Return to Transcripts main page
Connect the World
Trump Considering Asking Ukraine and China to Investigate Bidens; Giuliani Considers Filing Lawsuit against Congress Members; Trump Calls Whistleblower Complaint "Total Fiction"; Ukraine Documents Provided by Giuliani Delivered to Congress; British Prime Minister Presents New Brexit Plan to Parliament; Interview with Philippe Lamberts, Belgian MP, on Boris Johnson's Brexit Plan; Trump's Republican Allies Mostly Silent on Impeachment Investigation; Ex-Diplomat Kurt Volker on the Hill as First Witness in Ukraine Probe; Iraqi Police Kill 12 during Protest. Aired 11a- 12p ET
Aired October 03, 2019 - 11:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[11:00:00]
(MUSIC PLAYING)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE (voice-over): Live from CNN London, this is CONNECT THE WORLD with Becky Anderson.
BECKY ANDERSON, CNN HOST (voice-over): And moments ago, even while he is facing impeachment inquiries for asking a foreign government to investigate
his political rival, Donald Trump just stood outside the White House and asked two foreign governments to do just that, all over again. You better
believe it. That just happened.
And that's not all this hour. Boris Johnson turns on the charm to sell his new Brexit deal, but British lawmakers and others sticking to caveat
emptor.
Plus, 15 killed, almost 1,000 wounded in protests surging across Iraq.
Well, it's 4 o'clock in the afternoon here in London. It's 11:00 in D.C., We begin this hour with a defining moment for the Trump era. Kurt Volker,
who was U.S. special envoy up until last Friday for Ukraine, is on Capitol Hill, speaking before three House committees. He's the first official to
testify in what is this whistleblower scandal involving president Donald Trump's dealings with Ukraine.
He's a key player in all of this and could provide potentially damaging testimony on the pressure placed on Ukraine and on possible efforts to
cover it up.
Well, President Trump spoke a short time ago as he departed Washington for an event in Florida. He says he thinks both Ukraine and China should
investigate former Vice President Joe Biden and his son.
He's also doubling down on claims that the whistleblower complaint is total fiction. He's once again insisting that his call with the Ukrainian
President that kicked off all of this was, quote, "absolutely perfect."
Suzanne Malveaux following things on Capitol Hill. Anita Kumar is White House correspondent for "Politico" and CNN legal analyst Michael Zeldin is
with us.
It does seem absolutely remarkable. I want Suzanne to walk us through exactly what you understand to be going on, on the Hill.
But as far as I understand it, what's going on, on the Hill is an investigation into whether Donald Trump put pressure on a foreign country
to dig dirt on an opponent. He has said he believes that China and Ukraine should do exactly that in front of the press in the last hour.
SUZANNE MALVEAUX, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yes, Becky, you really have to kind of wrap your mind around all of this to make sense of it because, on the
one hand, you do see the president earlier today, saying that Schiff was a liar and saying the whole investigation is crumbling before his very eyes.
Then he goes forward to talk about that he did want, in fact, for Ukraine and now other countries to actually get involved here in the Bidens, in
investigating the Bidens.
So what are we seeing behind the scenes?
Of course, you have somebody who's a Republican, who's been a career servant, who's not somebody who is particularly supportive of this
president in terms of being an all-in Trumper, not going to fall on the sword for the president and resigned because he wanted to go ahead and be
very truthful about what he knows.
But still a lot of unanswered questions, Becky, as we know.
What did the Ukrainians think about the State Department's role in trying to dig up dirt on his political opponent?
What about his personal attorney, Rudy Giuliani?
All of these things still are things that we don't know. But we have heard directly from the president, saying what he knew and what he wanted.
So let's see, what is the State Department involvement?
What does he believe?
Did he get any kind of pressure from the president or from his own secretary of state in terms of the kinds of things that he was asked to do
and his administration?
ANDERSON: Well, Rudy Giuliani has outed him on a number of -- in a number of TV interviews, suggesting that he has had a relationship with him and
they have been trading narratives on this or trading information.
Michael, Rudy Giuliani now says he's considering legal action over all these congressional investigations. He says the president's rights are
being violated in this messy process and it's Democratic lawmakers who may end up in court. Have a listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
RUDY GIULIANI, ADVISOR TO DONALD TRUMP: We should bring a lawsuit on behalf of the president and several people in the administration, maybe
even myself as a lawyer, against the members of Congress individually for violating constitutional rights, violating civil rights.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ANDERSON: Your thoughts, Michael?
MICHAEL ZELDIN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: I don't think there is a cause of action, a lawsuit that could be brought for those things.
[11:05:00]
ZELDIN: If there was an allegation that somebody engaged in conduct that was libelous or something that and it wasn't part of their speech and
debate clause, protected constitutional speech, theoretically, there could be a lawsuit.
But to say the press or the political opponents of the president can be sued for accusing them of wrongdoing is just silly. So I don't know what
Giuliani is referring to, what law he thinks is violated. But I think this is just TV talk.
ANDERSON: Doug Heye is a CNN political commentator and Republican strategist also with us.
And today -- sorry, hi. Hi, Doug. In today's closed door testimony from the former U.S. special envoy to Ukraine, Kurt Volker, Republican members
of the Foreign Affairs Committee are not permitted to ask questions, as I understand it.
The lead Republican of that committee, Michael McCaul, wrote in a letter, and I quote, "I was alarmed to learn less than 24 hours before the first
interview is scheduled to start that it will be led by the Intelligence Committee and that questioning will be done solely by their staff.
"Also, we were told that only a single Republican professional staffer from the Foreign Affairs Committee will be allowed to attend, while the majority
will have two."
What do you make of that decision?
DOUG HEYE, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well, I think members obviously are troubled when they don't have direct access to any potential witness. It's
why you saw the letter from the chairman. I should say, chairman McCaul is a really respected member of the Republican conference. He's respected on
both sides of the aisle.
He's not one of these wild-eyed Republican members, who's going to go off on crazy tangents that we've seen other Republican members do.
And with ambassador Volker, whether this is a closed-door session or ultimately if there's an open session, we've seen so many of these caustic
hearings that have turned into sideshows. Volker is respected on both sides of the aisle.
This is, regardless of how the questions are brought up, this is going to be an orderly process, with a nominee who treats the committee with respect
as opposed to what we've seen so often in the past few months.
ANDERSON: An orderly process, a process that we know today will be three committees behind closed doors.
Anita, just walk our viewers, who may not have been, you know, working the machinations of this over the past 24 hours, just where we are at in this
impeachment inquiry.
ANITA KUMAR, "POLITICO": Well, where we're at is that obviously House Democrats are looking for investigating what the president was doing what
he was talking to the president of the Ukraine.
Was he asking for information?
We seem to -- the president has actually admitted he was asking Ukraine to look into Joe Biden and his son. So we already know that.
But the president, President Trump is saying that he did nothing wrong, that there wasn't actually pressure, that he didn't say, I'll withhold any
foreign aid or any aid to your country if you do this.
So really, they're trying to figure out exactly what was said on that call. Obviously the White House released what they call a transcript. Many
people are saying there was information missing from that. So they want to have a fuller picture of what he asked and not just Ukraine on that call.
Did he ask at other times?
And who was involved?
Really, to me, that part of who else was involved is really an open-ended big question that has yet to be answered. We know the secretary of state,
Mike Pompeo, was listening in on that call. He's since admitted that, since that was reported.
Who else was on that call?
We know a number of other people were.
How much did the vice president know about this?
There was a report in "The Washington Post" today, saying that the vice president was knowledgeable, should have been knowledgeable of that call,
should have had a transcript. He went and met with the president of Ukraine. He would have known what was on that call.
The vice president's office is pushing back on that. So there's really a lot of unanswered questions. I will say that the one thing that's struck
me is the House is moving very fast on this in the last week. We spent months seeing them investigate a number of things. It was very slow going.
But this investigation seems to be very fast.
ANDERSON: Let's get back and listen to what some of the U.S. president said, speaking to members of the press in the last hour on the
whistleblower.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: Well, if you look at the whistleblower's complaint, it's totally inaccurate because the conversation that I had was absolutely perfect and
most people that have read it say the same thing.
The whistleblower never saw the conversation. He got his information, I guess, second to third hand. He wrote something that was total fiction.
Well, I would think that, if they were honest about it, they'd start a major investigation into Biden. It's a very simple answer.
[11:10:00]
TRUMP: They should investigate the Bidens because how does a company that's newly formed and all these companies, if you look -- and by the way,
likewise, China should start an investigation into the Bidens because what happened in China is just about as bad as what happened with Ukraine.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ANDERSON: Doug, you know, you've been close enough to the GOP, to the Republican Party and to its supporters.
Is this a stable genius?
As far as the president is concerned, he believes he is.
HEYE: No, not at all. I think we've seen that not just in what the president said a little while ago but also in the press availabilities that
he had yesterday.
There's a reason you're not seeing a groundswell of Republican members fighting their way to get on television to defend the president. It's
because they know there's not a real plan of action here. They don't know what the answers ultimately will be.
And they don't want to put themselves out there, defending the president on something where they don't know where things will end up.
I would say, just as a political point, if you're the president of the United States and you're telling foreign countries to go after the son of a
potential opponent of yours and you have children who are named Ivanka, Don Jr. and Eric, you're on a very, very dangerous ground, considering a lot of
the business dealings in foreign countries that your own children have been doing.
You're inviting that in and that's problematic for Trump.
ANDERSON: Yes, that's fascinating.
Michael, you are Robert Mueller's former special assistant at the DOJ.
How does this investigation compare to the Mueller investigation?
ZELDIN: Well, it's different in respect that it's ongoing; whereas, Mueller's was retrospective. Mueller was looking at past conduct, whether
there was collusion and this is a real-time investigation. This is more normal for an investigator to look at.
I think that the allegations here, if provable, are quite understandably wrong, which is to use the powers of your office for personal gain. If
that narrative is the one that sticks -- whether it's impeachable or not, I don't know. But it's certainly problematic legally and politically.
Mueller, I think, was a little more obscure for people to understand, what is collusion, it's not a crime, what counts as a collusive act. So it
wasn't as easily told a story. As a prosecutor, you learn in court that you have to tell a story that the jury can understand. Here, that's what
has to happen from a Democratic standpoint.
ANDERSON: Yes.
Suzanne, no collusion, no crime, is how Donald Trump describes the results of the Mueller investigation. His words, not those of those involved in
the Mueller investigation, it has to be said.
Let's get back to what's going on now and to some of the more familiar faces to our international viewers. Kurt Volker is not one of those. He
is, as we know, behind closed doors giving testimony to committees today. He's the former special envoy to Ukraine. There will be a number of names
that will be new to our international viewer.
But Rudy Giuliani is not one of those names. Rudy Giuliani is the personal attorney, of course, to Donald Trump. And he gave the State Department a
packet of documents, containing unproven and debunked claims about Vice President Joe Biden and his son, Hunter.
Now Congress, as I understand it, was provided with this material yesterday. Take a listen to what House Democrat Jamie Raskin said on that
matter.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. JAMIE RASKIN (D-MD.): The existence of this packet and its curious history raises profoundly troubling questions.
Why was secretary of state Pompeo in possession of this packet of disinformation?
Why did he distribute it and circulate it?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ANDERSON: And to answer that question, Suzanne, if you can, why would Mr. Giuliani circulate that information?
Has it become any clearer at this point?
MALVEAUX: It's not much clearer but it was a very bizarre situation yesterday, Becky, as you can imagine, because there was quite this buildup,
that you had the State Department inspector general coming before in an urgent matter, while the secretary of state Pompeo was out of the country,
to produce this trove of documents.
Then ultimately lawmakers looking at it, realizing this was some of the same debunked propaganda we'd seen about the Bidens and the former
ambassador to the Ukraine and that this wasn't very useful.
They didn't quite understand why he would bring it forward. He didn't even know where it came from. Well, it was later in the day that we found out
precisely where it came from.
[11:15:00]
MALVEAUX: Most of those documents and those debunked conspiracy theories coming from Giuliani himself, who handed it over to the White House, who
handed it over to Secretary Pompeo with a promise, if you will, of looking into investigating the Bidens.
So again, once again, you have Giuliani in the middle of all of this as a focal point of this investigation, what his activities were. And some of
the questions, of course, is the way he was connected to the State Department and how the State Department was being used in all of this.
ANDERSON: Busy times during what is supposed to be a recess in Congress. Thank you, Suzanne.
Anita, finally to you. While Mr. Trump has stayed mostly quiet, at least in public, for the past week, we heard from him in the last couple minutes.
He said China and Ukraine should investigate the Bidens.
Yesterday we saw his infamous fire and fury, taking off on a Twitter tirade, saying the Democrats are focused on, quote, I'm going to say it out
loud, "bullshit."
Are we seeing any strategy from Mr. Trump or has his temper now well and truly taken over?
KUMAR: Well, what we're hearing from the White House and people close to the White House is actually that they don't really have a strategy at the
moment. They are trying to come up with one but they don't really know who's in charge of that or exactly what that message will be.
So far, we've seen the president has his own message. We've been hearing that every day for the last week or so and we will continue to hear that.
But as far as what staff is in charge, how are they going to respond to different accusations, they really don't have a current plan.
So they're losing time, right, as the Democrats go ahead and do this. They don't have their own plan.
We are seeing somewhat of a plan from the Trump campaign, the reelection campaign has been very focused on fighting back, has been using this
impeachment inquiry to raise money. They've raised a lot of money in the last week. So we're seeing that on, the political front, they sort of know
how they're fighting back.
But in the White House, both on the legal and PR front, they need to sort of get that -- have a meeting and figure that out, how they're going to act
and behave as they go forward.
ANDERSON: Smart minds, incredibly smart analysis. To my panel, all of you, thank you so much.
So the bottom line today, what will the former U.S. envoy to Ukraine's testimony reveal?
And will it hasten the speed of this impeachment inquiry?
We will be on this all day.
Now U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders recovering in Las Vegas a day after receiving a procedure to treat a blocked artery. The two-time Democratic
presidential candidate is off the campaign trail until further notice.
He experienced chest discomfort on Tuesday night and asked for a chair to sit down in the middle of a campaign event. While he's not on the stump,
he is on Twitter. The 78-year old tweeted that he's feeling good and fortunate to have good health care, one of his great stump narratives.
Still to come, Britain's prime minister presents his latest Brexit plan to Parliament. What Boris Johnson is saying about reaching a deal with just
four weeks, four weeks, to go until Britain is due to leave the European Union.
And Baghdad and other cities in Iraq are now under curfew after two days of deadly protests. The death and injury toll just keeps rising. We'll take
a closer look at what is causing so much anger.
(MUSIC PLAYING)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[11:20:00]
(MUSIC PLAYING)
ANDERSON: Like it or lump it, leave the E.U. without a deal on October the 31st. That was Boris Johnson's message when he presented his latest Brexit
proposals to Parliament earlier today, saying his government has made a, quote, "genuine attempt to bridge the chasm" between the U.K. and the E.U.
on the issue of the Irish border.
And promising there will be no return to physical customs checks between Northern Ireland and the Republic. Crucially, the Northern Irish DUP, on
whom the Conservatives relied on for support in Parliament, are on board with these new plans, along with the hardest Brexiteers within his own
party.
Opposition leaders, well, they say they are unworkable. Bianca Nobilo is with me now.
What is new and different in what he calls this serious proposal for Brexit?
BIANCA NOBILO, CNN CORRESPONDENT: This is all to address the backstop. So you'll remember that the only thing that there is a majority for in the
House of Commons is the need to avoid a no-deal. We know that's been demonstrated many times over. The other one was to replace the backstop
with alternative arrangements.
That's the only other thing that's got a majority in the House of Commons. That's what he's seeking to do here. So there would be customs checks but
they would be away from the border itself between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland.
ANDERSON: Doesn't say how that's going to work.
NOBILO: Well, the transition period is intended to be the time all of that is flushed out. But you can imagine the concern that would cause
everybody, really, who's very concerned about that issue of the border.
The other would be a regulatory border, essentially down the Irish Sea. This is an area where the DUP have given ground. You rightly mention the
fact that the DUP have shifted on this, have softened their stance.
It's very significant. They've been described throughout this process as the tail that wags the dog. So they're wagging somewhat
unenthusiastically. And the Brexiteers have followed. But the problem is, even if this could get through the British Parliament with a slender
majority, is the E.U. on board?
At the moment, it's not looking like they sound particularly --
(CROSSTALK)
ANDERSON: Well, I'm going to talk to a member of the European Parliament in just a moment. I guess what we should nail at this point is that you
say that there is momentum.
You see the scope of support for these new proposals, these serious proposals, from Boris Johnson, that this would get through Parliament. It
doesn't go to -- Europe doesn't matter if he can't get this through the British Parliament.
NOBILO: And that is crucial. That's where Theresa May made the mistake. She came to an agreement with Europe but Parliament would never vote
through it. And even though Parliament budged this time when torn, it was still defeated rather resoundingly at the third attempt.
It does seem like there could be the numbers to get this through the British Parliament at the moment. The tone was markedly different and
definitely appreciated by the members that I spoke to, that Boris Johnson was not sounding like he did last week and using deliberately inflammatory
rhetoric.
ANDERSON: My way or the highway, my deal or no deal.
NOBILO: Yes, he was being more conciliatory.
Let me just ask you this. You talk to people inside the House an awful lot and you have great sources.
Are we at that point where -- certainly the British prime minister says we are -- where lawmakers are beginning to say we just need to get this done?
We just need to get this done.
[11:25:00]
ANDERSON: The British public is fed up, whichever side of the fence they stand on. They are fed up with what's going on.
NOBILO: There's definitely that feeling in Parliament, that this House of Commons, this composition can't get anything done. There isn't a majority
for anything else that Boris Johnson has tried to do.
This needs to be a cross-party effort in order to break this deadlock. The problem is and this has been referenced in the debate this morning, that if
people remain attached to their ideal outcomes, whether they're Leavers or Remainers, that's going to thwart progress.
But there's definitely a tone, an atmosphere of people thinking this is more than three years, the public are fed up. Realistically, it doesn't
help any of the parties. Labour has divisions across Remainers. Leavers, the Conservatives, are looking more and more chaotic as weeks go on. The
Liberal Democrats have come under fire for being hypocritical in ignoring the referendum result. It would be in a lot of parties' interests to just
move on.
ANDERSON: As opposed to a vote of no confidence, a general election, which everybody says is what Boris Johnson is actually angling for.
NOBILO: And the poll outcomes are unpredictable.
ANDERSON: Correct. Thank you.
So that's the scene in London. Of course, Britain needs to strike a deal with the rest of the European Union, one that is approved by all 27
remaining member states, as we have just been explaining.
For more then on the European response, let's bring in Philippe Lamberts, who's a Belgian member of the European Parliament.
So what do you make of what you have seen from Boris Johnson?
PHILIPPE LAMBERTS, BELGIAN MEMBER OF EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT. Well, I am not very optimistic, to be honest. We read carefully the proposals made by the
British prime minister yesterday and today.
And actually, it doesn't seem like a serious negotiation offer. Net sense that if you want to avoid --
(CROSSTALK)
ANDERSON: Why not?
LAMBERTS: -- the border in Ireland -- well, basically what you need is -- well, let me explain. If you want to avoid the border in Northern Ireland,
you need basically to have alignment between both customs rules and other regulatory rules on food safety and all the rest of it between Northern
Ireland and the Republic.
Now we already know from the British proposal that there will be divergence between the two areas on the customs side, which means customs controls.
Again, the British government comes up with evasive answers on what kind of controls, where will they happen, with what kind of technology and all the
rest of it.
But that means that indeed Northern Ireland and the rest of the island will be different customs zones. The second point -- and this is the area where
the prime minister wishes to be seen as conciliatory -- is when he makes -- he says that there will be regulatory alignment between Northern Ireland
and the rest of Ireland.
That is on all the rules, food safety and all the rest of it, basically the E.U. rules --
(CROSSTALK)
LAMBERTS: -- that's part of the solution. We welcome that, except that this is not an offer in the sense that this is all subject to consent by
the stalwart (ph) institutions in Northern Ireland, which, by the way, are dysfunctional as we speak.
And if you want consent, you basically need two communities to approve. That is the DUP has a veto right about regulatory alignment, which means
that we have to commit to open all borders without any guarantee whatsoever that there would be regulatory alignment. This is simply impossible.
ANDERSON: OK, all right. Much of that will be understandable, some of it won't, to those who don't study this thing on a minute-by-minute basis.
You've made some very, very good points.
Former prime minister, Theresa May, of course, sitting now in the back benches. She failed to pass her plan through Parliament multiple times.
Mr. Johnson not only needs support from the E.U. in the first instance, he needs it from Parliament. Today's new proposal was met with skepticism by
some and outright blowback from others.
But there is a sense, there is a sense that there may be scope for support because people just want to get this done. If Mr. Johnson fails to get a
deal, you could see him passing the blame to Brussels at this point. He gets this through Parliament but Brussels still says no.
And that's not going to be a good look, is it?
LAMBERTS: Well, first, there's absolutely no evidence that prime minister Johnson has a working majority. What we know is he's, at the moment, a
minority government. And there's absolutely no evidence that whatever proposals he's coming up with carry a majority in the House of Commons.
[11:30:00]
LAMBERTS: Again, it's not because he is a majority in the House of Commons that there's a majority in the European Parliament to support the same
deal. You need basically the two sides to agree.
You can, of course, agree with yourself. I was a bit skeptical when I heard a chasm has been bridged. If a chasm has been bridged, it's between
the various wings of the Tory Party and between the Tory Party and the DUP. But still, he's not a majority and let alone an agreement with the European
Union. So --
ANDERSON: Very briefly, I'm running out of time --
LAMBERTS: But if there's a majority in the U.K. --
ANDERSON: Sorry. Very, very briefly. Let me just put this to you. Boris Johnson says he would rather be dead in a ditch than extend this.
Sorry, sir. Let me ask you this. If he goes to Europe and asks for an extension, he said he'd rather be dead in a ditch than do this, will Europe
provide that extension at this point, yes or no, sir?
LAMBERTS: Yes, I think the European Union will give the extension if it is asked by the British government.
ANDERSON: Right. With that, I'm going to have to leave it there. Sir, it's been a pleasure having you on. Thank you so much for filling in some
of the gaps that continue to exist on what exactly will happen next with regard to Brexit.
We're going to take a very short break. Back after this.
(MUSIC PLAYING)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(MUSIC PLAYING)
ANDERSON: Well, last hour we heard from the U.S. president, who now says he wants both Ukraine and China to investigate former Vice President Joe
Biden and his son, Hunter. This comes as the former U.S. envoy -- special envoy to Ukraine, Kurt Volker, is testifying behind closed doors today on
Capitol Hill.
[11:35:00]
ANDERSON: CNN has learned that dozens of pages of documents were delivered on his behalf ahead of his testimony to three House committees. Now Volker
resigned just one day after he was named in the whistleblower complaint against president Donald Trump.
Well, there's still so many questions surrounding the impeachment inquiry into President Trump. Let's take a quick look at what we know at this
point.
On Wednesday, the State Department inspector general gave Congress documents provided by Donald Trump's lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, containing
unproven claims about Joe Biden and his son.
That comes as a new report says the whistleblower at the center of the investigation reached out to the House Intelligence Committee before
sending the complaint to the White House.
And there's new scrutiny surrounding vice president Mike Pence over his reported efforts to pressure Ukraine on a recent trip to Warsaw.
Meanwhile, House Democrats say they will subpoena the White House on Friday if the Trump administration doesn't comply with requests for documents
related to this Ukraine controversy.
So how are the president's allies reacting to all of this political drama?
CNN's Dana Bash finds out.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
DANA BASH, CNN SR. U.S. CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: What you mostly hear from congressional Republicans on impeachment is the sound of silence. GOP
sources tell CNN they have a good reason for that: fear.
They have no idea what else House Democrats investigating will uncover. Along with GOP fear, frustration with the president. Performances like
Wednesday in the Oval Office.
TRUMP: The whistleblower was so dishonest.
BASH (voice-over): -- and later in the East Room.
TRUMP: This is a fraudulent crime on the American people.
BASH (voice-over): His rambling, shoot-from-the-hip comments, his stream of consciousness tweets, not exactly an anti-impeachment road map for
fellow Republicans.
In fact, a source involved in Senate GOP discussions tells CNN, "He's taking it upon himself to tweet about every shiny object. That is not
helpful right now."
To be sure, lots of Trump GOP allies eagerly came out to defend the initial bombshell, the transcript summary of the president, asking Ukraine's leader
to do him a favor and investigate his political opponent, Joe Biden.
SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM (R-SC): It was a nothing burger for me, the phone call with the president and the Ukrainian President.
BASH (voice-over): But GOP spin on behalf of Trump is not aging well, especially confronted with facts about the call.
SCOTT PELLEY, CBS NEWS HOST: President Trump replies, I would like you to do us a favor, though.
REP. KEVIN MCCARTHY (R), MINORITY LEADER: You just added another word.
PELLEY: No, it's in the transcript.
MCCARTHY: He said, "I would like you to do us a favor though?"
PELLEY: Yes, it's in the transcript.
BASH (voice-over): -- and about the whistleblower.
REP. JIM JORDAN (R-OH): You had a bureaucrat who didn't like the president --
JAKE TAPPER, CNN HOST: Wait, wait, wait. What are you talking about?
JORDAN: We know he didn't like the president.
TAPPER: No, we don't know that.
BASH (voice-over): Baseless attacks like that on the whistleblower.
TRUMP: We have a whistleblower that reports things that were incorrect.
BASH (voice-over): -- plus repeated, brazen threats from the president did compel Iowa Republican Chuck Grassley, a long-time champion of
whistleblowers, to release a statement, warning, "No one should be making judgments or pronouncements without hearing from the whistleblower first
and carefully following up on the facts."
Also noteworthy, Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell, who rarely grants interviews. This week, he did, declaring, if the House impeaches the
president, the Senate will have no choice but to start a trial.
SEN. MITCH MCCONNELL (R-KY), SENATE MAJORITY LEADER: Under the Senate rules, we're required to take it up if the House does go down that path.
And we'll follow the Senate rules.
BASH (voice-over): Senate GOP sources say they're bracing for more shoes to drop, a politically dicey waiting game for more than a handful of Senate
Republicans on the ballot and potentially vulnerable in 2020, Cory Gardner in Colorado to Martha McSally in Arizona to Joni Ernst in Iowa, Susan
Collins in Maine, to Thom Tillis in North Carolina.
It's not just their own political future at stake but control of the Senate, which Republicans could lose with three or four seats, something
McConnell is well aware of.
MCCONNELL: What I want to do is spend our time accomplishing things for the American people.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
ANDERSON: CNN's Dana Bash reporting there.
Well, my next guest knows all the ins and outs of the relations between the United States and Ukraine. Steven Pifer was the U.S. ambassador to Ukraine
during the Clinton administration. He joins us now via Skype from California.
I just want to get a sense from you of what Kurt Volker's role would have been and what he would have been doing on behalf of the U.S. State
Department, sir.
STEVEN PIFER, FORMER U.S. AMBASSADOR TO UKRAINE: Yes, well, Ambassador Volker was asked back in 2017 to become a special envoy.
[11:40:00]
PIFER: With his first focus being to try to work with a Russian counterpart by the name of Vladislav Surkov to see if the U.S.-Russia
dialogue could support the dialogue being conducted by the German and French leaders to try to end the fighting and bring peace to Donbas in
Eastern Ukraine.
Now part of the problem is the Russians have really cut that channel off over the last year to year and a half. But Ambassador Volker has been
working to maintain international support for Ukraine, to continue to assure that Ukraine remains in the attention of Europe and other countries.
ANDERSON: CNN contributor and "Washington Post" columnist Josh Rogin writes, and I quote, "Add Ambassador Kurt Volker to the long list of GOP
foreign policy professionals who answered the call to serve and went to work for President Trump, only to be tainted by Trump's alleged corruption
and then thrown under the bus by the Trump team.
"But he's not the same as Rudy Giuliani, Trump's personal lawyer. Volker was actually trying to serve our country."
As you hear me read out those words, what are your thoughts?
PIFER: Well, I have a lot of sympathy for the position that Ambassador Volker found himself in. Also, Ambassador Yovanovitch, who, until May, was
our ambassador on the ground in Kiev because they're conducting the country's business.
The United States has said it's in its interest that Ukraine develop as a stable, secure country and part of that is ending the conflict that Russia
has inflicted on Ukraine.
But then you have Rudy Giuliani, the president's lawyer, conducting his own foreign policy, which is not focused on the nation's business. It's
focused on digging up discredited scandals and doing other things that would be in the interest of President Trump's re-election prospects. And
those two agendas are very, very different.
(CROSSTALK)
ANDERSON: Yes, which Donald Trump has just supported. He just said on the lawn as he left to go to Florida that he wants to see China and Ukraine
digging the dirt on the Bidens. He wants their support. He's not stepping back on this at all.
I just want to bring up secretary of state Mike Pompeo in here as well because he has been quoted as saying -- and this was just in the last
couple days in Italy -- that Ukraine policy is and continues to be perfectly consistent.
PIFER: Well, I think the policy that his diplomats are conducting is consistent. But I don't see any consistency between what American
diplomats are doing and what Rudy Giuliani is doing.
This is confusing, I think, to the Ukrainians, because, on the one hand, they're getting different messages. It's hard to ignore Rudy Giuliani,
given that he's such a close associate of President Trump.
But what he's suggesting to Ukraine, I fear, puts Ukraine at risk; that is, in the last 28 years, Ukraine has had strong bipartisan support in
Congress, Republicans and Democrats alike.
But the concern is, if Ukraine becomes a political football in American domestic politics, that support could be disrupted. So Ukraine has to be
very careful here.
ANDERSON: I wonder if you can remember any similar characters to that of Rudy Giuliani being introduced into the mix when you were, for example,
working in a similar position as Kurt Volker is in the Ukraine. Well, you were the ambassador, of course.
Did you come across individuals who were there at the personal behest of the U.S. president?
Just how unusual is this, is what I'm trying to get at.
PIFER: Yes, happily, I did not. And there's a history. Presidents from time to time will call on people. For example, President Clinton asked
former governor Bill Richardson to be a special envoy to North Korea. But I would argue, you know, that was very much in the U.S. government's
interest.
But it's hard for me to see what Mr. Giuliani is trying to do with Ukraine that advances U.S. interests. And it's the same thing about the July 25
telephone conversation.
From the memorandum on the conversation we saw, I can't see any business on the part of America that the president was doing in that call. It was all
about CrowdStrike and his ongoing fight with Hillary Clinton or trying to, you know, dig up some derogatory information on this question about the
Bidens, this charge that the vice president was working to protect his son.
[11:45:00]
PIFER: It's long been discredited. So there's this inconsistency. And I think it makes it more difficult for American diplomats to work on American
interests when you have someone like Mr. Giuliani playing on the sidelines.
ANDERSON: Your insight is fascinating, sir. It's a pleasure having you on. Thank you very much indeed for joining us.
Folks, you're watching CONNECT THE WORLD, live today in this hour from London. We normally come to you out of our programming hub in the Middle
East in Abu Dhabi. Across that region, we are watching a series of violent uprisings from Iraq to Lebanon and beyond.
What is causing all of this unrest?
That after this.
(MUSIC PLAYING)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(MUSIC PLAYING)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE (through translator): Despite the curfew, we're going out to protest, to call for our rights. We want to change the regime.
They have arrested our people. They have done things to our people they did not even do to daish.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ANDERSON: You can hear that anger there from an Iraqi man in Baghdad after days of deadly protests, going so far as to compare the government's
response to the protesters to ISIS. The death toll has risen to 22 with more than 1,400 people injured.
As you heard, curfews now in place in Baghdad and in other cities. Iranian media reporting a border crossing as being closed at the request of the
Iraqi government.
Well, a monitoring group says the government has shut down 75 percent of the country's Internet service. Protesters have been marching against
unemployment and government corruption.
Let's bring in CNN's Ben Wedeman, who has spent many months in Baghdad and across Iraq, tonight coming to us out of Beirut.
Why now?
Why are we seeing what we are seeing in Iraq now, Ben?
BEN WEDEMAN, CNN SR. INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, Becky, over the last few years, we've seen sporadic uprisings, so to speak, in Baghdad and
other Iraqi cities against the government on questions of not -- it's not democracy that they're really focusing on. These are real bread and butter
issues -- jobs, corruption.
They want power. The electricity in Baghdad and in other Iraqi cities is regularly cut. They want potable drinking water. Youth unemployment in
Iraq is about 40 percent. They're demanding basic improvements to their lives.
And this in a country that is floating on oil. This in a country that has the Tigris and Euphrates running through it, that should be an agricultural
powerhouse but imports much of its food.
[11:50:00]
WEDEMAN: So they would like to see this country really realizing its potential. Iraq, at the moment, is not a dictatorship; it's a very
imperfect democracy, where there's freedom of speech.
But you can say what you want, nothing seems to change election after election. So it's a very fundamental cry for human dignity and hope in a
country that should otherwise have both -- Becky.
ANDERSON: Ben, this is not unfamiliar. We've been witnessing uprisings across the Middle East or similar disturbances, similar protests, similar
demonstrations on the streets, all too familiar, emerging in Egypt and Lebanon, where you are, next door in Jordan and, of course, we've just been
discussing Iraq.
Is it the same story behind this regional unrest?
Are they at all related?
WEDEMAN: Basically, this is sort of a reckoning. You have contracting economies in, for instance, Jordan and Lebanon. Egypt, actually, its
economy is growing at 5.6 percent last year.
But the fruits of that statistic in Egypt are simply not being felt by ordinary people, where the number of people living below the poverty line
since 2015 in Egypt, for instance, has gone from 28 percent in 2015 to 33 percent today.
So you have economies that are sort of crippled by corruption, where ordinary people just are seeing their standards of living drop.
So in Jordan, in Lebanon, for instance last Sunday just outside here, there were demonstrations, where people were burning tires on the street. They
weren't violent demonstrations but they were emotional demonstrations.
I think, across the Middle East, you're seeing people saying, enough is enough with governments mired in corruption, promising the world and
delivering almost nothing. People want to see their lives improve and they are not improving at the moment.
It used to be that the governments could point to the struggle against Israel, the fight against terrorism and say, hold your demands until we
deal with these issues.
Well, terrorism; they defeated ISIS. The Arab-Israeli conflict has sort of fallen by the wayside, as Arab governments have basically given up on that
fight. The real demand of people, improve our lives, is not being heard. Now they're demanding to be heard -- Becky.
ANDERSON: Fascinating. Ben, thank you. Ben Wedeman is in Beirut for you this evening, spent years, years covering the Middle East.
You're watching CONNECT THE WORLD live from London. And touchdown: the UAE's first space mission has ended and gone off without a hitch. Live
updates on the astronauts' landing view, up next.
(MUSIC PLAYING)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[11:55:00]
(MUSIC PLAYING)
ANDERSON: It's five to 5:00 here in London. Welcome back to those viewers and welcome home to those who will be watching this one man and welcome
home to him, the UAE's first astronaut, Hazzaa al-Mansoori, making a safe landing today in Kazakhstan after spending eight days floating around the
Earth aboard the International Space Station.
Getting back, he remarked, quote, "I'm returning with Zayed's ambition achieved. We're not done yet and we will never be, to bring back the
golden era of Arab astronauts."
Who knows where his next stop might be. UAE is far from done. It plans to launch a probe to Mars next year.
Well, he lands back into a very different world from that which he left, with Donald Trump not missing a beat on defending himself against that
impeachment inquiry, which itself is going full steam ahead. More on that coming up on CNN.
I'm Becky Anderson. That was CONNECT THE WORLD. Thank you for watching. We work the Middle Eastern week, so see you on Sunday.
[12:00:00]
END
