Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Live Event/Special

First Public Impeachment Hearing Begins; Ambassador Bill Taylor and State Department Official George Kent Arrive for Impeachment Hearing. Aired 9-9:30a ET

Aired November 13, 2019 - 09:00   ET

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

[09:00:31]

WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: Good morning. I'm Wolf Blitzer in Washington. We want to welcome our viewers here in the United States and around the world.

In the next hour, history will unfold up on Capitol Hill as open impeachment hearings begin in the House of Representatives. And President Donald Trump becomes only the fourth U.S. president in American history to face impeachment.

The testimony of today's two witnesses could be the most crucial for Democrats. Did the president and his allies pressure a foreign country to investigate a political rival? Did they try to withhold U.S. military aid to that country in the middle of a war until that investigation was announced publicly?

If Democrats don't make their case today right out of the gate, it will only get more challenging in the coming days and weeks. As for Republicans, they hope to poke holes in the testimony shifting their strategy from criticizing the process to undercutting the substance of the Democratic narrative.

We're covering all the angles on this historic day as these hearings are set to begin. Let's go to our senior congressional correspondent Manu Raju. He's live up on Capitol Hill.

Manu, let's talk a little bit about what we can expect the format. It's going to be very significant.

MANU RAJU, CNN SENIOR CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: No question about it. Both sides recognize the significance of this moment believing that this could set the stage for how the public understands what the president did and whether his conduct is impeachable or not.

Yesterday behind the scenes, Democrats and Republicans strategized for several hours apiece trying to figure out their best lines of questioning. For Democrats they want both George Kent and Bill Taylor, the two witnesses today, to detail the full timeline of events. What they witnessed and the concerns that they raised about the president enlisting his personal attorney Rudy Giuliani to carry out Ukraine policy, essentially urge the Ukrainian government to open up investigations into the president's political rivals. Expect Bill Taylor to make clear what he said behind closed doors,

that he believed he was told that the Ukrainian aid, roughly $400 million, provided to Ukraine to combat Russian aggression, that that was tied to the Ukraine publicly announcing those investigations. Also George Kent making clear that he also believed that a visit at the White House with the new president of Ukraine, Zelensky, was contingent on that public announcement of investigations.

Now Republicans will push back and make the case this way, saying that they -- these two witnesses had no direct knowledge about exactly what the president was doing. What he was thinking. That's going to be a consistent theme throughout as they try to undercut the credibility of this testimony.

But right from the start, Wolf, expect Adam Schiff, the House Intelligence Committee chairman, to make it clear, lay out the scope of this investigation, make clear what he believes is the president's misconduct, and detail why it was critical for Ukraine to get this aid to combat Russian aggression.

So the tone will be set from the top as we get set for two weeks of intense public hearings that could set the stage for this president to be just the third in American history to be impeached -- Wolf.

BLITZER: And Manu, tell our viewers why this hearing is about to begin will look different than previous congressional hearings where you have the five-minute rule. Today it's totally different.

RAJU: Totally different because Democrats want to get into the substance of the allegations right from the top. Typically, as you said, Wolf, member after member get five minutes apiece to ask questions, oftentimes members devolve into speech making, and don't ask those pointed questions. Well, that's going to be different in this round because there are two staff attorneys from the Democratic side first and the Republican side who will begin that round of questioning.

That's Dan Goldman on the Democratic side, who's the chief counsel in charge of the investigations on Democratic side who will be asking the questions for 45 minutes. That Adam Schiff will work in questions with Dan Goldman to ask those questions. Then it will be kicked over to the Republican side, and that's Steve Castor, who's the attorney for Jim Jordan, the top Republican on the House Oversight Committee.

Castor will be asking those questions for about a 45-minute round. Then we will get into the five-minute rounds of questioning from member, from member to ask those questions. So expect this to be a lot different to how we've seen impeachment hearings in the past because Democrats hope that they'll be able to draw out this narrative for 45-minute question and answer session. Allow these witnesses to get into real detail about what they witnessed and what they saw and Republicans hope that their 45-minute round will allow them to push back -- Wolf.

BLITZER: Yes. It's going to be very, very significant.

Manu, we're going to get back to you, especially as the witnesses arrive and members arrive as well.

[09:05:01]

Gloria, this process, Daniel Goldman, the House Intelligence Committee's director of investigations, former U.S. assistant attorney, he's going to be focusing in on these two witnesses, getting them to say in effect what they've already said in closed-door sworn depositions that yes, there was this so-called quid pro quo, that the president of the United States was using his political advantage to get dirt on potential political -- a potential political rival.

GLORIA BORGER, CNN CHIEF POLITICAL ANALYST: And I think the first thing he's going to do before that is have them talk about who they are and how unimpeachable they are as witnesses. Their credibility, their years of public service. You know, I think George Kent has been in public service, his family has been in public service for decades. And I think he's going to try and show that these are people without political motive. But actually, people who are devoted to the country and to the State Department.

And then have them in tandem in a way describe what they saw and how U.S. foreign policy had run amok and how money that had actually been appropriated -- this is important -- appropriated by the United States Congress was being held up for brazen political purposes by the president of the United States and how Rudy Giuliani was effectively running foreign policy as opposed to Mike Pompeo.

DAVID GREGORY, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: Wolf, you know the public nature of this is what Democrats understand is so important. What have Americans heard about the deep state, about allegations of a coup from the president and his supporters? Instead we're going to find dedicated public servants who are in the diplomatic corps who have served Republicans and Democrats. These are not partisan people.

And of course, some of the people who are very uncomfortable were in fact political appointees by this president. I think that's going to be quite impactful. The larger question, the larger context about whether it's impeachable will, obviously, be debated. But I think to Gloria's point, who we're seeing for the first time is going to give a face to the notion of faceless bureaucrats and whistleblowers going after the president. And I think Democrats understand they need to chip away at that right away.

BLITZER: But it's a problem potentially, Nia, for the Republican counsel Steve Castor. He's the House Oversight Committee GOP counsel but he has been detailed over to the Intelligence Committee to handle the questioning in all of this. You have these two experienced diplomats, Ambassador bill Taylor, Deputy Assistant Secretary George Kent, and I assume he's going to try to undermine their credibility which could be problematic.

NIA-MALIKA HENDERSON, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: It is problematic because of who they are and because of their records, because of their records in public service. Bill Taylor, West Point grad, served in Vietnam for instance. They'll probably try to do that. I think probably more effective line of questioning will try to get at the fact that they never talked to the president, right? That this is essentially hearsay.

And it's also their interpretation of what they thought was going on, right? They don't have any sort of firsthand knowledge that this was the president's directive. So I think that is the line of questioning they'll get at. And it's a fruitful line of questioning. You know, it's I think a powerful argument. They can insulate the president from some of their claims and say essentially, you know, these were people who weren't really in on what the president's thinking was. This is just their interpretation.

Something else I think that's kind of intangible when we look at this is how they appear on TV, right? I mean, this very much is a show, right? And they, obviously, have impeccable resumes. But do they appear credible on air? Do people believe what they say? Do they seem steady under pressure? That will be something else, I think, people are going to be watching for and sort of intangible.

We don't know how these people appear on air. We've seen their statement so far and we'll see how they appear and how people interpret their credibility.

BLITZER: We'll see how they deal with what could be some cross- examination by the Republican counsel. That's coming up.

Senior White House correspondent Pamela Brown is getting new information over at the White House right now. The president, he's been pretty busy tweeting already.

PAMELA BROWN, SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: He has been very busy tweeting already. He is gearing up to watch the morning portion of these hearings before his meetings begin with Turkish president Erdogan. In these tweets this morning, he is going after the Democrats involved in this and even the witnesses, Wolf, calling them never Trumpers.

Now these two witnesses we should note are still in this administration. They're career diplomats. They've worked for administrations on both sides of the aisle. But the president's tweets give you a glimpse of the White House strategy today. Focusing on these witnesses. They are going to be quick to point out that they were not on the call in July with President Zelensky of Ukraine. That they never spoke to the president directly about Ukraine.

So part of the strategy here is to really undermine the witnesses' credibility. As one official I spoke to here at the White House said, they are expecting these witnesses to say things about this president, about the White House, the Ukraine policy that are not flattering, but they do not believe it will be a clean shot for the Democrats because of the distance from President Trump.

[09:10:06]

But there is going to be a rapid response approach here at the White House today with legislative affairs, the White House Counsel's Office, the communications teams all working together monitoring the developments in real time, sending out notes to surrogates and talking points, and this is a very busy monumental day here at the White House, Wolf, because not only do you have these public hearings, the first set of public hearings in the impeachment probe but you also have the meeting with the Turkish President Erdogan a month after the president pulled U.S. troops out of Syria paving the way for the Turkish invasion there and really causing this backlash from Congress.

And so that is also going to be a big focus here today. Now there will be a joint press conference at 3:10 p.m. Eastern Time where we could hear from the president for the first time on his thoughts on what is transpiring today -- Wolf.

BLITZER: All right. Stand by, Pamela.

I want to bring in Kylie Atwood. She's been doing some reporting on today's two lead-off witnesses. Both seasoned career diplomats.

Kylie, why is their testimony so crucial?

KYLIE ATWOOD, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: Yes. Well, Wolf, we have heard from Democratic aides that the expectation is that these are the two witnesses who were witness to the full scope, the full story line of what President Trump was doing here. And now let's look at who they are. So we first have Bill Taylor.

He is the top U.S. diplomat in Ukraine. And he told lawmakers behind closed doors that it was his understanding that the Ukrainian asks to the U.S. were explicitly tied to the Ukrainian President Zelensky announcing investigations into President Trump's political rivals. So that there was some sort of connection there that he was made aware of. That he was alarmed that the U.S. security assistance to Ukraine had been put on hold during that time.

Now Bill Taylor is a decorated, very widely respected diplomat. He has served -- he actually had to be pulled out of retirement to take this job. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo encouraged him to take the job even though he was wary of taking it because Ambassador Yovanovitch had been pulled out of the job abruptly because she lost confidence from President Trump. And he's also a West Point graduate and he is a Vietnam War veteran.

Now the other person who is going to be seated next to him in today's hearing is George Kent. And George Kent is a top State Department official. And he worked with Bill Taylor over the past few months on Ukraine policy. He will be able to corroborate a lot of what Bill Taylor said. And behind closed doors, he told lawmakers that he was told by other U.S. officials that President Trump specifically wanted President Zelensky to go to the mics, announce investigations and to say the names in that announcement of his political rivals, Biden and Clinton.

And it's important to note, however, that George Kent has worked on Ukraine policy for multiple administrations. He was in the Obama administration. He was at the U.S. embassy in Kiev from 2015 to 2018. And during that time, he did raise concerns about Hunter Biden and his business interest because he was on the board of a Ukrainian business while the vice president, Joe Biden, was in office. So that will be an interesting part to watch as well. But George

Kent, another widely respected top diplomat at the State Department who has worked on policy for years with regard to Ukraine and will be able to speak about how that has changed during the Trump administration -- Wolf.

BLITZER: All very, very significant. Kylie Atwood, stand by. We're going to get back to you as well.

I want to get back to our analysts.

Carrie Cordero, you're a legal and national security analyst. I assume Adam Schiff, the chairman of the Intelligence Committee, the Democrats, they picked these two diplomats as their lead-off witnesses because they assumed they were the most effective, most credible in making the Democrats' point.

CARRIE CORDERO, CNN LEGAL AND NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: I think they have a number of credible witnesses. These being two of that group. So I think, really, many of the witnesses we're going to hear from over the course of the next two weeks all have experience and all are credible.

Bill Taylor, I think, is a critical witness, though. And he's someone whose testimony I was most interested to read his transcript from his --

BLITZER: By the way, you see Ambassador Taylor walking in right now. The top U.S. diplomat in Ukraine. An experienced American diplomat going back decades.

CORDERO: He is. And I think what we're going to see is that he is going to be incredibly well spoken, well prepared. As a diplomat, he is someone who is a communicator. He is someone who is going to know how to communicate this to the public and the fact pattern here is actually not that complicated.

BLITZER: He's going through security right now as he's entering the building. But go ahead.

CORDERO: The fact pattern that he's going to be describing and that George Kent are going to be describing is not actually that complicated of a fact pattern.

[09:15:00]

It's whether or not a White House meeting and defense assistance were held out in exchange for the Ukrainians conducting investigations into a conspiracy theory regarding the 2016 election and the Bidens. That's it.

It's not actually an overly-complicated fact pattern, and Bill Taylor really was witness to all of the behind-the-scenes conversations and interactions that were going on within the White House and the State Department. WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: Because you hear the president, Ross

Garber, you know, you're an expert on impeachment. But you hear some of the president's supporters suggest these career American diplomats are never Trumpers, that they're deep state. I don't know if the Republicans are actually going to go that route in the course of their questioning today. But that's what the point that they're trying to make in undermining their credibility.

ROSS GARBER, TEACHES IMPEACHMENT LAW AT TULANE LAW SCHOOL: Yes, and that's going to be very interesting to see. I mean, the president has been tweeting out, even this morning, about sort of the never Trumper angle. I'd be surprised if the Republicans on the committee and in particular the Republican lawyer for the committee goes down sort of that never Trumper angle.

One, because I think it would be hard to do, two, because I think it's probably not their most effective point to make. I think what the Republicans are going to try to do is show that, yes, these witnesses had information, as Carrie pointed out, but they didn't have it from the Republican -- from the president.

And so they didn't know what was in the president's head, and what was key here, I think what we're going to come down to is the president's motivation. And I think where we wind up from the Republicans in the White House is the notion that these witnesses don't get us very far on that.

BLITZER: Well, we'll see what happens because it's going to be dramatic. Suzanne Malveaux is up on Capitol Hill, Suzanne, you're watching the witnesses come in to the Capitol. You're watching the members come in. Set the scene for us where you are.

SUZANNE MALVEAUX, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Sure, Wolf. Well, I just threw a question to Bill Taylor just moments ago, we just saw him pass us by behind and walk into the building here. I asked him if he felt that this was a legitimate exercise in light of the fact so many Republicans say it is illegitimate, he did not respond.

Also asked him as well what does he hope to accomplish? And that really, Wolf, is going to be the key challenge here, is for these hearings to unfold, and Adam Schiff, the chair of the Intelligence Committee acknowledging for Americans themselves to see this process play out before their own eyes and make that determination.

Whether or not these are credible witnesses and the stories that they are telling sound and ring true to them. A number of Republicans, as you know, Wolf, are not going to be here, they're not going to be paying attention to this. We've heard from Senator Lindsey Graham over and over.

Senator John Cornyn and Ted Cruz and others, saying that it's a flawed process, a partisan process, even a circus. There are other more moderate Republicans, however, Senators Joni Ernst and Susan Collins, Rob Portman saying they're not going to experience this the way most Americans or at least some Americans experience it from gavel to gavel or the way we're going to experience it. They are busy. They say they have work to do. But they will send their

representatives or they'll take a look at perhaps a recorded version of it or an excerpt at some point at a later date to make their determinations. And finally, Wolf, you have senators like John Kennedy, Republican from Louisiana, again saying he'll pay attention, but he thinks it's all baked. That it's already cooked and done.

That it is a partisan exercise. Democrats I spoke to say, well, the truth hurts, get over it and you should watch. Wolf?

BLITZER: We will all be watching these hearings, Suzanne, I'll get back to you as well. Ambassador Bill Taylor has arrived, waiting for deputy assistant Secretary of State George Kent to arrive as well. The historic day here in Washington, in the nation's capital. We're watching lawmakers and witnesses arrive on Capitol Hill.

I'll speak live with the chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, that's coming up next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:20:00]

BLITZER: All right, you're looking at live pictures. George Kent; the deputy assistant Secretary of State who oversees Ukrainian policy, there he is just arriving up on Capitol Hill. He'll join Ambassador Bill Taylor, the top U.S. diplomat in Ukraine for this televised hearing that is about -- that's getting ready to begin about a half an hour or so from now.

Suzanne Malveaux, you're there up on Capitol Hill, going through security up on Capitol Hill, it's -- everyone has to go through security.

MALVEAUX: That's right, and you'll see a couple of protesters behind us as well. But I just got that question to George Kent whether or not he felt it was a legitimate process, and he did not respond, but, you know, the big question is how do you get these key witnesses to testify, to testify publicly and behind closed doors.

We are learning that they were both subpoenaed earlier today to get them here at this public hearing. There have been numerous methods and strategies that some of these witnesses have used. Some have defied the White House order to show up and have done so, others have taken their cases to court.

But what is very clear is that the Democrats using various ways and methods to get them here, they have managed to get their key witnesses. And for the others who have not shown up, the acting Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney, for instance, as well as the former National Security adviser John Bolton.

[09:25:00]

They say they no longer need their testimony. They feel very confident that they've got an ironclad case with the witnesses that they have coming forward now, Wolf.

BLITZER: All right, Suzanne, stand by, we're going to get back to you. Right now, I'm pleased that we're joined by the Chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, New York Democratic Congressman Eliot Engel. Mr. Chairman, thanks so much for joining us. Just explain, why were these two witnesses that are about to appear before the committee, why did they have to be subpoenaed?

REP. ELIOT ENGEL (D-NY): Well, I think they had to be subpoenaed because we want to make sure that everything is done on the up and up. These people had no wish or desire one way or another to testify except to tell the truth, and as many of your guests have said, they're career diplomats and they have an impeccable records.

And they are people that you can really trust and believe. I know the Republicans are making a big deal out of it, but, frankly, they would make a big deal out of anybody who came to testify. I think when you talk about Mr. Taylor and Mr. Kent, they are consummate professionals and well thought of by everyone.

And so I think we're going to listen to their testimony. I of course, was at the private sessions and heard it, and I think that American people can make up their minds for themselves. But these are very credible witnesses, and the Republican attempts to malign them are really not -- are very unfair.

BLITZER: Yesterday, the Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee Adam Schiff, who is going to be chairing this committee hearing, he suggested that the possibility that the president was engaged in bribery, treason, high crimes and misdemeanors. And he didn't use the word treason, he did use the word bribery, high crimes and misdemeanors.

Do you see evidence that the president of the United States may have been engaged in bribery, high crimes and misdemeanors? Those are the crimes that the U.S. constitution sets forward for possible impeachment.

ENGEL: Well, I think you can certainly make the case. You can argue over semantics, but I think it's pretty easy by now to know that the president essentially used American foreign aid money to try to bribe Ukraine and doing things that really should not be done. The Congress, as has been said many times, appropriates this money.

The president is then not allowed to keep it, to use it for his own political purposes. And you would have thought that after the 2016 elections when Trump was accused of being close to Putin and close to Russia, that the Trump administration would stay away from these people.

Instead, they went and did the same exact thing, trying to involve a foreign nation in our elections. I don't want a foreign nation, any foreign nation involved in our American elections. But apparently the president and his people have learned nothing from it.

So, it's quite obvious that money was withheld, foreign aid much needed by Ukraine, our ally by the way against Russia, it was much needed and it was held until the Ukrainians decided to go ahead and help the president with his political campaigns to try to get smears on Joe Biden and his son.

It's clear, I think, all the witnesses who were knowledgeable about it, it's not really in dispute, and the question is, should the president be doing that with money that was appropriated by the Congress for foreign nation, and I think anybody looking at it fairly will say, no, it was absolutely wrong to do.

Mr. Taylor and Mr. Kent are not going to sully their reputation by coming before Congress and not telling the truth or by coming before Congress and trying to twist things. They will tell the truth.

BLITZER: Yes --

ENGEL: That's in it for them. And Republicans can't --

BLITZER: They will be -- yes, I was going to say --

ENGEL: Yes --

BLITZER: They will be sworn in, if they lie, now that's potential perjury. One point the --

ENGEL: Yes.

BLITZER: Republicans will make, Mr. Chairman, and I expect we'll be hearing a lot about it that neither of these two diplomats or Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch who will testify on Friday, she was fired by the president, removed from the embassy in Kiev, that none of them actually had direct conversations with the president.

They didn't hear anything specific, any specific orders to do, you know, anything inappropriate directly from the president. How effective of an argument will that be?

ENGEL: Well, I don't think it's effective at all because we know that the money was withheld. You know, the nonsense about being concerned about corruption in Ukraine or whatever, this wasn't concern about corruption in Ukraine. This was the president -- you know, do us a favor, though, however he said it there.

He clearly wanted a favor, a political favor from Ukraine in exchange for a meeting with the president of the United States in the Oval Office and in exchange for other things as well.

END