Return to Transcripts main page

The Situation Room

Interview With Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-CA); Week Two Of Impeachment Hearings Set To Begin; Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) Says, Facts Uncontested That Trump Abused His Power For Personal, Political Benefit; Trump Attacks Another Witness As His Impeachment Defense Faces New Tests; Feds Seeking New Interviews In Giuliani Probe; Trump's Unannounced Hospital Visit Raising Questions. Aired 6-7p ET

Aired November 18, 2019 - 18:00   ET

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

[18:00:06]

WOLF BLITZER, CNN HOST: Happening now, breaking news: uncontested abuse.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi suggests impeachment investigators already have proven wrongdoing by the president, as another key witness was just scheduled to testify publicly, a busy three days of hearings and potential bombshells about to begin.

Lying to Mueller? Democrats are looking into possible perjury by the president during the special counsel's investigation. A top House lawyer revealing that's a key part of the current impeachment probe.

Trump ally to testify. The E.U. ambassador who boasted about his access to the president will be in the impeachment hot seat this week, confronted with contradictions to his closed-door testimony. Will Gordon Sondland try to protect Mr. Trump or himself?

And Rudy's legal peril. The president's personal lawyer and his Ukraine connections under scrutiny tonight on multiple fronts. We're learning about a new focus in the criminal investigation of Rudy Giuliani.

We want to welcome our viewers in the United States and around the world. I'm Wolf Blitzer. You're in THE SITUATION ROOM.

ANNOUNCER: This is CNN breaking news.

BLITZER: Breaking news: Democrats just added a ninth witness to a jam-packed schedule for televised impeachment hearings during a critical second day of testimony that begins in a matter of hours.

An aide who overheard a phone call in which the E.U. ambassador told Mr. Trump that "Ukraine will do anything you ask" will testify Thursday. Also tonight, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi says the facts are uncontested that Mr. Trump abused his power for his own personal political benefit.

This as Democrats may be looking to broaden potential articles of impeachment by investigating whether President Trump lied to the special counsel, Robert Mueller, a top House lawyer revealing that question is now a key part of the impeachment inquiry.

I will get reaction from Congressman Eric Swalwell, a Democrat on both the Intelligence and Judiciary committees. And our correspondents and analysts are also standing by.

First, let's go to our congressional correspondent, Phil Mattingly.

Phil, the State Department aide who overheard that conversation between President Trump and the U.S. ambassador to the E.U. will now be testifying in public this week. How problematic is that for the president's defense?

PHIL MATTINGLY, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, Wolf, David Holmes, U.S. political counselor at the U.S. Embassy in Ukraine, was behind closed doors for six hours on Friday testifying.

An explosive and often explicit opening statement that CNN obtained, that will now become public, testifying on Thursday, linking President Trump directly to the idea of investigations into Ukraine in exchange for something, overhearing that phone call between U.S. Ambassador to the E.U. Gordon Sondland and the president at an outdoor tavern, but also going in-depth throughout the course of his 10-page opening statement about the hold on U.S. security assistance, about the overall U.S. policy to Ukraine, and his knowledge of the shadow effort run by individuals like the president's personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani.

Now, his testimony is now scheduled for Thursday. That will be the final day of a three-day marathon, nine witnesses over the course of

three days. One witness everybody is keeping a very close eye on, Gordon Sondland himself. He will testify by himself on Wednesday morning, based on his initial deposition, his amendment to that deposition and a series of depositions from other witnesses that have come out since that deposition that call into question certain contradictions, whether or not he remembered everything, whether or not his memory was actually truthful.

That is a witness that both Republicans and Democrats are keen on seeing. But, Wolf, whether it's Holmes, whether it's Sondland, whether it's any of the other individuals, there's no question about it. This is as big as it gets for the public hearings coming up in the impeachment inquiry -- Wolf.

BLITZER: As the investigation is clearly still unfolding, Phil, the House speaker, Nancy Pelosi, is now telling Democrats that the president of the United States clearly abused his power.

What's the latest on that front?

MATTINGLY: Yes, Wolf, that's right.

The speaker of the House not mincing any words, saying in a letter to her Democratic colleagues today -- quote -- "The facts are not -- are uncontested, that the president abused his power for his own personal and political benefit, at the expense of our national security interests." Wolf, while the speaker has been very careful to say that there's no guarantee that they're going to vote on articles of impeachment, or that they will even draft them, she says things like this underscoring what you're hearing from a lot of Democrats.

They believe, based on the closed-door testimony alone, they have enough evidence to move forward. She's saying this publicly. It's very clear there will be at least one more week of public hearings. But this process is moving forward. It will end up in the Judiciary Committee and more likely than not, Wolf, there will be a House vote to impeach President Trump -- Wolf.

BLITZER: Phil Mattingly reporting from Capitol Hill, thank you.

Now to the president's impeachment defense. He claims he's thinking about testifying in writing, even as he keeps attacking the investigation and the witnesses.

Let's go to our Chief White House Correspondent, Jim Acosta.

Jim, is there any evidence the president actually is reconsidering his strategy of stonewalling?

[18:05:03]

JIM ACOSTA, CNN CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: It doesn't sound like it, Wolf.

President Trump is floating the idea, however, that he will somehow cooperate in the impeachment inquiry, saying he is considering the idea of providing written testimony.

But Democratic aides at this point say they are not taking this very seriously. But the president is also back to attacking witnesses in the inquiry. This official working under Vice President Mike Pence is coming under attack by the president.

It is a tactic that we have already seen anger some in the president's own party.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

ACOSTA (voice-over): Tossing out a shiny new bright object, President Trump is dangling the possibility he might provide written testimony in the impeachment inquiry, tweeting: "Even though I did nothing wrong, I like the idea and will, in order to get Congress focused again, strongly consider it."

That was in reaction to what appeared to be an offer from House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

REP. NANCY PELOSI (D-CA): if he wants to take the oath of office. Or he could do it in writing. He has every opportunity to present his case.

ACOSTA: But here's the problem. The president has dangled this possibility before during the Russia investigation.

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I would love to speak. I would love to go, nothing I want to do more, because we did nothing wrong.

ACOSTA: After months of haggling, the president ended up submitting answers to questions in writing. And as special counsel Robert Mueller stated in his report, "Mr. Trump stated on more than 30 occasions that he does not recall or remember or have an independent recollection of information called for by the questions."

Add to that attorneys for the House of Representatives now say they are investigating whether the president lied to Mueller about not remembering aspects of the Russia probe.

REP. JAMIE RASKIN (D-MD): It's a crime to lie to federal prosecutors in the course of a federal proceeding. That's perjury.

ACOSTA: The president is also back to attacking witnesses in the inquiry, taking aim at Jennifer Williams, an aide to Vice President Mike Pence, who told lawmakers Mr. Trump's phone call with the leader of Ukraine was inappropriate.

The president didn't like that and tweeted: "Tell Jennifer Williams, whoever that is, to read both transcripts of the presidential calls. Then she should meet with the other never-Trumpers, who I don't know and mostly never even heard of, and work out a better presidential attack."

The president's swipe at Williams came on the heels of his tweet directed at former Ukraine Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch.

REP. ADAM SCHIFF (D-CA): What effect do you think that has on other witnesses' willingness to come forward and expose wrongdoing?

MARIE YOVANOVITCH, FORMER U.S. AMBASSADOR TO UKRAINE: Well, it's very intimidating.

ACOSTA: The big question is what, if anything, Republicans will do about it, though one House GOP member said he was alarmed by the administration's attempt to link military aid to political dirt.

REP. MICHAEL TURNER (R-OH): The president United States shouldn't even, in the original phone call, be on the phone with the president of another country and raise his political opponent. So, no, this is -- is not OK.

ACOSTA: House Republicans are considering asking Wisconsin Senator Ron Johnson to detail what he knows about the president's actions.

Johnson, who would discuss the matter with the president, says the entire issue should not have been exposed.

SEN. RON JOHNSON (R-WI): Having this all come out into public has weakened that relationship, has exposed things that didn't need to be exposed. ACOSTA: Also hanging over the president is something of a medical

mystery, as White House officials are still not offering many details about Mr. Trump's sudden trip to Walter Reed hospital over the weekend. The White House said it was just a routine checkup as part of his annual physical, but sources told CNN the trip did not follow the usual protocol, calling Mr. Trump's visit abnormal.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

ACOSTA: And the president will be back to keeping an eye on the impeachment inquiry, as the public hearings get under way tomorrow.

Mr. Trump's fellow Republicans are hopeful he will cease his targeting of administration officials who are testifying this week. As one Trump campaign source told me late last week about the president's attacks when he was attacking Marie Yovanovitch, the former Ukraine ambassador, that was not a good day for the GOP, in the words of that one Trump campaign source.

Wolf, they feel like that backfired for the president -- Wolf.

BLITZER: Yes, it did.

All right, Jim Acosta, thank you.

Joining us now, Democratic Congressman Eric Swalwell. He's involved in the impeachment inquiry as a member of the Intelligence and Judiciary committees.

Congressman, thanks so much for joining us.

REP. ERIC SWALWELL (D-CA): My pleasure, Wolf.

BLITZER: And, as you know, you have now scheduled this public hearing with David Holmes, the diplomat who overheard that phone conversation between the president and Ambassador Sondland.

If, hypothetically, Ambassador Sondland decides to plead the Fifth, refused -- refuses to answer questions, would you be willing to give him immunity?

SWALWELL: Wolf, we haven't heard that he intends to do that just yet.

And he actually has already testified in a deposition and also updated that testimony, which now aligns with what all the other witnesses to what Ambassador Sondland saw -- had said.

So he's pretty locked in, so to speak, as to those facts, Wolf.

But what we will hear this week, which is important, are people who listened to the phone call, three people who listened to the phone call, and people who had direct conversations with President Trump.

And those were the two attacks that we heard last week, when Republicans didn't really have any attacks on the evidence. Their attacks were, you don't have anyone who heard the phone call and you don't have anyone who talked to President Trump.

Well, the American we will hear both of those pieces of evidence this week.

[18:10:03]

BLITZER: All right, in a letter to House Democrats, as you know, the House speaker, Nancy Pelosi, writes this.

I will read the read the quote again: "The facts are uncontested that the president abused his power for his own personal political benefit, at the expense of our national security interests."

As you know, nine witnesses still have to testify publicly this week. But the House speaker seems to have already made up her mind about impeaching the president.

What say you?

SWALWELL: I have not, and I don't think she has either.

But the evidence points in one direction, that this president leveraged our taxpayer dollars to have the Ukrainians help him cheat an election. And he has had every opportunity to send in witnesses that would show his innocence, and he has blocked those witnesses from coming forward.

And so we can only conclude that that's where the evidence is going. Too early to reach an ultimate conclusion, Wolf, but the president has an opportunity to send over the witnesses we have asked for, Mick Mulvaney, John Bolton, send over the documents, the millions of documents that he has blocked the State Department and White House from turning over.

Because he has blocked lawful subpoenas, we can only conclude that reflects on his own guilt.

BLITZER: The president says he's considering Speaker Pelosi's suggestion that he provide written answers to your questions in the inquiry.

Do you agree?

SWALWELL: Well, Wolf, he hasn't turned over his taxes, despite saying for years that he would do that. He didn't show up in person with Bob Mueller, despite saying he would do that.

He sent written answers, which it looks like he may have falsified, to the Mueller team. But, more than that, we would like him to just allow the witnesses we have subpoenaed to come to Congress and the documents we have subpoenaed to be provided to the committee.

So he's not serious in this process. And I don't think it's worth our time engaging with him on this, other than to say, we have a lot of evidence right now, and we shouldn't allow him to dictate the terms for this investigation. BLITZER: So, on this front, she says she would like him to answer

questions, and he says he would do it, maybe in writing.

Do you disagree with the speaker?

SWALWELL: No, I disagree that President Trump is serious about that. I think the speaker reflects that.

Of course, there are questions out there, but I don't think any of us believe that Donald Trump is serious about this, because a serious person would have already cooperated with the lawful subpoenas that we sent over.

Instead, he's blocking people who could help us in the investigation.

BLITZER: We have just got this notification that the Justice Department inspector general, Michael Horowitz, has just been scheduled to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee on December 11 to deliver his report on his investigation of the origins of the Russia investigation and what the investigators were up to.

What's your reaction to that?

SWALWELL: Well, transparency is good, Wolf. I'm looking forward to the report.

But there's no denying that Russia interfered in our election, that Russia ran a misinformation campaign, and that they hacked Donald Trump's political opponents' e-mails and had a preference for Donald Trump to be elected.

I also wonder, Wolf, what else was the FBI supposed to do when they got information that the Russians were reaching out to people on the Trump team suggesting that these hacks would be coming? Does anyone really believe that they should have just said, you know what, we don't care, we're not going to look at that, we're not going to get involved in a political campaign?

I don't think that's the case. So I will reserve judgment until I see the report. But this president continues to invite foreign governments to participate in our elections. And our law enforcement need to have the confidence of America's leaders that they will be able to investigate that if it happens again.

BLITZER: Congressman Eric Swalwell, thanks so much for joining us.

SWALWELL: My pleasure. Thanks, Wolf.

BLITZER: All right, just ahead, highly anticipated public impeachment testimony by President Trump's E.U. ambassador just two days away.

Also, after amending his private testimony, will Gordon Sondland now plead the Fifth? Stand by.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:18:33]

BLITZER: We're following the breaking news on a late add to the crowded schedule of witnesses in the impeachment investigation this week.

U.S. Embassy aide David Holmes will testify publicly on Thursday about a phone call he overheard between the U.S. ambassador to the European Union and the president discussing whether Ukraine would investigate Mr. Trump's political rivals.

Holmes has told lawmakers behind closed doors that he heard President Trump asked Ambassador Gordon Sondland -- I'm quoting now -- "So he's going to do the investigation?"

Sondland then replied that he's going to do it, adding that President Zelensky will do -- quote -- "anything you ask him to."

Let's break it all down with our legal analyst, former federal prosecutor Laura Coates.

So, what do you think? He admitted some crucial information in his earlier sworn deposition. He revised it once. What do you anticipate?

LAURA COATES, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Well, first of all, is Gordon Sondland.

The idea that he's had these epiphanies over time is precisely the reason why you have closed-door hearings to begin with. One of the tactics and strategies involved here for the members of the House was to make sure you couldn't coordinate your testimony, you would actually present what you should tell, you would have a full and complete accounting of what you have done.

And you have seen over time that, when you had other witnesses come in, suddenly, he realized, oh, you meant the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help me Congress.

And in this role, he has failed time and time again. It'll be interesting to see whether or not he will have additional epiphanies in his opening statement or wait until there are questions.

If he waits until that moment, it might be too late for him to correct his testimony.

[18:20:00]

BLITZER: Because hovering over this is the Roger Stone conviction on all seven counts last week, including lying to Congress.

Do you expect Ambassador Sondland potentially to plead the Fifth?

COATES: I think he's considering that right now.

I mean, the sword of Damocles is above his head right now. When you see Roger Stone involved in behavior that the underlying conduct itself wasn't the legal problem, it was the lying to Congress and not giving a full accounting of information, that is hovering over him right now, thinking, here, I have not given information the first time or the second time.

I have forgotten a phone call and which I held the phone away from my ear in a crowded restaurant in Ukraine, potentially making vulnerable the president's own conversation with a number of his advisers, it's odd to think that he's not considering it right now.

But there are complications of the Fifth. Number one, he may have already waived it. You heard Congressman Swalwell talk about the issue of, he's already testified to this fact. You can't now go back and say put that genie back in the bottle about that exact content.

The other issue could be, they could say, well, we will give you immunity, how about that, thereby him, look, if you give -- are given immunity on this issue, you no longer have the fear of prosecution, you can testify freely.

And he could still at that point say, you know what, I'm going to be silent. I'm not going to testify. I can't really guarantee that I will have no prosecution here.

But, again, we have the Oliver North case, remember that, when Congress gave limited immunity, then there was later prosecution. The court said, hold on, you have already given immunity here. You cannot give that person immunity and then try to prosecute them later on.

So he has a bevy of choices, but the best one for him, tell the truth.

BLITZER: The president seems to be a bit distancing himself from Ambassador Sondland right now. What could the impact of that be?

COATES: Well, it could be that Gordon Sondland said, you know what, if I'm persona non grata, I'm not going to the person in your corner, and I will tell the whole truth, even if it implicates you in this issue.

Remember, it's an impeachment inquiry, not a best friend contest.

BLITZER: Laura Coates, as usual, thanks very much.

COATES: Thank you.

BLITZER: There's more news coming up ahead, as we're getting new information about the criminal investigation of Rudy Giuliani and his Ukraine connections.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:26:40]

BLITZER: We're following breaking news, as another round of explosive impeachment testimony begins in a matter of hours.

House Democrats announcing that the U.S. Embassy aide David Holmes will publicly answer questions on Thursday. Holmes says he overheard a recently revealed phone call in which President Trump pushed for an update on whether Ukraine would investigate his political rivals.

Our Political Correspondent, Sara Murray, is joining us right now.

Sara, this is going to be a very pivotal week in the impeachment inquiry.

SARA MURRAY, CNN NATIONAL POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: That's right, Wolf.

David Holmes just rounds out what is sure to be a jam-packed week of testimony. And based on the president's Twitter feed, he doesn't seem to be looking forward to it.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

MURRAY (voice-over): Lawmakers are ready for a full slate of public impeachment hearings this week. And President Trump is already feeling the pressure.

Jennifer Williams, a State Department employee who is detailed to Vice President Mike Pence, is set to testify Tuesday. She listened in on Trump's July 25 call with Ukrainian President Zelensky and previously told lawmakers she found it unusual that Trump brought up investigations that were more political in nature.

Over the weekend, Trump lashed out at Williams as a never-Trumper. And the vice president's office chose not to defend her, even though sources say Pence has been very selective about which career officials are detailed to his staff.

Meanwhile, even some GOP lawmakers admitted they were concerned about private testimony from former National Security Council official Tim Morrison. According to a transcript released over the weekend, Morrison says he saw U.S. ambassador to the European Union Gordon Samoan press one of President Zelensky's aides to announce an investigation into Burisma, the energy company Joe Biden's son served on the board of.

TURNER: Well, of course, all of that is alarming.

And as I have said from the beginning, I think this is -- this is not OK.

MURRAY: Morrison also testified that someone was acting at President Trump's direction.

He is also set to testify publicly Tuesday, along with Lieutenant Colonel Alexander Vindman, the National Security Council's top Ukraine expert, and Kurt Volker, the former U.S. special envoy to Ukraine.

But Sondland's testimony set for Wednesday is the most highly anticipated of the week, and lawmakers are sure to have questions about this call between Sondland and Trump just a day after Trump's call with Zelensky. WILLIAM TAYLOR, ACTING U.S. AMBASSADOR TO UKRAINE: The member of my staff could hear President Trump on the phone asking Ambassador Sondland about the investigations. Ambassador Sondland told President Trump the Ukrainians were ready to move forward.

Following the call with President Trump, the member of my staff asked Ambassador Sondland what President Trump thought about Ukraine. Ambassador Sondland responded that President Trump cares more about the investigations of Biden, which Giuliani was pressing for.

MURRAY: Democrats are already claiming Sondland, who didn't mention the details of this call in his closed-door testimony, misled lawmakers.

SEN. CHRIS MURPHY (D-CT): Gordon Sondland clearly didn't tell the truth in his initial testimony.

MURRAY: According to "The Wall Street Journal," e-mails show Sondland kept other officials in the loop about the push for investigations, including acting White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney and Energy Secretary Rick Perry, another point of questioning for lawmakers.

Both Mulvaney and Perry have refused to testify. Also coming Wednesday, testimony from Laura Cooper, the Pentagon's deputy assistant secretary for Russia, Ukraine and Eurasia, and David Hale, a top State Department official. The White House's former Russia expert Fiona Hill rounds out the week of testimony on Thursday.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

[18:30:01]

MURRAY: Now, we will see David Holmes on the Hill just a day after Gordon Sondland. And, Wolf, you can bet one of the things lawmakers are going to want to talk about is that conversation he had with Gordon Sondland after Sondland talked to the president, in which Sondland said the president doesn't really care so much about Ukraine, he just cares about the big things, like the investigations into the Bidens.

BLITZER: That's clearly significant. Sara Murray, thank you very much for that report.

Let's bring in our analysts and our correspondents.

And, Bianna, let's talk a little bit about these nine witnesses that we're going to hear from starting tomorrow morning. The House speaker, Nancy Pelosi, raised the possibility, raised the idea of the president himself testifying. Watch what she said on Sunday.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. NANCY PELOSI (D-CA): The president could come right before the committee and speak all the truth that he wants.

MARGARET BRENNAN, CBS NEWS HOST: You don't expect him to do that? PELOSI: If he wants to take the oath of office or he could do it in writing. He has every opportunity to present his case.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: The president tweeted he's seriously thinking about that. What do you think?

BIANNA GOLODRYGA, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: Well, he has done a lot of this in writing and that is his Twitter feed and what he's tweeting throughout these testimonies, specifically what we heard from him when Ambassador Yovanovitch was testifying on Friday.

Look, a lot of people, Republicans included, would say that the president really damaged himself by doing so. And if the president decides that he wants to submit questions through his lawyers, we have been before as well, ala the Mueller investigation.

But, look, I'm not sure that the president would be doing himself any favors. We've seen through his Twitter feed he either calls these witnesses never-Trumpers or says that he's never met them and doesn't know who they are. None of that makes the president look good in this case.

The president also has said throughout this time that this was a perfect telephone call. So this does not square with where Republicans, those who are even defending him, stand. They are either saying that this is something that should be decided by voters next year or something that's not that big of a deal given that the money, in fact, was released. But very few Republicans are publicly saying that there is absolutely nothing wrong with the president's actions.

And so what you're hearing time and time again from all of these witnesses is that they were alarmed by what they heard, by what they found out, what was going on throughout this process.

And in addition to that, it is something that is highly unusual. These are experts. These are political diplomats who have been in their jobs and roles for decades combined. And they've never seen a situation like this in terms of U.S. foreign policy. And what they have laid is the negative effects that it's had on U.S. national security as well. So that's where the president continues to get hurt.

And I think for Republicans, the last thing they want is for the president to continue to say that he did nothing wrong.

BLITZER: The House Democratic attorney, the lawyer for the House of Representatives for the Democrats, now wants to open a formal investigation as part of the impeachment inquiry, whether the president committed perjury, whether he lied during those written answers to Robert Mueller.

SABRINA SIDDIQUI, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: Right. So the trial of Roger Stone, who has acted as a long-time informal political adviser to the president, produced evidence that President Trump may have lied to Special Counsel Robert Mueller about his contacts with Stone, as well as conversations around WikiLeaks and the hacking of Democratic Party emails in his written testimony that he provided to Robert Mueller. And just to be on this point, I think that reinforces exactly why the president's attorneys have no appetite for him to personally testify as part of this impeachment inquiry.

You'll recall at the time that there were negotiations between Mueller and the president's lawyer about whether or not he would testify in the Russia investigation. Rudy Giuliani said they did not want the president to be part of what was a perjury trap. So you had the president's personal attorney effectively admit that the biggest problem from their vantage point was that they cannot trust their client, President Trump, to tell the truth.

I also think that one of the challenges for the president if he is weighing whether or not to testify, even in written form, is the White House has blocked several Trump aides from testifying, people who have been directly involved in conversations with the president. If the president himself were willing to answer questions about dealings with Ukraine, then there's no rationale for blocking those aides from testifying about their conversations with the president.

BLITZER: It's interesting, the president keeps attacking one of these key witnesses, Kylie. The secretary of state, Mike Pompeo, had a chance to defend some of the State Department officials today. Listen to this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REPORTER: Can you explain why you haven't chosen to make comments in their support?

MIKE POMPEO, SECRETARY OF STATE: I'm happy to talk about Ukraine policy today. I'm not going to get into the issues surrounding the Democrat impeachment inquiry. I'm just not going to do it today.

REPORTER: Ambassador Yovanovitch was on the Hill on Friday. The president made a tweet right when she was appearing, saying that everywhere she went turned bad. Is it an assessment that you agree with, you've known her?

POMPEO: I don't have anything to say. I'll differ to the White House about particular statements and the like.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: So how does that go over at the State Department?

[18:35:00]

KYLIE ATWOOD, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY REPORTER: Yes. I mean, Secretary Pompeo coming today and saying very broadly that he supports State Department officials, that they're the greatest diplomatic corps in the world. But then when he's asked specifically about these career State Department officials who have been smeared by President Trump, he did not come out and say supportive things and their names at the same time.

So I've asked about Ambassador Taylor and if he's going to stay in his top post in Ukraine, he said the State Department officials are doing a great job but wouldn't say anything about Ambassador Taylor. When he was asked about the other U.S. official who has been repeatedly attacked by President Trump on Twitter, he also wouldn't say anything about her.

So he is in a sticky place right now. He also told reporters that there are things he would like to say but he is not going to say. So it's clear that there are pressures on him from the State Department wanting to make him say more to support them but the White House is not doing it (ph).

BLITZER: Because the moral over there, Phil, must be awful right now.

PHILIP MUDD, CNN COUNTERTERROSIM ANALYST: Yes. He's -- let me be polite. He's not in a sticky place in my -- from my perspective. I did this stuff for 25 years. I felt pressure at times from the White House. I thought that pressure was appropriate. Difficult questions, and particularly me dealing with Vice President Cheney, I thought his questions were tough but fair.

The White House can pressure people if they want. They can't smear. If you smear somebody, whether you're in corporate America or you're working at the CIA or the State Department, the boss is supposed to stand up and say, you can't do that to my subordinate.

I tell you where this is going to come into play. If the story keeps going to naming the whistleblower and the White House gets involved in naming him, the CIA director, like Mr. Pompeo, is going to be on the hook to be in public saying, Mr. President, you can't name and shame my people in public. This is -- he's got to speak, Pompeo. I think this is a mistake.

BLITZER: Yes. Well, we're going to continue to watch it very, very closely dramatically unfolding.

Also just ahead, we're going to take you inside the federal criminal investigation of Rudy Giuliani and his Ukraine connections. Was he looking to advance his own interests as well the president?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:40:00]

BLITZER: Tonight, Rudy Giuliani's dealings in Ukraine are under scrutiny by federal criminal prosecutors as well as by impeachment investigators. Sources now tell CNN the feds want to know if Giuliani and his indicted associates tried to influence Ukraine's state-run energy company to advance their own personal business interest.

We're joined by CNN's Senior Investigative Correspondent, Drew Griffin.

Drew, we're learning more about Giuliani's shady connections in Ukraine.

DREW GRIFFIN, CNN SENIOR INVESTIGATIVE CORRESPONDENT: Yes. And the question, Wolf, was this less about politics and more about money involving Rudy Giuliani, his two indicted associates and the gas business.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

GRIFFIN: You probably don't know Dale Perry but history may record this energy executive as one of the first who sounded the alarm about what would become President Trump's impeachment inquiry.

In April, Perry's former business partner, Andrew Favorov, now a director at Ukraine's state-owned gas company, Naftogaz, says two shady characters had approached him with a secret plan to take over the management inside Naftogaz. Those two shady characters, Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman, are two low level Soviet-born businessmen from South Florida, and they were trying to clear the way for their own gas business.

You said he took it as sort of a threat, a shakedown.

DALE PERRY, MANAGING DIRECTOR, ENERGY RESOURCES OF UKRAINE: A shakedown. Because he said, look, either I join them and become the CEO or they're going to find someone else to be the CEO and remove all of us, all of us, meaning the top management of Naftogaz.

GRIFFIN: Naftogaz was finally making a profit. Its new CEO had spent five years cleaning up the corruption-plagued giant. The efforts had support of anti-corruption leaders across Ukraine and the world, including U.S. Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch. But Parnas and Fruman said they were working on getting rid of the ambassador.

PERRY: They were suggesting that President Trump had already agreed that, yes, they would remove her.

GRIFFIN: Andrew Favorov isn't talking but two sources familiar with the matter tells CNN, Perry's description of the events is correct. Perry was so alarmed, he wrote a letter that eventually reached the State Department but it may have been too late.

A short time later, what Parnas and Fruman predicted happened. The U.S. ambassador, Marie Yovanovitch, was removed, stunning anti- corruption officials in Ukraine. Now we know from American diplomats, Parnas and Fruman had powerful help.

GEORGE KENT, DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF STATE: I became increasingly aware of an effort by Rudy Giuliani and others, including his associates, Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman, to run a campaign to smear Ambassador Yovanovitch.

GRIFFIN: While Rudy Giuliani was using Parnas and Fruman to help him push his conspiracy theories about the Bidens and that Ukraine was behind the election meddling in 2016, Parnas and Fruman were using Giuliani for their own scheme, to oust the U.S. ambassador getting in their way of their plans for a gas business. Sound farfetched? Former federal prosecutor Ken McCallion, has seen it before in Ukraine and says the House impeachment inquiry is exposing the real issue.

[18:45:09]

DREW GRIFFIN, CNN SENIOR INVESTIGATIVE CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Former federal prosecutor Ken McCallion has seen it before in Ukraine and says the House Impeachment Inquiry is exposing the real issue, money.

KENNETH MCCALLION, FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR: It's really not just about the Bidens. It's not about a DNC server being hidden in Ukraine. It's really about the money. It's a fight for control of Naftogaz and the natural gas resources.

GRIFFIN: Parnas and Fruman may have begun their plan in 2018. Parnas hired Guiliani for half a million dollars, a federal indictment alleges they also began donating hundreds of thousands of dollars in foreign funds to Republic causes, giving them incredible access to political fundraising events, including at least 10 with President Trump. Both have pleaded not guilty.

"The Washington Post" even reports Lev Parnas told the president he needed to replace his U.S. ambassador to Ukraine and Trump reportedly agreed. This would all make perfect sense except for one thing, Parnas and Fruman had zero experience in the gas business and could not have acted alone.

MCCALLION: Parnas and Fruman with no background in the oil gas national resources area, all of a sudden, decided to form a country which you can only do in Ukraine or Russia really with the blessing of the powers that be, in this case, this would be Firtash.

GRIFFIN: Firtash is Dmytro Firtash, a Kremlin-connected oligarch who made a fortune selling Russian gas to Ukraine. He's been fighting extradition to the United States since 2013 when he was charged in a bribery scheme. He's declared his innocence and has hired prominent Washington lawyers to lobby the Trump administration to drop his case.

Attorneys for Parnas and Fruman refused to answer questions about Dmytro Firtash, but in an odd arrangement, Firtash's attorneys hired Lev Parnas as a translator. Sources tell CNN, Parnas has bragged Dmytro was bankrolling his lavish lifestyle of private planes bodyguards, telling them, I'm the best paid interpreter in the world.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

GRIFFIN: Wolf, federal prosecutors certainly want to know what Parnas, Fruman and Rudy Giuliani were doing. Guiliani insists he did nothing illegal, but there is a question now of his shadow policy in Ukraine didn't also involve a shadowy business deal -- Wolf.

BLITZER: Drew Griffin, excellent reporting as usual. Thank you very much. Just ahead, is the White House telling all about President Trump's

unscheduled trip to the hospital? Our chief medical correspondent, Dr. Sanjay Gupta, is standing by live.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:52:25]

BLITZER: Tonight, there are new questions about President Trump's health after he made an unscheduled trip to Walter Reed Hospital on Saturday.

Let's bring in our chief medical correspondent, Dr. Sanjay Gupta. Sanjay, could the president's sudden trip to the hospital mean he potentially has some sort of serious medical issue?

DR. SANJAY GUPTA, CNN CHIEF MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, that is the concern, Wolf. I mean, I think any time someone, a medical person hears someone made a surprise trip to the hospital over the weekend, you know, something that wasn't already planned necessarily, then you worry what prompted that. And I think that's probably the most important question, not even, Wolf, not what he had done at the hospital but why he had it done.

Now, I will point out, Wolf, and you know this, but the test that they talked about the president having at Walter Reed, a quick exam and some basic lab results, those things could have easily been done at the White House as well. They have a pretty extensive medical facility there. So, the real question is what did he have done at the hospital that he couldn't have had done at the White House and why. And, you know, the concern is there something medically going on here?

BLITZER: Based on his two previous physicals that were released, a lot of those details, we know the president has heart disease. He has high cholesterol. What do these issues place him at risk for?

GUPTA: Yes. I mean, you can take a look at the numbers there. So , the weight of 243. The BMI, he's clinically obese by these numbers. He's taking medication to lower his cholesterol, Crestor. And that looks like it has probably helped him.

But we also know that he's had these scans, coronary calcium scans. And that's basically looking for abnormalities with the blood vessels that lead to the heart. And the real concern was back in 2018, the results of that test which the White House did not disclose right away, only upon further questioning they disclose that, showed a number of 133.

And what that means, this calcium score of 133, they say relatively high risk of heart attack or other heart disease over the next three to five years. So, that's probably the top of the list of concerns. He's at risk of heart disease.

It doesn't mean he's had a problem. The White House says there was absolutely no symptoms. But you're right, Wolf, putting it all together, that would be the biggest concern. BLITZER: Yes, we'll watch it closely together with you, Sanjay.

Thanks very much.

We'll have more news in just a moment.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:59:18]

BLITZER: Tonight, the Trump administration is reversing, reversing longstanding U.S. policy on Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank. The Secretary of State Mike Pompeo says the United States is now abandoning its decades-long position that objected to the settlements. The European Union strongly condemned the move by the Trump administration. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu called President Trump to thank him for the policy change. This is the latest in a series of moves likely to increase tensions between the Trump administration and the Palestinians. We'll watch this closely.

To our viewers, thanks very much for watching. I'm Wolf Blitzer in THE SITUATION ROOM. You can follow me on Twitter and Instagram @WolfBlitzer. You can always tweet the show @CNNsitroom.

"ERIN BURNETT OUTFRONT" starts right now.