tv CNN Newsroom With Fredricka Whitfield CNN December 7, 2019 11:00am-12:00pm PST
so jeremy, give us more about what all this means. >> yeah. so this report that was released today is laying the groundwork for this committee, the judiciary committee, to take up impeachment proceedings. it's an historical document. it was written in 1974. it lays out the reasons why congress has the rights to impeach the president. it includes arguments from the president pushing back into why the democrats should not be going forward. the report does not actually say that the president committed impeachable owe fechbss, but it makes clear that's where dress are headed as well as a statement from jerry nadler. he said that the framers' worst nightmare is what we are facing at this very moment. president trump abused his power, betrayed our security and corrupted our election for personal gain.
the constitution details only one remedy for this misconduct, impeachment. right behind me, nadler ands other democrats are prepping for a hearing on monday where we will get evidence from the committees detailing the offenses against the president. they're going to be here today and tomorrow practicing getting all those details right, rehearsing so thinks go as they expect approximately following that we could see next week articles of impeachment and a vote in the judiciary committee on those. the key question, what will those contain? specifically whether they will include allegations detailed in the mueller report with relation to obstruction of justice. some of the members on this committee want to see that in the impeachment articles arguing the president's conduct should not be excused. but moderates democrats are wary because they ohm got onboard after it was focused narrowly on
ukraine. that's a key we're going to watch in the coming hours and days, fred. >> jeremy herb, thank you so much, on capitol hill. this impeachment process is not unfamiliar to our next gaeft. zoe loftgren is the only congress to woshlg on all three, presidents nixon, clinton and now trump. she is a 13-term representative from california and also a member of the house judiciary committee. and on wednesday she questioned four legal experts who testified about the legal and historic merits of this impeachment. welcome, zoe lofgren. >> thank you. >> so let me start with this report just released and delivered outlining the grounds for impeachment that your committee is now involved in. are you confident the house will have strong evidence to send articles of impeachment to the senate? >> we are going to get a full
report from the intel committee on the direct evidence about the president's misconduct, but we have a pretty good idea from the 300-huge report that has been issued as well as the testimony that was given, thathedid abuse his power to gain a personal advantage in the election, and that's a pretty serious matter. >> it's a very serious matter. walk us through what may happen on monday. what should people expect? >> we will get, i believe, a presentation from the intel committee of their findings and we'll get an opportunity to ask questions and make sure that we've got a full picture of what they have found. >> are you using, you know, previous impeachment proceedings as kind of a guidepost, you know, for you -- >> yes. >> since you've been through it
before and your roles have varied in these occasions, but you can you help but use your previous experience as reference points? >> well, the most important experience, even though i was just a law student and not in charge of anything, the nixon impeachment is something i was reflecting in. >> that was in '73, you were awe law student, we're looking at pictures now. >> ravages of age. he engaged in misconduct that had to do with rigging the alekaleks election, the committee voted to impeach him. he resigned before the house took a vote. here we have a president who took advantage to gain an advantage in the election, but it's even worse because he involved a foreign government in that. and, you know, i've been thinking also about what he did with the appropriated funds for ukraine. people that go, where is
ukraine? it was really to allow ukraine to protect themselves against russia, who had invaded them. so that's a big concern, because there's? >> that's why it was congressly approved milliary aid? >> that's right. and it was bipartisan, we don't want russia to sweep through ukraine. russia is trying to reconstitute itself as a soviet union. they are a serious adversary of the united states. this action certainly benefited russia. >> so when you hear the arguments, or one of the arguments, one of the arguments that the president wanted to get to the bottom of of corruption, wanted to employ or recruit or involve someone who had already been established or western leaders had already said was a corrupt figure, to actually lead an investigation that would involve the bide ends, what is
your reaction to one of -- that being one of the arguments as to why the president was, you know, in his right to do this? >> well, you know, it doesn't look like -- the first piece of evidence, in a way the most serious piece of evidence, was the notes of the phone call he had with the president of ukraine. where he said, you know, the president is asking about the aid, and then president trump, he doesn't talk about corruption. he talks about the bidens. that's the investigation he wants. so at the same time he was doing that, the department of defense and the department of state had been asked by the congress to investigate whether the aid should be released because of corruption issues. that was part of the legislation that became law. and they had both said, no, you can release this, because -- the corruption issues have abated and the aid should be released. he never mentioned corruption.
he mentioned the bidens. you know, i don't think any fair-minded person could look at the evidence we've got and reach a different conclusion. and the thing that is a mystery to me is if there were exculpatory information, if there was a different explanation, why didn't the president come forward? he refused to let people testify. if they had something to say that would lead us to a different conclusion, i would have been happy as all get out. because no one wants to be in this situation of impeachment. >> what's your interpretation -- sorry to interrupt, what's your interpretation now of the white house counsel saying it doesn't want to take you all up on the invitation by being a part of the process because, according to the letter, the statement coming from white house counsel, cipollone, that it is completely baseless, that it has violated
basic principles of due process and is a charade and for that reason it won't participate? >> that's false. the president isn't required to participate but the president's lawyers' statement is demon strabably false. we have given more to president trump than were given to president nixon and clinton. he's declined to take advantage of some of those opportunities, but that's his choice. i think the president appears to think he can just blow off the constitution, and i don't think so. >> and then before i let you go, because as we are looking forward, we're also going down memory lane with you, because you have been involved in three of the modern era impeachments. in 1998, you were a congresswoman as opposed to be being a law student in '73. and at the time you did not believe the allegations against president clinton rose to the
level of high crimes and misdemeanors. >> right. >> was there anything that changed your mind about that? or -- >> no, because the high crime and misdemeanor is abuse of presidential power. president clinton engaged in an affair which is not admirable, and he lied about that affair, which again was not admirable. but that was not presidential power. that was ant bus of presidential power. that was a toddry affair. >> so in contrast, why do you see this with more clarity? >> well, you know, if we thought lying about an affair was an impeachable offense, we'd have the two affairs that the president covered up and his lawyers in prison as a consequence, but that's not impeachable. that's just disappointing. what's impeachable is the use of presidential power to subvert the constitution. and that's why we're engaged in
this. >> okay. dpept there were others who argue that clinton's abuse of power, i mean, was conducted, was carried out, perhaps as circumstances very different, but that there are parallels? >> i just don't think there are. i mean, he lied about a personal indiscretion. he didn't use the full force of the presidency to subvert the government to his own personal needs. he lied about sex, not a good thing. president trump has also lied about sex. not a good thing but not impeachable. >> thank you so much. appreciate you being with us. >> thank you. you bet. coming up, a heartbreaking tribute after yesterday's deadly shooting at a naval air base in florida. why one of the victims is being hailed as a hero. shhhh. i took mucinex dm for my phlegmy cough.
what about rob? the king of dry, scratchy coughs. it's got two medicines in one and lasts 12 hours. 12 hours?! who studies that long?! i never studied a day in my life and i turned out fine! put me down lady! watch the sign! ooooo ow, that was a corner. only mucinex dm relieves wet and dry coughs for 12 hours with 2 medicines in 1 pill. i thought i was managing my moderate to severe crohn's disease. then i realized something was missing... me. my symptoms were keeping me from being there. so, i talked to my doctor and learned humira is for people who still have symptoms of crohn's disease after trying other medications. and the majority of people on humira saw significant symptom relief and many achieved remission in as little as 4 weeks. humira can lower your ability to fight infections, including tuberculosis. serious, sometimes fatal infections and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened; as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems,
serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure. before treatment, get tested for tb. tell your doctor if you've been to areas where certain fungal infections are common, and if you've had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have flu-like symptoms or sores. don't start humira if you have an infection. be there for you, and them. ask your gastroenterologist about humira. with humira, remission is possible.
at chevy, we're all about bringing families together. this time of year, that's really important. so we're making it easier than ever to become part of our family. that's why our chevy employee discount is now available to everyone. the chevy price you pay is what we pay. not a cent more. family is important to us. and we want you to be part of ours. so happy holidays. and welcome to the family. all: the chevy family! get the chevy employee discount for everyone today.
following breaking news for you. cnn has confirmed that a number of saudi nationals were detained for questioning following friday's deadly shooting at the naval air base in pensacola, florida. we're also learning the identity of one of the victims in the shooting. he is joshua kaleb watson who was a sailor in the navy, and in this interview from january he talks about his plans for the
future. >> so i was selected for navy pilot, hopefully heading down to pensacola at this point. right now i'm slated for november. get through flight school and maybe get to fly jets. that would be pretty cool. >> his brother saying watson died a hero. natasha chen is in florida. what else is his brother saying? >> adam watson posted on facebook saying that his youngest brother gave his life in this senseless tragedy you just spoke about, how heartbroken he and his family are. he said this is the worst day of his life, to lose this morn family member and he said that he died a hero. although there is a hole in their hearts that can never be filled again. a lot of families really impacted by this. and this entire community really shane. we know also one of the two deputies who was injured in this incident has been released.
i want to refer to some notes here about those two deputies. one of them was shot in the arm, the other in the knee. one of them had surgery on friday. the one who was shot in the arm was treated and released yesterday already. so both of them it seems are going to be okay. and there were six other people besides those two deputies among the injured. and of course those who were killed, there are three people who were killed in addition to the shooter. that shooter had actually exchanged gunfire with those two deputies and that's when they were hit. we're waiting to learn more about the other victims as they want to be careful about waiting an appropriate time after next of kin have been notified themselves about the victims, fred. >> so natasha cnn has details on this shooter who has been identified as a saudi national.
his uncle telling cnn the gunman showed nothing suspicion before he moved here in 2017 to begin training at the base. >> reporter:. that's right. he came here in august of 2017 as part of a training case. it's funded by the kingdom of saudi arabia. that was supposed to end in august of 2020. he had been here more than a couple of years. his uncle spoke to cnn saying that his nephew was 21 yooerz old. he scribed him as being likeable, exceptionally smart person. he did not see any indication his nephew would do this. saudi arabia needs to get to the truth of what happened. if his nephew is guilty he would be accountable to god. within the last hour or so we learned from an official, that saudi nationals were detained and questioned following the shooting yesterday. and as is natural for any case
of this nature, officials are going to talk to those who are connected to the suspected gunman and that includes his friend circles, which includes saudi nationals. they did not have additional information about the status of those detained saudi nationals, whether still detained or being questioned. >> thank you so much. former pentagon press secretary retired rear admiral, back with me, what does it tell you saudi nashlz were detained but we don't know if they were complicit. it could have been that they were simply questioned. >> right. i think, and i'm not a law enforcement expert but that seems to make eminent sense to me, that the fbi would want to talk to the colleagues from saudi arabia of this individual, just to see what they might know about whatever motivation he might have had and whatever planning he might have executed
in getting ready for this horrific attack. it makes eminent sense to me and we'll have to wait to see how much they are willing to disclose about what they learn from those discussions. >> and john, natasha explained earlier, folks coming from saudi arabia aren't the only folks who may come for training but people come from other parts of the world as well. talk to me about how vital this is, particularly when there is u.s. military arsenal assistance perhaps to other countries and what whether what just happened will in any way impact or change the programs moving forward? >> yeah, great points, fred. first of all, there are literally thousands of foreign nationals undergoing military training of all sorts inside the united states. because so many of these countries purchase arms and ammunition, weapons, platforms and systems to operate in their home territories.
and so many of them pay for this training, as the saudis were paying for this. it's not something that the u.s. taxpayer is fronting. but it is in our national security interest to have these programs in place so that these individuals can go home and not only defend their countries better with these systems, ours, but they can participate in coalition operations more effectively and efficiently with the u.s. and our allies and partners. it's in our interest that we conduct this kind of training going forward. now whether or not that program is going to change, i think secretary defense esper yesterday indicated that he's willing to take a look at this program going forward and doing a review about the vetting procedures in particular. i would not be surprised if you see some sort of announcement or indication from the pept gon that they are going to take a broader look at this program. but i don't think it will change in terms of its, you know, the purpose of it. i would hate to see the program
get thrown away all together. i don't see that happening. it's too important to us. i wouldn't be surprised if they announced some sort of review to get their hands around it and see if anything went wrong that may be avoided in the future. >> thank you so much. >> my pleasure. still ahead, he withheld prissner in iran for three years, now this princeton graduate student is finally heading home as part of a prisoner swap. i'm a verizon engineer, and i'm part of the team building the most powerful 5g experience for america. it's 5g ultra wideband-- --for massive capacity-- --and ultra-fast speeds. almost 2 gigs here in minneapolis. that's 25 times faster than today's network in new york city. so people from midtown manhattan-- --to downtown denver-- --can experience what our 5g can deliver.
(woman) and if verizon 5g can deliver performance like this in these places... it's pretty crazy. ...just imagine what it can do for you. ♪ only roomba i7+ uses two multi-surface rubber brushes. ♪ and picks up more pet hair than other robot vacuums. and the filter captures 99% of dog and cat allergens. if it's not from irobot, it's not a roomba™.
new today, the trump administration says it is hopeful a prisoner swab with iran will lead to better relations with tehran. the exchange freed a princeton graduate student arrested on espionage charges back in 2016. xiyue wang spent three years in a prison but is now undergoing a medical check in germany before returning to the states. kylie atwood joins us. what is president trump saying
about this prisoner swap? ? >> president trump has just recently put out a tweet on that. president trump has tweeted, taken during the obama administration despite 150 billion gift, returned during the trump administration. thank you to iran on a very fair negotiation, see, we can make a deal atogether. so there he is referring to some iran assets that were freed up because they had originally been sanctioned, they were freed up with the obama administration struck the iran deal. but the bottom-line here is that president trump is casting this as potentially positive momentum, as a launching ground for potential better u.s./iranian relations. that could be two sfoeld. a senior official spoke with reporters today and said on the condition that this could potentially be positive momentum
for the other u.s. prepsners who are in iran, that could be a good thing. we don't have any proof that that is to be the case. obviously the u.s. also released an iranian who had been detained here in the u.s. as a part of this deal with xiyue wang. but the other element to consider is generally relations under the trump administration have not been good. a senior official reiterated today that president trump remains open to sitting down with them with no preconditions. they are moving back to that position and trying to seize upon this positive momentum. it's a great day for the xiyue wang family. >> thank you so much. up next, it's a working weekend on capitol hill as house democrats consider articles of impeachment against president trump. what we're learning from a new report just released from the house judiciary committee. t-mobile is lighting up 5g nationwide.
this is cnn breaking news. all right welcome back, this breaking news on the deadly naval base in pensacola, florida. according to the group site, search for international terrorist entities, the gunman posted hatred towards americans for what he perceives as a pro-israel stance. senior editor nic robertson joining me for more. can you tell us more about what was found and this group site? >> yeah, what appears to be you might interpret it as a will, if you will, an online will, but minutes before posted online minutes before the shooting began. there are quotes in there quoting osama bin laden that you'll never be safe while there are americans on our soil, also
quoting an war al locky, the yemny born al qaeda cleric who like bin laden was skilled in drone strikes, well he was killed in a drone strike in 2011, bin laden killed in a takedown back in the same year, but those quotes are striking. because it seems to show that he is using if it does prove to be him, if this extremist monitoring website is correct, it does seem to be using the language that was used by al qaeda ten years or so ago to, dense saudi arabia, against america. this is quite striking. the king of course has called this an outrage. he said this is not -- this is not saudi arabia, the -- they say this is not saudi arabia. they have their faith and put
their trust in the kingdom and the king. but of course these new details that possibly indicate his mindset going into the shooting, and i say possibly, because these have all yet to be confirmed by cnn -- possibly going into the shooting, some al qaeda type content abanti-american, anti-israeli, quoting al qaeda leaders and figure heads. >> is there any clarity on whether these sentiments associated with this gunman, was this posted while he was in training at this u.s. facility or was this prior to? and i ask because it would seem if there was a track record prior to coming to the u.s., that any kind of vetting to make sure that this candidate is -- everything is known about this candidate before coming to a u.s. military insulation ftalla
any training? >> sure, this extremist monitoring website says that this was posted, this twitter account posted this about 15 minutes before the shooting began. so immediately prior. so that's why we might think of it as a will. if it was him. if it was his. the name seems to indicate that it might be, the twitter account was created in 2012. and yes, he would have been very thoroughly vetted, thoroughly vetted to get into the saudi military, thoroughly vetted to be picked by the saudi military to come on a training program in the united states, and thoroughly vetted by the united states to be allowed in to get on that training program. one would also expect, but this may now come under more skrutne, that in his time, the over two years that he was in the united states, that attention would have been paid to any sort of changes in his character or behavior.
now, whether that would have been a responsibility of the saudis or whether that would have been something that the united states would have taken on, remembering there are over 850 saudis going through some sort of military training in the united states as of yesterday, so that would be a big job for either of saudis or the united states to do. but this does appear to be something that was sent out in his name, appears, again, we have yet to verify all of this, appears to have be been sent out minutes before the attack. and therefore would seem to indicate his state of mind and some of his rationale if it was him behind this twitter. >> okay. and then, nick, what's your view on the level of cooperation, the exchange of information from the saudi authorities to the u.s. on this particular matter? because we know the president, you know, said that the king called him. they had a conversation.
the president of the united states read, you know, a statement or, you know, conveyed the sentiments of the king. but with this kind of added information here from this site, group, what kind of communication do you believe would transpire now? >> the saudis are in the same situation as the united states. it would appear, at least as of the time of the shooting yesterday. they're starting from scratch. they've got to go through all the social media accounts, go talk to people he was talking to in the last few weeks, find out his state of mind. and, you know, what we saw yesterday was really an indication of the strength and relationship between the king of saudi arabia and president trump and also between saudi arabia and the united states. and an effort by saudi arabia to try to get ahead of this and knock down any repercussions
before they come up. this undoubtedly is going to be problematic for saudi arabia. this is not what they want. listen, there is a world heavyweight boxing match taking place in a few hours here in read. t rehad. they want that. international sporting events, the world's biggest ipo a few days ago. this is how they want saudi arabia to be seen. these new details emerging are going to have a real negative impact. i think it's going to take a little while to see how the saudis calibrate themselves to this. the king has been very clear, however, he has said saudi authorities must fully cooperate with u.s. investigators. and i don't think you're going to find anyone on the saudi officials side that's going to start covering up tracks at this stage. however you can expect the saudi authorities to be very fully
engaged with the shooter's family at the moment to get every scrap of detail they can learn about him, his inclinations and what the families can tell him. >> the saudis would have to be fressed on what they knew, what they know about this gunman, right? because you just mentioned a moment ago the scrutiny that is placed on any candidate who would be coming stateside for this kind of training, the scrutiny that would be involved for any saudi to be a part of the military. so how and who will hold the saudis to account to express what they know about this person, what they knew prior to his dispatch, and what they learned aside from what you just mentioned was 15 minutes of possible twitter activity prior to this shooting? >> well, clearly the military is -- the u.s. military is going to examine their procedures, proceed calls, operational
practices, the level of oversight they have, or whether or not they even want to continue at this time to engage in this sort of training. it's in the mutual interest of both countries. just the beginning of last year i was flying on a saudi black hawk helicopter with saudi pilots, the air base we took off from, it was parked next to u.s. black hawk helicopters flown by u.s. pilots. it's interchangeable. i've flown on plenty and this one was no different. the interoperability of the two forces is important for the united states to be able to project its power through allies in this region and it's important for the saudis to be able to project their power in the region and hold off the threat of their enemies in the region. so the relationship is important. but having said that, who is going to hold who to account? well, we can expect, you know,
politicians, particularly congress congress in the united states, i think, to again double down on what they've been saying to the president, the displeasure, the weapons systems being sold to saudi are killing yemenis, because it's recognized yemen in a civil war there and there are collateral civilian casualties. it's going to bring pressure there. you would expect the way the relationship is conducted right now between the saudi king and president trump, that president trump is going to be -- is going to have words with the saudi king about this. but the real systems and procedures, one would imagine, that is going to come from, you know, from within the military. but what laws may come into effect because of what's transpired -- again we don't know the details of it yet, we're beginning to get the first clues that there is a real potential overtones to this. this is something we know the fbi is investigating.
it isn't confirmed. it's an avenue they're looking at. anyone going into the situation, any investigator, is not going to overlook that particular issue. i think this has a long way to travel yet, fred. >> that's right. these new details, not being confirmed by u.s. authorities, but instead coming from this site intelligence group, an independent group that has compiled this information. thank you so much. and we'll be right back. she wanted to move someplace warm. but he wanted snow for the holidays. so we built a snow globe. i'll get that later. dylan! but the one thing we could both agree on was getting geico to help with homeowners insurance. what? switching and saving was really easy! i love you! what? sweetie! hands off the glass. ugh!! call geico and see how easy saving on homeowners and condo insurance can be. i love her!
welcome back. just hours ago the house judiciary committee released a new report laying out the historical arguments for impeachment. in one section arguing that abuse of power is impeachable, this report says, i'm quoting now, the powers of the president are immense but they are not abstute. that applies to the president as his president ses sores. president nixon erd. and president trump was equally
mistain when he declared he had the right to do whatever i want as president. end quote. joining me right now, liz wheel, she is a former federal prosecutor. liz, it's a working weekend for these committee members who are trying to draft these articles of impeachment. they've laid out this multiple-page report in preparation for monday's hearing. so what does it sound like to you, that abuse of power is near definitely going to be an article of impeachment? >> absolutely. we've got abuse of presidential power, obstruction of justice, then right at the top, fred, we get to treason or bribery, and the way they get to treason is betrayal of national interests through foreign entanglements. that's very interesting. that's right up at the top. you see how you can get through
that with president trump's basically the bribery of the ukrainian president, that's right up at the top. that's treason. that's what the founding fathers said was the number one reason for impeachment, then corruption of office or election. that's right up there as well. note very particularly that this, if we count this as really a 50-page road map as opposed to the 300-page report that came from the intel committee, we'll be hearing about that on monday, but take this as a 50-page roadmap, much easier to follow, that then they don't have anything mentioned here about the mueller report, no offenses or counts related to that. my guess would tell me that the staff members at least are doing very vehemently behind the scenes to keep out any evidence from the mueller report or any offenses listed here.
>> and you agree with that? >> i do. >> you think that's wise? >> i do. as a prosecutor you want to throw in everything. you want to be able to throw everything in, be able to have the jurors hear everything. but this is not just a basic prosecution, but this is a political act and prosecution. these senators who are going to be here, they've heard the mueller report. everyone has. that's old news at this point. >> you feel like it's fresher to deal with -- >> absolutely. >> -- 17 witnesses, depositions? >> yes. >> these articles, abuse of power, obstruction, treason, prescribely, most of it supported in your view by the testimony already collected? >> yes. and here's the thing. if president trump brings in and through his lawyers, because they will be represented at the senate trial, now brings in giuliani and he's in ukraine and bringing in all of this defense,
may we call it that, that he's bringing in now, and that then brings in the russians and the 2016 election and all that, then he opens the door. >> you don't see him doing that -- >> to potentially. >> question mark. >> to potentially bringing in the mueller report, i would argue, at the senate trial for the democrats, i don't think you'd wanted want to do that. but it could happen. the democrats could be holding that back. would president trump want to open that door? i wouldn't think so but it could happen. >> so you see a greater willingness for the white house attorneys to be very engaged in the u.s. senate trial, you know, if indeed the house votes to impeach the president and all roads seem like they're heading that way, however it's the white house counsel who just said, you know, through a statement, you know, dated yesterday that, no, no interest in being a part of this process. >> not this process. >> in the house.
so why is it advantageous in the into the and not necessarily in the house? >> i think at that point they will engage at the senate. i think there will be some defense at the senate. i don't think the president is going to sit mute at the senate because i think he sees the senate as more favorable, which it is of course, to him. i think there will be some -- i don't know how that exactly will play now, but i think the president sees that as much more favorable to him. >> liz wheel, all fascinating. thank you so much for being with us. >> you got it. >> we'll be right back. [ electrical buzzing ]
welcome back. on monday democrats will present evidence that the judiciary committees against president trump white house attorneys say they will not -- describing the inquiry as baseless saying that in a letter. with me now, ron brownstein, a senior. franchesca, an analyst. m moderates are frooelg feeling frustrated saying they don't want the mueller report to be part of it. how important will it be that it is a streamlined report that lays out articles of impeachment
that pertain to ukraine? >> it's a big decision. the first point is, there are 31 house democrats in districts that trump carried in 2016 and the vast majority are going to be comfortable voting for articles of impeachment. in with bill clinton came out and why not approved. we don't know what party leaders are going to do. certainly if they do include the mueller report you would think members that had the opportunity to vote yea or nay, i think the big story is there is a solidified democratic majority to move this on. >> what's the message that the white house is sending by saying, no, you are not going to involve our counsel because in a letter saying they believe it's a charade? >> well, the white house has long said that they believe that, and to participate at this point they believe it would make the entire process look
legitimized. they've argued it has not been fair to them thus far. the white house is also starting to find its footing in it's messaging. the impeachment messengers coming out more aggressively, zealously, fighting on his behalf, speaking to the media. the argument they're making to the democrats is that they could lose their seats if they vote for impeachment. they're claiming that democrats to lose the house if they vote for impeachment on the grounds they've laid out. they're pushing back against what democrats are laying out as the grounds for bribery as part of the expect the articles of impeachment. >> ron, is it of great risk that the white house would really put all of its stock in the u.s. senate proceedings in that trial and that's where counsel would be engaged because there's this level of come fort that this republican-led senate is going to err on the side of the white
house? >> support for impeachment is around 50% of the public, hire than bill clinton's which never reached more above a third. fred, despite that there were 90 house republicans in districts that bill clinton carried, almost all of them voted. only seven lost their seats. i think voting for impeachment is a great threat isn't supported by history. putting their eggs in the senate is putting their message on all issues -- their goal is to delegitimize the process. talk to their base republicans should stick with me. they're not putting forward a substantive argument designed to counter the evidence and to reach out to voters beyond their base. one of the key elements in public opinion the shared opinion that the president did something wrong is higher.
that's the challenge for the democrats. they've got to get more of those people who think this was wrong to cross the threshold to saying it was a high crime and misdemeanor. >> fan chesca, what are you hearing about how the white house is poising itself to count on the senate to come to the rescue? >> the white house is waiting to hear from mitch mcconnell to see who procedures he will put forward. because the thing is the president says he would like to see live witnesses like hunter biden but he might not get that depending on what those rules and procedures say. in some ways the white house has to wait for mitch mcconnell or take a vote in order for them to figure out what their next steps are. >> always good to see you both. thank you so much. >> thank you. we've got so much more straight ahead. see you tomorrow. ana ca berrira is up next.
this is cnn breaking news. >> hello, i'm in new york. thank you so much for being with us on this saturday. we are following several breaking news stories at this hour today. new developments in the shooting in pensacola, florida. this is the breaking news. we're learning new details. a u.s.-based intelligence group has revald the man who shot and killed three people and wounded 8 is a saudi national who is being described as harboring extreme anti-american views. i'll take you live to saudi arabia in just a moment. also today an american official now confirming to us that an additional number of saudi nationals have been detained and are being questioned in the shooting. we've learned the name of one of the victims, an active duty naval officer and we've heard from his heartbren