tv Anderson Cooper 360 CNN October 1, 2019 5:00pm-6:00pm PDT
>> nothing mousey about this whistle-blower. jeanne moos. cnn, new york. >> important note is the mouse is still running around the white house. just saying. >> thanks for joining us. alaska 360 starts now. ac 365 starts now. and good evening from washington we begin with tonight with breaking news with all the signs of something big. cnn has learned gnat state department's inspector general has sent what sources describe as an urgent email requesting a bipartisan congressional staff briefing tomorrow related to documents on ukraine. one congressional aide called the email highly unusual and cryptically worded. this comes at the end of a day that saw the state department and three house committees battling over depositions from key players in the ukraine story. with allegations of administration stonewalling and
signs late today that at least some parts of that stone wall appear to be crumbling. also tonight a remarkable look inside president trump's vision for the u.s.-mexico border. the story in "the new york times" citing multiple white house and administration officials saying the president often talked about a border trench filled with snakes or alligators and sidekick spoke of shooting migrants in the legs. we have the two reporters in the by line on first tonight but firps the ukraine story, the lafrt on the email from the inspector general backup kiley atwood joins us with that. what do we know? >> this is a shocking urgent request from the state department inspector general. they came to congress today and said they do want to discuss ukraine and the state department. we really don't know many details of what they're coming to congress with. but as you said it was described to me by a congressional aide as highly unusual and cryptically worded. they are not sure what they're going to discuss tomorrow.
but what we do know -- an aide explain that the request said they had the inspector general of the state department received documents from the acting legal counsel, the legal adviser at the state department. it's not as if the inspector general is operating on its own here. it had interactions with the state department before in request went forth. and it's also noteworthy that it came to congress an hour after secretary pompeo sent a letter to congress alleging that these depositions leading up to the requests for depositions of five current and former state department officials amounted to bullying and intimidating state department officials. we'll have to see how it plays out and how this new information impacts the impeachment inquiry. >> and secretary pompeo essentially seems to be playing for time or making the argument this is happening too fast, that they need more time in order to figure out how to comply or not. >> yeah, that's what he said.
but he didn't actually say that we're just going to pick new dates and this is going to happen. he said that they want to review some of the legal and procedural questions that he had. i also think it's highly important, some of the questions he had here. i mean, he said that the committees had been sending intimidating communication foss career state department officials. he himself did not provide evidence for that. but that is what he alleges here. he said that the committees told the state department officials they couldn't come with counsel from the state department. pompeo there frustrated that fwres is trying to cut out the executive branch of their conversation was current state department officials. >> also a little rich that secretary of state mike pompeo is accusing those investigating, the whistle-blower complaints, as bullies and intimidating when it's the president of the united states who is -- was bullying and saying terrible things about the ambassador to the -- u.s. ambassador to ukraine ab, a
career foreign service officer who secretary of state pompeo has not deferred the the career foreign service officers in the department state department much at all. >> he has knots taken knee opportunity to levied defend that ambassador who you just referenced. that's the current -- the former u.s. ambassador to ukraine who was recalled early. she wasn't supposed to come back. folks on the hill called it a political hit job. said the trump administration was trying to get her out. pompeo didn't come to her defense. she is a career date are state department official. she is one of the folks, however, who has fwrd and rescheduled to date to speak with congress. that's october 11th. supposed to be tomorrow but they pushed it back a little bit. >> kiley add atwood. a lot of developments. angus king of maine caucuses with democrats and expected to hear from the state department inspector general tomorrow. i spoke to the senator just before air time.
>> senator king, i want to start by asking the state department inspector general requesting in briefing tomorrow on capitol hill, the senate intelligence committee expectsed to be briefed. i'm sure you can't say much. i'm not sure how much you know or anybody knows at this point. i'm wondering what is your initial reaction? >> well, inspectors general are very important people in the united states government. their job is to be a watchdog. their job is to be independent of politics, of the people running the agency. the fact that the inspector general at the state department as well as as you know this all started with the inspector general at the intelligence agency has something to say to the committee. that's important. i don't know what it is. i haven't been briefed on it. but it certainly is something that sounds significant, particularly because he stated that it's urgent, that he wantsed this meeting right away. >> and just, again, a lot we
don't know as you said you haven't been briefed on it. is the inspector general at the state department free to, you know, this came shortly after the secretary of state, you know, was had a lot of pushback, said they are not going to be intimidated, things like that. is the inspector general free to contradict what the -- the secretary of state has said publicly about not cooperating? >> well, i don't know specifically about the inspector general law with the state department but generally inspectors general have wide latitude, particular will in reporting things to congress. that's their job. and so i would say it's likely that this inspector general has every right to go to congress. that's what -- that's how the statute was designed across the government. and by the way, anderson, it's really interesting. the first whistle-blower statute was in 1778 in the continental congress with where they set up a whistle-blower statute saying
anyone who knows of malfeasance in the government has a duty to report it. and we've got continuity for 240 years on that principle that certainly is coming flew important play right now. >> the context of it is also incrediblery important. people pointing out there is not a direct quid pro quo hanging over the head of the ukrainian president, the new young ukraineening president zroents a career as a politician or leader, is in fight with russia that is going on, and the hundreds of millions of dollars in u.s. aid that will aid that fight. and nas the context with which the president is asking for a favor. >> and that -- the president unilaterally cut off the aid without any consultation with anybody that i've ever heard of. apparently state department was against it. defense department against it. did he it. it was his order through the office of management and budget about a week or two before the phone call. and he starts the
conversation -- the first sentence is you know, we have done a lot for you. and then later on, of course is the famous exchange where zelensky says we are ready mr. president to buy the javelin missiles for our defense. and the president said yes but first i have a favor though. and -- that's pretty powerful evidence. the other thing, anderson, i had a hunch about this so-called transcript. i had two staff members of my office the other day read it aloud. and we timed it. they read it in normal speaking pace. it took 10 minutes and 40 seconds. the phone call was 30 minutes. >> that's interesting. >> we don't know what's missing. it may be there was a translator involved and that made it go much longer. but the president of ukraine speaks english. if there was no translator that raises a question of what's in the other 20 minutes of that
discussion. so that's the point, i think. and that's why i've been very conservative on impeachment and haven't been pushing for it. but that's why i think there has to be an inquiry to get to the facts surrounding this -- what looks like at least an attempted transaction. >> would -- and you're right the transcript is just -- it's from the recollection of people i believe in the situation room. and some other potential audio that may be out there, i think. would there be a recording of the phone call from -- and see -- is there more out there? do you think? details of the call? >> well, i don't know. but my understanding is that the practice would have been to simultaneously not record the conversation but we have -- we see people with this mask. and they talk into it and say all the words. and it makes a literally a transcript. i would be surprised if that
doesn't exist. and i think that's obviously one of the pieces we have to -- we have to find occupant more about. the other thing, anderson, that's really bothering about this is this tossing around of the word treason. treason is the only crime specifically defined in the constitution. article iii, section 3, defines treason essentially as siding with an enemy of the country in a war. and to throw it around in this situation, the problem is the president feels that he is the state, you know, like louis the xivth. criticism of him is treason against the united states. that's not trau. that's not the way it works. and whistleblowers are people that come forward -- by the way, the whistle-blower doesn't decide the case. he or she is brought forth a set of facts which are now in the hands of congress. and they have the opportunity to investigate it to find out whether the whistle-blower is
right or wrong. with you the whistle-blower -- the whistle-blower did a public service, which is exactly what people are supposed to do. if they see what they believe is abuse of power in the federal government they are supposed to report it. that's what this whistle-blower did. and now we have a chance to get to the bottom of what those allegations were. >> are you confident congress can protect the whistle-blower's identity. >> i certainly hope so. because, you know, the president is using words like interview. but last week he used words like spy and implying execution. that's a threat. and, you know, those were the words he was using last week. if in goes -- if the articles -- if articles of impeachment come from the house, i'm a juror. so i'm -- although you've heard me express real frustration about what's going on. i rest my final decision if if comes to that on what the facts are and what's actually presented for the senate in a trial, which we would be presided over by the chief
justice. >> senator angus king. i appreciate your time. thank you. >> thanks, anderson. >> more next on what to make of the news as white house lit up pink for the breast cancer warehouse. and we get perspectives on what this could mean. later "new york times" correspondents talk about moats on the border with alligators and snakes. shooting mierpgts in the legs. things that white house insiders were willing to dish about. when you have pain...
you want relief. fast. only thermacare ultra pain relieving cream has 4 active ingredients to fight pain 4 different ways. get powerful relief today, with thermacare. the amazing new iphone has arrived. and so has t-mobile's newest signal. no signal goes farther or is more reliable. get up to 50% off the new iphone, on a single line or a family plan. only at t-mobile. right now, at t-mobile, when your family joins, you can get a free line of unlimited. and you can also get 50% off the hottest new phones for a limited time. only at t-mobile.
here's the thing about managing for your business.s when you've got public clouds, and private clouds, and hybrid clouds- things can get a bit cloudy for you. but now, there's the dell technologies cloud, powered by vmware. a single hub for a consistent operating experience across all your clouds. that should clear things up. i had a few good tricks to help hide my bladder leak pad. like the old "tunic tug". but always discreet is less bulky. and it really protects. 'cause it turns liquid to gel. so i have nothing to hide. always discreet. come on! let's hide in the attic. no. in the basement. why can't we just get in the running car? are you crazy? let's hide behind the chainsaws. smart. yeah. ok.
if you're in a horror movie, you make poor decisions. it's what you do. this was a good idea. shhhh. i'm being quiet. you're breathing on me! if you want to save fifteen percent or more on car insurance, you switch to geico. it's what you do. let's go to the cemetery! pain happens. saturdays happen. aleve it. aleve is proven better on pain than tylenol. when pain happens, aleve it. all day strong.
tonight's breaking news that the state department inspector general wants urgently to brief a string of house and senate committees on something ukraine related. that story unfolds as we speak. we'll bring you late developments as we learn about them. right now we're lucky to have former state department spokes american. jen sfak are sackky. chief legal analyst jeffrey
toobin and deputy williams. and currently a cnn legal analyst. jen, from your experience, is it possible -- you were talking about this before we came on air -- is it possible that inspector general is going to be saying something supporting secretary of state pompeo? >> well we koept know. we don't know what he is going to say. i will say there is some history though with secretary pompeo-on and the political appointees in the state department. one there is bad ballad to the benghazi investigations. he dragged many civil servant appear officers before congress. he hasn't been known as somebody who has been a big defender of the institution or the people serving there. including some of the ambassadors who are asked to testify. that's important context. and he is a subject of the entire controversy. so we don't know what he is going -- it's highly unusual. that's clear. we don't know what he is going to present. but i think it's also likely
that there is information related to the letter pompeo owe sent today, related to unhappiness within the state department about how this has been handled. these are career civil serves who are used to apieding by asks of congress, by the institution. s in a bit out of the norm for them. >> dana. >> kiley mentioned this earlier, the fact that pompeo's letter to congress, which he tweeted simultaneously, that i have no intention of letting my people talk to you and by the way, congress is brow beating members of my staff. and members of the state department. the fact that that came not that long before the inspector general called capitol hill and said i want to talk to all of the committees, suggests that maybe it's not the ig, you know, that we saw at the -- the dni where it's like i'm going to represent a whistle-blower. it might be okay, guys we
understand where you're coming from you want information. but slow the roll a little bit here. it could be the opposite. it could be -- i had these people come to me who want to talk to you. don't feel comfortable because wlaf mike pompeo said. i want to help. it could be either way. we don't know. >> and you know one of the broader questions about in impeachment investigation in its entirety is will the trump administration allow anyone from any party of of government, from the white house, justice department, state department to testify? because as the oversight committees have been going forward, basically they haven't. they have stonewalled almost everything. >> it's effective. >> it's effective. and the congress has had to go to court. which is a very laborious process, slow not resolved. >> and the democrats want in to be relatively quick. >> and the one thing that's different from the oversight problems versus impeachment is that the members of the --
particularly the intelligence committee have said if we get no access we are not going to court. we are going to list in -- this -- in obstruction from the committee as part of the impeachment investigation, that they will basically say, look, your stonewalling is evidence of why the president should be impeached. >> what was striking today was secretary pompeo's letter where he essentially uses the word brow beat and accusesing them of shaking down employees. he didn't use the words presidential harassment. because ultimately he adopts the president's playbook. which is to accused any institution vepgt the president of being lilg illegitimate and wading into territory they shouldn't. and. >> instant it a bit rich for secretary of state pompeo to be suddenly a defender of the career foreign service officer in the state department in which he is on the call in the president is denigrating the
career foreign service officer officer to the president of the ukraine. >> and the kinds of things he lays out in the letter. this is the kind of stuff you would negotiate when counsel can appear who comes how long they sit for. but the tone is striking. and striking for someone who is himself the subject of the inquiry. he was on the call. >> and the only people it looks like the intelligence committee will be able to get to at least in the short-term are mr. voelker who has left the ut state department and the former ambassador who was all but fired. >> and they have a good reason to tell their own story behind closed doors and in whatever negotiation they can make. i mean, they have been dragged through the mud threw this whole journey by giuliani, the trump administration, even by pompeo's silence. while it may be true congress sidekick aggressive, i don't know -- you know, there is more to marry from the individuals they know a lot about. >> can the former ambassador who i believe is still with the state department. >> yes. >> although -- stateside, can
she go and talk if pompeo has said, no? >> i mean, that's a tricky question that goes back to jeffrey's question. i think she -- there has been reporting i think she is going to be meeting with. >> she will do it but not until next week. that's where we are. >> is that a stall given what pompeo said is this like you know, i'll just say it's next week i'm not sure it's at all. >> possibly. did you u but i think volker will be key. because regardless what the ig will say from the state department tom, and thursday volker who did resign, who has the ability and will to talk behind closed doors to congress and thursday, he was named. and not only named, he was named as somebody who tried to help the ukrainian navigate the political pressure that they felt from the president. and that is really key. >> although according to giuliani he was the guy who helped set up giuliani's meeting. >> i will say having worked with
a lot of career foreign service officers that is hard to believe. giuliani is seen as a proxy for president trump. volker obviously he has a long history. but he is a public servant. the likelihood of him roguely setting up meetings for giuliani of all people with the government he is sitting in the country and representing the united states for, is so unbelievable. >> it doesn't have to be rogue. pompeo knew about it he heard the call. >> the likelihood of him taking that upon his own seven and making that decision, reaching out without there being engagement or direction from pompeo and the white house seems hard to believe to me. >> i wouldn't even be convinced we know what rudy giuliani's role is. is he the president's lawyer, an official arm of the state department, regarded as a federal employee. i know the answer is no. but the point is -- this is going to come up when they claim he can -- the president can assert executive privilege over communications ke with rudy giuliani.
we don't know what he did and so it's sort of odd to judge him in the context of these state department employees. that will be the subject of litigation. what is his role and how is it legally significant. >> ink i don't think it's the subjective litigation. i think if they don't get cooperation from giuliani as they have said from the letter, we are going to view that as obstruction. >> it's more on the impeach zbloomt they are not going to court. they want this over by the he said of the year. if they go to court. >> doesn't that then sacrifice any attempt to get republicans in the senate to come onboard? >> i mean, if they are just seen as moving forward, not hearing from- from giuliani, not hearing -- giving republicans the opportunity -- >> i mean, they -- i think they will make an effort to talk to giuliani. but they will not get it. and i don't see how that could be held against the democrats trying to get. >> it could be used as cover. they could say you were bullying
giuliani. >> potentially. >> i'm sure that's true. >> as a general matter they have to file the lawsuit to appear that they are at least going through the proper processes and so on. i don't think they could just move on from giuliani. for instance if they think they have a basis for bringing him in to testify, slap him with a subpoena. if he doesn't appear, sue him appear and then see. or then just move on. >> i also think there is no news flsh in i sag there aren't mm democrats who think they have any chance of getting enough senators to convict in the senate. >> right, right. >> that's true. >> what about senator grassley's comments about the whistle-blower? i'm worning how someone who knows the hill well -- how significant is that? because some people are saying it's a break from the president. essentially saying the whistle-blower should be listened to and it should go through. >> i was surprised grassley didn't say it last week when the whistle-blower came out. he has historically for decades been probably the biggest
champion for whistleblowers in the government. and the fact that he -- when he was talking to manu in the hall last week i was shocked that he seemed to side with the president. it wasn't until he saw the -- the comments that the president made not only last week but this woke saying i want to interview the whistle-blower did he seem to wake up and go i'm the guy protecting whistle-blowers. i don't necessarily think he is kind of a canary in the coal mine when it comes to republicans that this is a specific issue about protecting- >> democrats i think are clear eyed in the senate and i talk being to staffers they know there has to be 20 republicans voting for impeachment at that point in the process. that's enormous hill to chime but the transcript, whitley believe bloesh pushed a number of opposed to impeachment over the edge. they hope the process in the house will bring cracks in the armor. but they are clear eyed. >> call me.
>> call me sick. >> just not late for dinner. >> there you go. but i'm not surprised at all it took grassley as long as it did just because he has two forces. number one he is the whistle-blower guy. but number two he is a republican senator with a republican base that finds the president very popular. and until republicans start turning on the president people like senator grassley will continue falling in line. >> i want to thank everybody. up next more breaking news a black buster report from "the new york times" on staggering put forward by president trump. apparent reemtedly to stop migranting from crossing the border, everything from alligators to snakes and shooting them in the legs. ring e stories that i've heard to life. i wanted to keep digging, keep learning... this journey has just begun. bring your family history to life like never before. get started for free at ancestry.com
with tough food, your dentures may slip and fall. fixodent ultra-max hold gives you the strongest hold ever to lock your dentures. so now you can eat tough food without worry. fixodent and forget it. if ylittle thingsate tcan be a big deal., that's why there's otezla. otezla is not a cream. it's a pill that treats plaque psoriasis differently. with otezla, 75% clearer skin is achievable.
don't use if you're allergic to otezla. it may cause severe diarrhea, nausea, or vomiting. otezla is associated with an increased risk of depression. tell your doctor if you have a history of depression or suicidal thoughts or if these feelings develop. some people taking otezla reported weight loss. your doctor should monitor your weight and may stop treatment. upper respiratory tract infection and headache may occur. tell your doctor about your medicines and if you're pregnant or planning to be. otezla. show more of you. performance comes in lots of flavors. ♪ (dramatic orchestra) there's the amped-up, over-tuned, feeding-frenzy-of sheet-metal-kind. and then there's performance that just leaves you feeling better as a result. that's the kind lincoln's about. ♪
more breaking news. exclusive report in the "new york times" documenting the lengths to which sources say president trump was prepared to go to stop mierpgts crossing the southern border. just a few of the remarkable details the white house insiders told "the new york times," the president they say wanted a water-filled trench filled with armgts or snakes constructed as a barrier in addition to the wall. and apparently talked about it so much that white house personnel actually went and tried to price it out pl also suggest nag rgt migrants be shot in the legs to slow them down or stop them. the story is incredible fascinating. the details remarkably reported to "the new york times" to julie davis and michael sheerer it's the book out october 8th.
it comes out october 8path both are cnn political analyst and joining me as well. this reporting is astonishing you've been working on this a long time. if you can just kind of wraud strokes how serious was the president talking about shooting migrants in the legs and you know alligators and snakes? >> well, i mean he was definitely very serious about being enraged really that he couldn't get his arms around the problem. and the conversation about shooting migrants in the legs came you may remember after suggested publicly that if migrants threw rocks at border patrol agent who were there across the border that they should treat it as a rifle and shoot to kill. he was quickly told by the staff that is not legal. we can't use lethal force unless we are defending ourselves. and so instead of dropping the idea he was so desperate to try to figure out some way of holding people back that he then pretty seriously raised the
question what if we just shot them in a non-lethal way wrb just slow them down to deter them. he was looking norways to slow people down stop them from coming, at the deter them from trying. i think po importantly the people we spoke to told us it was hard to tell when he was serious about some of the things. he did keep asking about a trench filled with water. he would raise the possibility of having snakes or armgts or other countermeasures as part of that. and they never really knew is he musing, just angry or is this something we need to seriously consider? but in the case of the trench they found it it would be three times as expensive as a wall. >> a trench with including the snakes or armgts. >> i'm not sure -- i'm not sure they priced the out the animals. >> how would -- who would they call to price out? but it's not just -- he talked about electrifying the fence,
flesh peering stakes on the fence and even paint going matt black he called it flat black raise going with the kirstin neelds was the fence would get so hot too hot to touch and burn people climbing up it. the big picture here from before becoming president he was obsessed with the idea of stopping migrants from entering. and he has been frustrated at every step of the way partly by logistics and practicality. some of the things are not practical. but by his own staff opinion and the frugs tracing building over the first two and a half years was as much with the people around him raising the practical problems, no, mr. president it would cost three times more. no, mr. president it's not practical. we don't have the materials wouldn't work. or. >> you can't take the people's land to build on. >> exactly. so one of the things that we talk about in the story today
and in the book more broadly is the dishneau dsh the way in which all of this led him to get rid of the people around him. ultimately the week that we document in the paper today ends with him fierpg kirstin nielsen his homicide secretary over a troubled year and a half but did he that with other people too because any didn't -- because some of them chamged bernally what he wanted to do and that frustrated him. >> and didn't stom with kirstin nielsen. then it was a slough of people, steven miller and others believed weren't sufficiently supportive. but this is a corner that the -- i mean this is a trap of the president's own making. he made promising during the election, saying that mexico is paying for the wall and it's this big beautiful wall with a beautiful door into it. all the various promises he made without any -- there were many other republicans on the debate stages saying this is not going to happen. what you're talking about is made up. his aides were the ones who had
the unfortunate job of actually saying those same things to him of the rubber hit the road. you can't actually build it like you are talking about. >> and this is one of the themes throughout the book. frankly why we wanted to do this particular book because this is kind of a theme that keeps coming back and donald trump's presidency. that he made all the promises. he talked in the grandiose ways about things he wanted to do in office. but then he comes in and confronts the ramt of governing. a lot of the logistics and practicalities as mike said weren't working. but the law wouldn't allow him to do the things that his impulse guided him to. for instance, the story talks about how he wanted to completely shut down the border, the u.s. border. and he repeatedly talked about wanting to use the u.s. military to essentially police the border, which you can't do. but even when we talked with him in the oval office at the end of the process of writing this book and asked him about it he seemed very disappointed.
he said i could have 100,000 of the best military of the world and i still can't stop people from coming. he continues to be really angry and frustratewood the limits of his power as president. >> one of the things he said, once on a trip to the border. he told borderths- correct me if i'm wrong in your reporting -- essentially that they should just stop allowing anybody in. nobody in. and that whatever trouble they got in he would, you know be -- they would be okay. to the point that as soon as he left the border patrol agents the boss says ignore what he said. you don't have the right to just dsh zbloosh this was a moment where the phrase the president started using that day in that trip and we were both down at the border that weekend -- was that the country is full. that the country is full and sew told the border agents in this sort of room this sort of back room after he did the photo op in front of the wall.
just say the yes is full. you don't have to approve them. it was a striking moment that underscored everything else in the story, which is that, you know, administration officials were constantly having to kind of walk the president back from the precipice. walk him back from the edge of what could be a crisis, whether it's the actually closing the border, which they got, you know, republicans and business types and others to say this would destroy the economy, or whether it's legally saying to people he works for you can't do that. >> it's fascinating. incredible reporting i look forward to the book. thank you so much julie hirschfield, michael sheerer. look forward to it process. with capitol participating a surprise amazes from the state department inspector general. we talked with two advisers on what their take is concerning what happens next. rizi. ♪ things are getting clearer, yeah i feel free ♪ ♪ to bare my skin ♪ yeah that's all me.
♪ nothing and me go hand in hand ♪ ♪ nothing on my skin ♪ that's my new plan. ♪ nothing is everything. keep your skin clearer with skyrizi. 3 out of 4 people achieved 90% clearer skin at 4 months. of those, nearly 9 out of 10 sustained it through 1 year. and skyrizi is 4 doses a year, after 2 starter doses. ♪ i see nothing in a different way ♪ ♪ and it's my moment so i just gotta say ♪ ♪ nothing is everything skyrizi may increase your risk of infections and lower your ability to fight them. before treatment your doctor should check you for infections and tuberculosis. tell your doctor if you have an infection or symptoms such as fevers, sweats, chills, muscle aches or coughs, or if you plan to or recently received a vaccine. ♪ nothing is everything ask your dermatologist about skyrizi. ♪
our breaking news from the top of the hour. another inspector general trying to present what they say is urgent information to congress. this time the state department inspector general speaking to senior staff members tomorrow in congress. it's important to point out we don't know the subject matter. only that the sudden request appears unprecedented annan on the heels of secretary of state mike pompeo pushing back and the demand for documents and the deposition of current officials
in the state kpt. joining me is david gergen and our commentator adviser to president obama david axelrod. david axelrod, what's your reaction to the request from the inspector general at state? it's seems like it's urgent. there is a lot we obviously don't know. but it's fascinating. >> well, the timing of it is very interesting. first of all, my feeling is this is like a fast-moving loco motive. it seems to be developments every hour. this is interesting because it came after secretary pompeo base country stiff-armed the congress and said they need more time to put materials together. he wasn't going to let his people get intimidated and bullied and so on. and then this -- in outreach came from the inspector general who has documents he thinks are of importance for the committee, urgent -- on an urgent basis. it's really intriguing.
and i don't know what to make of it other than that there are things that will be in the committee's possession that perhaps the secretary of state did not anticipate. >> and, david, i mean this inspector general -- correct me if i'm wrong -- can operate essentially independently like the inspector general in the intelligence community who insisted on forwarding the whistle-blower complaint to congress. >> abilitily. that's the whole point of having an inspector general. it's an independent body or person within the government agency to be there as a watchdog and keep congress informed if there is misbehaviors under way there. we don't know what's happening tomorrow. i would assume if it were good news for the president it would be out by now. >> i guess the question is could it even be another -- somebody else having given the documents to the inspector general? i mean there is no -- would the inspector general, david axelrod, have access to documents without somebody
giving the inspector general the documents? >> well, we know -- we know that in the -- in the case of the whistle-blower there was a set of procedures. and it could be that someone in the legal counsel's office was approached by a whistle-blower and then transferred some of the materials to the inspector general. i think that's the pattern that was followed with the dni. so it could be the same thing here. one thing we should point out here, anderson, is that we have the checks and balances built into our government. i don't think any president loves inspector generals. inspectors general. every president has been stung by an inspector general report. but the fact that they are independent and traditionally maintained the independence is really important to the function of government. >> david, david gergen, how much knowledge at this point could the white house have about whatever is going on over at the
state department? i mean, would the white house be aware of what the inspector general is meeting with them about tomorrow? >> well, they should be. especially, you know, in the case of -- what we just saw with the intelligence community when the inspector general got the report and understood it he did let maguire know who is the acting boss of the department. i would assume before the inspector general speaks tomorrow that there will be notification. but that -- it looks to me they are doing it in a way that secretary of state pompeo who stopped others from going up and teaching has dsh has had an end run performed on him. the inspector general is going around him. i'm sure pompeo is extremely unhappy. >> you know we can speculate on some matters that may be a part of in. we know for example that the ambassador was summarily
dismissed, a career diplomat in ukraine, airport at the instance of rudy giuliani baups he -- she wasn't -- perhaps because she wasn't playing ball in his maneuverings there. and then there is giuliani himself who is traveling around the world as the president's lawyer, but apparently being squired by employees of the state department, which is highly unusual because he is out there performing essentially political chores. there are many, many things -- there are many exposures here for the state the department. one suspects they know the exposures. they may not know which particular aspect is covered by this inspector general, you know, meeting. >> and david gergen, volker is still set to testify on thursday. the -- the testimony of the
ambassador, the former ambassador who as david axelrod pointed out the was forced out -- i believe it was supposed to be tomorrow. it's moved to next week. is it possible for pompeo owe to stop her from actually appearing before congress? >> well. >> i mean she is still i i guess works for the state department. >> as long as she worked for the state department i think she does. i think he feels and his letter made it clear he believes she can be stopped and has been stopped. but it does suggest gnat other person involved, volker, who became sort of a goo are go-between may have well resigned from government employment. so he could be testify. he is now free to testify. pompeo can't stop that. but i think there is a whole sense -- there is a sense from the trump point of view that he is losing control of events, which is a place he hates to be. and it's cascade cading against him i'm not sure if a dam is
breaking. but you do feel there is a cascade of bad stories, and that could move the public opinion even more than it's moved already. >> david gergen, david axelrod appreciate it very much thank you. >> up next more on the surprise briefing expected from the state department inspector general. this fall, book two, separate qualifying stays at choicehotels.com... ...and earn a free night. because when your business is rewarding yourself, our business is you. book direct at choicehotels.com
pain happens. saturdays happen. aleve it. aleve is proven better on pain than tylenol. when pain happens, aleve it. all day strong. dflings odors onto your softle fsurfaces? then they get released back into the air so you smell them later ew. right? that's why febreze created new small spaces. press firmly and watch it get to work... unlike the leading cone,
it's certainly a big night for breaking news. let check in with chris and see what he's working on for "primetime." >> every night and so many nights, it gets weird and weirder. i don't know what this means. tonight we're going to have some people who worked in the fbi and in the state department talk to us about what kind of protocol is this where the inspector general of the state department says they have to talk to certain high-ranking members of congress. they had to know it was going to leak and the only vague guidance is that there's some documents that were obtained by its legal counsel. so we don't know what it means.
obviously the only pitfall, you don't want to speculate about it, it's more news on our watch. also tonight, we have two people coming on to make the case about what's wrong with the impeachment inquiry. >> chris, we look forward to that about five minutes from now. we'll see you then. we'll be right back. i can't believe it. what? that our new house is haunted by casper the friendly ghost? hey jill! hey kurt! movies? i'll get snacks! no, i can't believe how easy it was to save hundreds of dollars on our car insurance with geico. i got snacks! ohhh, i got popcorn, i got caramel corn, i got kettle corn. am i chewing too loud? believe it! geico could save you fifteen percent or more on car insurance.
what do you look for i want free access to research. yep, td ameritrade's got that. free access to every platform. yeah, that too. i don't want any trade minimums. yeah, i totally agree, they don't have any of those. i want to know what i'm paying upfront. yes, absolutely. do you just say yes to everything? hm. well i say no to kale. mm. yeah, they say if you blanch it it's better, but that seems like a lot of work. no hidden fees. no platform fees. no trade minimums. and yes, it's all at one low price. td ameritrade. ♪
i want to share some happy news about our friend and colleague, 3-year-old nusaba underwent liver surgery last week. she's still in the hospital recovering. her donor went home over the weekend and is resting. the donor said they wanted to do a good deed for the baby girl and wanted nusayba to live a happy life. she's already put on her lipstick and gone on an ice cream date with her dad. >> her father wanted to
encourage everyone to rej sfgis as a donor because it could save a life. >> tonight we relaunch "full circle," streaming live at 5:00. >> i love you in the mock neck. i love your eyes peering into the distance of where the news will take us. >> who knows where it will take us. >> that's what that look tells me. i am chris cuomo. welcome to "primetime." we have more news dropping on our watch tonight. the state department's inspector general has requested an urgent briefing. why? we don't know. we do know what it is related to within that own department. we'll tell you. could it be a ukraine dimension? there is no indication that it is but there's lots to cover. what do you say? let's get after it. >> it's going to be a another big,