count with oscar mayer deli fresh. jane fonda says she wants to get arrested every friday, and after moving to washington, d.c., that's exactly what she's been doing. all to address the climate crisis. joining me now is actress and activist jane fonda. do you like that activist as well? >> yeah, i do. but i didn't -- i don't want to get arrested. >> but you will. >> but i'm willing to risk getting arrested by engaging in
civil disobedience. you want to know why? because climate activists have been marching and rallying and writing and putting out articles with the information, and it hasn't caught on. so we need to up the ante and do more. >> yeah. >> and i'm trying to take a lesson from the student climate strikers. >> but i heard you say you've been -- people, you know, have been rallying for climate change for four decades, for 40 years now. >> mm-hmm. >> and nothing is done. you say the time is now for civil disobedience. >> correct. yes. that means you risk being arrested. >> yeah. >> yeah. >> you know, i found it interesting, jane, that you said that -- and correct me if i'm wrong -- that you recognize your white privilege and your fame when getting arrested.
explain what that means. >> well, i'm famous, and i'm white, and i'm in jail, and they're not going to treat me the way they would treat me if i was an unknown black woman, and i'm very aware of that. and, you know, when i spent the night in jail in cleveland, all the other prisoners were white, and this time they were all black. you know, that's 50 years. that's jim crow. that's mass incarceration. that was -- the saddest part of being in jail was seeing the extent to which this country doesn't prioritize social safety nets and mental health services because a lot of those people shouldn't have been in. they should have been treated elsewhere. >> protests have been part of your life for decades. what makes this climate crisis, you think, so -- you spoke about it just moments ago -- so different and so urgent at this moment for you? >> well, if we had paid attention to the science 30, 40 years ago, because they knew. the scientists, exxon, we now know because of leaked memos, they knew what they were doing. they knew it was causing damage to the environment. but because they lied and they hid the science and hoodwinked us, we didn't take action soon enough. and so now we only have a
limited amount of time. the science says 11 years left before we reach a point beyond that we can't control. >> let me talk to you about that science because this week more than 11,000 researchers from around the world, they've issued a report warning of untold suffering caused by climate change if they don't change our ways on a massive scale. >> yeah. >> the science is undeniable. >> undeniable. >> what needs to happen to save the planet? >> well, the scientists themselves. . >> well, the scientists themselves, and this is really surprising. they're usually pretty neutral. they say the only way we're going to have it happen the way it needs to happen is for massive numbers of people to be mobilized in the streets, and you know, i'm trying to show on my fire drill fridays, this is the new normal. we have to be out there. we have to be risking arrest. we have to engage in civil disobedience because we have very little time and what has to happen is so huge. i mean, we did it kind of during the new deal. roosevelt was forced to put into play programs that lifted people
out of poverty and despair. he left out african-americans. this time with a green new deal, everyone will be lifted, and we have to fight for that, which means we can't elect anybody to office that isn't really brave. >> i have so many questions for you. >> ask, come on, man, i've waited -- >> when you said african-americans, you recognize that, many people don't recognize that. and as an african-american, that's heartening to me that you can recognize that and that you're bold enough and brave enough to be able to say that because not many people do that, jane. >> well, i've been studying. >> and you've lived it. >> i've been studying it. >> and you lived it. >> you know, and when i first heard about a green new deal, i thought, oh, why can't they just stick to the climate. why do they have to talk about justice and jobs, but the more i learn, the more i realize we're not going to solve the problem unless it's holistic. it has to be a win-win for everybody. because the mentality that has so raped and damaged the globe is the same mentality that brought african slaves here hundreds of years ago and
created genocide, you know, committed genocide against the indigenous people. it's a mind-set that the earth is ours to exploit endlessly and workers are there to use and then discard, you know, poof. >> can we talk some politics now? because i know you are very involved in politics. can we talk about the impeachment and what's going on and the testimony that we've heard over the last couple of weeks? where do you stand on impeachment now, jane? >> we're never going to solve the climate crisis if we -- he is an oil president. his cabinet is an oil cabinet. he is bought off by fossil fuels, and a lot of people in the senate, a lot of republican candidates are too. so we can't solve the problem when we have elected officials who are -- who are paid by the fossil fuel industry, and so, the sooner that we move beyond
him the better, whether it's through the elections or through impeachment or whatever. >> half the country wants him impeached and removed from office. is that surprising to you? >> no, it's not surprising to me. >> you've seen division before. our country's really divided now. i would imagine there was a big division during -- >> during the vietnam war, absolutely. but there's a big difference. >> tell me. what is it? >> there's a ticking time bomb kind of looming over everything that we didn't have or we didn't realize that we had during the vietnam war, which is the climate crisis. this is human kind has never been in a situation like this where we face the kind of dangers that could kill hundreds of millions of people, that could force mass migrations, could create health pandemics. i mean, just look at the fires and the floods and the sea risings and all the things that are happening right now, and imagine they're happening one right after the other, and we don't have time to catch up. what happens to the economy? what happens to our national
security, right? so it's never been that way before ever. >> is it more important in this election, this upcoming election in 2020 for a candidate to have your particular -- share your ideology or someone who can just beat this president? >> well, it's not -- i think that the person, whoever the person is no matter how brave they are may not be able to get the job done unless we the people of this country make them do it. >> do you think someone like a joe biden is too moderate? >> i don't want to talk about individuals. >> okay. but -- >> i'll tell you one thing, whatever democrat wins the primary, i will go all out, not that anyone's asking me, but i'll do whatever i can. >> i'll ask you. i'll ask you specifically because this is out there. this climate change is your fight. you've always stood up for what you believe, and i admire that. so few people do that. where did that come from, jane? >> you know, i was hedonistic and ignorant for so long, and i
realized once you see something -- you know, once i really understood what the vietnam war was about if i had then turned away, then i would be part of the problem. i would be guilty, you know, once you know something, then you have to use whatever power you have, and as a celebrity with a hit series behind you, you got a lot of -- you can do stuff more than i used to be able to do. i'm almost 82. i've got to do whatever i can. i'm not going to be alive when whatever is going to happen is going to happen, but i have nothing to lose, so i have to do everything i can to try to encourage other people to come along. join us. join us. >> thank you. >> what would happen if you got arrested for civil disobedience. it's a misdemeanor, it's not a felony. >> there's a lot of people who would like to see get in trouble or do something like that. i would not be afraid of that. but i don't know if that's my role right now. >> you stay where you are, you do a good job. thank you. thanks for having me.
♪'cause no matter how far away you roam.♪ ♪when you pine for the sunshine of a friendly gaze.♪ ♪for the holidays you can't beat home sweet home.♪ the united states postal service goes the extra mile to bring your holidays home. we can go down this what do you think? ♪ woo! yeah! it's good! it's refreshing. ♪ at northwestern mutual,