Return to Transcripts main page
Proofs of Russia's Hacking; Trump Changed His Campaign Promise. Aired 10-10:30p ET
Aired January 5, 2017 - 22:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[22:00:00] ANDERSON COOPER, CNN HOST: And that's it for us. Thanks for watching. CNN Tonight with Don Lemon starts now.
DON LEMON, CNN HOST: Breaking news, stunning details from the classified intelligence report delivered to President Barack Obama today.
This is CNN Tonight. I'm Don Lemon.
Sources tell CNN American spy agency know who handed over stolen democratic e-mails to WikiLeaks and intercepted the communications captured top Russian officials celebrating Donald Trump's victory.
All this coming just hours before intelligence chief due to sit down with Trump behind closed doors to brief him on Russia's action.
Meanwhile, sources say President-elect Donald Trump will ask Congress not Mexico to pay for promised border wall. And Capitol Hill republicans promising to take action this year to repeal Obamacare despite the lack of any replacement plan. House Speaker Paul Ryan also promising to defund Planned Parenthood. What will that mean for the health of American women.
There's a lot to unpack in that. Now let's go CNN -- let's get right to CNN's Gloria Borger, she's our chief political analyst, David Rohde, a CNN global affairs analyst, and Pamela Brown, CNN justice correspondent. Gloria, this is for you, this is one part of Donald Trump's campaign speech that we all can remember though. Listen to this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT-ELECT OF THE UNITED STATES: We are going to have a strong border, we are going to build the wall. It will be a real wall, a real wall. Who is going to pay for the wall?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Mexico.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Mexico.
TRUMP: By the way, 100 percent. (END VIDEO CLIP)
LEMON: So, there is some breaking news tonight on this topic. So what exactly is going on?
GLORIA BORGER, CNN CHIEF POLITICAL ANALYST: Manu Raju and Deirdre Walsh our reporters up on Capitol Hill have reported that the president-elect's transition team is signaling to republicans in Congress that they actually want to start funding the wall through the appropriations process. Not the appropriations process in Mexico, but the one here.
LEMON: Yes. Which means taxpayers.
BORGER: Right. Which means taxpayers. Now the transition team will say that Donald Trump has always promised that Mexico would reimburse us for the wall which implies that we would pay for it first.
But the question is, how would they get that passed? How many billions of dollars would that cost? And would the democrats shut down the government over this because they didn't want to fund these appropriations?
LEMON: Did they ask -- did they say that?
BORGER: So there are lots of questions that need to be answered.
LEMON: There is that nuance about, you know, paying that, but initially he said Mexico, I will make Mexico pay for the wall.
BORGER: He did. He did. And as he went on with the campaign he said, and we were just looking this up, he said at one point that we would pay for the border wall with the understanding that Mexico will reimburse us for it.
And then he said, Mexico will pay. But what will be their motive...
BORGER: ... to reimburse us for a wall that we had already paid billions of dollars for.
LEMON: And again, as you said.
BORGER: Thank you very much.
LEMON: That's after saying something and then coming back and correct it -- correcting it.
LEMON: Which is often the case on Twitter. Go ahead, David Rohde. (CROSSTALK)
BORGER: They are clearly struggling with the way to figure this out.
LEMON: Yes. David.
DAVID ROHDE, CNN GLOBAL AFFAIRS ANALYST: It's, you know, one of the many examples of how is he actually going to govern? He's made, this is arguably his most famous promise and he's sort of, already he's sort of moving around on this. And what will happen over time, where will be six months from now if he versus on major issues like this, this is such a signature issue for him.
LEMON: Yes. Pamela Brown, let's move on. Because you have some breaking news to tell us about, fascinating new details about the intelligence report on Russian hacking is all about. What can you tell us about that?
PAMELA BROWN, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, that's right. We've learned that the U.S. intelligence community has identified the go-between people that the Russian government used to leak that documents to WikiLeaks according to our sources.
So, the U.S. has essentially identified these people. You'll recall this week Julian Assange, the founder of WikiLeaks said it wasn't a Russian government official that handed those documents over. But we have learned that the Russian government used what's called cutouts, so other people to do the dirty work.
And apparently, the U.S. knows who these people are, and that information is in that classified comprehensive report that the president -- that was presented to the president today.
Also, Don, in this report is intercepted communications of Russian government officials celebrating and congratulating one another to some of this communication after Donald Trump won the election. We're told there's no smoking gun, where someone outright said we did x, y, z for Donald Trump to win.
But it's just one piece of the puzzle, Don, that intelligence officials have used to come up with this high confidence that Russia was behind the hack, and in part, wanted to help Donald Trump win, Don.
LEMON: And also tonight, retired general Martin Dempsey, Pamela, the chairman of the joints chiefs took to Twitter, and he said, "Intelligence is hard thankless work. Fortunately, we had dedicated patriotic and courageous men and women on the job. Thanks."
[22:05:06] It's an extraordinary comment that is almost certainly aimed at Donald Trump.
LEMON: How often do generals weigh in on the middle of a political firestorm like this? BROWN: Well, it's not, I wouldn't say common for sure, Don,
especially for someone like Dempsey, who has been very adamant up until now to stay apolitical to stay out of the fray, but as you there it seems as though he's sort of breaking for that -- from that and sending this implicit message to Donald Trump who has been casting doubt on the intelligence community's assessment.
So, you're seeing this outward tone from former officials also current officials, we heard DNI Chief James Clapper today also sending this strong message, saying there's a difference between skepticism and disparagement. And he said there's a big concern, Don.
LEMON: Yes. David, all of this rank over intelligence puts military leaders in a tough spot. Do you think that he felt specifically on this one General Dempsey, that retired General Dempsey that he had to come out and defend the intelligence community?
ROHDE: Yes. I think there's a sense in the intelligence community and military, you know, we've been at war for 15 years, so this idea of disparaging them is really deeply disturbing.
I've talked to four former CIA officials just tonight, they say people are apoplectic about the way he's treating the intelligence community. Morale is down, there aren't sort of resignations yet. And so, most importantly, this is very dangerous for I think for Donald Trump politically.
There was a story last night in the Wall Street Journal that was going to revamp the entire intelligence structure, now today they're saying they're not going to do that. If he cuts funding, if he treats them this way and there is a terrorist attack in the United States and there is some kind of intelligence failure, he could be blamed for that. Donald Trump could be blamed for that.
You know, this is -- this is a community that protects the United States. So, if you're disparaging them, you're changing the system seemingly on a whim. That can come back to haunt you.
LEMON: Is he backed himself into a corner?
BORGER: Well, look, yes I think he has. But I it's OK. There's nothing wrong with challenging intelligence. The president does it every day in when he gets his daily briefs. I mean, this is, presidents are paid to be skeptical and ask questions.
LEMON: To do in public?
BORGER: Well, that's exactly right. You don't do it in public to humiliate people. These are -- these are public servants, these are heroes, these are people who toil in secrecy on behalf of the United States and they don't always get it right. But they are important and we depend on them for our national security.
So, what the president has done is set up a collision course not only with the intelligence community but also with republicans on Capitol Hill who support the intelligence community and who believes that their findings on the Russian hack are appropriate.
So, if I were going to brief Donald Trump tomorrow, I think this is what is in his head. What's in his is don't delegitimize my election. OK? And I think if I were briefing Donald Trump I would say, Mr. President-elect, we are not delegitimizing your election, we do not -- we -- you won the election. But we want to tell you about what Russia's intent was when they put the thumb on the scale of, you know, your side.
BORGER: And you have to decouple those things for Donald Trump because this is something he cares very deeply about. Which is, he legitimately won the election. Nobody can challenge that.
LEMON: But he thinks that -- and that, you know, for him, it's probably about his ego and about being -- you know, which is very interesting because seemingly he tried to delegitimize that the current president of the United States.
BORGER: But there were lots of things that influenced this election.
BORGER: And you know, the fake news and all the rest might have been part of it, but Donald Trump won. And so, you have to separate those two things. There are lots of people who want to use this and say this delegitimizes his presidency. I don't think that what's the intelligence community...
LEMON: And they have said as much.
LEMON: Let's -- I want to listen to the current president on what he said tonight and I'll let you respond to it.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: My hope is that when the president-elect receives his own briefings and is able to examine the intelligence as his team is put together, and they see how professional and effective these agencies are, that some of those current tensions will be reduced.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
LEMON: So, Donald Trump is standing alone in resisting what the intelligence community found. Do you think he is going to change his tune after he's briefed tomorrow? ROHDE: He might, I mean, that's a smart thing to do politically but
it's not clear. It's again this confusing signals. Dan Coates, who he named today as the Director of National Intelligence, a moderate, he's respected, he's, you know, he worked with democrats when he was in the Senate.
There's a lot of controversy around Flynn, the national security adviser. There's disparagement of his findings, his accusations that its politicize intelligence, that sort of echoes Flynn's argument.
And more than any other figure in this national security team Flynn is really worrying people in the intelligence community. That's what I've heard from these four former officials today.
LEMON: David, Gloria, and Pamela, thank you so much. I appreciate it.
BROWN: Thank you.
LEMON: When we come right back, the former CIA director who says he is no longer a top adviser to Donald Trump.
LEMON: Here's our breaking news tonight. Sources saying that U.S. spy agencies know who passed stolen e-mails to WikiLeaks. And we have the information that Russian officials celebrated Donald Trump's election victory.
Let's discuss now with Michael Chertoff, a former secretary of Homeland Security. P.J. Crowley, former assistant Secretary of State and author of "Red Line American Foreign Policy in a Time of Fractured Politics and Failing States," and Ambassador R. James Woolsey, chairman of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies and a former director of Central Intelligence.
Good evening, gentlemen. Thank you for coming on. Ambassador Woolsey, I have to go to you first. You are no longer associated with the Trump campaign. What changed?
R. JAMES WOOLSEY, PRESIDENT, FOUNDATION FOR DEFENSE OF DEMOCRACIES: Well, it's not that I'm no longer associated, it's that I was letting people know by the statement that I put out today that I have -- I'm not now working on the transition.
And I was simply changing a designation to make sure that nobody thought I was doing something that I wasn't. I worked on the campaign, a bit as an adviser. And little bit at beginning on transition but I haven't been doing anything with the transition.
I've been helping back grounding press on issues. And I just thought it was better, sounder and more honest if I took the piece off the table that suggested that I was working on the transition because I'm really not.
[22:15:09] LEMON: I want to play something you said in 2010, in a 2010 interview about Julian Assange. Here it is. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
WOOLSEY: Assange J. and the people who have done this definitely have blood on their hands. If you are someone who is trying to help the United States and our allies in Afghanistan learn where the Taliban were strong or if you were helping the United States in other parts of the world fight terrorism, you could well be put not just at risk but in serious risk of being killed by the enemies of the United States and freedom around the world.
I consider Mr. Assange, a hand maiden of terror and he definitely has blood on his hands as far as I'm concerned.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
LEMON: So, those are -- those are pretty strong words. Does Donald Trump giving credibility to Assange was that a turning point for you?
WOOLSEY: No, not particularly, I mean, I think one can sometimes pull a quote out of what is said by a really bad person still find it useful. I've always been particularly fond of Trotsky's you may not be interested in war but war may be interested in you. I use that a lot but I'm not showing some allegiance to Trotsky by saying it.
LEMON: Al right. Thank you for responding to that. P.J. Crowley to you first, you have been on the front lines of national security issues and political wars in Washington, what do you make of the rift that Donald Trump has created with the intelligence community?
P.J. CROWLEY, FORMER UNITED STATES ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF STATE: Well, I think he's painted himself into a corner certainly as we look forward to the confirmation hearings of his national security team, he's done them no favors.
You know, we saw this morning in the thoughtful hearing on Capitol Hill, a very strong sentiment by members of the Senate on a bipartisan basis that, you know, this is a serious situation, some even called it attack on the United States. I'm not sure I would use that terminology necessarily.
And so, you know, coming up next week with his team on Capitol Hill, they're going to have to try to figure out how to get to the middle ground that -- and senators today, you know, basically charted it out for Mr. Trump, which is there is a difference between interference which is clear and influence which is less clear in terms of what impact Russians had on the election.
But there's no question, you know, particularly, you know, given the report that we now, you know, see and also the sentiment of Capitol Hill that Russia has done something that goes beyond the line and there will need to be consequences.
LEMON: Michael, aside from the hacks, the Russians are also spreading fake news. I want you to listen, this is Senator Tim Kaine talking about that today.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TIM KAINE, UNITED STATES SENATOR: You know, I had a little role in this election, I was along for the ride for 105 days and was the subject of a couple of fake news stories. And it was interesting there were at least three that the mainstream media didn't cover because they were so incredible like, why would they.
But I looked at one of the stories and that have shared 800,000 times. And when I see an administration who is place as the proposed national security adviser someone who traffics in these fake news stories and re-tweets them and shares them, who betrays a sense of either gullibility or malice that would kind of be -- that these are stories that most fourth graders would find incredible, that a national security adviser would find them believable enough to share them, causes me great concern.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
LEMON: Secretary Chertoff, the Russians have always spread this information that's different, you know, this is now a time of social media and the internet, but how dangerous has fake news become?
MICHAEL CHERTOFF, FORMER UNITED STATES SECRETARY OF HOMELAND SECURITY: I think we've seen this in Europe over the last couple of years, and some of you may remember when that airliner was shot down over the Ukraine by forces that was sympathetic to Russia. There were Russian sponsored media stories that blamed that on the Ukrainian government in order to create smoke screen and confusion.
We've seen other instances, there was one in the last couple of years where there was an effort to hack into Ukrainian media and present false stories about the outcome of election there.
So this has been a problem that Europeans have lived with for a long time. Now there is a certain element of fake news that's driven by economics. You have these kids in Macedonia who are getting, making money by driving clicks to these outrageous stories.
But we also have seen for years that is a matter of state craft and strategy that Russians do use social media as well as conventional media to drive a narrative that confuses the west and even winds up throwing sympathy away from the U.S. and towards the...
[22:20:00] LEMON: How much influence do you think it had on this election?
CHERTOFF: I don't think -- I don't think what came out of this election was particularly influential, but I think when you look at some of the stories that appeared in Europe and when you look at the elections that are coming up this year, I suspect we're going to see a much more concerted effort and one that may find more traction.
And frankly, rather than looking back at the election which I think was legitimate and I don't think it was affected, I think we need to look forward to what is going to come next. Because I think as they say, you didn't see nothing yet.
LEMON: Ambassador Woolsey, are you concerned that General Flynn, that Trump's national security adviser has trafficked in fake news stories?
WOOLSEY: I didn't know that he had trafficked in fake news stories. I -- that's news to me.
LEMON: That there was the incident of him re-tweeting fake news stories. His son who was on his team also trafficked in fake news stories. I think we may have discussed them I'm not sure with you here either. Because I can...
WOOLSEY: Correct. In the sense of sending them to a few people you know and saying isn't this weird or...
LEMON: Who are giving them credence by putting them on social media which everyone in the world has access to and by re-tweeting them.
WOOLSEY: Well, one of the reasons I've stayed away from social media is lack of technical competence to deal with it, so I'm not entirely sure what the implications are of this. I just believe that one ought to, if you send something out that is clearly false, probably ought to put some kind of indicator on it, look isn't this weird or whatever, and I don't know that he didn't do that.
LEMON: P.J., I'll ask you the same question. Does that concern you?
CROWLEY: I think it is a concern but I think it also just reflects the fact that we've been waiting for this pivot, where you know, the Trump team appears to still be in campaign mode and they're now at cusp of governing and they haven't yet made the shift.
As Gloria said in the last segment, you know, so much of their inner thought processes has become public and that is new and that's probably something that they'll have to adapt to once, you know, they're in control.
I mean, you have the situation where Donald Trump is still positioning himself as outsider as an opponent of government, yet very soon he's going to be the owner and operator of that government and responsible for its functioning and responsible for the welfare of intelligence operatives and military people that go into harm's way every day on our behalf.
LEMON: Secretary Chertoff, we are just 15 days away from the inauguration. What are the security challenges? Are they greater than in the past? Which ones are greater than in the past?
CHERTOFF: Well, I would say this, since 9/11 and it was certainly true when we prepared for the inauguration in 2009, the concern about terrorism at inauguration has been obviously been at the forefront. And that's over and above the challenge of dealing with a large crowd, people coming in from other parts of the country who may not be familiar with Washington.
So, I think in light of what we've seen in Europe, in light of what I called crowd sourcing of terrorism by ISIS where they go on social media and encourage people to pick up a gun or knife or the keys to a car to carry out an attack, I think one of the prime focuses will be to make sure we have a secure experience both for the participants and for the spectators.
LEMON: All right. Thank you, gentlemen. I appreciate it.
Up next, has Donald Trump changed his mind about one of his signature campaign promises, one that got him roaring cheers at rallies?
[22:25:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)
LEMON: House republicans indicating tonight that President-elect Trump may have changed his mind about one of his major campaign promises.
Let's discuss now with former Congressman Jack Kingston, a former senior adviser to the Trump campaign, political commentator Kayleigh McEnany, contributor, Hilary Rosen, and commentator Bakari Sellers.
OK. Here we go. We heard it so much, build that wall. Mexico's going to pay for the wall. So, you heard what I said, Kayleigh, house GOP officials are now telling CNN that Donald Trump is going to ask Congress to pay for the wall. So, what happened to the signature campaign promise? Is it changing? Are taxpayers going to pay for it now?
KAYLEIGH MCENANY, REPUBLICAN STRATEGIST: I hope it's not changing. It's one thing to ask Congress to pay for the wall and go about and getting some sort of funding from Mexico.
In fact, you can look on Trump's web site, there's a detailed plan using the patriotic act and regulations that would allow him to tax remittances. So, I think he has to at least pursue this route if he wants to engage Congress first, get taxpayers to pay for it first, and then go to Mexico and make sure that we get the taxes remittances and the force stream of income he has listed and how he'll pay for the wall via Mexico, fine.
But I think he has to make some effort to have Mexico pay for it because it was the key promise.
LEMON: That was a lot of explaining, Kayleigh.
HILARY ROSEN, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: When you're explaining you're losing.
JACK KINGSTON, FORMER UNITED STATES REPRESENTATIVE: Well...
LEMON: Jack -- Congressman, excuse me about that, are we ever going to see a wall?
KINGSTON: We will see a wall. The overarching message here is immigration security. Controlling the borders. And building a wall is more important than paying for the wall, or who is going to pay for the wall.
I think what -- all right, Bakari, you hang in there. You know, I can tell you though, republicans want the wall built. We want the benefits of the wall, the security, keeping the drugs out, keeping the illegals out, keeping potential terrorists who aren't Mexicans from coming in.
KINGSTON: That's all important. And if he wants to get it done quickly, putting it in the April 28th bill and getting this thing started, that's number one sell.
LEMON: OK. Hilary, that was lot of explaining too, as well from Congressman.
KINGSTON: She's loving it.
LEMON: But go ahead. Go ahead, Hilary.
ROSEN: When you're explaining you're losing. This is crazy. You know, he no more is going to get Mexico to pay for that wall than he is going to be able to keep everybody on, you know, their own insurance plan once he repeals Obamacare.
This is just kind of the problem of governing and Donald Trump is quickly finding out that all of that stuff he said during the campaign, he just can't keep his promises to the American people.
And you know, we're just going to add it up. We're going to add up all the things that he said he was going to do that now we're not going to do. And we'll have republicans spinning like tops about why it doesn't matter.
[22:30:01] LEMON: Bakari, do you see a scenario, imagine this though, where democrats could end up trying to shut down the government over this use of tactic that republicans have used before?
BAKARI SELLERS, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: Definitely. I think that all the tactics are on the table. I think you saw...
(JOINED IN PROGRESS)
[22:30:00] HILARY ROSEN, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: ... it doesn't matter.
[22:30:01] DON LEMON, CNN HOST: Bakari, do you see a scenario, imagine this though, where democrats could end up trying to shut down the government over this use of tactic that republicans have used before?
BAKARI SELLERS, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: Definitely. I think that all the tactics are on the table. I think you saw that the president of the United States even talk -- when he was speaking to democrats a few days ago, it was about Obamacare, but it's about just the tone and tenor that need to take, is about adopting a lot of the tea party tactics.
Speaking of tea party it's kind of ironic that my fellow panel mate here, former tea party Congressman Jack Kingston is now saying it doesn't matter who pays for it. I just think that's the height of irony.
But even more importantly we can argue about the fact that net migration from Mexico is zero, we can talk about the fact that most people don't go across a wall or take tunnels, it actually take planes to come to the United States. And we know that most people actually overstay their visas, those are the majority of the people here illegally.
We could talk about all of that. But Donald Trump was actually when he was chanting who is going to pay for the wall, he meant New Mexico, not just Mexico, Don.
JACK KINGSTON, FORMER UNITED STATES REPRESENTATIVE: Bakari, let me say this. Good line, number one. But the truth of the matter is, republicans are actually very, very concerned about immigration security. Because we don't know who and what has been coming over those borders.
So, really in all seriousness, building the wall is paramount. Secondary issue was having Mexico pay for it. But I can promise you, if you polled it right now with republican based voters they would still be extremely happy and comfortable having a wall built.
LEMON: And even if the taxpayers pay for it.
ROSEN: No matter who pays for it? I don't think so.
SELLERS: Well, that's the biggest problem.
KINGSTON: Yes, because of the benefits.
ROSEN: I actually think...
SELLERS: But that's the biggest problem. He's not the president of the republican base, he is the president of the United States of America. And if we're going to talk about the fact -- and it's really -- it's really incorrect headline to say that Congress is going to pay for the wall, because Congress is not going to pay for the wall.
That five of us here talking today and all the taxpayers watching are going to pay for the wall.
SELLERS: And I can tell you with student loans and everything else, I don't feel like paying for the wall.
LEMON: Hilary, quickly because I want to move on with another subject. Go ahead.
ROSEN: Well, I just think that part of the rhetoric around building the wall and making Mexico pay for it was really, you know, a sort of an anti-immigrant, a racist anti-Latino symbolism.
And I think what's happening is when you see that rhetoric fall apart, the whole coalition falls apart. And I do think that we're going to start to see this divide between Donald Trump and the republican Congress who are not going to be able to keep the promises that he's made to the American people.
LEMON: OK. As this plays out -- I'm sorry, Kayleigh, we're going to talk more. You know that we have lots of time to discuss this 24 hours a day. But I want to talk in this discussion and get Congressman Kingston's reaction to this.
Tidal wave of intelligence news today. You have Clapper who is testifying that Russia hacked the election, you have intercept showing that Russian officials celebrate Donald Trump's win, you have the Intel report identifying the go-betweens Russia used to give stolen e- mails to WikiLeaks. Is all of this putting president-elect in a tough spot where he's sort of painting himself into a corner?
KINSGTON: I don't think it is, and I'll tell you why, I think the democrats have turned this whole thing into politics and for the people back home are watching, they are saying I'm a little bit confused. I mean, this is not just he's not my president, the never Trump move.
LEMON: Hold on, what do you mean how the democrats keeping those. People in the intelligence community are democrats?
KINSGTON: Well, I think that the intelligence community has been used as political pawn by democrats and by non-Trump supporters to say, look, this is -- this is not how you handle these things and this is what he said. This is what the FBI said. This is what the CIA said.
And you know, you keep getting this intelligence community leaks to the press, which in my opinion as not called for at all, it's beyond the pale, it's probably unprecedented. I was on the committee that had a lot of classified briefings with the intelligence community. I think there is a shake-up that's needed.
But I've never seen the intelligence community talk to the press the way they have in the last couple of days.
LEMON: But you say democrats -- hold on.
ROSEN: But you know what. But, Don...
LEMON: Hold on. Hold on. Hold on. You say it's democrats. But let's put up what General Dempsey said if we still have that. He is the chairman of the Joint Chiefs. He said "Intelligence is hard thankless work. Fortunately, we have dedicated patriotic and courageous men and women on the job. Thanks."
He's saying there's no doubt to defend the community. He's not saying it as a partisan person, he's saying it as a member of the intelligence community.
KINSGTON: But he's not -- he's not foremost voice out there. There foremost voices out there are in many respect in many times are the same people who were against Trump and who were Hillary supporters.
KINSGTON: So, I'm just saying that...
SELLERS: That's not true.
ROSEN: that is not true.
KINSGTON: The Democrat Party out there have said publicly...
ROSEN: You had the republican -- you had the republican chairman of the Senate armed services committee holding these hearings today, let's just remember that.
You had the majority of the republicans on the Senate armed services committee today expressing their concern about the Russians interfering with U.S. elections, denying the fact that it had anything to do with delegitimizing the election, Jack, and you know that that's what they were saying.
[22:35:01] What they were saying is respect for the intelligence community is paramount -- of paramount importance to U.S. national security and they went out of their way to distance themselves from the president-elect on that very point because they know how damaging it is.
LEMON: Congressman, stand by, we'll let you respond after the break.
LEMON: Back now with former Congressman Jack Kingston, Kayleigh McEnany, Hilary Rosen, and Bakari Sellers.
Congressman, you are making a point.
KINSGTON: Well, what I would say and Hilary, I have to correct you, immigration security is not about racism at all. And I think it's time the democrats get away from that. I mean, there are illegal problems. Illegal immigration is going on, it displaces American jobs, drugs are being smuggled in. In many cases there is criminal element that's out there.
It's not a matter of racism, it's a matter of national and security. And so, but when people say well, it's just racism then that reduces the whole argument back to politics and then, you know, Trump versus Hillary land or red versus blue.
It's not conducive to the conversation. And Hilary, I have great respect for you so I'm not lecturing you at all. I would never do that. But I'm saying -- I'm saying...
LEMON: While lecturing though. But go ahead.
KINSGTON: I would -- I would lecture Bakari given the chance. But now, I mean, Hilary, I'm saying as a reflection of the democrats, it's not conducive to say well, this is all about racism because I have to say it's not about that at all.
[22:40:05] ROSEN: Well, I just don't think you could have been at those rallies, you can have been at the post-election scenarios and just heard the way people talked about the wall as a symbol of keeping people out of this country, of dividing us...
ROSEN: ... of making us feel less than and still have that view. But you know, it's an old argument and I don't need to keep going at it.
LEMON: OK. So, let's discuss now. Kayleigh, I want to play something. This is Director Clapper's testimony on election hacking.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JAMES CLAPPER, NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE DIRECTOR: This was a multifaceted campaign. So, the hacking was only one part of it. And it also entailed classical propaganda, disinformation, fake news.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Does that continue?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
LEMON: Kayleigh, break this down for me, U.S. intelligence, certain that Russia hacked the election, republicans and democrats agree. Lindsey Graham, republican John McCain certainly, you know, marquee republicans, why does Donald Trump continue to dismiss that outright?
KAYLEIGH MCENANY, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well, look, I think two things are going on. Donald Trump is rightly frustrated that democrats are doing what Jack said, and that they're politicizing that. So, he is right on that front and he should push back on that, and he can even question the intelligence community. That is fine.
But I think at this point you have to conclude where there is smoke there is fire. Russia did hack the DNC, that happened. It didn't influence a single vote but it did happened and you have top republicans admitting this. You had just a few moments that James Woolsey coming in...
LEMON: Even the intelligence reports say you don't think it would change the election.
LEMON: So why continue to doubt it if it's not going to change that? He is the president-elect that...
MCENANY: Exactly. And this is where I want -- I'm supporter of Donald Trump I want to see him succeed.
MCENANY: And he could make this go away if he just said this happened. It didn't influence the election, the sanctions should stand. Let's move on.
SELLERS: There are a couple of things that...
ROSEN: Like make some news tonight.
SELLERS: There are couple of things that are wrong with that. The first -- the first is that Kayleigh and Jack have tried to diminish this to be a partisan fight which is not. This effort was led by John McCain today, he is the chairman of the Armed Services committee, that's first.
And second, I think it's very disrespectful for Kayleigh and Jack or anyone else so sit up here and say that the people who go out of their way to serve our country and secure this information who are part of our intelligence community are playing politics. that's second.
MCENANY: I didn't say that. You're putting words in my mouth, I said democrats are.
SELLERS: The third thing is -- the third thing is...
MCENANY: I said democrats are not intelligence officials. Those are different things.
SELLERS: The third thing that's incorrect, is that you simply cannot dismiss this by saying that I agree that they hacked the DNC, yes, they may not have hacked specific machines in this country, that may be true. But they engaged in propaganda much like we see them engage in Russia, so that is true.
In this, you simply cannot dismiss this by saying I agree with the intelligence community, now let's move on.
MCENANY: No, I didn't say that.
SELLERS: What you had -- what you had...
MCENANY: You missed like half of my statement.
SELLERS: What you had was you had Russia, who actually committed an act of warfare, cyber warfare in the United States of America, that is a fact.
SELELRS: And if Donald Trump or Jack Kingston or any other republicans want to believe Julian Assange that's not the case.
KINGSTON: Where was the president of the United States who claims he knew about this October 7th. Why do they not declare a war...
SELLERS: If you will exactly right they want to know exactly why...
KINSTON: ... then he thought Hillary was going to win so he didn't say anything.
SELLERS: Because he did -- because Hillary did not want to put his scales on this election, that's very clear. I think the White House should have stepped up on October and said made everybody head blow up by coming out and saying that Russia was meddling in this election.
SELLERS: And yes, I think that would have affected the outcome.
MCENANY: No. They were meddling -- they were not meddling in the election...
LEMON: OK. Stop. Because this is also really important. My time is short, Hilary. And I want to turn to you. I want to talk about other big news today.
Obamacare, the Speaker, Paul Ryan says republicans are going to move to stop funding for Obamacare, Planned Parenthood art of the in the repeal process was well. Elections have consequences. Did you see this coming so quickly?
ROSEN: Well, I think we did see it coming so quickly. That's why we felt like the election had such that big stakes. But I do think that this is a very divided country. I do not think that the majority of people in the country want to see poor women lose access to health care.
Planned Parenthood does not get money from the government to fund abortions. They get money from the government just like any other health care provider to do cancer screenings and birth control and other sorts of basic fundamental health care for women.
And people do not want to see the republicans in Congress go so far to the right that they take away health care for women. They do not want insurance for poor people taken away.
MCENANY: that's not the way....
ROSEN: If the republicans overplay their hands here, I think that it's a problem. They cannot have it both ways.
ROSEN: And I think that Donald Trump is going to be on the chopping block on this very issue because he has tried to go both ways.
LEMON: Kayleigh, go ahead.
MCENANY: Hilary, I agree with you. I don't want any woman to lose health care or access to breast cancer screening, they don't have to.
[22:44:59] There's 1200 facilities can do the saving screening mechanisms but they don't have to go to -- they don't have to go to Planned Parenthood where 300,000 babies a year are slaughtered. They don't have to go there. There are other options...
ROSEN: There is no substitute for those health care plans.
MCENANY: ... and we don't have to support. You are using this as a shield to cover for abortion, I get that.
ROSEN: There are no...
MCENANY: There are other options where people don't lose health care, they also don't have to be complicit in the killing of babies.
ROSEN: There is -- it is just factually untrue that the federal government is supporting abortion. It is factually untrue...
MCENANY: They are supporting an organization that is the number one provider of abortion. That is actually true.
ROSEN: They are not providing any abortion funding and here are simply no alternative for so many women in this country in rural health centers across this country. And if the republicans go this far and actually take this away...
MCENANY: that's the rhetoric argument that propagate genocide.
LEMON: We're done. Thank you.
ROSEN: They will find -- they will find a backlash beyond control.
LEMON: Thank you very much. I appreciate that. When we come right back, 15 days to go until Donald Trump takes the oath of office. But as a Trump team plans a celebration, others are planning protests.
LEMON: For opponents of President-elect Donald Trump, is inauguration day the time to hit the streets and protest or to lay low as the nation -- as a nation celebrates a peaceful transfer of power.
Let's discuss now CNN political commentator, Kevin Madden, a republican strategist is here, and also CNN political commentator Charles Blow, a New York Times columnist.
[22:50:06] Gentlemen, thank you for joining us. Charles Blow, you wrote a column today it's called the anti-inauguration. And in it you write this about Donald Trump.
You say, "Now is the time to make plans to send him the strongest possible signal that your opposition to the presidency will not be pouting and passive but active and animated." What do you mean by it? Talk to me about the anti-inauguration.
CHARLES BLOW, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well, I just think that, you know, resistance itself is a kind of a passive and negative positioning of yourself and your authority and your -- and your passions.
And so, what I want people to do is turn to positive kind of articulations of their principles, to look at all of the things that Donald Trump and indeed the republican Congress and the Senate have targeted, or said they would target as part of this administration and over the next four years or at least over the next two years while they absolutely still have control.
And to say if these things matter to me, what is it that I can that is positive and affirming for me in my believes. I learned in Sunday school a long time ago as little boy that, you know, they used to say works with a -- or faith without works is dead.
I also believe that resistance without action is dead.
BLOW: And you have to do something, it cannot just be pouting online, cannot be tweeting people. It cannot be...
LEMON: Or hash tags.
BLOWS: Hash tagging.
BLOW: You do actually have to donate your time, donate your money.
LEMON: I got to get Kevin in. Charles asked this in the column today, Kevin, he said, "What is proper response to president as polarizing as Mr. Trump? Should the office of the president be honored no matter who fills it or should there be four years of pure rejection and defiance?" What do you think?
KEVIN MADDEN, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well, look, I enjoyed the column and think it made some several good points. I think the big challenge for a lot of folks that are very resistant to the idea of a Trump presidency, is are they going to be, are they going to be opponents for opposition sake or is it going to be channeled.
In a way that Charles talks about in his column towards persuasion, which is we recognize that we are in a very hyper partisan environment right now. There are -- there is very little that you can do to change the minds of Trump's most ardent supporters, there is probably very little you can do to change the minds of Trump's harshest critics.
But there is a big very mobile middle still in this country and when that -- when those protests or that opposition is focused on persuading in changing those minds I think that's always where the most value is.
LEMON: Do you think it's hyper partisan or do you think it's the people who just don't like the way Donald Trump conducted business on the campaign trail. Because there is a difference.
LEMON: I don't know if I've really seen this when there is a transition between a democrat and a republican this sort of resistance, don't you think this has more to do with Donald Trump than it has to do with partisan? MADDEN: For some, there is. But I do think there is, what I've
witnessed during this particular campaign is a partisan tribalism. Where there is nothing that you could do, no evidence, no facts no reason to change somebody's mind if they're a supporter of Trump.
And the same goes for those who are opponents of Donald Trump. No matter what you argued with them with facts or with reason. They refused to see an issue through a different lens. (AUDIO GAP) remember though, right now I still think as much as (AUDIO GAP) get the attention, there is still a very mobile big middle in American politics that can be persuaded.
LEMON: OK. Charles, let's talk about some of the big stories tonight.
BLOW: Can I ask Kevin?
BLOW: I don't think I wrote that second passage you read, but go ahead.
LEMON: All right. So, some of the big stories tonight. Paul Ryan said today that together with dismantling Obamacare, republicans will also strip the funding from Planned Parenthood, the two republicans Senators, Susan Collins of Maine, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska pro-choice, could defunding Planned Parenthood kill their Obamacare bill?
BLOW: You know, it's an interesting question. Whether or not, you know, will it kill the repeal I guess is what you're asking because they don't actually have a bill to introduce yet. And in fact, they have said they are going to do it piecemeal basis.
BLOW: Right, so, it could kill their chances of killing Obamacare? I don't know if it's to that level yet. But one thing I will say in which I think is really important which is that lack of health care is a slow creeping death and it relates to Planned Parenthood and it also relates to the killing of the Affordable Care Act.
You won't necessarily see people dying this left and right in the street but eventually they die because you do not have health care. It's preventive care that keeps you alive. It is treatment of people who have diseases that are -- or situations that are considered to be pre-existing conditions. People literally die.
[22:54:59] And what we're going to see is people die. That is a real thing, that is not -- that is not about partisanship.
BLOW: that is a real thing. And women, in particular get services from Planned Parenthood that are not about abortions.
LEMON: Kevin, is this something of a reach for republicans do you think?
MADDEN: Well, look, I think there is a way -- this is how I look at this. So, I think a lot of people to this point, the health care debate, the Obamacare debate, the Affordable Care Act debate had been had through a different lens and it's been one that worked for republicans. And I think this could potentially reframe it.
For up until this point it has been a dollars and cents argument. When Obamacare premiums spiked towards the end of the campaign that had a very negative effect on voters and their views of potential Clinton presidency and how they judged last eight years.
It was also an economic value argument; there were different opinions about how people got access, the affordability of their care. I still think that largely worked to the republicans' favor in this particular election.
This debate this turns is not a bit of a culture war and that is a much more difficult fight right now and it's probably not one that many republicans decided that was how they wanted to spend the first 100 days of this presidency.
LEMON: Kevin and Charles, thank you very much.
MADDEN: Great to be with you.
LEMON: When we come right back, crime that President Obama calls despicable. New development in the case of the brutal attack on a special needs teen. The whole thing is broadcast on Facebook live.
[23:00:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)
LEMON: It is a crime so shocking. The reaction of revulsion has spread all the way to the White House.
This is CNN Tonight.