tv The 2nd Trump Impeachment Trial CNN February 11, 2021 1:00pm-4:00pm PST
you're hearing me, very loud and clear, this is not the american way. >> mr. president, you have got to stop this. you are the only person who can call this off. call it off. >> pretty simple. the president caused this protest to occur. he's the only one who can make it stop. what the president said is not good enough. the president has to come out and tell his supporters to leave the capitol grounds. and to allow the congress to do their business peacefully. anything short of that is abrogation of their responsibility. >> a guy who knows how to tweet very aggressively on twitter, you know, puts out one of the weakest statements in one of the saddest days in american hi history. >> the ptresident's role in the
insurrection, in his speech that day, baseless authorities creating a combustible environment of misinformation and division. to allow the president of the united states to incite this attack without consequences is a direct threat to the future of this democracy. >> did the president encourage violence? yes. no doubt that he did. final question. did the president act willfully in his actions that encouraged violence? well, let's look at the facts. he stood before an armed, angry, crowd known to be ready for violence at his provocation. and what did he do? he provoked them. he aimed them here. told them to fight like hell. and that's exactly what they
did. and his conduct throughout the rest of that terrible day really only confirms that he acted willfully. that he incited the crowd and then engaged in a dereliction of duty while he continued enflaming the violence. and, again, we don't have to guess what he thought because he told us. remember the video he released at 4:17 p.m., lead manager raskin showed that to you yesterday. the one where he said, "we had an election that was stolen from us." remember the tweet that he put out just a couple hours later, 6:01 p.m. on january 6th, you've seen it many times. you can see it on the slide. that theed ase are things that happen with a sacred landslide victory is unceremoniously and viciously stripped away.
that is what he was focused on. spreading the big lie and praising the mob that attacked us and our government. you heard manager cicilline describe reports that the president was delighted, enthusiastic, confused that others didn't share his excitement as he watched the attack unfold on tv. he cared more about pressing his efforts to overturn the election than he did about saving lives. our lives. look at what president trump did that day after the rally. it's important. he did virtually nothing.
we've seen -- manager castro mentioned this that when president trump wants to stop something, he does so simply. easily. quickly. but aside from four tweets and a short clip during the over five-hour-long atattack, he did nothing. on january 6th, he didn't condemn the attack, he didn't condemn the attackers, didn't say that he would send help to defend us. or defend law enforcement. he didn't react to the violence with shock or horror or dismay, as we did. he didn't immediately rush to twitter and demand in the clearest possible terms that the mob disperse, that they stop it, that they retreat. instead, he issued messages in
the afternoon that sided with them. the insurrectionists who had left police officers battered and bloodied. he reacted exactly the way someone would react if they were delighted and exactly unlike how a person would react if they were angry at how their followers were acting. again, ask yourself how many lives would have been saved, how much pain and trauma would have been avoided if he had reacted the way that a president of the united states is supposed to act. there are two parts of president trump's failure here. his dereliction of duty that i just have to emphasize for a
moment. first is what he did to vice president mike pence. the vice president of the united states of america. his own vice president was in this building with an armed mob shouting, "hang him." the same armed mob that set up ga gallows outside. you saw those pictures. and what did president trump do? he attacked him more. he singled him out by name. it's honestly hard to fathom. second, our law enforcement. the brave officers who are sacrificing their lives to defend us, who could not evacuate or seek cover because they were protecting us. i'm not going to go through, again, what my fellow manager
showed you yesterday. but let me just say this. those officers serve us faithfully and dutifully and follow their oaths. they deserved a president who upholds his. who would not risk their lives and safety to retain power. a president who would preserve, protect, and defend them. that's not what he did. when they, the police, still barricaded and being attacked with poles, he said, in his video, to the people attacking them, "we love you. you're very special." what more could we possibly need to know about president trump's state of mind?
senators, the evidence is clear. we showed you statements, videos, affidavits, that prove president trump incited an insurrection. an insurrection that he, alone, had the power to stop. and the fact that he didn't stop it, the fact that he incited a lawless attack and abdicated his duty to defend us from it, the fact that he actually further inflamed the mob, further enf enflamed that mob. attacking his vice president. while assassins were pursuing him it this capitol. more than requires conviction. and disqualification. we humbly, humbly, ask you to convict president trump for the crime for which he is overwhelmingly guilty of.
because if you don't, if we pretend this didn't happen, or worse, if we let it go unanswered, who's to say it won't happen again? >> mr. president, members of the senate, first of all, thank you for your close attention and seriousness of purpose that you've demonstrated over the last few days. thank you, also, for your courtesy to the house managers as we've come over here. strangers in a strange land. to make our case before this
distinguished and august body. we're about to close. i'm proud our managers have been disciplined and so focused, i think we're closing somewhere between five and six hours under the time that you've allotted to us. we think we've been able to tell you everything we need to say. we'll obviously have the opportunity to address your questions and then to do -- to do a final closing when we get there. i just wanted to leave you with a few thoughts. again, i'm not going to retraumatize you by going through the evidence, once again, i want to leave you with a few thoughts to consider as you enter upon this very high and difficult duty that you have. to render impartial justice in this case as you have all sworn to do. and i wanted to start simply by saying that in the history of humanity, democracy is an
extremely rare and fragile and precarious, intransitory thing. abraham lincoln knew that when he spoke from the battlefield and vowed that government of the people, by the people, and for the people, shall not perish from the earth. he was speaking not long after the republic was created and he was trying to prove that point. that we would not allow it to perish from the earth. for most of history, the norm has been dictators, autocrats, bullies, despots, tyrants, cowards, who take over our governments. for most of the history of the world. and that's why america is such a miracle. we were founded on the extraordinary principles of the inalienable rights of the people and the consent of the governed. and the fundamental equality of all of us.
you know, when lincoln said, "government of the people, by the people, and for the people," and he hearkened back to the declaration of independence when he said, "four score seven years ago" he knew that wasn't how we started. we started imperfectly. we started as a slave republic. lincoln knew that but he was struggling to make the country better. and however flawed the founders were as men in their times, they inscribed in the "declaration of independence" and the constitution all the beautiful principles that we needed to open america up to successive waves of political struggle and constitutional change. and transformation in the country. so we really would become something much more like lincoln's beautiful vision of government of the people, by the people, and for the people, the
world's greatest multiracial, multireligious, multiethnic, constitutional democracy. the envy of the world. as tom payne said, "an asylum for humanity where people would come." think about the preamble. those first three words, pregnant with such meaning, "we, the people." and then all of the purposes of our government put into that one action-packed sentence. "we, the people, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, ensure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare and preserve to ourselves and our posterity the blessings of a liberty." and then right after that first sentence, the mission statement
for america in the constitution, what happens. article 1, the congress is created. all legislative powers herein are reserved to the congress of the united states. you see what just happened? the sovereign power of the people to launch the country and create the constitution flowed right into congress. and then you get article 1 section 8 comprehensive vast powers that all of you know so well. the power to regulate commerce, domestically, internationally, the power to declare war. the power to raise budgets and taxes and to spend money, the power to govern the seat of government. and on and on and on. and then even in article 1 section 8 clause 18, and all other powers necessary and proper to the execution of the foregoing powers. that's all of us. and then you get to article 2, the president, four short
paragraphs. the fourth paragraph is all about what? impeachment. how you get rid of a president who commits high crimes and misd misdemeanors. what's the core job of the president? to take care that the laws are faithfully executed. and our framers were so fearful of presidents becoming tyrants and wanting to become kings and despots that they put the oath of office right into the constitution. they inscribed it into the constitution. to preserve, protect, and defend the constitution of the united states. we've got the power to impeach the president. the president doesn't have the power to impeach us. think about that. the popular branch of government has the power to impeach the president. the president does not have the power to impeach us. and as i said before, all of us who aspire and attain a public
office are nothing but thor is vents of the people, the way the framers would have it, the moment we no longer acted as servants of the people but as masters of the people, violators of the people's rights, that was the time to impeach, remove, convict, disqualify, start all over again. because the interest of the people are so much greater than the interest of one person. any one person. even the greatest person in the country. the interest of the people. are what count. now, when we sit down and we close, our distinguished counterparts, the defense counsel, who have waited very patiently, and thank you, will stand up and seek to defend the president's conduct on the facts. as i think they will. it has already been decided by the senate on tuesday that the senate has constitutional
jurisdiction over this impeachment case brought to you by the united states house of representatives. so, we've put that jurisdictional constitutional issue to bed. it is over. it's already been voted on. this is a trial on the facts of what happened. incitement as we said is a fact-intensive investigation and judgment that each of you will have to make. we've made our very best effort to set forth every single relevant fact that we know in the most objective and honest light. we trust, we hope, that the defense will understand the constitutional gravity and slem anity of this trial by focusing like a laser beam on the facts and not return to the constitutional argument that's already been decided by the senate. just as a defense lawyer who loses a motion to dismiss, on a constitutional basis, in a criminal case, must let that go and then focus on the facts
which are being presented by the prosecutors in detail. they must let this constitutional jurisdictional argument go. not just because it's frivolous and wrong as nearly every expert scholar in america opined but because it's not relevant to the jury's consideration of the facts of the case. so our friends must work to answer all the overwhelming, detailed, specific, factual, and documentary evidence introduced of the president's clear and overwhelming guilt in inciting violent insurrection against the union. donald trump last week turned down our invitation to come testify about his actions and, therefore, we've not been able to ask him any questions directly as of this point. therefore, during the course of their 16-hour allotted presentation, we would pose these preliminary questions to
his lawyers. which i think are on everyone's minds right now in which we would have asked mr. trump, himself, if he had chosen to come and testify about his actions and inactions. when we invited him last week. one, why did president trump not tell his supporters to stop the attack on the capitol as soon as he learned of it? why did president trump do nothing to stop the attack for at least two hours after the attack began? as our constitutional commander in chief, why did he do nothing to send help to our overwhelmed and besieged law enforcement officers for at least two hours on january 16th after the attack began? on january 6th why did president trump not at any point that day condemn the violent insurrection
and the insurrectionists? and i'll add a legal question that i hope his distinguished counsel will address. if a president did invite a violent insurrection against our government, as, of course, we allege and think we've proven in this case, but just in general, if a president incited a violent insurrection against our government, would that be a high crime and misdemeanor? can we all agree at least on that? senators, i've talked a lot about common sense in this trial because i think, i believe that's all you need to arrive at the right answer here. you know, when tom payne wrote "common sense," the pamphlet that launched the american revolution, he said that common sense really meant two different things. one, common sense is the understanding that we all have without advanced learning and
education. common sense is the sense accessible to everybody. but common sense is also the sense that we all in common. as a community. senators, america, we need to exercise our common sense about what happened. let's not get caught up in a lot of outlandish lawyers' theories near. exercise your common sense about what just took place in our country. tom payne wasn't an american, as you know, but he came over to help us in our great revolutionary struggle against the kings and queens and the tyrants. in 1776 in the crisis, he wrote these beautiful words. it was a very tough time for the country. people didn't know which way things were going to go.
were we going to win against all hope? because for most of the rest of human history, it had been the kings and the queens and the tyrants and the nobles lording it over the common people. could political self-government work in america, was the question. and payne wrote this pamphlet called "the crisis" and in it he said these beautiful words, and with your permission i'm going to update the language a little bit pursuant to suggestion of speaker pelosi. so as not to offend modern sensibilities. okay. but he said, "these are the times that try men's and women's souls. the summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will shrink at this moment from the service of their cause and their country but everyone who stands with us now will win the love and the favor and the affection of every man and every woman for all time. tyranny like hell is not easily conquered but we have this
saving consolation. the more difficult the struggle, the more glorious in the end will be our victory." good luck in your deliberations. >> thank you. thank you. now, i have two -- we're going to do the adjournment resolution in a moment. i have two other things that we have to do. they're quick. first, mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that it be an order to make several unanimous consent requests as if in legislative session. >> objection so ordered. >> i ask unanimous consent that on friday, february 12th, from 10:30 to 11:30 a.m. that notwithstanding adjournment the senate be able to receive house messages on executive matters. committees be authorized to report legislative and executive matters and senators be allowed to submit statements for the
record. introduce bills and resolutions and make co-sponsor requests and where applicable the secretary of the senate on behalf of the presiding officer be permitted to refer such matters. >> without objection, so honored. >> and a second request poignantly appropriate at this moment. i ask unanimous consent that pursuant to the order of the senate of january 24th, 1901, the traditional reading, washington's farewell address, take place on monday, february 22nd, following the prayer and pledge, further that senator portman be recognized to deliver the address. >> is there objection? do i hear any objection? so ordered. >> and finally, mr. president, i ask unanimous consent the trial adjourn until 12:00 noon tomorrow, friday, february 12th, and this also constitute the adjournment of the senate.
>> any objection? without objection, so ordered. >> senate adjourned. >> senate's adjourned. welcome to "the lead." i'm jake tapper in washington. the house impeachment managers have just concluded their opening arguments in their case against former president donald trump. over the last two days democrats using mr. trump's own words and tweets and actions. social media posts from insurrectionists. and newly revealed surveillance video. all to build the case that then-president trump incited the insurrection on january 6th. senators, who are something like a jury ain this case will hear next from trump's legal team. that's tomorrow as they attempt to defend his actions surrounding the u.s. capitol attack. joining me here in studio, dana bash and abby phillip. let me just -- i'll start with you, abby. it seems to me they had the task of presenting to the jury these arguments. donald trump lied over and over about the election results.
the rally took place january 6th because of him, because it was the last chance for him to, in his view, overturn the election. he incited the mob rushing to the capitol knowing that there were violent people in the crowd. and that it likely would lead to violence. and then once it happened, he was indifferent, if not rudely ignoring the requests that he stop it. and as far as i can tell, they made a pretty good case for all four of those points. >> yeah, and so much of that case was made as they repeatedly said, not by mind reading but by looking at the evidence put out into the world by trump, himself. his tweets. his statements. his comments. throughout the day that laid out a chain of events and also preceding that. his words. his tweets. his comments. all the way leading up to the end of the day on january 6th.
i thought that the final message here from democrats was actually asking the senators in that room, perhaps particularly the republicans who are obviously reticent to punish or cross donald trump, to think about the consequences of doing nothing. what are the consequences to the country, to the constitution, to america's standing in the world. and laying out a case for the likelihood that this was not a fluke. that these things could happen again. and in some cases arguing that it was likely to happen again. trump has said he wants to run for president again. he has not actually denounced the lie that undergirds all of this. and his supporters who carried out this attack have said that they are emboldened. so that's a pretty heavy message to leave republicans with. the question is, are they listening? were they listening? not entirely clear. >> right. i mean, they were listening but
did they actually hear it? >> right. >> and first of all, there were according to our colleague, manu raju, many of them weren't in the chamber for a lot of this but they know the arguments and day lived it and they know this president and they know the tightrope that they have had to walk for five years. and i'm talking about republicans, of course. and so, the question is, do they have their ears open? are they open to very cogent arguments that we heard for two straight days? bolstered by the president's own words. by his own tweets. by the -- all of the public evidence that has been on our tv screens over and over again. and i thought that the end, after congressman neguse went through and asked questions like, was the violence foreseeable, did the president encourage violence, did he have a dereliction of duty in not
stopping it when it started, which was obvious that he and only he could do. but then winding up with jamie raskin. the head manager talking about common sense. and, you know, trying to puncture the republican argument that we've heard over and over again and probably will after they have their votes that this isn't constitutional, that they didn't really prove that he actually incited it, we didn't -- we don't know, we don't have witnesses. so on and so forth. he's saying, you know what, we all know what happened. use your common sense about what happened and more importantly, like you said, abby, about not punishing him and what that will mean for the future. >> is there any other jury or jury-like body in the world where we have so little expectation that people will actually vote according to what the evidence suggests as opposed
to political considerations that they have. and i recognize that there are some people, some republicans in that room, that are going to do what they think is right. i think mitt romney is a good example of it. of that. but there are, i mean, i think if it were secret ballot, let me put it that way, if it were secret ballot, would there be a different count? you cover these people. >> that's a good question. i -- you probably both have been asked that question a lot. i have, too. what about a secret ballot? this is, you know, a trial that they put on and they decide the rules of. maybe they can just make it anonymous and that could change the outcome. >> like an actual jury. >> like an actual jury. the question, of course, it isn't an actual jury, isn't anything else like we see anywhere else in the country. it is unique. it is a political exercise. which has its own rules, again, that they create. and they all realize that part of being an elected official means you have to be accountable to the people who elect you. and, you know, this is a pretty big thing to be accountable for.
having said that, you know, it does defy logic that, again, these people who sat through this testimony, sat through the arguments for two straight days, but much more importantly, lived through it, can say, you know what, i'm going to, you know, hang my hat on the constitutionality argument. i'm going to hang my hat on whatever other legal or political excuse is out there for me to do. >> and one other thing, abby, i don't think we've talked a lot about, but it certainly was relevant during the two-month period leading up to january 6th, which was how individual election officials and judges and governors and secretaries of state, how they were going to act knowing that if they did anything to cross donald trump, "a "a," their careers might be in jeopardy. and "b," their lives might be in jeo jeopardy. this is something we haven't talked about but has to be on
the mind of every juror especially the republican ones for whom president trump really has a particular animus when it comes to feeling betrayed. that if they vote to convict donald trump, they might have to essentially go into hiding. because a lot of these incited supporters of the president might wish them harm. >> and watch out for that argument coming from the president's lawyers tomorrow. perhaps the day after. they signaled, the president's lawyers signaled, a couple days ago that one of the cases that they're going to make against connection, and against these impeachment proceedings, is that this would enflame anger and division. effectively saying you're going to rile up the mob again. if you do this. it's, in a lot of ways, a veiled threat to everyone in that room, but it's particularly focused on the republicans who are in the position to change the course of
how this goes. and i think they are cognizant of that. you've heard many republicans like marco rubio and others making that argument themselves. they're worried about the consequences of not allowing this behavior to go unchecked but of the consequences of saying to the president -- president trump's followers, this is not acceptable. that's the reality of the situation. they're not -- there have been many republican officials who have exhibited a lot of courage and bravery over the last several months and said, you know what, the country is worth more than just my own ability to be reelected. very few of these people are in the congress right now. >> yeah. >> that's just a fact. they are worried about being reelected. they don't want to have a tough fight. they don't want to fight at all. they just want to cruise back in to another six years. and they will if they stick to
the, you know, the party line with standing by donald trump. >> that's very interesting and troubling argument that we've heard a number of times. basically, the appease the terrorists argument which in foreign policy is something that conservatives and trump supporters laugh at. >> never mind foreign policy, but the american justice system. >> but the idea of, like, don't go after soleimani in iran. if you do that, there will retaliations. the argument is you do what you need to do, you don't do what you're afraid the terrorists are going to punish us for. >> no question. >> anderson, it's interesting that we're now hearing that, except the threat is from american terrorists. >> i thought it was also very interesting, jamie raskin, we'll talk about this with our legal team right now, to hear jamie raskin at the end positing questions, questions that they would have asked president trump, former president trump,
if he had agreed to come and answer them, essentially, daring the -- or getting the former trump -- former president's attorneys to answer those questions. >> well, i think what he's doing is saying that, you know, they laid out the case. they've done it methodically. they've done it completely. and based on what's there, they're saying the senate has enough to convict and if the president has anything else, if he has evidence to undermine anything that the managers said or introduced, now is the time to bring it and he's sort of leaving that out there for the republican senators so they notice and so that the managers will come back to that if the trump lawyers don't do that. that the trump lawyers didn't and probably won't come back with evidence. >> one of the things also we were talking about before we came on camera which i think is
really important to emphasize is how the argument of jury diction l issues are over. >> yeah. anderson, this is something we've been talking about for days. and we saw coming. that because, you know, we talked a lot about that belknap case from the 1800s where jurisdiction was decided but then a whole bunch of the senators who voted no on jurisdiction, then went and voted not guilty, that was something that the managers had to deal with. is this notion that because some of the republican senators -- because almost all the republican senators found no jurisdiction, when time comes to reach a verdict, they're going to vote not guilty because of that. representative raskin -- >> which gives them basically a fig leaf. they don't have to then acknowledge or deal with the actual crime. >> they don't have to deal with the facts. representative raskin is saying no, no, no, you can't do that. jurisdiction was decided. it's decided by the entire senate. the senate has jurisdiction. the next question you're going to be asked is was donald trump
guilty or not guilty on the merits? that's the decision that you need to make. you can't avoid that. the jurisdictional issue is over. and it's an argument that he has to make. i don't know how successful it's going to be, but it's an important argument. >> it was important from a political point of view to put it before the country to say the senate voted on this. >> jayeah. >> he said that -- that let's not get caught up in a lot of outlandish lawyers' theories here. that's been decided. and so what he was saying to the senate is, you can't hide behind that anymore. you can't say, well, i'm not going to decide donald trump's guilt or innocence here. i'm not going to vote to convict because i don't think we should be here in the first place which is what you hear from a lot of senators on the republican side and he's saying to them, that's not a question before you right now. that's over. now you have to vote aye or nay and i think it gets -- >> it doesn't stop them,
though -- >> of course not. >> -- from using that excuse if they choose to. >> no, but i think he put ts it out there not for them. but for everybody watching to say, okay, they have to decide whether, in fact, donald trump willfully, you know, inspired the violence at the -- at the capitol. >> laura, some of the questions that jamie raskin was saying that they wanted to ask the president, why, mr. president, did you wait two hours to say, stop, or any form of stop, why did you do nothing to send help for at least two hours? why didn't you condemn the violent insurrectionists that day? and if a president incited a violent insurrection against our government, would that be a high crime? >> and none of those questions are meant to be rhetorical, but they're meant to linger. they're meant for the defense team to actually address these things. they know they planted some seeds. and it's up to the defense team to actually address them or they will become trees. full-fledged trees. and possibly actually be enough
to persuade some to say, look, all of the different exit hatches have been closed off by this -- the impeachment man manager's eloquence and methodical approach to this particular case. they -- please give me a reason that i can say acquittal. they're going to be begging with their eyes and attention span hopefully for that moment. but those seeds have now been planted, anderson, as is this overarching theme of, look, they're likely going to argue that the democrats are trying to scapegoat trump, want a reason to punish somebody for the tragedy of an insurrection but he's not the guy. they plant the seed of, well, you were a sacrificial lamb. he was spending you out essentially to be slaugthtered for lack of a better material. either politically or actually by these insurrectionists. these seeds have been planted in their minds. the defense is going to have to do a much stronger job tomorrow to try to chop down the trees that are growing than they did on that very first day. as you said, the idea of saying,
hey, that's off the table now, the idea of jurisdiction, they don't have a judge to keep them focused and say you cannot talk about thee tse things. they're going to try to do down that road of distraction. the senators know if they voted already in favor of this being constitutional to go forward, have jurisdictional issues and also know they're now on trial as well. their choices they make are as much about the future of democracy as what president -- then-president trump -- did. >> and jamie raskin was explicit about it when he addressed the jury, he said, senators, america, so as the trial has gone on, they have built out the idea that it's not just donald trump who's on trial, given the strength of the evidence, the power of the pattern, neguse was masterful in marshalling all the points that filled the gap we were talking about in the last panel. was donald trump acting knowingly and now they're turning to america to put these
senators on the spot if they don't do the right thing. >> yeah. one of the things he ended with, part of it what gloria quoted which is about sort of don't get caught up in lawyerese, use your common sense. >> yeah, they made a very, very, very compelling case. you know, john, we might say if we were watching basketball, almost a slam dunk kind of case. that trump incited an insurrection, in their words, against the nation he swore an oath to protect and must be convicted. then they said, not only convicted but then disqualified from ever holding federal office again. >> a damning detailed, compelling, overwhelming case, presented over a couple days. largely on the basis of the president of the united states. the former president of the united states. in his own words and his own tweets. and the words of the thugs and the rioters, the insurrectionists who stormed the capitol. a little more than a month ago. the president's lawyers get their chance tomorrow. they can try to swing the
pendulum back. you would have to have your ears blocked -- just have to be decided you aren't going to listen to not, based on everything we've seen, just take the last two days, never mind the constitutional question, the last two days of the prosecution case to come away with the idea. they built the predicate that the president used this language for a long time. the president was in touch. the president should have had full knowledge. he would have to have his head in the sand to not have full knowledge that his words motivated his people. he invited them here. that is not in dispute. the president set the date for this rally, repeatedly reminded his supporters and urged them to come. we saw the president at the rally. i think the powerful point they kept trying to make was, and then the president who swore an oath to the constitution watched and did not say stop, did not say go away, did not criticize them, called them actually patriots and said i love you, our journey will continue. so, a very compelling case put together. great teamwork, if you're just watching, as someone who covered courts years ago, great teamwork by the prosecution. sometimes things can get lost when you hand things offer.
the managers presented an overwhelming case. those republican senators now have to hope that the president's lawyers can come in and chip away on the facts. not on the process. but on the facts. because if they can't chip away on the facts, it's going to be hard. we saw the president -- former president -- in his own words. we heard the thugs in their own words. saying he sent us here. we're fighting for him. so, but let's -- we owe them the open mind of seeing what they can do in their presentation tomorrow. if they can't chip away at the fact, then i think gloria made this point, this is choosing time for these republican senators. they understand, crossing donald trump complicates their politics so what's more important to them? their power? or the principle? their career? or their country? that is the choice they may have to make as shortly as saturday if this continues on the pace it's on. >> because the insurrectionists -- very compelling moment is when the house impeachment lawyer, you know, managers, they really used the video to show that these insurrectionists thought they were simply obeying marching orders from the commander in chief that that's what they --
that they thought that's what the president at that time wanted them to do and they wouldn't be punished for that. more than 200 now have been criminally charged. >> so a good lawyer, and you see this happening, a good lawyer will say, and you saw when one of the president's lawyers left the proceedings today, on fox news, he teed this up. they are going to make the case, well, he didn't call the proud boys. they saw something on twitter. that's how they trarnslated it. he didn't call the woman who said trump sent me. she saw something on twitter. you can't blame the president for that. that's why the managers spent so much time to go through the four years to say that the president, there's plenty of evidence, over four years, the president has to know when he says these things people act on them. just to chip away at that direct argument. >> our special correspondent jamie gangel is working her sources. what are you hearing, jamie? >> well, to john king's point about having ears blocked, i've spoken to a number of republican sources today, one is a former trump administration official
who said, "all i can say is what i say every day. if this isn't an impeachable offense, what is?" and then the source went on to say, "if these managers can't convince you, you are not listening or you don't want to listen." so, that speaks to what john was saying about, will they have their ears open? the other thing, and john touched on this as well, is about the future of the republican party. and i spoke to a senior congressional republican who said to me that this trial is going to tell you the future of the republican party. at least for the next couple of years. is this the party of trump? or are these republicans willing to break and move forward? they know that donors are leaving the party. they know voters are leaving the party. they know that members are
leaving the party. but to the point we've been discussing, these senators want to stay in power. they want to get reelected. i think an interesting question will be, wolf, what about those who've decided to retire? what about those who may have four years or six years down the road? will any of them be listening? wolf? >> we'll find out in the next couple days. all right, jamie, thank you. jake, back to you. >> thanks, wolf. now that the house impeachment managers have concluded their opening arguments the trump legal team will again with their defense of the former president tomorrow. our correspondents are getting new details about the trump team's plans right now and reaction to the case presented by the house partnershipment ma impeachment managers. kaitlan collins is live for us. jim acosta is near mar-a-lago where i believe president trump was golfing earlier today. kaitlan, let's start with you. what are you hearing about the case the trump defense team plans to make tomorrow?
>> expect it to be a lot shorter than what you saw from democrats. you saw today they finished up earlier than what we saw in the last impeachment trial. they took up a good portion of their time breaking it up from yesterday to today. we're not likely to see that from former president trump's team. i'm told that they expect to finish their arguments by tomorrow. there'd been some questions about that because, of course, one of his attorneys actually requested a delay of the trial so he could observe the sabbath. he said now that he's not going to need to have that delay but he'll just not participate in the proceedings at that time. but i'm told that they expect to make their arguments and finish them up by tomorrow. that would then punt us and move us on to the question session of this with the senators. but, of course, the question is, what are they going to say when they actually get on the floor? because they're following what we've seen from these impeachment managers, this methodically, carefully laid out timeline and reconstruction of what the president said and what actually happened. and what we're seeing from the attorneys and talking to them on capitol hill today, is that
they're going to say that there's no direct link between what the president was saying and what those rioters and insurrectionists actually did. whether or not that's a successful argument that they can make given what you just saw laid out by house impeachment managers and the people that we've seen who have actually been indicted say that they did what they did because of president trump's comments. it could be a tough argument for them to make, jake, but that's what we're expecting as of this moment. >> all right. kaitlan collins, thanks so much. pamela, you're hearing that the president's lawyers height not take the entire time that they have allotted. >> that's right. i mean, it could be as short as three to four hours. so, much less time than they're al allotted. what they've been doing, they're pulling together nr videos, specifically of high-profile democrats like chuck schumer. they're planning to use a video of chuck schumer in front of the supreme court, he said the conservative justices would pay the price when it came to an abortion case. they're trying to make the case, they will try to make the case, rather, as of now, that there's
hypocrisy with the democrats noup, it's worth noting that, of course, nothing happened after chuck schumer said that. unlike with trump, he was talking about go fight and so forth and saw the riots on january 6th. but as kaitlan pointed out, trump's lawyers will try to argue he never intended for those rioters to go inside and take over the capitol, jake. >> uh-huh. all right. pamela brown, thank you so much. jim, you're in florida with the former president. >> yeah. >> what are you hearing? >> yeah, jake, you're right. he was out playing golf earlier today at his golf course in west palm beach. but in the meantime, he has been wanting to see more lawyers who are supportive of his cause out on television. told by a source familiar with former president's thinking that he wants to see more legal voices out there defending former president trump and in addition to that, jake, i could tell you i talked with one of the president's attorneys for his impeachment case, bruce castor. i asked bruce castor what is going to take place tomorrow. he didn't offer a whole lot of details but he did say that they are streamlining the
presentation that they're planning to make in order to keep things short. and in the words of bruce castor, "we are cutting to shorten the case." so that gives you some indication as to where they are right now in terms of the strategy. it seems like they're thinking less is more at this point. and i asked bruce castor whether or not they are still confident, they remain confident, that the president will be acquitted in all this, that there won't be enough republican senators to join with the democrats to convict the former president. and castor replied, "very." and so, while, yes, this was a devastating case put on by the democrats, the video was highly charged, highly emotional, and i think even, you know, sparked some emotion on the side of pro-trump lawyers, pro-trump advisers that we're speaking with, the trump impeachment team believes at this point there's really just no way that the president's going to be convicted at this point. just looking at the raw numbers in terms of where republicans look like they're going to end up in all of this, jake. >> all right. jim acosta in florida.
along with kaitlan collins and pamela brown. thank you so much. and we should talk about the fact that they seem so confident, the trump team. it's because they already have 44 republican senators who voted to say that they don't think this trial is constitutional. the idea that you're going to have 17 republicans total vote to say that he should be convicted even though so many of them already said they don't even think this trial should happen doesn't make much sense. >> right, which is why the fact that we are going to see such an imbalance of firepower between what we've seen over the past few days and what we're going to see tomorrow is probably not going to be of that much of a consequence because they are speaking to a jury that has almost all made up their minds. i'm not here to say that things couldn't change drastically if something happened. but it's unlikely that is going to happen.
and by the way, that is in part why i am told by people close to the president they're trying to keep him -- not that he has much of an avenue outside because he doesn't have twitter, but trying to keep him on the golf course. trying to keep him occupied. and, you know, he's certainly working the phones talking to his friends. but the hope is he just tries to -- they get him to keep as quiet as possible to get through a case which his allies say over and over again, in private, i think maybe they said in public, they don't thinks that there's a chance that he can lose. >> maybe the best thing that could have happened to trump's aides is that he's not on twitter anymore. because you can imagine what he would be saying throughout this hearing. >> no question. >> i mean, his lawyers, the strategy on the trump side, is likely going to be to kind of phone it in. they don't really need to say anything. they want to probably do no harm to where they already are, which is they think a majority of republicans, a vast majority of republicans in that chamber, are going to vote to acquit and it's
not going to be -- i don't think we should expect our socks to be blown off tomorrow by the case that they're going to make. i mean, think about the fact that the constitutional case was supposed to be the stronger of the two cases in the first place. and it was so incredibly weak that even republican senators came out of that session saying, that was terrible. how could you possibly listen to that? and believe that this was unconstitutional? so, i think this next segment which is going to actually be on the substance, is where they have even less of a leg to stand on. it's not going to be anything spectacular. but it just goes to show they don't think that this process is actually about the senators taking in the information and processing it and making a decision. that's a real shame, but that's how they're viewing it from the trump side. >> i would be surprised if we didn't hear from the trump lawyers the argument that when it came to the last impeachment democrats said you have to have witnesses. >> yeah. >> you got to have witnesses or else it's a sham. there's all this language.
we ran it a few days ago from now-vice president harris, chuck schumer, et cetera. now, the argument, of course, is that the last impeachment was about something that went on behind closed doors. and you needed witnesses whereas all of this took place in front of all of us. we all saw it happen. basically in real time. but i would be surprised if trump team didn't bring that up. >> but to be fair, i mean, when you look back at the presentation that we saw over the last few days they presented ben sasse, other members of congress, who had pertinent information who if they were called to testify would have been asked about those very same things. it's just out there. in the public sphere. that's one of the things i think democrats are going to look at. >> i meaning it wouldn't hurt it they could have gotten witnesses. they did ask for one witness. >> donald trump? >> the defendant. >> he turned it down. >> he turned it down. which was interesting that jamie raskin at the very end posed the questions he would have asked him. but, look, this is something
that the trump defense team is going to try to avoid when if comes to a lot of the substance. going to see a lot of what aboutism, lot of videos of democrats at rallies being fiery and the question is going to be will that matter? will they actually be able to with a straight face suggest that what those democrats were doing is even close to akin to what we saw the president do at that rally and then most importantly, did not do when the riot started. >> certainly, democrats have said stupid things at rallies. violent sounding things. threatening things. but have they launched a campaign that was eight months long to try to discredit an election that culminated in violence that a lot of people feared. i don't think that has happened. but we'll see what they present tomorrow. when the trump lawyers get their say. up next, what president biden has to say about the trump impeachment trial so far. our coverage continues. we're going to take this quick
break. we'll be right back. tea leaves better. which makes the smooth tea taste better, and time together even better. and drinking lipton can help support a healthy heart. lipton is a proud sponsor of the american heart association's life is why campaign. this is decision tech. find a stock based on your interests lipton is a proud sponsor or what's trending. get real-time insights in your customized view of the market. it's smarter trading technology for smarter trading decisions. fidelity.
this is cnn breaking news. >> welcome to our viewers in the united states and around the world. i'm wolf blitzer in "the situation room." we're following breaking news. house democrats wrapped up their case against former president trump in his second and truly historic impeachment trial np they focused in on his words and actions. as they urged senators to hold him responsible for repeatedly lying that the election was stolen from him. and then encouraging his supporters to march on the u.s. capitol in a siege that left five people dead. the democrats also played the words of rioters who say they were following trump's orders and argued that he, quote, lit the match of insurrection. let's begin our coverage this hour with our chief national affairs correspondent jeff zeleny who's up on capitol hill
for us. jeff, the democrats not only want trump convicted, they also want him barred from ever holding office again. with one warning that he would, quote, undoubtedly cause future harm if allowed. >> wolf, those words were dramatic and certainly weighted with american history in mind here. as the house prosecutors rested their case several hours early. they implored the senate jurors to hold the president accountable for his actions with one impeachment manager saying, "impeachment is not only designed to punish but also prevent." of course, prevent is the idea of stopping the former president from ever running for office in the future. but even as one critical audience for these arguments were in the senate chamber, those 100 jurors, it's clear a second audience is the american people. these house impeachment managers are trying to change the president's legacy forever. >> january 6th was not some unexpected radical break from his normal law-abiding and peaceful disposition. this was his state of pind.
mind. this was his essential m.o. >> reporter: the house impeachment team rested its case tonight urging senators to hold president trump responsible for repeatedly misleading his followers and inviting them to the capitol in a last-ditch effort to stop the election from being certified. >> he knew they were coming. he brought them here. and he welcomed them with open arms. >> reporter: on their final day of arguments, the prosecutoors zeroed in on the former president's own words and actions. saying he showed no remorse. and must be held responsible for his conduct. >> you don't have to take my word for it that the insurrectionists acted at donald trump's direction. they said so. >> hey, we were invited here! we were invited by the president of the united states! >> reporter: colorado congresswoman diana degette one of the impeachment managers, seized upon the stories of one rioter after another. who said they breached the capitol at trump's direction. >> let's call trump, yes. dude.
dude. let's tell trump -- >> trump would be very upset. >> he'd be like, no, just say we love him. we love you, bro. no, he'll be happy. what do you mean? we're fighting for trump. >> i thought i was following my president. i thought i was following what we were called to do. >> all of these people who've been arrested and charged, they're being accountable. held accountable for their actions. their leader, the man who incited them, must be held accountable as well. >> reporter: the big lie, that the election was rigged and stolen from trump, is also on trial. which prosecutors argue was dangerously misleading and not protected by freedom of speech. >> he was the president of the united states. and he had spent months, months, using the unique power of that office, of his bully bulpulpit
spread that big lie that the election had been stolen. he struck a match. and he aimed it straight at this building. at us. >> reporter: prosecutors also say trump has still not told the truth and restored faith in american democracy. >> he does not say the one sentence that would stop future political violence. the election was not stolen. he still hasn't said that sentence. >> reporter: one day after horrific sights and harrowing sounds of the attack filled the senate chamber -- >> it's official, we've lost the -- we've lost the line. >> reporter: convicting the president still remains a remarkably high bar. with 17 republicans needed to join all democrats in finding trump guilty. but lead impeachment manager jamie raskin said that was the best way to ensure trump does not return for another bid at the presidency. >> president trump declared his
conduct totally appropriate. so, if he gets back into office and it happens again, we'll have no one to blame but ourselves. >> and, of course, the audience for those remarks includes some of the potential rivals for the 2024 campaign, if president trump were to jump in again. but, wolfing , we're talking to republican senators as they're leaving the chamber. to a person, they're praising the actions of the house impeachment managers. they're saying they put together a very good case but many of them are stopping short of saying they still believe it's unconstitutional to impeach and convict a former president. of course, that question was decided earlier this week. it is constitutional. at least by a majority vote. now going forward here the question is how many of these republican senators actually are open to changing their minds? throughout the course of the afternoon in the senate chamber, many seats on the republican side of the aisle were, in fact, empty. many senators milling around
clearly not paying as careful attention as yesterday during that very dramatic testimony. but now tomorrow the president's legal team has their shot at this. they're working on their arguments here tonight. wolf? >> the vote was 56-44. it was constitutional. you need 67 to convict. >> indeed. >> that's a pretty tough challenge right now. all right. jeff zeleny, thank you very much. let's dig deeper into all of this. our correspondents and analysts are with us. john king, now that we've all heard the totality of the house impeachment manager's case, did they do what they needed to do? >> i think the praise from so many republicans, wolf, answers in the affirmative. yes. that does not mean they changed the minds. as you noted, 44 republicans voted this shouldn't happen. that they don't believe it's a constitutional trial. now, they're not supposed to make their next vote based on that. they're supposed to vote on the facts now that it has been granted jurisdiction. this is a political exercise as much as it is trial. however, what did the democrats do? a compelling, dramatic, fact-filled and emotion-filled two days of presentation.
a mix of videos of former president trump's tweets going back years to show this is how he operates. this is what he does. he knows his followers follow his words. they made a very compelling case. and, again, you see that in the praise. number one, that the republicans are giving it, number two, you see it in the words that the president's lawyers are using when they give interviews outside. saying they want to make the case that this trial should not be happening. again, in a court of law, they could not make that argument because it has been settled by the vote the other day. but in the senate they can, and that's what they will do saying we just shouldn't be here. >> that's a good point. dana bash, as strong as the democrats' presentation may have been, the house impeachment managers, what do you do if almost all -- almost all of those jurors, the republican jurors, in this case, seem to have already made up their minds? >> you hope that there are more senator bill cassidys out there. you hope bill cassidy in this final vote will be the way he was on the vote about whether or not the trial is constitutional. and by that i mean he was
willing to be persuaded and he certainly was. having said that, they understand the math. they understand the reality. they understand the political climate that republicans are in, particularly within their own party. and the problems that they are having. and many of them who are on the ballot would have, it could be a political death sentence for them to vote against president trump. and many of them are not willing to do that, which is why so much of what we've heard for the past two days, wolf, has been about trying to convince the jury and persuade the jury, but it's about marking it for history. and about gathering all of this in such an incredibly powerful narrative as they have in a way that historians will be able to look back and say, this was and this is the trump legacy. >> you know, norm eisen, let's talk about the legal perspective for a moment. did the house managers prove what they needed to prove from
the legal perspective over the last couple days? >> wolf, they presented an overwhelming case that the president over a long period of time, starting before the election, incited the insurrection. he packed the bomb, if you will. on january 6th, as joe neguse said, he lit the fuse and he threw it at the capitol with completely predictable results. neguse posed three questions, and i think the managers powp powerfully answered them. was violence foreseeable? did the president encourage violence? and did he do so knowingly? in that recital of evidence, the pence tweet, the video, the later tweet by the president embracing the violence. the failure to renounce to this day the president's inaction, his glee at watching the violence on tv. it's an overwhelming legal case, and to add to dana's point, they
didn't only argue to the jury in the senate. they didn't only argue that case to history and posterity. they argued to the american people with jamie raskin at the end saying, senators, america, so there will be consequences for the senate. how many times before the republicans learn their lesson that there will be consequences if they defy this overwhelming case. >> you know, gloria borger, the house managers did present their case and it was really stark. we have people inside the senate that at times there were, what, p about 15 empty chairs on the republican side of the chamber. it's hard to have your mind change if you're not even listening to the argument. isn't it? >> it is. i mean, we were told, of course, that because of covid, people could be watching on television and they were allowed to do that. but i -- i do believe that these arguments had to focus the minds of a lot of republicans even
though they, in the end, are going to disagree with jamie raskin because what he did at the end was he took away the fig leaf from them because the constitutionality argument which we hear from the president's lawyers has been decided. the senate voted on it. it's not before the senate right now. what is before the senate is is the president guilty of inciting an insurrection? that is the only question. an they have to vote on that question. and that is what he was telling the american public. so if they weren't sitting in their chairs, okay, the american public was hearing this and the american public heard as norm said a very methodical case laid about what happened before, leading up to january 6th, what happened at the rally on january 6th, and how the president did
not react as he should have after the rally on january 6th as the violence was occurring. that is what the public heard. and that's what to dana's point that's what's going to be in the history books. >> the democrats, abby phillip, also devoted a really significant portion of their time today to try to demonstrate what they say was a complete lack of remorse from the former president trump. why is that factor so important in this case? >> well, we heard one of the impeachment managers being very clear that the question is not whether trump runs again or whether he should run again, but what happens if he runs again and loses. and what is the likelihood that these events could happen again and that they might be successful in overthrowing the government or the will of the american people after an election in which he loses. the message from the impeachment managers is that the lack of remorse is a signal that trump
is not -- it opens the door that this could all happen again by him. not to mention by someone else who watches this and says, well, there are no consequences. meanwhile, on the republican side, you see them arguing about the what-ifs of the other part of this argument. they're saying, well, what if, you know, another party uses impeachment to punish their political rivals. i think the bigger question for the democracy is what happens to democracy if someone is successful in overthrowing the results of a free and fair election. >> everybody, stick around. we're going to have much more on the breaking news coming up. we'll talk about the latest impeachment developments as well with democratic senator masie h hi hirono. plus there's breaking pandemic news. president biden made a major announcement about vaccines as the country tries to ramp up the fight against the coronavirus.
i am robert strickler. i've been involved in communications in the media for 45 years. i've been taking prevagen on a regular basis for at least eight years. for me, the greatest benefit over the years has been that prevagen seems to help me recall things and also think more clearly. and i enthusiastically recommend prevagen. it has helped me an awful lot. prevagen. healthier brain. better life.
like an updated kitchen in just an afternoon. it's a whole new look. -drinks? from the new kitchen cart? -yes. the bedroom style of your dreams. this room is so you. -i got it all on wayfair. yeah you did, and so did i. the perfect setup for game night. i know this! it's the singer, it's the singer! yes! i got next game. -kelly clarkson. i love this sofa. look at the storage. you like my sofa? -i love your sofa. we're following the breaking news. the house impeachment managers just rested their case against the former president, donald trump. our chief congressional correspondent manu raju is up on capitol hill. manu, i understand you're getting some reaction from
republicans. >> yeah, i've been speaking to a number of republicans since this wrapped this afternoon. and what's interesting is that almost universally, republicans are praising the job of the democratic impeachment managers gave. they're saying this performance was much better than what happened in 2020 when most of these republican senators were sharply critical of how the house democrats then presented their case against donald trump. but this time they're saying that day did an effective job, but there's still a catch. virtually all of them still have the same process concerns that they have been saying for days and days and days, that they don't believe the senate should be trying a former president. and they're still signaling they plan to vote to convict, but still some interesting reaction coming in including from texas senator john cornyn who's a member of the republican leadership, he said i have to compliment the impeachment managers in terms of their presentation. he called it an excellent presentation. he said the standard is pretty high for the trump team to meet. then i asked him about -- pushed
him further about how he plans to approach his final vote. whether he says that trump is some for inciting this dead l i riot on january 6th. he said you have to look at dr donald trump's mind at this time, we don't know. he added this, the real, biggest concern i have is the idea of impeaching a former office holder without explicit authorization in the constitution. and what that means to exactly retribution on political opponents in the future. and that, wolf, is what the line is from republican senator after republican senator which is a sign of where this is headed. while they believe the democrats made an overwhelming case and show that donald trump was responsible for what happened here. they're still signaling they're going to let him off the hook in the ultimate vote probably no more than six republican senators at most signaling they're likely to convict. but at the moment at least saying that democrats in the last couple days made their case, wolf. >> yeah, democrats made the case but they're still going to vote to acquit and not to convict. all right, manu, thank you very much. joining us now, democratic
senator mazie hirono of hawaii. she's a juror in the case as well. senator, thank you so much for joining us. so what's your reaction to that reporting that we just heard from manu? how optimistic are you that any additional republicans can be persuaded to convict, especially after most of them voted that the entire trial isn't even constitutional. >> well, we already voted on that issue on the first day of the trial but i'm afraid that our republicans are looking for an escape hatch because they're still afraid of trump and his base and that escape hatch is that this is somehow unconstitutional. it is not because for one thing he was impeached while he was still president, and most constitutional scholars have said that impeachment was perfectly within the authority of the house and, therefore, the senate can conduct the trial. so there you have it. we already took a vote on it, but the republicans are looking for some kind of an escape hatch. i think it's really a sad day
when the house team, jamie raskin and his team, as far as i'm concerned, prove that the president incited a violent insurrection against another branch of government, congress, trying to do its constitutional duty and he -- the president did nothing to stop the riot and the harm that the insurrection caused. >> the house managers, as you heard, senator, they argued repeatedly that the insurrectionists who stormed the capitol were takie ing marching orders, in their words, from the former president. how strong was that evidence? >> it was very strong. and, in fact, many of the insurrectionists, they used a blow horn. one example was when trump was still going after pence and used certain language. and the rioters used the same language and a blow horn, through a blow horn, then started chanting, "hang pence." and so there was a lot of that
kind of communication going on. the president knew clearly that he was sending a group of people who were intent on taking over the congress by -- by barging in, by hurting people and the president did nothing. so i would say one of the questions that jamie raskin left us with is the president has
acknowledged that he would have been the person who could have put a stop in this riot and this harm. he -- why didn't he? the minute he heard that there was a massive riot going on at the capitol, why didn't he stop it? two, why didn't he stop it even two hours into the riot? why didn't he ever condemn the insurrectionists and the insurrection? so, really, we are left with the question of, if a president
incited a violent insurrection, is that a high crime and misdemeanor? and i would say, yes. now, i think the republicans are going to look for all kinds of escape hatches to not come to that conclusion. >> yeah, and as we keep saying you need 67 votes in order to convict. democrats were extremely critical, as you remember, senator, of the last impeachment trial a year or
so ago for not allowing witnesses, the republicans didn't allow witnesses, at that time. did the managers hurt their own case by not calling on witnesses this time around? >> this was a case that occurred in front of the whole world's eyes. and all of the jurors, that's us, we were all there. so it was a very different kind of an impeachment trial than the first one. by the way, i do not think that the house managers did a bad job. i thought they did an excellent job in pursuing what was very
difficult because the republicans refused to require any production of documents or appropriate witnesses. so, this case -- trump was offered to come and be a witness, but he declined. >> he certainly did. he certainly did decline. they wanted to have him answer questions under oath, go through cross-examination. they made that offer. his lawyers declined. senator hirono, thank you -- you want to make another point? >> thank you. yes. this is not a criminal trial so we don't have to figure out what was in trump's mind. we just have to look at what he did, what he said, both before the january 6th, during january 6th, and thereafter. >> thanks. >> that's what we need -- >> thanks so much for joining us, senator mazie hirono of hawaii. there's more breaking news we're following in "the situation room." president biden announces a major development in the u.s. effort to get more covid va vaccines. plus former president trump's latest thinking on his impeachment trial.
and what he wants to see happen as his lawyers are now preparing to offer their defense starting tomorrow. at means selling every. and eating nothing but cheese till you find the perfect slice... even if everyone asks you... another burger truck? don't listen to them! that means cooking day and night until you get... [ ding ] you got paid! that means adding people to the payroll. hi mom. that means... best burger ever. intuit quickbooks helps small businesses be more successful with payments, payroll, banking and live bookkeeping. - [announcer] grubhub perks give you deals on all the food that makes you boogie. (phone dinging) (♪ singing in foreign language ♪) ("2 phut hon (kaiz remix)" by phao) ♪ get the food you love with perks from-- - [group] grubhub! - grub what you love.
want to save hundreds on your wireless bill? with xfinity mobile you can. ♪ how about saving hundreds on the new samsung galaxy s21 ultra 5g? you can do that too. all on the most reliable network. sure thing! and with fast nationwide 5g included at no extra cost. we've got you covered. so join the carrier rated #1 in customer satisfaction. and get a new samsung galaxy starting at $17 a month. learn more at xfinitymobile.com or visit your local xfinity store today.
we're following multiple breaking stories this hour. including the house impeachment managers just concluding their case against former president trump. setting the stage for his lawyers to present their defense starting tomorrow. and there's breaking pandemic news we're following as well. a significant boost, this is very important, a significant boost to the u.s. vaccine supply. let's go to our chief white house correspondent kaitlan collins. kaitlan, i understand president biden just announced what's going on over at the national
institutes of health. tell our viewers what's going on. >> yeah, wolf, while he was there, he confirmed that they have purchased an extra 200 million doses of vaccine. that means there would be enough for every american by july. it's 100 million doses from moderna, 100 million from pfizer as well. that does not mean they are ready yet, though, wolf, so they're not going to be ready until later this year. that means there will still be challenges to come about distribution and actually getting those vaccines into the arms of americans. but it does ramp up the supply that they would have and these are the details really that president biden gave us while he was speaking just a few moments ago. >> just this afternoon, we signed a final contracts for 100 million more moderna and 100 million more pfizer vaccines. we're also able to move up the delivery dates with an additional 200 million vaccines to the end of july. faster than we expected. and in further good news, both
companies agreed, we're now contractually obligated, to expedite delivery of 100 million doses that were promised by the end of june to deliver them by the end of may. that's a month faster. that means lives will be saved. that means we're now on track to have enough supply for 300 million americans by the end of july. >> now, wolf, while president biden was there, he was heavily critical of his predecessor saying that they were misled by former president trump's team on what the state of the vaccine program was. they did not find that out, he said, until he got into office. that's a criticism that they've lobbed in the past, but he probably made it in its starkest terms yet there speaking at the nih, saying that while the scientists did their job to get a vaccine ready in record time, president biden said that former president trump did not do his job to get a program ready to
actually administer that vaccine to americans. and now it's something that they are having to deal with. so, some pretty strong criticism of former president trump. and, of course, wolf, this comes as this impeachment trial has been going on. and president biden has insisted that he is not watching much of it, though he did weigh in earlier after he caught the highlights of that grim new footage that we saw yesterday. >> i watched some this morning. i think the senate has a very important job to complete. and i think my guess is some minds may have been changed but i don't know. >> he said that's his guess, wolf, but he did not answer our question about whether he now does believe that former president trump should be convicted by the senate. >> kaitlan, i want you to stay with us. i also want to bring in our chief domestic correspondent jim acosta and cnn special correspondent jamie gangel. jim, you're down not too far from mar-a-lago in west palm beach. what are you hearing from the
former president's inner circle about what we should expect from his legal defense team tomorrow? >> well, wolf, first of all, we should point out donald trump was out on the golf course during the final presentation from the democratic impeachment managers earlier today, but as for the strategy for what we're going to see tomorrow, i was talking to bruce castor earlier today, just very briefly about what we should expect. he said that they -- the impeachment team for the former president will be streamlining their case. that they are streamlining it right now to make this case as brief and as concise as possible. and in his words, "we are cutting it now to shorten the case." that is what he told me earlier today. and so they're going to go out there, they're going to present some videos tomorrow, wolf, in the senate that they hope will show some hypocrisy on the democratic side. some instances where democratic lawmakers have used terms likeh say, well, democrats have used this kind of heated rhetoric as
well. obviously, there's no equivalence. when the democrats used that kind of rhetoric, it did not end if any kind of insurrection. wolf, you get a sense talking to our sources the trump impeachment team wants to get this over as soon as possible. i think the strategy at this point is less is more. >> you know, jamie, you got a lot of well-placed republican sources. how are they responding to the democrats' closing arguments? >> everyone i have spoken to today thought that the democrats, the house managers, did an extraordinary job. that said, these are people who by and large think donald trump should be convicted and they're really, i would say, distraught and disturbed that there is -- we're not seeing movement from the senate republicans. they do not think the votes are there. one of them said to me that they were just shocked because of the influence of the big lie. that they just can't get past
it. and then influential republican connected to leadership said to me, trump knew exactly what he was doing. it was premeditated. he held the rally. he invited people to the rally. he sent them to the capitol. he encouraged violence over and over. but another republican source said to me they're still scared of donald trump but what this person said is the way to stop being scared is to convict him. and then vote that he can't run again. that's really the way to be done with him, but they do not seem willing to do that, wolf. >> they certainly don't. you know, jim, i understand you and kaitlan have some new reporting, significant reporting, on the former president's personal battle that we all remember with coronavirus. apparently, what are you hearing? was far more serious than officials at the time were willing to admit? >> it was far more serious than officials were willing to admit,
but we knew that at the time to some extent, wolf. and i'll explain that a little bit. yes, kaitlan and i, our reporting at the time that the president came down to the coronavirus that he was showing signs of potential pneumonia at that time. and also that there was some talk of putting him on a ventilator. now, i will tell you, wolf, at the time, we talk ed to white house officials about how the then-president was doing, they were saying he had mild symptoms from the coronavirus, hee was going to fine. i was talking to sources that day, he was having difficulty breathing, he was not doing well, he had supplemental oxygen. he'd been oadministered oxygen. the next day we recall the then-white house physician went out in front of reporters and essentially danced around reporters' questions about whether or not the former president had received supplemental oxygen at the time, what was his oxygen level in his blood at that time. there was a lot of dancing
around about all of that from the doctor treating the president at that time. and then mark meadows, you'll recall, wolf, the white house chief of staff after that time, went up to reporters after dr. conley gave that presentation and essentially told reporters, no, the president is doing far worse than what you're being told, we're not out of the woods yet, he is still in a very serious state. and so, wolf, just goes to what we knew at the time. what we were reporting at the time. but i think it's a perfect time to punctuate it once again with some of this reporting that we're seeing in "the new york times" this evening. also on all of this. they were first to report some of these details. the white house -- there's no other way to put this, wolf, the white house was lying to the public about how serious the president's condition was at that time. there's just no other way to put it. >> yeah, that's excellent reporting from you and kaitlan, guys. thank you, thank you very, very much. we're getting more very important news coming into "the situation room" on the coronavirus. we also have a lot more on the other breaking news. very important breaking news
from capitol hill where democrats, they wrapped up their impeachment case against the former president. so will former president trump's attorneys, are they ready to make their case starting tomorrow? we'll update you. new information coming in. t-mobile is now america's largest and fastest 5g network. and to celebrate, we want everyone to unleash 5g speeds in more places. right now, every current and new customers can get a free samsung galaxy s21 5g. just bring in a qualifying device to trade. switch to t-mobile and save up to 20% every month vs. the other guys. the leader in 5g coverage. the fastest 5g speeds. the best value in wireless. and a free galaxy s21 for everyone. only at t-mobile.
we have a lot more on the breaking news coming out of the house impeachment manager's decision to wrap up their case against the former president donald trump. we're also following breaking news in the coronavirus crisis. just a little while ago, president biden announced the united states has secured another 200 million doses of the coronavirus vaccines. our chief medical correspondent dr. sanjay gupta is with us right now. how significant, sanjay, is this new purchase, 100 million doses of pfizer, 100 million doses from moderna? >> well, when you start to do the math on all this, wolf, you're realizing now between those two, you're going to have 600 million doses and that's
just, again, the two of them. not counting johnson & johnson, for example, which may come out under emergency-use authorization. but two doses each. that's 300 million people, wolf. you keep in mind that everyone talks about the idea that we want to get to this herd immunity of some 75% of the country. you know, 250 million people or so would be around that herd immunity. so it's -- you get to the position now where you say, even without another vaccine, we have more than enough. the amount is there, but the speed's going to be important. we know some of these doses will arrive probably, you know, all of them by the end of july, but some hopefully earlier, even by may, perhaps. >> the cdc now says, i think this is significant, that people who have been fully vaccinated, in other words, both doses, two doses, and that's millions of people already, might be able to skip quarantine if they've been exposed to someone who does have co covid. tell us about that. >> yeah, this is really interesting, and there's a lot in this.
so people should look at what the cdc has put on their website. basically, what they're saying is that if you have the antibodies now, you -- even though you could still potentially be carrying the virus and potentially even transmit the virus, the risk of that is significantly lower. that's. what the cdc is essentially saying. so, even if you've been exposed to someone with covid and you have the antibodies, it is still true that you could become infected and possibly transmit the virus even if you don't get sick. you're not likely to get sick because the vaccine's protecting you. so, so they're saying because that risk is so low that you don't need to go into quarantine after that sort of exposure. you still need to wear a mask. so you don't potentially infect others. but quarantine, the number of people who are going to be in quarantine is going to be significantly reduced by these sorts of measures. we need to -- you know, it would be good to see some of the evidence behind this to understand exactly how the cdc
is basing this. israel, there was a study that came out of israel that basically showed people who have been vaccinated, even if they subsequently had an infection, asymptomatic infection, the overall amount of virus they were carrying in their nose and mouth was a lot lower which means they were a lot less likely to infect people around them. so bottom line, no more quarantine if you've been exposed after being vaccinated. >> the cdc also, this is interesting, came out with some new research on how we can get more protection from our masks. one mask, two masks. tell us what the cdc is now suggesting. >> yeah. well, you know, the mask data is interesting, wolf. we keep getting more and more data about this. we've known that masks can be very effective in terms of reducing the spread of the coronavirus but now we're seeing what seems to work better. double masking, we can show this, if we have the graphic, show how much more effective this is. double masks and then people who knot up the mask at the end so
it's really getting a snug fit around the ears and folding the mask so you have no gaps around the nose or the mouth. that tends to work the best. if everyone around you is doing that, and you're wearing that level of protection, you significantly bring down transmission. wolf, as much as we talk about vaccines, critically important, masks, especially the way that we're showing them on the screen here, would be a lot more effective in terms of actually reducing transmission now. i will say, wolf, and you and i have talked about this, there's even better masks, high filtration, n-95 or kn-95 masks which are particularly good as well at really bringing down the likelihood you would spread it or actually receive it, receive the virus. >> if you wear that mask, a medical mask, let's say, you put a cloth mask over it, you're in much better shape, potentially, much more protected and much less likely to spread coronavirus in the process. that's what i think they're suggesting. all right, sanjay, thank you very, very much. coming up, new charges
join us, the defenders, in our mission. cybereason. end cyber attacks. from endpoints to everywhere. new developments tonight in the capitol siege. five people associated with the far right group the so-called proud boys have now been accused of conspiracy. let's go to the senior justice correspondent evan perez. there are these new charges tonight as well as some alarming new details emerging in court. what is the latest? >> wolf, this is the biggest
group of defendants who are being charged in a conspiracy case and this is five people who are associated as you said with the proud boys, arrested in arizona and in the area near kansas city, missouri. they're accused of helping to lead groups of rioters into the capitol according to prosecutors. they wore tactical style gear with helmets and one with a club that was disguised as a flag and again this is the biggest grouping of conspiracy charges against one group of individuals. proud boys now represents the largest groups of organized group that attacked the capitol on that day. in court today we also got some more details about another group that was charged separately. these are associated with another group of the oath keepers, thomas caldwell according to prosecutors, they believe he was in touch with another paramilitary group to
try to bring weapons across the potomac river with a boat to bring weapons into washington days before the insurrection and then there's another one who was charged alongside caldwell, jessica watson, a leader of the oath keepers groups that was in ohio. according to prosecutors, she said that essentially she was waiting for the signal from president trump. i'll read you a part of what the prosecutors say in court. i'm concerned this is a e lap rat trop. unless potus okay investigates us, it is not legitimate. if trump asks me to come i will otherwise i can't trust this. this goes in line with what you heard over the last couple of days in those presentations at the impeachment trial. >> no one i understand has been directly charged at least so far in the death of the capitol police officer brian sicknick but you have some new
information about the investigation. >> that's right. look. a month after the event, it is clear that this is a very difficult case for prosecutors and for investigators but there is new video that investigators have that they believe narrows a number of suspects to just a handful of people. that's a big development simply because until now they were struggling to try to build a case. they believe that this will help them bring federal murder charges against whoever was responsible. one of the interesting things is that they're pursuing the idea that sicknick who was there helping to push back the crowd was perhaps sprayed with a chemical irritant and the thing that fatally killed him. >> evan perez, thank you very, very much. there's more breaking news. the impeachment trial of former president trump about to enter a critical new phase as house democrats have now wrapped up the case and trump's lawyers are
preparing to present their defense starting tomorrow. it's 100% online the and gives them a competitive offer that won't change for 7 days. an offer that they can put toward their new car. some people can't believe our friendly advocate will come to them as soon as tomorrow. drop off their new ride and whisk their old one away. because we make trading your car unbelievably easy. all so you can say... told you so. experience the new way to trade in your car with carvana.
as someone with hearing loss i know what a confusing and frustrating experience getting hearing aids can be. that's why i founded lively. affordable, high-quality hearing aids with all of the features you need, and none of the hassle. i use lively hearing aids and it's been wonderful. it's so light and so small but it's a fraction of the cost of the other devices. they cost thousands less. it's insanely user friendly. you take the hearing test online, the doctor programs in the settings. you don't even need to go into an office. they're delivered to your door in a few days and you're up and running in no time. it connects via bluetooth to my phone. you can stream music and you can answer phone calls. the audiologist was so incredible she's full of all kinds of little helpful hints i love it. they're a game changer for me. i feel like i can take on anything. it feels great to be in control of my hearing. better hearing has never been this easy. try lively risk-free for 100 days. visit listenlively.com
welcome to our viewers here in the united states and around the world. i'm wolf blitzer. we are following breaking news on the trump impeachment trial. the house managers have now wrapped up the arguments and set a high bar as the trump team prepares to make its case starting tomorrow. the democrats closed in on some key issues of the trial.
they argued that trump directly and knowingly incited the deadly capitol insurrection, showed no remorse and took no responsibility. they used his own words and actions and the words of rioters as evidence. timely, the house managers made an urgent appeal to convict the 45th president and also to ban him from seeking or holding federal office ever again. they offered a chilling warning that the violence, the chaos and the division could all be replayed in four years if trump were to run again and were to lose again. let's go to correspondent ryan nobles on capitol hill. as the trump defense prepares to make its case what are you learning? >> reporter: wolf, we are seeing that they're beginning to prepare for the trump defense. in fact, a group of key republican senators also serving as jurors were seen going into a private room with members of the trump legal defense team.
this as they plan their response to the democratic house impeachment managers that worked today to directly tie the actions of president trump of what happened here on january 6th. >> senate's adjourned. >> reporter: the democratic house impeachment managers rested the case against former president donald trump. >> if you attack the first amendment, the constitution, betrayed the oath of office. presidents don't have any right to do that. it's forbidden. >> reporter: the prosecutors wrapped the case with hours of time available hoping a shorter presentation will have a greater impact. >> all of the wonderful supporters. >> reporter: day three they tied trump to the mob by showing that those that stormed the capitol did so because they believed the president sent them there. >> you don't have to take my word for it that the insurrectionists acted at donald trump's direction. they said so. >> we were invited here! we were invited!
hey, we were invited here! >> we were invited by the president of the united states! >> let's call trump. >> reporter: the managers showed several examples of rioters shouting trump's name and saying they were doing his bidding. >> does he not realize president trump called us to siege the place? >> following my president. i thought i was following what we were called to do. >> we are fighting for trump. >> reporter: they showed how trump showed the support of the mob and demonstrated no remorse for the role played in inciting the anger. >> my speechl and my words and final paragraph, my final sentence and everybody to the tee thought it was totally appropriate. >> we know president trump didn't make a mistake because, you see, when we make a mistake and something bad happens we would show remorse. we would accept responsibility. president trump didn't do any of
that. why not? because he intended what happened on january 6. how do we know that? he told us. >> reporter: the trump legal team will get the chance to rebut tomorrow but they attempted to get a head start today. the lead lawyer david schoen left the chamber while the trial was under way do go on fox news promising the presentation will show no link between trump and the actions of january 6th. >> i think you'll be moved what you see and get a better picture of what is going on here and the hypocrisy in some of the positions taken by the house managers in this case. >> reporter: but democrats believe they have provided overwhelming evidence of trump's connection to the crime and warn that it was incumbent won the jurors to hold him accountable because of what might happen in the future. >> i'm not afraid of donald trump running again in four
years. i'm afraid he'll run again and lose. because he can do this again. >> reporter: we told you about that meeting between some of the republican senators and the trump legal team as senator graham one of the senators that was in the meeting left the room and would not say what they were talking about but just saying he'll see everyone tomorrow and it is evidence that the republican senators already have their minds made up. many after watching the presentation today conceded that they thought the democratic house impeachment manageran excellent job with the presentation but can't get past the process argument you cannot impeach a president that left office and it seems to be very unlikely that the former president will be convicted. >> ryan up on capitol hill, thank you very much. let's start with john king. the house impeachment managers you laid out the entire case against the former president. do you believe it was enough to
convince some of these republican senators to actually do what they're clearly so reluctant to do but convict him? >> the trial appears to be on a fast track. i think you have to say by what we heard from ryan the answer is as of the moment it does not look so. you have graham and other republicans actually plotting strategy with trump's lawyers. they're supposed to be impartial jurors. you have others, two republican senators, leaving the chamber giving credit, complimenting the presentation saying it was powerful but they have doubts about whether it's appropriate to convict a former president. so you see some republicans coming up with a political argument. but this is the challenge the managers have, the prosecutors here, essentially, trying two cases, convict president trump in the senate. if they fail at that not getting enough republican votes they try to convict the republican party
in the american court of public opinion making the sense that we presented the evidence and the republicans decided to stay with donald trump, to stay as the party of trump. >> abby phillip is with us. the democrats' presentation i think everybody agrees was very, very strong. but there are signs to change the minds of the republican senators is an enormous challenge. >> it really is because in part so many of these republican jurors, 45 of them, voted just a couple days ago to say that the whole proceeding is unconstitutional in their view and so it really raises the bar for them to although i will say it is certainly possible for them to vote one way in that vote and then now that that issue is decided to look at the merits of the case and evaluate it and make a decision about whether trump is in fact guilty or not of the case that's at hand which is whether he incited a riot and so many are not at
that point and they're concerned about political futures and don't want to invite primary challenges, well-funded opponents coming into the states and giving them a hard time and so many of them take the easiest route and that right now if you're a republican in the senate is to vote to acquit donald trump. >> you know, our senior legal analyst laura coats is with us. from the legal perspective did the house impeachment managers the nine of them present a complete and persuasive case? >> yes. full stop. and when you're a prosecutor you actually have to meet the burden of proof to unbiassed jurors that know nothing about it. in an impeachment trial you have to do that and change the minds of those politically obs nantz. the president intended to have
the conduct that occurred, lawless action that did occur, but they're facing a herculean effort for those looking for an exit hatch that's sealed off by the compelling testimony. they broke it down two ways. what the president did and what the president did not do and i must say for an impeachment trial that everyone thought would divide the country these house impeachment managers went above and beyond to show that they should be unified as one. it happened to them. it happened to us they kept saying. the president, they said, left everyone, all of us here in the capitol to die and left with the three questions why the president didn't do more to turn the rioters back. if the defense team can't answer that question we should all know that the senators found the exit ramp of the procedure that they already had in the rear-view mirror and it's a shame for leadership. >> yeah. the house impeachment managers all nine of them, laura, they
tried to offer what's called a prebuttal to the trump defense team arguing that the first amendment defense is nothing more than a distraction because i suspect tomorrow when the trump lawyers make the case they cite the first amendment. that's what they say the president was doing. >> they will cite it and say it's protected speech, anyone would be vulnerable for the slippery slope to occur if you hold him accountable for what they call political hyperbole and what people who heard the evidence call incitement of a riot hanging the hatd on there and try to hook it as they did in the brief on cancel culture, this impeachment is somehow a way and a vehicle of censorship, trying to usurp the will of the people and prove those things and set up in the brief a couple of points where they have raised factual disputes and a big one here to consider is that they say there was a flurry of
activity that trump did to try to repel the attack. they have now raised that. they better be prepared prove it or otherwise why wouldn't they contort themselves into a contrite pretzel trying to call back the people who had a flag in their name and committed a riot? if they can't prove it, then they have missed the mark and america will suffer in terms of its democracy. >> abby, the house managers, nine of them, argued the threat posed by the former president is not just in the past. listen to congressman ted liu of california. >> i'm not afraid. of donald trump running again in four years. i'm afraid he's going to run again and lose because he can do this again. >> that argument likely to resonate with the republicans in the senate? >> some republicans that's the profound question not about
trump specifically. it is about the actions that he's accused of and whether condoning it opens the door for it to happen again. could be trump again in four years if he were to run or someone else and you do see republicans like mitt romney and others i think even senator cassidy who surprised people by changing the voter earlier this week. that's ultimately i think the big question that the impeachment procedure poses to republicans who are hesitant to vote to convict which is, you know, are you protecting did democracy by allowing this to go forward without any kind of punishment? maybe it will be trump in four years but it could be anyone who might try to do exactly the same thing again.
>> john, the house impeachment managers clearly appealing to the republican senators. i thought a most effective thing they did was video clips of republican governors in maryland, ohio, massachusetts, republican lawmakers, former trump administration cabinet members and other officials saying how awful the president was in doing what he did around january 6th. but the question is, is that going to resonate with these republican senators? >> we'll know that in the final math but the house managers, did democrats tried to say this is about all of us, the country, democrats, republicans, our staff, the capitol police, the custodial staff. forget your name, party, where you come from. this is about all of us and also a smart strategic move in the sense that an argument to hear from the president's lawyers is he did not tell them specifically to do this. this was not his doing and the
democrats were powerfully saying if you don't think the president had the power to stop it, why didn't you go on television that day, go on social media saying, mr. president, you can stop this. stop this. the democrat prosecutors essentially saying you all know this. every republican in this room knows the power of this president. he brought them here and could have stopped them. he didn't. >> why did the cabinet officials and others resign as a result of this? that was a powerful moment. coming up, i'll speak with a senate juror about the final arguments and what happens next. president biden makes a new announcement on vaccines and his former president trump for quote not doing his job.
if you have postmenopausal osteoporosis and a high risk for fracture, now might not be the best time to ask yourself, 'are my bones strong?' life is full of make or break moments. that's why it's so important to help reduce your risk of fracture with prolia®. only prolia® is proven to help strengthen and protect bones
from fracture with 1 shot every 6 months. do not take prolia® if you have low blood calcium, are pregnant, are allergic to it, or take xgeva®. serious allergic reactions like low blood pressure, trouble breathing, throat tightness, face, lip or tongue swelling, rash, itching or hives have happened. tell your doctor about dental problems, as severe jaw bone problems may happen. or new or unusual pain in your hip, groin, or thigh, as unusual thigh bone fractures have occurred. speak to your doctor before stopping, skipping or delaying prolia®, as spine and other bone fractures have occurred. prolia® can cause serious side effects, like low blood calcium, serious infections, which could need hospitalization, skin problems, and severe bone, joint, or muscle pain. don't wait for a break, call your doctor today, and ask about prolia®.
we're back with breaking news on the house impeachment managers resting the case against donald trump. they offered a final very compelling argument that the former president is directly responsible for the deadly capitol insurrection. we're joined now by one of the senators serving as an impeachment trial juror, democratic senator ben cardin of maryland. thank you for joining us. the house managers tried to tie
donald trump directly to the insurrection arguing that the rioters were taking marching orders from the former president. do you believe that the house impeachment managers made their case? >> well, wolf, it is good to be with you. i think they laid out a very compelling case and i think the way they ended on the questions that jamie raskin ask for the president's lawyers to answer, why did the president wait so long before asking his supporters to leave the capitol? why did the president wait so long before answering our question on sending help to the capitol for us, the national guard? and why is he never condemned what the intruders did, what the rioters did? we are waiting for of course the president's lawyers to putt on his defense but i thought that jamie raskin and the house managers laid out a coherpt case
against the president. >> we learned a little while ago that some republican colleagues including graham, cruz, lee, they actually went into a room off of -- near the senate over there, they met with mr. trump's attorneys earlier in the afternoon. is that something the impartial jurors should be doing? >> i'm surprised to hear that. we all need to make inspected judgments. we took a separate oath to be jurors and to weigh the information that is presented. that's why i say we need to listen to what the president's lawyers are suggesting and a charngs for questions and closing arguments and seems strange to have separate meetings with the counsel. >> does it weaken the house impeachment managers' case that they didn't call on witnesses, something democrats as you well remember called for in the first
trump impeachment trial? >> wolf, we haven't decided that question yet so after the president's lawyers present their case if the house managers believe that witnesses are necessary then we'll consider that but recognize that we all witnessed the events of january 6, the information that we have is a lot of it firsthand information and of course very po po powerful to see the videos presented so we have a lot of firsthand information. >> have you actually spoken, senator, you don't have to give us names if you don't want to, to republican colleagues? do you think any of them may actually vote to convict? >> i have not talked to my house -- my senate colleagues, not talked to my democratic or republican colleagues. this is a matter of individual conviction. you have to vote your conscience
and therefore it is not really i think appropriate to try to talk to my colleagues as to how they think the trial is going. >> senator, as usual, thank you so much for joining us. >> my pleasure. good to talk with you. we are getting new details right now on president trump's impeachment defense, hours away. why his lawyers may cut their presentation rather short. plus, there's breaking pandemic news we're watching. president biden makes a major vaccine announcement as he visits the national institutes of health. makes it brilliant. the visionary lexus nx. lease the 2021 nx 300 for $359 a month for thirty six months. experience amazing at your lexus dealer.
with unitedhealthcare medicare advantage plans, there's more to take advantage of. pick up your prescriptions here. and get free delivery there. ♪ wow, uh-huh ♪ unitedhealthcare medicare advantage plans. take advantage everywhere. ♪ wow. ♪ wanna build a gaming business that breaks the internet? take advantage everywhere. that means working night and day... ...and delegating to an experienced live bookkeeper for peace of mind. your books are all set. so you can finally give john some attention. trusted experts. guaranteed accurate books. intuit quickbooks live.
that's why at america's beverage companies, our bottles are made to be re-made. not all plastic is the same. we're carefully designing our bottles to be one hundred percent recyclable, including the caps. they're collected and separated from other plastics, so they can be turned back into material that we use to make new bottles. that completes the circle, and reduces plastic waste. please help us get every bottle back. when you switch to xfinity mobile, you're choosing to get connected that completes the circle, and reduces plastic waste. to the most reliable network nationwide, now with 5g included. discover how to save up to $300 a year with shared data starting at $15 a month, or get the lowest price for one line of unlimited.
tonight the impeachment trial spotlight is shifting to the trump legal team now that house impeachment managers have wrapped up their case against the former president. let's bring back our chief domestic correspondent jim acosta covering the former president for us in west palm beach not far from mar-a-lago. there was a lot of criticism of the trump legal team's performance at the start of the trial so i understand you're doing reporting on what's going on. what can we expect tomorrow? >> reporter: wolf, i think they're mindful of the performance that was panned earlier this week and try to streamline and condense the presentation that they're delivering to the senators tomorrow. i talked to bruce castor when's one of the president's impeachment lawyer saying that they have been cutting down their planned presentation to shorten it and that they have been doing that all day long so i think the strategy, the approach at this point is less is more. but they'll try to make some points and i think one point and
we heard the attorneys talking about this earlier today on capitol hill is they're going to try to make the case that when the president was using words like you have to fight like hell and so on that that was not a direct invitation or a direct incitement of the people who were on hand for that rally january 6th. you can't draw a direct connection between the words he used and what the protesters did up on capitol hill. obviously the democratic house managers presented a devastating case to say otherwise but the democratic senators advisinging this impeachment team and source sources we have been talking to indicate that's what they will be arguing and i think we'll see a video presentation or two tomorrow trying to accuse the democratic house managers of hypocrisy, hearing that they'll try to show people like ted lieu and eric swalwell using the
heated rhetoric and said fight like hell. there weren't insurrections that occurred after the house impeachment managers used that rhetoric and did happen with former president trump. as for the former president, wolf, he was on the golf course today i think trying to communicate a message he is not worried about this and talking to bruce castor about the final vote total castor said they're quote very confident that the president is going to be aquitted. meantime, talking to a source familiar with the former president's thinking he is not satisfied with the air waves. he is the television viewer in chief and he feels as though according to the source i spoke with there have been not enough legal voices defending the president and what he did on january 6th and i think was evident today earlier seeing an impeachment lawyer david schoen incredibly walk out of the trial
as it was going on and do a live shot, a hit, on fox news. i think trying to communicate to the audience of one the attorneys are trying to make his case. >> good point. all right. thank you very much. joining us, two former republican members of congress, mia love and charlie dent both cnn political commentators. mia, do you see this trial as a watershed moment for the republican party? >> the evidence that was presented today i think was absolutely devastating. there was video footage that the public has not seen. i think they laid out the case very well that this was incited violence by the president and it's put a lot of republicans in a very, very difficult position. however, i do not believe that it was enough to get 17
republicans to vote for impeachment because they're caught up on the process issue, is it constitutional to remove a sitting president, and they have to deal with the district at the end of the day so i think that those are some very, very difficult, it is a very difficult position for republicans to be in. >> let me ask charlie, what would an acquittal mean for the republican party? what impact could an emboldened mr. trump have on republicans going down the road? >> emboldened mr. trump if acquitted which is likely he will feel vindicated and use whatever power he has left to hold others to account, those that voted to impeach or convict. people trying to hold the president to account for his conduct and the president wants to hold republican members to account calling him out. that's what will happen and the
president i suspect will attempt to maintain a high profile going into the midterm elections to influence the direction of the party. >> we know that he is ready to seek revenge on republicans that cross him. is that fear going to determine the path forward do you believe for so many republican politicians? >> i think that there is no doubt in my mind at all that the president is going to try to retaliate and charlie is exactly right on this. the biggest problem we have with the impeachment hearing is that if the president gets off he will feel vindicated, showed no remorse. a thing that representative lieu said that resonated with me is a person who feels bad or made a mistake shows some remorse and the president has shown zero remorse. this is again a very difficult position for republicans to be in. they are going to get retaliated
against if they vote against him and so that is where you see the difficulty, where you see a senator saying, am i going to be able to hold on to this seat? we barely lost the majority here so they're only one seat shy of being in the majority so i think it's a very difficult position. >> certainly is. charlie, you have been having discussions about potentially launching a new political party or a new faction of the gop. how viable is that when even after the insurrection, former president trump's approval rating among republicans remains at around 80%? >> i participated in a forum with 120 republicans who warrant a new direction for the party. yes, there was talk of a new party but really that's not the
main to cfocus or a faction ins the gop for a counter force. we want americans to have an option. if there's an election say between mark kelly in arizona and kelly ward in arizona we like the ability to support mark kelly. that we believe that this party must move forward not look backwards into the darkness and don't want to return to the cronyism that we have seen in the trump years. we think we need to rally around unifying principles like democracy and honest and truth and we should be talking about the issues. incremental change. alm sorts of things that are common sense that we could embrace. >> what do you think, mia? do you agree? do you think there's room now if not for a new alternative to the gop at least a new faction within the existing gop?
>> i'm going to be very clear about this. i'm not abdicating my position for donald trump. i believe in the same things that i have always believed in, free markets, personal responsibility, fiscal dis disrepublican. it would be a slap across the face of my parents who 'emigratd to this country and abdicate the sacrifices they made to get me to where i am today and so many other people and will not abdicate my position and i don't think anybody else should either. if somebody needs to go away it should be the president. the party is not going anywhere. >> thank you. president biden's vaccine announce. is really important and the new plea for patience as he slams failures of the trump administration. new details on the dramatic videos presented that showed just how close the former vice
do you have a life insurance policy you no longer need? now you can sell your policy, even a term policy, for an immediate cash payment. we thought we had planned carefully for our retirement. but we quickly realized that we needed a way to supplement our income. if you have one hundred thousand dollars or more of life insurance you may qualify to sell your policy. don't cancel or let your policy lapse without finding out what it's worth. visit conventrydirect.com to find out if you policy qualifies. or call the number on your screen. coventry direct, redefining insurance.
tonight the second trump impeachment trial is racing toward its conclusion with democrats wrapping up the case today and defense arguments set to begin tomorrow. this as the current president of the united states is focusing in on the coronavirus crisis. let's go to the chief white house correspondent katelyn collins. president biden made an important announcement today on vaccines. tell us what he said. >> reporter: wolf, following that announcement last month trying to get more doses of the
coronavirus vaccine, president biden has confirmed today that they have signed the con traktds to get an additional 200 million doses of the vaccine. however, thait's not going to b ready until much later this year but they believe by july they would have enough for all americans to be able to get one. that doesn't mean all americans will have one by then because the next problem they have to confront is the distribution and the actual vaccination process happening there but while he was speaking at the national institutes of health today president biden was heavily critical of the predecessor saying that they were misled on what that was going to look like and of course, wolf, this comes as president biden is trying to keep the focus on the pandemic but he is repeatedly being asked about the trial happening on capitol hill and even weighed in
again today. president biden predicting the grim new footage from his predecessor's impeachment trial could alter republicans' opinions about whether to convict him. >> i think the senate has a very important job to complete and i think my guess is some minds may have been changed but i don't know. >> do you think conviction is possible, mr. president? >> reporter: he didn't answer that question but a top aide said he was deeply affected by what he saw. >> he was shocked and saddened on the date it occurred and a reliving of that for many people who spent as much time as he has in congress. >> reporter: biden and the aides insisted he isn't paying close to attention to the trial and focused on the pandemic. at the national institutes of health today he announced they purchased additional 200 million doses of vaccine which could be ready later this year.
>> we signed a final contract for 100 million more moderna and 100 million more pfizer vaccines and on track to have enough supply for 300 million americans by the end of july. >> reporter: democrats are vowing the trial won't slow down his agenda. >> no, it is not slowing us down. when i first became majority leader they said you have three big tagsings. cabinet, impeachment, covid. we are on track. >> reporter: meanwhile the white house is facing criticism for adding fine print to this promise from the campaign trail. >> do everything to keep the educators and students safe to safely open a majority of k-8 schools by the end of the first 100 days. >> reporter: the white house saying a majority means over 50% schools open one day a week, the definition the white house tried to clear up today after criticism. >> the president will not rest
until every school is open five days a week. that is our goal and we listen to science and medical experts. we expect cdc guidelines tomorrow. >> reporter: president biden spoke to chinese president xi jinping for the first time since taking office. >> last night i was on the phone for two straight hours. >> reporter: biden raised the human rights abuses at home and policies abroad and today biden included this warning calling for more spending on infrastructure. >> but, you know, they're going to -- they will eat our lunch. they are investing billions of dollars and dealing with a whole range of issues that relate to transportation, the environment and a whole range of things. we have to step up. >> reporter: tonight another policy reversal, this one involving a signature of the trump era. biden is canceling the national emergency at the southwest board
er calling it unwarranted and no more american taxpayer dollar diverted for a border wall and learning how dire former president trump's condition was last october diagnosed with coronavirus and taken to the hospital. "the new york times" first reporting earlier that the president's condition was so severe that there was talk of putting him on a ventilator. because the blood oxygen levels so low at points and reported to believe in the 80s. of course, that is not what we were hearing at the time and they said that he had a lung issue associated with a pneumonia seeing in covid-19 patients and underscores how misleading officials at the time were at what the president's condition was, includes the president's personal physician who was giving up dates to reporters but not revealing a lot of information and not revealing as much as we have learned.
cnn confirmed some but first reported in "the new york times" about what his condition was really like and how bad it was last october. >> katelyn collins, thank you very much. let's get some annual sisz of the dean of the brown university school of public health. what do you make of this report that the then president was apparently in worse shape when he was taken to the walter reed medical center than his doctors and aides led us on to believe? >> yeah. so, thank you for having me on. it is disturbing and disturbing because i felt like dr. conley was being deceptive at the time. i understand if you in a normal situation may not want to reveal a detailed clinical history but this is the president of the united states and the american people had a right to know and it would have been better if the white house had been trance
pa parent and that's disappointing and thank goodness that the president recovered and would have been horrible for the country had the president gotten more ill or passed away and thankful that turned around but harrowing. >> let's talk about the good news that president biden announced today. the impact that these additional 200 million doses of the vaccines will be made available fairly soon. this is really potentially very significant, right? >> it is. i am very, very optimistic about where we will be with vaccines and vaccinations over once we get into let's say mid-spring, may or june. i fully believe around april or may we will be in a situation where any american who wants a vaccine can get one. that's going to be terrific. today's announcement adds to the doses. we also expect j&j to come online with an authorization and
the future with vaccinations is very, very bright. >> johnson & johnson you only need one dose right now. doctor, thank you so, so much. just ahead as house impeachment managers are wrapping up the arguments we take a closer look at the chilling new video they released showing the danger that rioters posed to the vice president mike pence and several key lawmakers. you can choose any workout you want to fit with your time frame. there are a ton of zero point foods that i love. i never feel restricted. the new myww+. join now, pay later! get your first three months free. if you have postmenopausal osteoporosis join now, pay later! and a high risk for fracture, now might not be the best time to ask yourself, 'are my bones strong?'
life is full of make or break moments. that's why it's so important to help reduce your risk of fracture with prolia®. only prolia® is proven to help strengthen and protect bones from fracture with 1 shot every 6 months. do not take prolia® if you have low blood calcium, are pregnant, are allergic to it, or take xgeva®. serious allergic reactions like low blood pressure, trouble breathing, throat tightness, face, lip or tongue swelling, rash, itching or hives have happened. tell your doctor about dental problems, as severe jaw bone problems may happen. or new or unusual pain in your hip, groin, or thigh, as unusual thigh bone fractures have occurred. speak to your doctor before stopping, skipping or delaying prolia®, as spine and other bone fractures have occurred. prolia® can cause serious side effects, like low blood calcium, serious infections, which could need hospitalization, skin problems, and severe bone, joint, or muscle pain. don't wait for a break, call your doctor today, and ask about prolia®.
my body is truly powerful. i have the power to lower my a1c. because my body can still make its own insulin. and trulicity activates my body to release it, lowering my blood sugar from the first dose. once-weekly trulicity responds when my body needs it, 24/7. trulicity is for type 2 diabetes. it's not insulin. it isn't for people with type 1 diabetes. don't take trulicity if you're allergic to it, you or your family have medullary thyroid cancer, or have multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2. stop trulicity and call your doctor right away if you have an allergic reaction, a lump or swelling in your neck, severe stomach pain, changes in vision, or diabetic retinopathy. serious side effects may include pancreatitis. taking trulicity with sulfonylurea or insulin raises low blood sugar risk. side effects include indigestion, fatigue, belly pain, decreased appetite, nausea, diarrhea, and vomiting which can lead to dehydration and may worsen kidney problems.
i have it within me to lower my a1c. ask your doctor about trulicity. - [announcer] grubhub perks give you the kind of panera deals that make you want to move. ♪ get a free delivery perk on your first order from panera, only on.. - [group] grubhub! - [announcer] grub what you love. want to save hundreds on your wireless bill? with xfinity mobile you can. how about saving hundreds on the new samsung galaxy s21 ultra 5g? you can do that too. all on the most reliable network. sure thing! and with fast nationwide 5g included at no extra cost. we've got you covered. so join the carrier rated #1 in customer satisfaction.
been arrested and charged with conspiracy for their roles in the deadly riot, and we are getting more details right now in the case that impeachment managers have made against former president trump and the video and the audio that they played during the trial. cnn's brian todd is joining us. he's got details. brian, tell us more. >> reporter: wolf, many of these police video and police audio dispatch clips have never been seen or heard from before. they depict the desperate straits the police officers found themselves in almost immediately. from the first moments, capitol police suffered casualties. >> multiple capitol injuries, multiple capitol injuries. >> reporter: from the moments police knew they would be overrun. >> we have 50 charging up the hill on the west front north of the stairs. they're approaching the wall now. >> reporter: officers' voices calling for reinforcements, get more panicked, desperate. >> they have a pole, 50, get someone here now.
dso. multiple law enforcement injuries, dso, get up here. >> reporter: never before seen video footage and audio clips of the assault on the capitol played at former president trump's impeachment trial by democratic house impeachment managers drive home the brutality, the sheer terror of the attack. they showed footage of then vice president mike pence being evacuated down a flight of stairs after hiding in a room near the senate chamber with his family. a "washington post" analysis found rioters came within 100 feet of pence at one point. >> extremists reportedly coordinated online and discuss how they could hunt down the vice president. journalists in the capitol reported they heard rioters say they were looking for pence in order to execute him. >> reporter: the impeachment managers played this footage of staffers for house speaker nancy pelosi scrambling to get into a conference room and shelter-in-place. they close an outer door, enter
through an inner door and barricade it. just a few minutes later, rioters streamed down the hall, and one slams his shoulder into that same entrance three times. he broke through the outer door, managers said, but couldn't breach the inner door. managers played a cell phone call, a pelosi aide whispering in the phone as rioters were at that door. meanwhile, on police dispatch radio, officers were sounding more and more like they were on a battle field, at war. >> they breached the scaffolding at the fence. >> reporter: and it became horribly clear they were losing that battle. >> we lost the line. we lost the line. >> reporter: footage showed senate minority leader chuck schumer reversing course and being rushed down the hallway. and senator romney exiting what he said was his hideaway.
capitol police goodman rushed him and said he'd be safer there. they didn't understand how close he was to danger and credited the officer. >> officer goodman was there to get me in the right direction. >> reporter: lawmakers were shown how close they came to rioters beyond the hallway doors to a rioter held at gunpoint on the floor or as they left the senate chamber to a violent mob coming after them. >> as you were moving through that hallway, i-p paced it off. you were just 58 steps away from where the mob was amassing. >> impeachment manager eric swalwell said right around that same moment it was again capitol police officer eugene goodman who encountered the mob and steered lawmakers away from that mob. that same officer goodman was the same officer who had steered senator mitt romney to safety. wolf? >> and we salute that police officer indeed.
brian, thank you very, very much. and we'll have more news right after this. ♪ ♪ ♪ when it comes to your financial health, just a few small steps can make a real difference. ♪ ♪ ♪ learn, save and spend with guidance from chase. confidence feels good. chase. make more of what's yours. t-mobile is now america's largest and fastest 5g network. and to celebrate, we want everyone to unleash 5g speeds in more places. right now, every current and new customers can get a free samsung galaxy s21 5g. just bring in a qualifying device to trade. switch to t-mobile and save up to 20% every month vs. the other guys. the leader in 5g coverage. the fastest 5g speeds. the best value in wireless. and a free galaxy s21 for everyone. only at t-mobile.
wanna build a gaming business that breaks the internet? that means working night and day... ...and delegating to an experienced live bookkeeper for peace of mind. your books are all set. so you can finally give john some attention. trusted experts. guaranteed accurate books. intuit quickbooks live. thinking about your financial plan... ...so are we. prudential helps 25 million people with their financial needs. with over 90 years' of investment experience, our thousands of financial professionals can help. go to prudential.com
liberty mutual customizes- wait... am i in one of those liberty mutual commercials where they stand in front of the statue of liberty and talk about how liberty mutual customizes your car insurance so you only pay for what you need? uhhh... yes. huh... what happens in this one? seagulls. oh, i like it. how are you doing? (seagulls sounds) only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪
stay with cnn for complete coverage of the second impeachment trial of donald trump. i'll be back tomorrow 11:00 a.m. eastern to bring argument by the trump defense team. thanks very much for watching. erin burnett out front starts right now. xxxx out front next, the breaking news, republican senators who are jurors in trump's impeachment trial, meeting privately with trump's lawyers to talk strategy. how do they possibly explain that? plus more breaking news. trump was much sicker with coronavirus than he and his doctors admitted, even under a lot of questioning. his condition was so concerning that he was almost on a ventilator. and new details on how sick melania trump actually was. the department of justice says oath keepers waite