Skip to main content

tv   New Day With Alisyn Camerota and John Berman  CNN  January 31, 2020 2:59am-4:00am PST

2:59 am
birthday. christine romans, i wish you all the sleep that your family will allow you to have this weekend. >> i know it's my birthday and it's such a slow news cycle. i wish for a better news cycle for my better. thanks, guys. >> i'm laura jarrett. "new day" starts right now. >> this is really sweet. thank you. republican senator lamar alexander says he plans to vote against witnesses. >> this would be the most significant vote he makes in his career and it's one of the last votes he'll make. >> the president's impeachment trial could be over. >> i call the impeachment hoax. and that's what it is. it's a hoax. >> we're likely to move on saturday at which the end the president will be acquitted. >> you can't be acquitted if you don't have a trial. and you don't have a trial when you don't have witnesses and
3:00 am
documentation. >> this is new day with alisyn camerota and john berman. >> welcome to our viewers in the united states and all around the world. it's 6:00 here in new york, and russia, if you're listening 2020 is open for the senate is now poised to say it doesn't even want to hear all the evidence the breaking news overnight, it is a no from senator lamar alexander. he was the deciding vote on whether to hear witnesses. included john bolton who has written. senator alexander explained his no vote. there's a lot in it including the fairly shocking statement that alexander thinks the democratic house managers have proved their case. there is also a new statement from john bolton overnight. but first there is one bit of
3:01 am
constitutional intrigue left. alexander's vote means the best democrats can do is lose or tie on witnesses. senators collins and mitt romney are expected to vote yes. we don't know yet about lisa murkowski. she says she will announce later this morning. if she's a yes , that makes a 50/50 tie. who breaks the tie? the chief justice of the united states john roberts could, but only if he wants to. more on that shortly. >> so the impeachment trial continues this afternoon at 1:00 p.m. eastern. there will be four hours of debate and then the critical vote will take place. if witnesses with blocked, the senators have a potentially long night ahead. senate majority leader mitch mcconnell is set to move ahead with final arguments. then a vote to convict or acquit the president could take place tonight or early saturday morning. lauren fox is live on capitol hill with the latest. a lot happened while our viewers were sleeping.
3:02 am
>> that's exactly right. it was just four months ago nancy pelosi said she was opening an impeachment inquiry into president trump. now we are hours from what we expect to be the crucial vote to acquit the president from his allegations. senate democrats hopes to introduce witnesses into the impeachment trial seemingly dashed thanks to a late night announcement by alexander. >> i'm deechly disappointed in it. i think that makes it likely that the senate may have the first impeachment trial in history that have no witnesses at all. >> he announced he would vote against having witnesses and
3:03 am
evidence. he said it was inappropriate for the president to investigate a political opponent and withhold united states aid to encourage that investigation. but adding the constitution does not give the senate the power to remove the president from office and ban him from the ballot simply for actions that are inappropriate. >> i think with this announcement, the chances of additional witnesses now has plummeted. i think we are likely to move on saturday to final judgment at the end of which the president will be acquitted. >> overnight, susan collins say announced she's made her decision saying she'll vote yes, because, quote, i believe hearing from different witnesses will give each side the opportunity to more fully and fairly make their case. it's still unclear if republican senators mitt romney and lisa murkowski will join her. their support would push the senate to a 50/50 tie. democrats growing increasingly frustrated by their gop
3:04 am
colleagues. >> he has been let off the hook by republicans who are not going to vote for his conviction, but he is not going to be set free by the american people, i hope, who get that this was not a fair trial. >> reporter: and in just a couple of hours, we expect that crucial vote on witnesses. it will probably happen around 5:00 or 6:00 tonight. the actual final vote on whether or not the president is guilty of what and whether he deserves to be removed from office. one of the key questions, though. what happens if there is a tie? there is not a lot of confidence that what justice john roberts would do would break that tie. so likely no vote on witnesses. john and alisyn? >> thank you very much for that. joining us now john avalon, anna palmer, and michael smerconish. we'll get to roberts and murkowski in a moment. first, i want to look at the big
3:05 am
picture here. let me read you part of this statement. quote, there is no need for more evidence to prove that the president asked ukraine to investigate joe biden and his son hunter. he said this on television on october 3rd and during his july 25th telephone call with the president of ukraine. there is no need for more evidence to prove he withheld united states at least in part to pressure ukraine to investigate the bidens. here's the crazy part. the house managers have proved this with what they call a mountain of overwhelming evidence. so john avalon, my question to you is what's the long-term impact of this? of acknowledging the house managers proved their case. the president of the united states asked for foreign assistance in a campaign. he withheld aid -- >> taxpayer money. >> -- in order to get that assistance. what's the wimplications of saying they proved it, it
3:06 am
doesn't matter? >> it's massive. the president lied, the white house lied from the beginning. and this happened. it doesn't matter to the extent of impeachment. it's inappropriate, but not impeachable. here's the problem. it sets the precedent that as you said in the open, it opens the door to foreign interference in our elections. presidents can request foreign governments to try to interfere on their behalf in elections. and that is 100% counter to what the founding fathers wanted and warned against. also the standard? that witnesses are not necessary in an impeachment trial. that's never happened before. but they have chosen not to hear more information. and that itself i think sends a sinister signal. >> michael smerconish, there's another part of the alexander statement that i also think is really stunning. so let me just read that. he said, it was inappropriate for the president to ask a
3:07 am
foreign leader to investigate his political opponent. and to withhold united states aid also another word for that is taxpayer money, to encourage that investigation. when elected officials appropriately interfere with such investigations with it undermines the principle of equal justice under the law but the constitution does not give the senate power to remove the president from office and ban him from this year's ballots for actions that are simply inappropriate. >> if i had shown all of you lamar alexander's statement with some very light redacting and then i were to ask you, so which way do you think he's convince you he was voting in the opposite direction. that's the stunning thing about it. the second is i don't think he's alone. i frankly think the sentiments he expressed in this statement are largely the sentiments of republicans. they won't acknowledge it, but some of the reporting has
3:08 am
discussed how behind closed doors there's an acknowledgment that the president was wrong. third observation is i've always believed the clock was the democrats' enemy. i don't know whether alexander means it when he says voting in iowa is a rationale. i don't know if he wouldn't have come to the same conclusion. but the juxtaposition of people casting ballots while this is going on was always problematic for the house democrats. >> alexander said the democrats proved their case. that's not going to make president trump happy. but his happiness on that matter isn't what's most important to him this morning. it begs the question, what's to keep an campaign of an office of outreach for investigations? is there anything? >> i mean, at this point, it doesn't appear that the senators are willing to go further than saying inappropriate in terms of foreign interference.
3:09 am
many have said publicly and privately it makes them uncomfortable, what the president has done. and this week what alan dershowitz was arguing if he wants to be re-elected, they should be able to do anything. i think the big question here is what happens after the decision not to have witnesses. do democrats have some amendments? are there procedural motions? what kind of mischief is going to happen? because i've covered the senate and the capitol way too long to know this is going to be cut and dry. that they're going to have one vote for witnesses and move to closing arguments. >> does anything change the ultimate outcome? regardless of whatever mischief they can stir up tonight, the president's going to get acquitted. >> right now it looks as though he's acquitted. we tried to see who would be the potential other senator that would vote yes besides mitt romney, murkowski, and susan
3:10 am
collins and there isn't anyone. right now it doesn't appear john roberts is going to tip the scales in one way or the other and not say i'm going to vote for witnesses. at this point i think it's pretty much the end game is already decided. but there is going to be some i think debate and potential different votes that could impact senators who are up for re-election like corey gardner in colorado. that democrats are going to try to put them in a fuf position. >> i don't know that acquittal is at question here. and the bar is high for convicting -- >> there was a feeling out among viewers that if witnesses came forward, if there were more evidence that came forward, that something could change the equation. that it wasn't all just an exercise in futility. i know that some of us in the media thought it was an exercise, perhaps, in futility. but there was always a femaling something could break open. >> if there was that feeling, it was clear that the answer was no, there never was.
3:11 am
and the bar for conviction is high and should be high. the bar for hearing witnesses and getting facts you would think is low and should be low. but john, to the point that anna was making about john roberts, if there's a 50/50 tie, technically the presiding officer is the chief justice of the united states. he could if he wanted to break the tie for witnesses. it was done in the impeachment trial of andrew johnson. but john roberts could. >> the temporary verdict of chase and the verdict aside, we have a precedent for chief justice breaking a tie. it's within his power and presiding status is in breaking ties. that said, people expect widely that john roberts will be
3:12 am
reticent. he would not want to intrude on such a question. but it goes to the heart of the integrity of the process. he's presided over a trial with no witnesses. where senators are actively choosing largely along partisan line not to hear new information. there isn't something on him. it's not just it's not likely to happen because of the balance of powers. >> also in terms of logic, some of this defies it, michael smerconish. the logic of a trial according to what we've all known in our lives is it has evidence, it has witnesses. the logic of a tie, as we see at our kids' soccer games every weekend, is that doesn't mean that one side wins. i'm not suggesting a literal shootout in this case in the senate. but you take my point that all of this defies what we've known to things to mean in the past.
3:13 am
>> they say nothing about what should now take place. instead, i offer you this gut check as someone who has paid close attention and watched his body language. he's been a very passive participant. the only time that he really exerted any influence was to thwart rand paul from outing the whistle-blower. that tells me he doesn't want to be the tie breaker. >> i don't think democrats should hold their breath today for john roberts. i also don't know lisa murkowski is going to vote yes on witnesses. she may not want to put pressure on him to break the tie. we still have to hear from her. you guys, stand by. we've got a lot more to talk about. john bolton had a statement overnight. the president's not going to like that one bit. and i think there are questions for democrats this morning. what could they have done differently perhaps before this point that might have led to a different outcome?
3:14 am
>> also just the bigger picture of what does this mean starting saturday? what does all of this mean? president trump is likely to be acquitted. what message does it send to president trump and future presidents about presidential power? when did you see the sign? when i needed to jumpstart sales. build attendance for an event. help people find their way. fastsigns designed new directional signage, and got them back on track. get started at i don't have to worry about that, do i? and got them back on track. actually, you do. harmful bacteria lurk just below the gum line, and if you're not taking care of your gums, you're not taking care of your mouth. so now i use this. crest gum detoxify. crest gum detoxify, voted product of the year. it works below the gum line and is clinically proven
3:15 am
to neutralize harmful plaque bacteria and help reverse early gum damage. gum detoxify, from crest. gums are good. so is my check up! crest. healthy, beautiful smiles for life. rowithout the commission fees and account minimums.
3:16 am
so, you can start investing wherever you are - even on the bus. download now and get your first stock on us. robinhood. seaonly abreva cany to help sget rid of it in... little as 2 1/2 days when used at the first sign. abreva starts to work immediately to block the virus and protect healthy cells. abreva acts on it. so you can too. of course i'd love to take an informal poll. i used to be a little cranky. dealing with our finances really haunted me. thankfully, i got quickbooks, and a live bookkeeper's helping customize it for our business. (live bookkeeper) you're all set up! (janine) great! hey! you got the burnt marshmallow out! (delivery man) he slimed me. (janine) tissue? (vo) get set up right with a live bookkeeper with intuit quickbooks. the easy way to a happier business.
3:17 am
3:18 am
is john bolton is speaking out. not to the senate, but he is speaking out. kxan reports that bolton showed support for those who have testified in the impeachment proceedings at an event last night he said, quote, all of them acted in the best interest of the country as they saw it and consistent to what they thought our policies were. the idea that somehow testifying to what you think is true is
3:19 am
destructive of the system of government we have, i think is very nearly the reverse. the exact reverse of the truth. we're back with john avalon, anna palmer, and michael smerconish. why didn't he comply with the request to testify? >> i think there was a rush at the time to try to finish his book, not get crosswise with the white house to see if he could be compelled to testify. for a lot of witnesses, that's the fig leaf they need to go forward and say what happened. partisan loyalty can be big. they did not want to confront uncomfortable facts. even if in the case of lamar alexander they're willing to acknowledge them in private that the president has been lying about this from the beginning. but that's the real issue.
3:20 am
the senate chose not to hear facts and witnesses that were directly relevant to this case. they couldn't be bothered. and hyperpartisan polarization has short circuited our system. >> it is interesting john bolton is praising those who chose to speak out when he has chosen not to. he says he's willing to speak to the senate, but he could have spoken it a long time ago. he wants to leave it up to the american people, but he is part of keeping information from the american people that might help them make their decision to the election. i do want to move on. to the question of democrats now, there's the real question, by the way, if every democrat will vote to convict the president of the united states. where do you see that going? >> yes, certainly that's been the story on the sideline a little bit behind the scenes is what happens with some of these moderate democrats, senator joe manchin, doug jones from
3:21 am
alabama. where do they end up on this issue? it seems as though there's a vote to whether democrats keep in line with them. one of them love to flirt on these issues and then almost always sides with democrats. i think it's these little dramas that are playing out. but now as you've said, i mean, we're basically going to move where they're not going to have witnesses. they're going to move to acquit them. it's kind of less of an issue in terms of what the outcome is. it's more where do they see their stamp on history, i think. >> and so michael, if the president is acquitted, what does that mean for the country? what does that mean for his perception of his own power moving forward? >> well, maybe it means that we're now witnessing the alexander doctrine. and the alexander doctrine is a president's efforts to get a foreign government to meddle in an american election don't rise
3:22 am
to the level of impeachment. because that's the conclusion if i take it face value, the statement that the senator put out. >> that's a crazy place to be. i have to say it's a crazy place to be. again, i think the crazier thing is not to hear evidence and not to hear from all the witnesses who could tell you what may have happened in the pursuit to get foreign interference. removal from office is a very, very high bar. john avalon, what could democrat have done differently? should they have done anything differently? and/or is this not a good outcome for them politically? can they not point back at this over the next several months and say cover-up? >> look, to answer your last question first, yes, they can claim it's a cover-up. they can say the president has been proven to be lying. i think they probably in retrospect should have included some charge like bribery or
3:23 am
extortion which would have mimicked the exact language and would have been called a criminal defense off the table. also it appears there's a sweet spot for impeachment. you need to start an impeachment proceeding not in the first year of a presidency and not in the last 18 months of a presidency to avoid the election argument. but just -- the macro point, michael just coined the alexander doctrine. the founding fathers absolutely understood and made it very clear that one of the greatest dangers they foresaw was foreign powers interfering and influencing our elections. and for it to be called inappropriate. to be given a pass on this. that is an incredibly dangerous precedent. because it opens the door. and does anybody think seriously, by the way, that republicans would not vote to impeachment a democratic president for doing just this? and that just shows how hypocritical and how shallow and how hyperpartisan and mindless so many of the debates we're seeing are even at this high
3:24 am
level. >> all right, john, anna, michael, thank you all very much for being with us this morning. >> be sure to tune into "smerconish" tomorrow morning at 9:00 a.m. eastern. that's after a special edition of "new day" which you should tune into at 7:00 a.m. tomorrow if you want more of this. >> an historic "new day" and historic "smerconish" tomorrow. the state department has issued its most serious alert telling americans not to travel to china as the coronavirus outbreak grows. more next. (man sneezes) what's the time? device: a dime is ten cents. severe cold or flu? take control with theraflu. powerful, soothing relief to defeat your worst cold and flu symptoms fast. device: (sneezes) theraflu. the power is in your hands.
3:25 am
3:26 am
you always want to be able to for your patients.f get them out of pain, get them out of pain fast. we have a new product out there: sensodyne rapid relief. if you use it on monday, by thursday, you'll be enjoying that chocolate ice cream again. they can start it, and 3 days later, i know that they're going to have the results they were looking for. here's the story of green mountain coffee roasters costa rica paraíso. meet sergio. and his daughter, maria. sergio's coffee tastes spectacular. because costa rica is spectacular. so we support farmers who use natural compost. to help keep the soil healthy. and the coffee delicious. for future generations. all for a smoother tasting cup. green mountain coffee roasters.
3:27 am
oh no, here comes gthe neighbor probably to brag about how amazing his xfinity customer service is. i'm mike, i'm so busy. good thing xfinity has two-hour appointment windows. they have night and weekend appointments too. he's here. bill? karolyn? nope! no, just a couple of rocks. download the my account app to manage your appointments making today's xfinity customer service simple, easy, awesome. i'll pass.
3:28 am
breaking overnight, the state department issued its highest level warning advising americans against travel to china because of the coronavirus outbreak. the warning follows the first
3:29 am
person-t person-to-person transmission of the virus in the united states. how concerning is this new case? this person-to-person transmission here. >> there's no question it's concerning. there's now evidence of spread within the united states. that never happened during the sars epidemic. but also this person who now has it is the spouse of one of the people who was known to have this infection, so they had close contact when the person was symptomatic. it's a little less concerning for wider spread. i think the risk to the general population still remains pretty low. united states is among the list of six countries where we do have evidence of spread. china obviously, but you can see the list of other countries there. and it's because of the spread in other countries that the world health organization took this step yesterday, john were of declaring this is a public health emergency of international concern. that's something -- these
3:30 am
declarations were in response to the sars epidemic and they've only happened a few times throughout history now. back 2009 the h1n1, bebola. it ma have affected trade. people need to be aware of what's happening. i want to point out something i think is always important. comparing flu numbers of this coronavirus. in the united states, if you look at flu so far this year it's already led to more than 8,000 people dying. millions of people have been infected. within china you look at the numbers, it's 171 people who have died. close to 10,000 infected. my point is, flu is a much bigger deal than the coronavirus is here in this country. and still, alisyn, less than half the country takes a vaccine. we wish we had a vaccine for the
3:31 am
coronavirus. we have one for flu, flu is a much bigger deal. yet half the country doesn't take that. the vaccine is being developed for coronavirus, but that's still a few months away. >> that's important context especially by people who are so alarmed by what's happening. if you haven't gotten the flu vaccine, think twice about all of this. we'll check back with you. because the death toll in china continues to rise. at least 213 people have died. nearly 10,000 cases confirmed. and new scrutiny this morning about how china is handling this outbreak. cnn's david culver has been covering this for us for weeks. he is live in beijing. so what's the latest there? >> reporter: hey there. you heard sanjay mention the global health emergency that the w.h.o. has characterized china to be under. what's interesting with the coronavirus in particular in how they're designating this is we're starting to see china, this country of 1.4 billion
3:32 am
people becoming isolated. and we're seeing to the north with russia, cutting off their far east border. there's called in hong kong to seal off as well. to and from mainland china. and so in state media what you're seeing here is they're using e ining w.h.o.'s guidelin. as we've been watching and monitoring the flagship newscasts, for example, it's not they're not covering this. they're only emphasizing specific parts. they're showing the hospitals being built, these deployments of medical personnel. we're seeing some patients being discharged and being handed flowers. they're showing a very positive and heroic side of all of this. but what we're learning talking to people on the ground within the lockdown zone, within the city of wuhan, within the province, the epicenter of all of this, is there a dire needs.
3:33 am
there's shortages in the hospitals. they feel they don't have the armor despite video of all the supplies coming in. they feel like they're not getting it. the social media and independent media here in china, they're doing investigative reporting too and they're revealing some of the desperate situations, john. >> all right. getting the truth from there is so important, david, which is why it's important to have you there. thank you very much. so it is possible that today's witness vote could end in an historic tie. what happens then? chief justice john roberts in the constitutional twilight zone. fact is, every insurance company hopes you drive safely.
3:34 am
but allstate helps you. with drivewise. feedback that helps you drive safer. and that can lower your cost now that you know the truth... are you in good hands? trump:global warming. th the a lot of it's a hoax." vo: mike bloomberg knows the science and understands the challenge. as president, a plan for 80% clean energy by 2028. mike will get it done. i'm mike bloomberg and i approve this message. americans come to to compare and save on loans, credit cards and more! but with the new lending tree app you can see your full financial health, monitor your credit score, see your cash flow and find out how you can cut your monthly bills. download it now to see how much you can save. when i get my teeth cleaned, my hygienist doesn't use
3:35 am
something like this. she cleans with something like this. it's got a round head. and it's got power. go pro with oral-b. power one on for oral-b's best clean ever. inspired by dentists. ...oral-b's round brush head surrounds each tooth... remove more plaque along the gum line... for cleaner teeth and healthier gums. i'll only use the one that's round. oral-b. brush like a pro.
3:36 am
3:37 am
. we are three days away from the iowa caucuses. and cnn politics reporter and editor at large chris cillizza is here with his big three questions going into iowa. good morning, chris. >> good morning. >> here are the three questions of yours as i understand it and you can expound on them.
3:38 am
how much does organization on the ground matter? number two, who's the second choice for the non-viables? and number three, will we have a clear winner? what are the answers? >> it's always easier, alisyn, to answer the questions you wrote yourself. i know the answers to these. okay. so let's start with organization. so obviously iowa is a state that candidates spend months and months and months building organizations. we know lelizabeth warren is known as the best organization. turnout voters on the day of the caucuses. you got to go to your local school or gym or whatever and wait around and caucus. it takes time. is it worth a point, elizabeth warren's best organization? two? five? is that could make a gigantic difference. now, question two. where do the non-viable candidate support go? you go into your local gym.
3:39 am
everybody goes with their candidate. literally you walk over and stand with your candidate. if your candidate doesn't have 15% support in that gym in that particular caucus, you're asked to recaucus. you can go join the candidate who has 15% or more support. where do the candidates who are going to have more than 1% support but less than 15% support, where do their supporters go? in some caucuses it's going to be amy klobuchar. in a lot it's going to be andrew yang supports. do they go to bernie as yang as suggested? do they go somewhere else? that stuff makes a huge difference. you want to be the first choice, but you also want to be the second choice of people behind a non-viable candidate. now, last one. are we going to have a clear winner? let's remember this is a very complicated reporting process. we will get three different numbers from the iowa democratic party. we will get number one, how many delegates each of the viable
3:40 am
responds with how many people voted for them or caucus for them? we will also get first time in history, we will also get the raw vote of the pre-non-viable conditions being eliminated then the raw vote of the after the non-viable candidates were eliminated. so there's a lot of ways to parse these numbers that i think allow a number of people to declare victory, potentially. and i think that could really complicate things in terms of the whole cliched three tickets out of iowa. meaning if you have to come in first, second, or third. based on what number? >> we will know who got the most votes in iowa on the first ballot. we have never known that before. and that could be very different than who gets the most delegate equivalent. absolutely you could get two different winners or maybe even three. all right, chris. the super bowl, i'm told, is
3:41 am
sunday night. most people not watching because the patriots aren't in it. >> well, that's certainly not true. >> if you are going to watch, you'll see something we haven't seen ever. not one, but two political ads here. it must be nice to be that rich. >> yeah. it's a remarkable thing. michael bloomberg who is worth $60.5 billion according to forbes and donald trump whose campaign has raised massive amounts of money. $100 million on hand end of last year, are both dropping between $10 million and $11 million. not for an ad campaign. for an ad. in the super bowl. trump mostly talking about his economic record. bloomberg with a longer ad about gun control. look. these are sort of vanity buys in some ways. i don't know you're going to persuade a whole lot of people with a single ad. it's to show you can do it. it's an intimidation play. i can do this and no one else
3:42 am
can. >> well, those will be very interesting to see at the super bowl. what were you saying about how nobody will be watching? >> we're going to freak out if you put that on your head. >> and it matches her outfit. incredible. >> don't think anything is by acciden accident. >> go-non-president teams. >> ouch. >> all right. it was nice having as part of "new day." all right. back to what's going to happen today. if senator lisa murkowski votes in favor of witnesses, we could see this historic tie. what happens then? we break it down at the magic wall next. when did you see the sign? when i needed to jumpstart sales. build attendance for an event. help people find their way. fastsigns designed new directional signage, and got them back on track. get started at
3:43 am
3:44 am
and got them back on track. does scrubbing grease feel like a workout? scrub less with dawn ultra. it's superior grease-cleaning formula gets to work faster. making easy work of tough messes. dawn is a go-to grease-cleaner throughout the kitchen, too. keep a bottle in the laundry room to pre-treat greasy stains. and keep dawn in the garage to lift grease off car rims. it's even gentle enough to clean wildlife affected by oil. dawn's grease cleaning power takes care of tough grease wherever it shows up. scrub less and save more... with dawn.
3:45 am
3:46 am
so we are waiting to hear from alaska senator lisa murkowski. how will she vote on witnesses? if she votes yes, in all likelihood it means the senate will be tied 50/50. so then what happens? joining us now is elie honig.
3:47 am
it gets interesting fast. >> it does. this is like a law professor's dream. let's start with the witnesses themselves. who is the on the democrats' list? these are the four administration witnesses democrats have been pushing for all along. bolton, pompeo, duffey, and robert blair. the most emphasis has been on john bolton after "the new york times" article on his manuscript. now, republicans have said, oh, we don't want witnesses. but if we're going to have witnesses, we have our own win list. the bidens, adam schiff, and the whistle-blower. now, if this was a normal criminal trial, you would have a judge going through each of these witnesses and deciding relevant or not relevant. if they are, they can testify. if they aren't, they can't. but we are in the united states senate. now, what's the breakdown? 53 republicans hold the majority. 54 democrats plus two independents who caucus with the democrats. so as often happens in the
3:48 am
senate, it's going to come down to a numbers game. now, we got some new news on where some of the potential swing republican senators stand. susan collins announced last night she will be a yes which gets the count to 48 for witnesses. mitt romney has not committed but looks to be leaning yes. lamar alexander is a no. and that really puts democrats in a tight spot. that's why all the focus is on lisa murkowski. if she's a yes, it's 50/50. >> surely this is spelled out exple explicitly in the united states constitution. >> no. the constitution tells us normally the vice president of the united states shall be president of the senate. but shall have no vote unless they be equally divided. that's in a normal vote. but impeachment is different. the thought is the vice president can't preside. he's got a conflict of interest. he may want to predict his guy
3:49 am
the president or may be hoping the president gets pushed out so he takes over. so in an impeachment case, the constitution tells us when the president of the united states is tried, the chief justice shall preside. so john roberts, can he break the tie? absolutely, he can. in fact, there is precedent as we mentioned before. chief justice samuel chase, could you have identified him out of a lineup? >> easily. >> easy. chief justice samuel chase when president johnson was tried in 1868, he did weigh in and break two ties. so there is sot precedent here. is roberts likely to do it? he's taken a very passive role so far. it's possible it's not likely. >> i think it's very unlikely. and murkowski has to vote yes. she knows if she votes yes, she's putting am this pressure on john roberts. this could be putting pressure on her. >> if roberts says i'm not touching this and it's 50/50 the
3:50 am
motion fails. we will not have witnesses. >> which i think is an important point. normally with a tie, one side doesn't lose. normally with a tie, one side wins. normally with a tie, it's a tie. >> you need a majority. 51 would be a majority. now, there's a great sentiment in the public here in favor of witnesses. polling has shown 70% to 75% wants to see witnesses. it's a trial 37 here are some of the arguments and we will hear debite today against witnesses. argument number one, it's just going to take too long. here's what a couple of leading republicans have said about the issue. >> there are things you can't do from the standpoint of executive privilege. >> we'd be here for a very, very long time. that's not good for the united states. >> we don't need to prolong what's already taken five months of the american people's time. >> that's the first argument. we don't want to be here forever. >> could the chief justice speed it up? >> he could. adam schiff said if there's a dispute over executive prif
3:51 am
lenl, i'll take it directly to the justice. the house should have done all this. we've had 15 prior impeachment trials. all of them have had witnesses. and the last argument is what we were calling the dershowitz argument. we'll now call the alexander argument of even though it's bad, it's not impeachable. >> if for some reason the justice did break the tie, it would be one of the biggest stories involving the supreme court ever. you know, bush/gore level action by a supreme court justice. that is how ig it would be. he's got that weighing on him. >> right. as we know, chief justice roberts doesn't normally like that level of limelight. >> it's going to be historic no matter what. this day will go down forever. >> thank you very much for walking us through all of that. >> as the impeachment trial wraps up, mike pompeo coincidentally is in ukraine. and he just said something that
3:52 am
plays such a central role in this trial. that's next. frequent heartburn? not anymore. the prilosec otc two-week challenge is helping people love what they love again. just one pill a day. 24 hours. zero heartburn. because life starts when heartburn stops. take the challenge at prilosecotc dot com.
3:53 am
any occasion the perfect coffee occasion. family brunch! just add ground coffee for a carafe, or pop in a pod for a freshly brewed cup. good strong coffee. our french roast. it was a decaf for you, yes? in your favorite mug. there we go.
3:54 am
3:55 am
you always want to be able to for your patients.f get them out of pain, get them out of pain fast. we have a new product out there: sensodyne rapid relief. if you use it on monday, by thursday, you'll be enjoying that chocolate ice cream again. they can start it, and 3 days later,
3:56 am
i know that they're going to have the results they were looking for. secretary of state mike pompeo is in ukraine this morning. he just wrapped up a meeting and news conference with zelensky who is a central figure in the impeachment. frederik pleitgen is live with more. what did the secretary of state say? >> reporter: hi there, alisyn. the secretary of course before this visit set himself up for a difficult time here in ukraine when he seemed to indicate after an interview with npr that perhaps americans don't care that much about ukraine. certainly trying to perceive things different as he was on the ground here. really what we noticed was that the ukrainians were trying to make this as easy as possible for the secretary of state. they were talking about the fact they don't want to get involved in anything that has to do with the impeachment proceedings going on in the united states. they kept repeatedly saying they need bipartisan support from the u.s. and it's something that's
3:57 am
important to them. now, the secretary in the press conference was asked whether or not a white house visit for president zelensky was dependent on investigations into ba reduce -- burisma and the bidens. he said absolutely not. let's listen in. >> there's no condition of the nature zriebd for president zelensky to come to washington and have that visit. it's not the case. we'll find the right time. we'll find the appropriate opportunity. >> reporter: so the secretary of state there. one of the interesting things he did not say, alisyn, was he didn't actually mention a date for when such a visit could take place. he was just saying that will happen when the time is right. so really president zelensky very much up in the air when he's going to be able to come to washington and have that visit. another thing that the secretary is going to be doing, of course it's going to be taking a lot of questions there. after that embassy went through
3:58 am
turmoil with the removal of marie yovanovitch and of course the role that secretary pompeo played with that to this day not apologizing to her in the way she was treated. >> and banning an npr reporting from asking the question about his reaction to the removal of marie yovanovitch. the pentagon has raised the number of the soldiers injured in the iranian missile strike again. again. sources tell cnn the number has jumped to 54. at the beginning the white house said no one was injured. let's bring in barbara starr. >> we have been there before this week. what's happening is people are underdoing these medical assessments. and these symptoms begin to emerge over time. and we're told it could take up to a month for symptoms to emerge. the numbers therefore could go up again.
3:59 am
but right now as of today as you and i are talking, 64 diagnosed cases of mild traumatic brain injury, concussion symptoms if you will, as a result of that iranian missile attack. 39 have returned to duty. that is very good news and perhaps an indicator of the sort of less than severity that these are mild brain injuries. that is what the pentagon is telling us. but of course the real question is what now? defense secretary mark esper defending the president's comments saying that the president understands these injuries. but the vice president still yesterday saying this, that there are no casualties. have a listen. >> thanks to the skill and heroh heroism of oub military on the ground, spite their missile attack, no american casualties
4:00 am
and iran is standing down. factually incorrect. there are 64 people injured and have been treated as a result of what iran did. and what is next? well, the pentagon saying they are asking iraq for permission to put patriot missile defenses into these bases to try to protect the future ballistic missiles. but they have yet to give their permission. >> barbara starr at the pentagon, thank you very much. major news in the impeachment trial of the president. a key senator comes forward and tells us what he thinks in this really closes the door on everything. "new day" continues right now 7 37. we have a situation. the fate of our nation is riding on how this is resolved. >> republican senator alexander says he plans to vote against witnesses. >> that's a big deal. the chae


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on