tv Anderson Cooper 360 CNN December 30, 2019 8:00pm-9:00pm PST
good evening. tonight new reporting on some of the central facts, the impeachment case of president trump. "the new york times" citing previously undisclosed emails and interviews with dozens of current and former administration officials providing perhaps our best look yet at the order to freeze military aid for ukraine. which the president allegedly with held for investigations into the bidens. it was, according to that reporting, very much a top down affair driven by the president with acting chief of staff mick mulvaney deeply involved in the aid freeze and other senior officials pushing back. john bolton for one. mark esper and as for mulvaney,
and pompeo. he facilitated the president's wishes. quoting now from the times, the aide, robert b. blaire, replied that it would be possible but not pretty. expect congress to become unhinged if the white house tried to countermand spending passed by the house and senate. he wrote in a previously undisclosed email. and he wrote, it might further fuel the narrative that mr. trump was pro russia. according to "the times" those carrying out the president's orders to freeze the aid for the most part did not know about the pressure campaign on ukraine's president. however, his testimony in the house shows mick mulvaney could be the exception which is why senate democrats want to hear from him and three others, all four of whom the president has blocked from testifying. in a moment one of "the times" reporters. first boris sanchez outside of mar-a-lago. we know the president has been working on any kind of strategy for the senate trial since he's been down in mar-a-lago?
>> reporter: anderson, it appears that president trump has been trying to sort out a strategy for a senate trial while here at mar-a-lago while quizzing allies, aides, advisers over how he should handle things moving forward. the president seeking information from a multitude of sources. we're told by people close to the president that he hears from allies that he needs to bolster his white house legal team. specifically, they've encouraged him to bring on a scholar in constitutional law. the feeling among some close to the president is that white house counsel could use some help. they don't feel like he's going to give the president the tv moments that he's looking for. as you know, anderson, the president wants a show. coincidentally, there was a constitutional law scholar at mar-a-lago over the last few weeks in alan dershowitz, a frequent defender of the president. there are some other open questions out there as well,
notably just how involved some of the president's allies in the house are going to be in a senate trial. people like congressman mark meadows, jim jordan, et cetera, and also whether we're going to see those live witnesses that the president has demanded but some republican senators have been less than enthusiastic about, anderson. >> he was golfing with senator lyndsey graham, is that right? >> yeah, that's correct. lyndsey graham, someone whom the president has frequently golfed with was on the links with him today. we're told that senator graham has been frequently meeting with white house council pat cipiloni in frequent weeks. he's not the only one golfing with president trump over the last few days. trey gowdy was also out on the golf course with president trump. gowdy was supposed to join the white house legal team but he couldn't because of legal rules. he would have to wait until next month to jump opt team.
they got an early start golfing this weekend. >> boris sanchez, thanks very much. joining us is mark mazetti. mark, your piece, it's fascinating the amount of confusion and frustration it paints at so many levels. it wasn't only within the west wing and budget office, it spread to the defense department, state department and congress as well. >> yeah. what we endeavored to find out here was what was the origin of the freeze in ukraine aid? who were the prime movers? you know, in the impeachment testimony over the last few months, a lot of people who testified only hear about it secondhand. we wanted to find out how it all began and what we found was that there was a lot more concern at the highest levels of the trump administration pretty early on including this email from the end of june where robert blaire basically lays out that this is
going to go badly. congress is not going to take this well and if anything, he understated exactly what would happen. of course, the ukraine aid was part of the reason why the president was impeached. so you see a lot more when you dig into the sort of machinery of how this was held up a lot more concern, confusion, anger about what was going on. >> it was also interesting, i think, in the article that mick mulvaney would leave the oval office or the room when president trump and rudy giuliani were discussing matters. >> right. and that was this idea that whatever president trump and rudy giuliani were discussing was privileged through attorney-client privilege and mick mulvaney shouldn't be there, but what we found was that, you know, in the personal mulvaney there's more of a kind of blurring of the two channels that were -- that are at the center of this story.
one of the channels, of course, is the pressure campaign to get the ukraine government to investigate the biden family. the other is the freezing of aid. those are the two parts of the quid pro quo. some said we didn't really know that the aid was being held up for this specific political reason. actually, there was more knowledge there. and i think that was one of the significant findings of our piece. >> also, if one of the president's arguments has been that this wasn't a personal, you know, request, this was about u.s. foreign policy, had nothing to do with investigations of the biden, the idea that mick mulvaney would make a show of leaving a room because what biden -- what giuliani and the president was discussing was based on, you know, the personal lawyer-client relationship on
personal matters, i mean, that's just not the case here. i mean, it goes against -- if it was just officially personal matters, then the whole idea is it's just confirmation that the president was pursuing his personal interests in a way that affected u.s. foreign policy. >> right. so that's what you see in this -- some of these new revelations is there's a lot more mixing of the official u.s. political -- sorry, the u.s. policy towards ukraine and what the president was pursuing privately for his own political gain in finding dirt about the bidens that many may have suspected for a long time that these things were, of course, never totally separate. i think there's more information now that they really were blurred. >> finally and very quickly. at the end there's an email from someone in the white house, i can't remember who it was, to someone in the defense department saying, look, the
defense department could have gotten the aid going and the responsibilities at the white house. what was the response from the defense department? >> the response was, i'm speechless. you must be joking. the allegation was at the end of the day throughout this whole process it was really not the white house's fault that the aid was held up, it was the pentagon. this was from a top pentagon budget official who called the bluff and said we know what really has gone on here. >> yeah. mark, it's fascinating. >> thank you. >> names you see all over "the times" reporting and they happen to be witnesses the democrats want to testify. mick mulvaney, john bolton, robert blaire, michael duffy. republicans are resisting lt call. house speaker pelosi has still yet to send articles of impeachment across. a federal judge dismissed a challenge by charles cupferman to a house subpoena.
there's no expectation, they will refile the subpoena. the lawsuit is unnecessary. john bolton, as you'll recall, declined to go before the house until that lawsuit was ruled on. let's get some perspective from house judiciary committee member. jamie raskin. these new details from "the times" how much do they change or do they change the calculus for the democrats here? >> well, they fill in a lot of the details that were kind of abundantly directed to by ambassador sondland who said everyone was in the loop. "the new york times" report suggests everyone was in the loop. everyone understood it. "the times" report says they tried to cover their tracks and tried to displace their own responsibility onto the department of defense and other actors. but ultimately the report demonstrates that one person and one person only was at the heart
of the entire scheme against zelensky and that was donald trump. he hatched it. he conceived of it. he executed it, and he swept up all of these different government powers in the process. and so they withheld the money. that's a violation of the constitution itself because under article 1 it's congress that decides where money should go and we appropriated that money. it cleared the department of defense anti-corruption protocol. they violated the impoundment control act by not notifying us formally they were trying to withhold that money. >> did the details give nancy pelosi more reason to delay sending the articles of impeachment over to the senate, do you think? >> no, i don't think so. look, we had 17 witnesses who were sworn under oath. they all told us different parts of the exact same story, which is the president executed a shakedown of the ukrainian president zelensky in order to get him involved in our presidential campaign in order
to smear joe biden, in order to rehabilitate this discredited conspiracy theory about 2016. that's the basic story. now we could have had 18, 19, 20 witnesses if we were willing to drag this on for months, but all of them have told us the exact same thing. in any event, what's put into the bill of indictment, which is what an impeachment is, doesn't have to be exhaustive. that's what the trial is for. and so at the trial the senate ought to call everybody who they think they need to fill in any material element missing from the case. what we don't have right now is any kind of alibi or any kind of alternative hypothesis about what happened. everybody agrees this is not an agatha kristie mystery. we know exactly what the president did. i think all of the senators have to have a fair and open mind including the democrats who must be open to any exculpatory evidence, any evidence that contradicts the overwhelming
weight of evidence coming out of the house. but unless that evidence comes forward, i would say that this is one of the most open and shut cases i've ever seen in my life. >> certainly republicans see it differently, particularly in the senate, and don't seem so inclined to bring forward any evidence or witnesses. how does this stalemate, if that's what it is, how does it get solved? >> but look at the conundrum in what you just said. if they don't see it the same way and if the president is convinced this is a fraud, a hoax, bs, everything that he's called it, then he should bring forward the witnesses that will show that. he should bring forward people to swear under oath why all of the other witnesses were wrong and why the house of representatives' understanding of what took place is false. but it doesn't help just to sit on the sidelines and throw tomatoes and eggs especially when chief of staff mulvaney himself has basically confirmed it saying of course there are political quid pro quos in the way we conduct our foreign policy.
the president has said this is what i wanted from ukraine, i wanted them to go after the bidens. we have one story where the president tried to drag a foreign government into our election in order to get himself re-elected. this is a high crime and if we let it go, american democracy will be forever changed. in a very negative way. >> if all you have is eggs and tomatoes, that's what you throw. doesn't seem like they have an argument to make. >> the president blockaded a whole series of witnesses in his cabinet, the secretary of state, secretary of energy, head of office of management and budget. he can send those people to go and testify if he has an alibi, if he has an alternative story. right now we have not seen one. what we need is a commitment to have a fair trial. the reason the constitution uses the language of a trial and the chief justice of the united
states superintendents the whole process is because it has to have the integrity of a trial. there have to be witnesses, there's got to be evidence. the jurors have to be open to evidence on all sides and then there has to be a fair outcome that the country will recognize as a real adjudication of what took place. >> congressman raskin, thank you. rudy giuliani, a new reporting on his involvement. shadowed from ukraine but similar in almost every respect. a rabbi joins us to talk about healing and a growing wave of anti-semetic hatred and deadly violence. ♪ ♪ after a night like this, crest has you covered. crest, the official toothpaste of santa. my gums are irritated. i don't have to worry about that, do i? harmful bacteria lurk just below the gum line.
( ♪ ) ♪ the sun is risin' ♪ ♪ as the day begins ♪ time for reflectin' on family and friends ♪ ♪ and hey, we got somethin' ♪ ♪ just for you (sniffing) ♪ it's a cup of your favori-i-i-ite... ♪ (loud splashing) (high-pitched laughter) dang woodchucks! with geico, the savings keep on going. just like this sequel. 15 minutes could save you 15% or more on car insurance.
giuliani at the center of the effort to help nicholas madura leave office. news to white house officials and against the wishes of john bolton. neither bolton's lawyer nor the white house nor giuliani responded to requests to comments from "the post." talk about it with john kirby who served the state department and republican strategist scott jennings and kiersten powers, columnist for "usa today." admiral kirby, is this how diplomacy is supposed to work? >> no. most decidedly not, anderson. two things count for a lot in diplomacy, accountability and alignment. if this is accurate, giuliani is out there meeting with maduro, trying to negotiate a deal, basically a regime change for his departure.
not in alignment with venezuela. and of course the other thing is mr. giuliani's not accountable to the american people, to the congress, or to the state department for his actions. he's accountable to only one person, donald trump, and that means that he's undercutting u.s. foreign policy at a very critical time in a very important part of the world. >> kiersten, i guess the president can have emissaries outside the usual chain. we've seen that with envoys and stuff. usually that's in a public role and public position. they are usually trying to advance what is actually u.s. policy. >> right. well, you know, so this is similar to ukraine in a lot of ways as you pointed out, but i think one way that it's different is that, you know, rudy giuliani and the ukraine situation was -- was part of the scheme to pressure the government into digging up dirt on a campaign rival so that made it very distinct. it was at odds with the ukraine policy but the question is
where's donald trump in all of this? has donald trump asked rudy giuliani to do this? i still think it's not the appropriate way to conduct foreign policy, but ultimately if donald trump told him to do this much the way, you know, i think that he did in the ukraine situation, it certainly seems that way, then that -- that actually is the government policy. it's at odds the same way bolton was very unhappy what was happening with giuliani regarding ukraine, but in the end the president decides, you know, whether or not he wants rudy giuliani doing this. >> scott, is this appropriate? >> well, i don't know because we don't know exactly in whose interests giuliani was acting. i mean, he obviously as admiral kirby said, he's accountable to the president. he claims to be his lawyer. he has paying clients. although he's accountable to the president, there may be other people paying him trying to get
outcomes which may or may not be in alignment with u.s. policy. if i were the president, even if i asked rudy giuliani to insert himself into the situation, what i would want to know is were you acting in the instructions i gave you and not trying to calibrate those against some other paying client which may or may not be exactly what i want? so i think the muddy waters here. who do you answer to? who gave you the orders? are you coordinating with the government appropriately? those are the kinds of questions you would want to know the answer to before you decide whether it was appropriate or not. >> admiral kirby, it's like if in past administrations you had an envoy on northern ireland who also had business on both sides -- you know, in northern ireland and united kingdom and you're not even paying the envoy and you don't know really who's working for. he makes an interesting point. >> no, he does. there's a lot of questions we don't know from this story. i think we need to learn more before we rush to a particular
judgment. that said, when a president, and lots of presidents do this, they hire special envoys, those envoys report up through the state department chain of command. there is accountability inside the chain of command and up to the president. they're also fully vetted before they become special envoys. in this case i'm imagining, mr. giuliani hasn't been fully vetted for his activities with maduro in venezuela and he certainly doesn't appear at least from the reporting right now to have been working through and with the state department along that chain of command. again, it goes to accountability and that's worrisome. >> again, kiersten, it's not exactly -- we're talking about ukraine, there's also turkey. giuliani has business interests there. you wonder where else he was using his connections to the president to advance his own business interests in terms of, you know, lobbying the president on behalf of people who he had business relationships with. >> yeah, i mean, that seems to be what he's up to. and i think, you know, the
president has to be aware of it. it's been widely reported on. you know, he's also representing people -- i mean, at a bare minimum it's a conflict of interest to have the president's personal lawyer representing, for example, you know, somebody who's being investigated, venezuelan who's being investigated for money laundering in florida. you have in this report, rudy giuliani went to the justice department to ask them to drop the charges against this person. that seems like a conflict of interest to me. and i do feel like if this was the obama administration and one of obama's -- you know, obama's personal lawyer was going and doing something like this, people like scott would definitely be criticizing it. >> he's also in, scott, a business -- i mean, rudy giuliani, let's be honest, he's in the money business now. he was once a public servant and, you know, obviously had the record he had, but he's in the business of making money.
he does security contracts in parts of the world, you know, for -- in ukraine and elsewhere and has clients which are not -- you know, he's not making wills for them, he's doing sort of obscure arrangements in, you know, some pretty interesting, odd places and, you know, he has a lot of money pressures personally. >> yeah, look. i don't begrudge people for having clients. he's a well-known person, he is he a lawyer, he's got a reputation. if people want to hire him and that's how he wants to make a living, i have no problem with that. what concerns me is if he is representing the president and saying one thing and doing something that's in someone else's best interest, is he making the president believe i am helping you while he's making money on that? if i were donald trump, i would be concerned is he making money
on my back i would be concerned. to me, i think if you're going to help the president and be his lawyer, that's fine. i think if you're going to make money and have consulting arrangements, that's fine. the mixing of the two combined with the fact that he is unappointed and unelected, unaccountable, it gives me a lot of pause. it's not endured to the president's benefit which as a republican bothered me. >> this is one of the reasons why people paid their lawyers instead of kind of making up salaries based on what they do. >> you get what you pay for in this world, anderson. you get what you pay for. >> that is definitely true. thank you. up next, new information on the attack on a hanukkah celebration outside of new york city. what they found after the suspect's capture. the story of one of the heroes of that sickening night.
here, it all starts withello! hi!... how can i help? a data plan for everyone. everyone? everyone. let's send to everyone! wifi up there? uhh. sure, why not? how'd he get out?! a camera might figure it out. that was easy! glad i could help. at xfinity, we're here to make life simple. easy. awesome. so come ask, shop, discover at your local xfinity store today.
dozens of congregants from two months old to 80 had gathered in the rabbi's home in monsey, new york, for a hanukkah celebration. that's when a man with a machete broke in. and started attacking. he's accused of stabbing five hasidic jews. facing federal hate crime charges. we're also learning tonight about a journal the fbi says they found be in the suspect's home that shows anti-semetic sentiments. references to hitler and nazi culture. there's a picture of a star of david and swastika. they tracked down his car through a license plate reader and they captured the tag as he drove across a bridge into the city. the gruesome attack brought
stories of courage and stories that go beyond bloodshed. sara sidner has the story. >> reporter: witnesses say the suspect slashed his way through a house of orthodox jewish worshippers injuring five and leaving behind a terrible blood-soaked scene during a hanukkah celebration. joseph gluck was inside that home. >> i saw him back and forth trying to hit. >> reporter: did he say anything? >> nothing. he didn't say anything to anyone. he just spoke to me outside once. >> reporter: what did he say? >> hey, you, i'll get you. >> reporter: gluck managed to get out. >> run back in. >> reporter: run back in and fight. his only weapon, the furniture around him in shambles. >> i picked that up from the back. he was three feet away from me. i hit him in the face. he started coming after me out towards the door. >> reporter: when the attacker
left gluck was worried he was going into the synagogue. by then the ambulances were arriving. >> it was a jarring scene. there was a lot of blood. there were patients laying on the floor severely injured and it's just something that you don't see everyday. >> reporter: his team whisked away four of the five injured in the ambulance service. a volunteer service made up of jewish community members. less than two hours later police tracked down the suspect using the license plate number gluck had given them. >> thousands of jewish members went to sleep more calm that night not worrying about their kids going to school, or husbands going to pray or them going shopping. >> reporter: you're the guardian angel. >> god is the guardian, i am the messenger. >> reporter: sara sidner is with us now. i mispronounced the town, it's monsey. sara, do we have any comment from the defense attorney?
>> reporter: we do. michael sussman said him and the pastor of the family say that, you know, they went through a bunch of these papers, the papers that you are hearing the prosecutors cite. they don't see anything that points to an actual anti-semetic motive in this case. he says this is a person who had a long history of mental illness. this isn't about him being a terrorist or he should not be called a terrorist but, indeed, he is someone who struggled with mental illness for much of his life. that is what we are hearing from his defense attorney in this particular case and he is on a $5 million bond. in just those first charges, the five charges that are being brought in the county, there are of course now five more charges being brought by the feds. those are all hate crime charges, anderson. >> those hate crime charges are
based on, at least in part, not only the attack itself but some of the journals that this person kept. i mean, there were from what i understand and what we know at this point multiple searches about hitler and hating jews and why did hitler hate jews and where religious areas around me. >> reporter: that's exactly right. they are basing it on the evidence that they have gathered. not only that, but also looking at some of the things he searched for, like synagogues in new jersey and new york as well. they are looking into his electronics and communication as well, basing all of that on saying that's evidence that shows that there is some anti-semitism going on here, which is based on hate which is why the hate charges came forward. >> sara sidner, thanks. cnn was able to confirm that in new york city this month alone there were ten separate acts of violence targeting jewish people. here with his thoughts is rabbi gantz. who spent saturday night with the victims.
thank you for your time. i'm sorry that we're meeting under these circumstances. how is the community holding up right now? >> community is holding up. just a glimpse of how the community is holding up, they have a welcoming of the new metorah the next afternoon, and the rabbi himself, the rabbi, his whole family was experiencing this tremendous terror came out to dance with the torah on the street with thousands of fellow jews and brothers being there in their presence adding light into the dark world. >> it's not only an extraordinary sign of -- show of faith and a show of fearlessness. >> you know, as you know, we cannot double down on our
strength and vigor to continue. we need to continue spreading goodness and kindness and light into this amazing world. anti-semitism has been going on in the capital of anti-semitism in new york city for many, many years as you know. it's spilled over to rockland county and to monsey but to stand behind and to be frightful is a tag line which really bothered me today. jews are going underground, and to me that was a very painful response to terror. >> what do you say to people who are fearful, who do have a desire to remain quiet or, you know, just try to -- who are fearful? how do you not give in to that? >> we listen to our children. we validate their questions.
we listen attenttivelily. we create warm environments around our children and family and at the same time we gain on our faith that's been the last 3 1/2 thousand years of jewish people. the people in the world, especially the jewish people, have been through every hardship that a nation can endure and as we say in the hagada, passover, we say not one nation has been upon us, against us, but god is there for us and helps us and strengthens us. as a rabbi, community leader, father, family, this is how we have to talk to our community, talk to our fellow members in leadership, not to be frightened. i think that's really one of the things that the antisemites, that the haters want us to do is
to double -- to get down and be frightened, lock our doors and obviously we put all security measures in strong place and we don't rely on prayer alone. we protect ourselves. we alert security. we fight back if we need to at times when we need to fight back. at the same time, we know that god doesn't take soul away from this world unless it's that soul's time and thank god by miracles these five people, it wasn't their time. god stood there with them fighting them, and that's what we teach our children, the concept that we have to stand strong in faith. >> rabbi gancz, i really appreciate talking to you tonight. thank you very much. >> thank you, anderson. >> i wish you peace and strength in the days ahead. thank you. >> thank you.
and my lack of impulse control, is about to become your problem. ahh no, come on. i saw you eating poop earlier. hey! my focus is on the road, and that's saving me cash with drivewise. who's the dummy now? whoof! whoof! so get allstate where good drivers save 40% for avoiding mayhem, like me. sorry! he's a baby!
just 35 days until the first in the nation iowa caucuses. 35 days. the numbers remain strong for pete buttigieg. the south bend mayor is comfortably a among the democratic front-runners. joe biden is on the rise up about 3 points since early november. senator elizabeth warren has dropped from first place to fourth in the same period. no other candidate gets double digit support. with me is rachel stasenberger and bacarri sellers. why do you think mayor buttigieg is leading in iowa and why is it different than nationwide? >> i have seen the candidates a lot more than nationwide. we've had more than 2,000 candidate events so far and we are expecting another 1,000 before the caucuses. there's a different relationship
that iowans have with candidates than most of the country. >> bacarri, buttigieg obviously has this lead in iowa. reality is elsewhere. he has 4% of iowans are african-americans. a state like south carolina, a quinnipiac poll has him polling at zero. how much would a win in iowa mean for the prodder rate? broader race. not necessarily new hampshire but south carolina and beyond? >> there are a couple of things. one, it does have something to do with the number of visits. individuals have gone to iowa. i think even more importantly it's the lack of diversity you see in iowa. the lack of diversity you see in new hampshire. that's where pete buttigieg is doing well. can he overcome the hump and garner any support? i've said this a thousand times on cnn because it rings true. the people who choose the democratic nominee are my momma and her friends. they're african-american women. that is who chooses -- of a
certain age. that is who chooses the democratic nominee. those are the voters in south carolina. those are the voters on super tuesday. those are the voters throughout march. those are the voters who are not reflective in iowa. if he does happen to win iowa, which i will say we have yet a ways to go, it will give him a spring board. pete buttigieg, let me say this, for everyone watching, pete buttigieg is not the future of the democratic party, he's the right now. he has a great voice. he has an obstacle because of a lack of relationship with the black voters which i believe is insurmountable. >> you did not say your mom's actual age, bacarri, you were raised right. >> of a certain age. >> he did that very well. very nice. rachel, historically how much do things change in the last month leading up to the iowa caucuses in iowa itself? >> that's right. we've been doing a lot of look at historic polls and what happens.
the last month is crucial. what we've seen up to this point, one of the experts has said sort of this introduction phase. getting to know you. the last month is about persuasion. a lot of that comes down to organization on the ground. who can turn interesting people into committed people? who can turn even on caucus night one person's supporters into their supporters? on the critique of buttigieg, iowa is a very white state, it is the state where barack obama spring boarded into the national consciousness back in 2008. it's a white state but he was the first african-american president so you can't necessarily equate a candidate's race and their attractiveness to iowa. >> bacarri, even if vice president biden doesn't win iowa or new hampshire, how much of it all do you think that hampers his road beyond? >> not much. i mean, i think that one of the
things that has to be said as we are talking about it, analyze it, pete buttigieg will be the best pete buttigieg he can be. he's not barack obama. one thing that has to happen, those individuals who are not bernie sanders, those individuals who are not joe biden, what they have to do is win iowa. joe biden will be just fine. if joe biden finishes in the top 2, 3, 4, he'll be fine. he'll do well in nevada. he'll do well in south carolina. he'll do well on super tuesday. the same goes true for bernie sanders. at the end of the day no one has shown like bernie and biden that they have any longevity. i think iowa plays a unique import right now. the uniqueness is certain people have to win iowa. if anybody wants to tell you they know who's going to win iowa, they're lying to you.
we can just go back to 2003, in december of 2003 and john kerry is running third or fourth and john kerry ended up winning that race and becoming the nominee. i'm not sure we'll have anything that drastic but there are still people who are running third and fourth. i still tell people that amy klobuchar, cory booker, a number of people can still win iowa for now. still up for grabs. >> 35 days. >> thanks very much. happy new year. coming up, i want to tell you about a breakout artist, who was a breakout artist and became a musical legend. if you don't know her, you should. i'll talk to linda ronstadt ahead of "linda ronstadt, the sound of my voice." ( ♪ ) hey there! i'm lonnie from lonnie's lumber. if you need lumber wood, lonnie's is better than good.
we got oak, cherry, walnut, and more. and we also have the best selection of plywood (clattering) in the state... hey! (high-pitched laughter) man: dang woodchucks! (wood clattering) stop chuckin' that wood! with geico, the savings keep on going. just like this sequel. 15 minutes could save you 15% or more on car insurance.
she won ten grammys in her own time. linda ronstadt is a new subject of a new cnn film "the sound of my voice." i sat down with her and talk about her incredible music, the illness that stopped her from performing and about politics. >> hearing the diagnoses, what is that like? >> i was shocked. i had this tremor. i thought they could fix it. took them about a year after that to come to the diagnosis and took them a little longer.
>> initially they thought it was parkinson's. >> i read that they can diagnose parkinson's really early by listening to their voice since my voice had been recorded so many times. >> it seems particularly cruel to have something that affects your voice before even anything else. >> some of my family are republicans and instead of talking about that, we have a great time. >> so you don't have to sing anymore >> now, i have to be careful because had so much taken away from us from this administration, i am not letting them take away my family relationship. they're fairly rational republican. >> so you can still have family gatheri
gatherings. >> i read that you read a lot about the republic in germany and you start to see parallels. >> great parallel and intelligence and berlin and the artists just busy doing their things. there is a lot of chance that they did not speak out and in industrial come pleng, of course, he was not controlled by the time he established and put his own people in place and stack the course and that's what he had to do to consolidate is power. we got hitler and he destroyed germany, forward and backward. the people, beethoven and they became jokes and laughing stock. >> a lot of people would be surprised to her between what happened then and now?
>> it is exactly the same. you find a common for everybody. i was sure that trump was going to get elected the day he announced and i said he's going to be like hitler. and sure enough that's what he delivered, you know? >> she's a lot more to say. she's a remarkable artist. lin lin linda ronstadt is live. >> stick around, our second hour of cnn 360 begins. ♪ ♪ after a night like this, crest has you covered. crest, the official toothpaste of santa. my gums are irritated. i don't have to worry about that, do i? harmful bacteria lurk just below the gum line. crest gum detoxify, voted product of the year. it works below the gum line to neutralize harmful plaque bacteria
and help reverse early gum damage. gum detoxify, from crest. i'm happy to give you the tour, i lohey jay. it. jay? charlotte! oh hi. he helped me set up my watch lists. oh, he's terrific. excellent tennis player. bye-bye. i recognize that voice. annie? yeah! she helped me find the right bonds for my income strategy. you're very popular around here. there's a birthday going on. karl! he took care of my 401k rollover. wow, you call a lot. yeah, well it's my money we're talking about here. joining us for karaoke later? ah, i'd love to, but people get really emotional when i sing. help from a team that will exceed your expectations.