Return to Transcripts main page

CNN NEWSROOM

House Democrats Issue Subpoena to Justice Department for Unredacted Mueller Report; President Trump Criticizes Release of Mueller Report; Analysts Examine Whether House Democrats Should Begin Impeachment Proceedings; Attorney General Bill Barr's Press Conference Ahead of Mueller Report Release Draws Criticism; Antigovernment Protestors Set Fires in Streets of Paris; Former Vice President Joe Biden to Announce 2020 Presidential Run; Grain in Bolivia Believed to Increase Health. Aired 2-3p ET

Aired April 20, 2019 - 14:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.


[14:00:00] FREDRICKA WHITFIELD, CNN ANCHOR: And the school district superintendent said officials found district employees acted appropriately and all safety procedures were followed during Raniya's medical emergency.

So much more straight ahead in the Newsroom. Hello again, and thank you so much for being with me this Saturday. I'm Fredricka Whitfield.

We begin with a major legal fight brewing in the wake of the Mueller report. Democrats have finally issued the subpoena that they've been holding close for weeks to see the full unredacted version, as they remain divided on the best plan moving forward. Will they begin impeachment proceedings? Or will there be censure?

Meanwhile, President Trump is lashing out once again on the Mueller report on Twitter, saying it was, I'm quoting on, "written as nastily as possible," end quote, and falsely claiming it found no obstruction. Let's start first with CNN's Political Correspondent Sara Murray. The Department of Justice is already pushing back on the subpoena, Sara, so what more can you tell us about where things stand?

SARA MURRAY, CNN POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: Look, you're right, there is a political fight and a legal fight that is brewing right now. Democrats have been sitting on this subpoena, now they have issued it. They want to see the full Mueller report without redactions. They also want to see the underlying evidence. And Fred, if you go through this report, not a whole lot is redacted in the obstruction of justice section, but there certainly are plenty of redactions when it comes to the whole collusion section, especially when it talks about interactions between the Trump campaign and WikiLeaks. That's one of the things that Democrats had been asking about.

But the Justice Department is already pushing back on this request, calling it premature. Let me read a statement that they put out. It says "In the interest of transparency, the Attorney General released the Special Counsel's confidential report with only minimal redactions. The Department of Justice has also has made arrangements for Chairman Nadler and others Congressional leaders to review the report with even fewer redactions. In light of this, Congressman Nadler's subpoena is premature and unnecessary. The Department will continue to work with Congress to accommodate its legitimate request consistent with the law and long recognized executive branch interests."

So Fred, that pretty much tells you that a legal fight is brewing. And of course, on top of this Democrats also want testimony. They want to see William Barr and Bob Mueller up on the Hill, so we will see if they get their wish.

WHITFIELD: Sara Murray, thank you so much.

Now to the president's latest reversal on the Mueller report. After first praising the report as total vindication and saying that Robert Mueller acted honorably, the president is changing his tune, describing Mueller as, quote, "highly conflicted." CNN White House Correspondent Boris Sanchez in West Palm Beach for us, near where the president is spending Easter weekend with his family at his Florida resort. So Boris, what is driving the president's change in tone?

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Fred, President Trump believes that even if Robert Mueller found no evidence of collusion or conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Russia, he believes the Special Counsel still wants to embarrass him. Sources have indicated the president is furious over the depiction of a White House that is chaotic, a president that is unhinged, and aides essentially ignoring or refusing to follow his orders.

Behind the scenes, sources have privately questioned the legal strategy behind this, with White House officials fully complying with Robert Mueller's investigation. We know that the president certainly is. Despite that, keep in mind, that strategy is part of what helped President Trump avoid a one-on-one interview with Robert Mueller.

Regardless, the president is fuming. Look at what he wrote on Twitter, this is just one of several tweets the president had sent out about the Russia investigation. He writes, quote, "Despite the fact that the Mueller report should not have been authorized in the first place, and was written as nastily as possible, by 13 (18) angry Democrats who were true Trump haters, including highly conflicted Bob Mueller himself, the end result is no collusion, no obstruction."

Fred, it's important to point out the Department of Justice looked into possible conflicts of interest on behalf of Robert Mueller. They found none. This is the same Department of Justice and the Attorney General William Barr who were basically saying that the president did not collude with Russia, and obviously the Mueller report is gray in the area of obstruction. But the Attorney General, William Barr, has suggested that the president should not be prosecuted for obstructing justice.

Beyond all of that, we should also point out the irony here. The president is again going after details in reporting that he believes are made up when the Special Counsel's report pointed out that the White House has repeatedly done that about news stories that turned out to be true. Fred?

WHITFIELD: All right, Boris Sanchez, thank you so much, from West Palm, appreciate it.

Let's talk more about all this. Joining me right now, a former Obama Homeland Security official and CNN's National Security analyst Juliette Kayyem, former Republican congressman and CNN political commentator Charlie Dent, and 2018 Democratic nominee for Florida's governor, and the former mayor of Tallahassee, Andrew Gillum. Good to see all of you, and happy Easter, Passover.

So CNN has estimating that eight percent of the report is redacted, most of that because of the ongoing investigation.

[14:05:03] So Juliette, then, once, or if Democrats, or the House, does indeed get the unredacted version, will this fill in a lot more blanks? Will they get a whole lot of information? Because I think the expectation was a lot more of the report was going to be redacted.

JULIETTE KAYYEM, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: Right. So the eight percent mostly applies to volume one, which of course is related to the interactions between the Trump campaign and Russia and what Russia was trying to do in the election. A lot of those cases are still pending. There's a lot of indictments and investigations going on. So it's understandable.

But even without that eight percent, this document, both volume one and then of course volume two, which has to do with obstruction of justice, together create a narrative that the House needs to act on. And if the way it acts is we want more information to determine whether there is going to be impeachment proceedings, or begins now, which I think there is plenty of evidence to, what is not going to be tolerable, and I say this for the history books more than for politics, is to let this document sit there, because future presidents will then view themselves immune, if the illegalities, if the conduct, whether illegal or not, is caught very close to an election. There is no -- there is no election out for the impeachment proceedings. So I think there is enough there, I have read it twice now --

WHITFIELD: So the argument you're saying, Juliette, there is not enough time left, a year-and-a-half, there's not enough time in which to even waste the resources or the time and energy in which to start proceedings.

KAYYEM: No, I would say they could start proceedings now based on what we've seen, just to get the investigation. It seems what the tactic is we want to see this additional information to see if there's actually more that would lead to an impeachment proceeding. But I think it is their constitutional duty now to, at the very least, begin impeachment proceedings. It's hard to read this document any other way.

WHITFIELD: That's a similar argument coming from Democratic presidential candidate Senator Elizabeth Warren. This is what she said at a town hall just this morning.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. ELIZABETH WARREN, (D) MASSACHUSETTS: We cannot be an America that says it is OK for a president of the United States to try to block investigations into a foreign attack on our country, or investigations into that president's own misbehavior. So I have called on the House to initiate impeachment proceedings.

(APPLAUSE)

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WHITFIELD: So apparently, it's gotten more complicated than that, because listen to all of this. I'm about to tell you, House Speaker Pelosi's communications director just released a statement saying, and I'm quoting now, "As the speaker has said repeatedly, one step at a time. We are focused to getting the full, unredacted version of the report and its underlying document, as well as hearing from Mueller. The report raises more questions and concerns that we believe the American people deserve answers to," end quote.

So Andrew, is that sufficient, just hold off, wait, don't get ahead of one self? Do you agree?

ANDREW GILLUM, (D) 2018 NOMINEE FOR GOVERNOR OF FLORIDA: I think Democrats have to be really, really careful about continuing to move the ball as it relates to making a decision here. We originally began with, we've got to take it slow because we've got to wait for the Mueller report. And that was even after we learned through the president's own admission, and admittance himself, was that he fired Jim Comey because he would not end the investigation. He already admitted --

WHITFIELD: The Russia thing.

GILLUM: -- over a year ago to obstruction of justice. And so now we've gone from there for let's wait for the Mueller report. The Mueller report is produced and has at least 10 instances again where the president obstructed justice --

WHITFIELD: Or attempted.

GILLUM: Or attempted to obstruct justice. And the truth is, is that at some point, the reason why the American people are going to go thin on this is we keep moving the ball. Let's wait for this. Let's wait for this. The truth is, we know exactly what we need to know to present enough evidence for the obstruction of justice of this president, and we're either going to pursue this to the fullest extent and not only compete after this presidency but compete to save democracy, or we're going to keep dragging our feet.

WHITFIELD: So you say get with it now.

GILLUM: We'll play a political consequence. I agree, yes. The evidence is there.

WHITFIELD: OK, so Charlie, how about Republicans? They have to decide if they are defenders of the president or defenders of the Constitution. Why aren't more Republicans speaking out about what should happen next, given this report is there for everyone to read and see?

CHARLES DENT, (R) FORMER U.S. REPRESENTATIVE: Well, Mitt Romney has clearly spoken up. But if you're a Republican --

WHITFIELD: He has condemned it, but he certainly hasn't said there should be impeachment or any other kind of other condemnation.

[14:10:03] DENT: This report does not vindicate the president. Is does not give him a clean bill of health. So if you're a Republican, if you're going to go try to spin this as an exoneration, you're really talking through your hat.

By the same token, Democrats have to be careful because they didn't get what they wanted either. They were hoping there would be some kind of a criminal conspiracy and a clear-cut case on obstruction. They didn't get that.

So right now, so neither side is particularly happy. I happen to think that pursuing impeachment path would be ill-advised for the Democrats. Now, Elizabeth Warren's campaign, in my view, is struggling. So she needs to change the media narrative, so she goes out and takes a strong position.

But I think they're better off running against the president and trying to defeat him because of his conduct in office, which we could all agree has been quite bad. That is really the bigger issue. If they couldn't get to bring charges, if Mueller wasn't about to bring charges, it is going to be, I think, hard for the Democrats to make that impeachment case, knowing that it is not going to get the votes in the Senate to remove him from office.

WHITFIELD: And since Thursday, there have been so many legal scholars who have said even an attempt of obstruction by a president is obstruction. So do you believe that the president in all of these attempts, and the reasons behind, whether it was trying to get somebody else to do the dirty work, they didn't do it, either resigned or they just tried to pass it on to somebody else, do you believe, Charlie, that that constitutes obstruction?

DENT: Well, I agree, Fredricka, that there were clearly attempts at obstruction by the president, particularly as it relates to Don McGahn and Rod Rosenstein. Don McGahn, by the way should be commended. I've known Don for 16, 17 years. He's an honorable guy. And he refused to carry out an order to fire the special prosecutor, and even threatened to resign over it. And he spoke honestly to the special prosecutor about that. So there is no question in my view that there was an attempt to obstruct.

I will leave it to the lawyers to determine whether or not that was in fact criminal. But it wasn't such that Mueller felt that he could make a conclusion on the matter. So I think it's still unresolved.

GILLUM: Mueller wasn't able to make a conclusion in the sense that what he did was follow the department protocol as it relates to the president, and concluded that he could not himself indict a sitting president. But he presented and gave as much evidence and information as necessary to Democrats to make that decision.

Listen, we're approaching Easter Sunday so I'm going to borrow from my pastor. He phrases this in the way of comparing the thermostat to the thermometer. And the difference between obviously is that the thermometer can tell the temperature, but the thermostat sets it. And we're concluding what the American people will think about us holding this president accountable before they have really ever weighed in on what they think around that.

And I'm not talking about just polls. Sometimes you've got to get out there based off of what your job and what your obligation is, make the case, and set the temperature in the environment, and stop taking it to determine what is the right thing to do. Half of Americans are sitting out of these elections. And we don't know why they're sitting out from these elections, but one conclusion could possibly be is that they don't see themselves and their voices reflected in the body politic as it is being carried out.

So I would caution people against being political strategists. We're not electing that as a president. We're electing someone with the moral character and fiber to lead this nation from the brink of where we are right now, under a president, who in my opinion has broken the law, and there's evidence to prove that he has done, and we ought to make a decision around what to do there.

WHITFIELD: And Juliette, on the Russia thing, as the president refers to it, this report lays out very explicit details.

KAYYEM: Very.

WHITFIELD: Of how Russia interfered with the election. What should be done with that information, in your view?

KAYYEM: That's exactly right, and I'm glad we bring it up. I worry that our focus on volume two, which is important, the obstruction of justice, the Sarah Sanders stuff, all that stuff, it's essential. But it is only essential to the extent that it reflects on what they were trying to hide, which is laid out in volume one.

So just putting volume two to the side, if I only had this conversation, or this document that tells me what the Trump campaign was doing, not only not to stop the Russians, but to facilitate, to welcome, to meet with them, all of this crazy stuff, from the Seychelles to the Trump Tower meeting, and then you say, have they done anything to say, well, that was wrong? No, they haven't. They've never said that, they denied that. Are we doing anything to stop it again? Absolutely not.

And if Congress doesn't do anything, so just through the national security lens, should we do it again in 2020? And you tell me whether you have heard anything from this White House that would convince you that they have learned the lesson of what they did wrong in 2016. So purely from the security perspective, and Homeland Security perspective, I only need volume one. I don't need volume two. And I would say proceed at this stage.

[14:15:06] WHITFIELD: All right, we will leave it there for now.

GILLUM: The only other thing I would add to that, because I think it is an excellent point, and that is if the shoes were on the other foot, do we think for a moment that with the number of indictment, guilty pleas, arrests that have taken place, the conduct of the president, this report volume one, volume two, that they would not hesitate to hold folks accountable here. And so my charge is not just Democrats. It is also to Republicans who love this country, I believe, who want to make sure that we reclaim our place on the national and international stage, they're all, the responsibility is incumbent upon all of them to live up to their constitutional obligation and what they took an oath of office for. This is not about an individual president. This is really about the preservation of democracy and what this says about us today, not only today, but for the ages.

WHITFIELD: We will leave it there. Andrew Gillum, Juliette Kayyem, Charlie Dent, thanks to all of you. Happy Easter and Passover.

Coming up, U.S. Attorney General William Barr facing harsh criticism for his handling of the Mueller report. But is it warranted?

And later, a fiery scene in the streets of Paris. Protests erupting there today. Police arresting more than 100 people already. A live report, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:20:29] WHITFIELD: U.S. Attorney General William Barr is coming under fire from critics after his generous summary of the Mueller report. Barr spent much of his Thursday press conference framing the special counsel report on the premise that its findings were favorable to president Donald Trump. Barr ignored information damaging to the president, and instead emphasized the report found no wrongdoing by the president.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

WILLIAM BARR, U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL: The White House fully cooperated with the Special Counsel's investigation, providing unfettered access to campaign and White House documents, directing senior aides to testify freely, and asserting no privilege claims. And at the same time, the president took no act that, in fact, deprived the Special Counsel of the documents and witnesses necessary to complete his investigation.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WHITFIELD: With me now, Michael Zeldin who served as Robert Mueller's former special assistant at the Department of Justice, he is also a former federal prosecutor and a CNN legal analyst. Michael, good to see you. Happy Easter and Passover.

MICHAEL ZELDIN, ROBERT MUELLER'S FORMER SPECIAL ASSISTANT AT DOJ: Thank you.

WHITFIELD: So, let's begin. Your reaction, as you were listening to it, what were you thinking and feeling?

ZELDIN: Well, I wrote a piece back on the 2nd of April saying that Barr was mistaken when he wrote a letter to Congress on March 24, providing the bottom-line summary of Mueller's report. I thought that that was inappropriate and it was misleading, and it set a political tone that we are now trying to deal with the aftermath of.

I also think that he repeated that same mistake in his press conference, when he again misrepresented aspects of the report, or cherry-picked parts of the report without picking the context in which some of those statements were made.

So I'm a little bit surprised. I worked for Bill Barr, I like Bill Barr, I have a great deal of respect for Bill Barr, but I'm a little bit surprised that he decided both on March 24th and again the other day with the press conference to even speak. It's not his report. It is not his investigation. Mueller was appointed to do this because the Justice Department had a conflict. Barr should have stayed out of it and just let Mueller do his own speaking or the report do its own speaking.

WHITFIELD: So given that you know him, and he is well known in the Washington area, I mean he's been an attorney general, he's overseen other Special Counsel investigations, and he has quite the legacy, particularly in the Washington lawyer community, as being a lawyer's lawyer, why would he do this? Why would he go as far as being the advocate for President Trump, whether it was as far back as that memo, and then getting the job, to the way you just characterized his two presentations of this report?

ZELDIN: I expect it depends on what you think he did. I think that he thinks that what he did was appropriate under the circumstances, that he in fact provided just the bottom line that the American public was dying to hear, and that he did not endeavor to influence public opinion with respect to what the report's full contents contained. It's hard to accept that completely when you read the full report, and you see how he took out sentences out of context, and sort of shaped the narrative in a way that Mueller didn't shape the narrative.

WHITFIELD: Which is intentional.

ZELDIN: When you read -- well, that's right. So the question is, when you read it that way, Fred, it invites the question, was this a mistake on his part undertaken in good faith but a mistaken nonetheless, or was this the act of a political actor who was there to protect that person who appointed him, the whole reason why we have a special counsel to begin with?

I don't really want to pass judgment on Barr in respect of whether he made a mistake or he was a political actor. Either way it turns out not so good for him because we are finding ourselves now a few days after the release of the Mueller report not understanding what Barr did, why he did it, and fully understanding that what he said was really a reflection of what the report's final findings were.

WHITFIELD: So these two, then, on public display, ways of handling the Mueller report, are these just simply indicators how he will be approaching his job as attorney general from this day forward, that he will, in the view of some people, perform almost like a defense attorney of the president?

[14:25:00] ZELDIN: Well, I hope not. I hope that Barr continues to exercise independent judgment. There's no point in him having taken this job at this stage of his career to just be a defense attorney for Donald Trump. However, these first few steps that he has taken I think were missteps, and we're going to have to just watch closely which Bill Barr surfaces, the Bill Barr that I worked for and know and think as a person of integrity, or a person who is prone to misstatements and mistakes in an effort to protect the person that appointed him. Too early to tell.

WHITFIELD: He came out of retirement for this gig, though, didn't he?

ZELDIN: Yes, he did. Well, essentially, he did, yes. And that's why it would seem to me he is the right type of person to be an independent actor. If Don McGahn proves himself in some sense to have had some level of independence in refusing to do what the president asked of him, you would think, and that guy is still in the middle of his career with a lot of career still to go, that Bill Barr could follow suit, and also exercise independent judgment, and when the president asks him to do something that he feels is incorrect, that he will say no, thank you. But so far, we haven't seen that.

WHITFIELD: Like a Don McGahn from what we just learned.

ZELDIN: Like a Don McGahn, exactly. We haven't seen it as completely as I would have hoped, but time is -- he is early in his tenure, so let's see what happens.

WHITFIELD: Michael Zeldin, we will all be watching. Thank you so much for joining us. We appreciate it.

ZELDIN: Thank you, Fred. Bye.

WHITFIELD: We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:31:00] WHITFIELD: Now to developing news out of Paris where protesters are out in force voicing their anger over what they call economic injustice. Earlier some of the so-called Yellow Vest antigovernment protesters lit fires, leading to clashes with police. Officers used tear gas and water cannons to break up the crowds. CNN International Correspondent Melissa Bell is in Paris. So Melissa, has there been change since the last time we spoke a couple of hours ago?

MELISSA BELL, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, the idea that the Yellow Vests had had, Fredricka, and this was the 23rd Saturday in a row that they were holding this protest against inequality in France. Fundamentally, what these protesters have been about is economic inequality. And even before the events of this week, and the fire at Notre Dame, they had called for a massive protest this Saturday, a black Saturday, they said, that they were hoping for. I'm just going to show you the scene here, which is where the protests ended today. Much different from the scenes we saw earlier on. There was a lot of tear gas. There were a lot of people in this square, and there were a lot of scuffles with police. That has now largely died down. The police have successfully managed to keep the pedestrians here away from the Champs-Elysees, where the last few weeks, this they have caused so much trouble.

Even before the events of this week, they had hoped that this would be a much bigger Saturday, and it was. There were 9,000 protesters on the streets of Paris today, compared to 5,000 last Saturday. And I think beyond their call for a bigger protest, what really fueled the protest, and we heard this over and over again today from Yellow Vest protesters, was the row over the donations being made to Notre Dame. That fire on Monday led to so many of France's richest families announcing donations. What the Yellow Vests have said today is, look, there are people in France who are in a position to give that much money, we have nothing on which to live. And that speaks to the profound economic inequality that we've been fighting against since the month of November, Fredricka.

WHITFIELD: Melissa Bell in Paris, thank you so much.

Still ahead, former Vice President Joe Biden is set to jump into the presidential race with a looming announcement next week. How will past controversies impact his future on the trail?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

WHITFIELD: Welcome back. Former Vice President Joe Biden is expected to make it official next week and announce he is jumping into the 2020 race. He is already the Democratic frontrunner in recent polls, but his announcement comes in the wake of allegations of misconduct or making people not feel comfortable. So how will that play out once he becomes part of the pack? CNN political reporter Arlette Saenz has more on his rollout next week.

ARLETTE SAENZ, CNN POLITICAL REPORTER: Well, Fred, former Vice President Joe Biden is expected to make things official later next week, formally throwing his hat into the 2020 ring. The format of that announcement is still debated among the team of advisers, whether it's going to be a video or potentially a series of events to launch the campaign.

But last week, you had Greg Schultz, one of Biden's top political advisers, up on Capitol Hill telling Democrats that things are still going ahead as scheduled. So later this week we are expecting Biden to go ahead and make this official. And this comes after he has kind of pushed deadlines along. At first, he had said at the start of the year, and then it kind of got pushed back to January, and we've slowly and slowly seen that his team has been trying to lay the preliminary groundwork for a possible campaign. And Biden has made it very clear that he wanted to make sure this wasn't going to be a fool's errand, that they had everything they needed lined up when it came to fundraising and digital strategy before he enters the race. This will mark his third run for the White House, and he knows what it

is like. His past two bids did not fair too well, so he wants to make sure that he has everything lined up.

Now, Biden's allies point to his experience in Washington, D.C., 36 years as a senator, and two terms as vice president, as the reason why they believe he is the most qualified person in the country to be president. But with that long career also comes a very long record which is going to undergo more scrutiny than it really has in the past. And you've seen some of the controversies come to light resurface in recent weeks. Whether it's his handling of Anita Hill's testimony in 1991, or his support for the crime bill. You also have his position on school bussing. That's all areas that his team knows he's going to have to address and have to continue to address once he enters the presidential campaign.

Biden is also going to have to figure out how to handle these recent allegations that he's made women feel uncomfortable in their interactions. He has acknowledged that that might change the way that he interacts with people, campaigns out on the campaign trail. And so we'll see later this week what kind of style Biden has as he is expected to eventually hit the campaign trail once he makes that formal announcement. Fred?

[14:40:03] WHITFIELD: Arlette Saenz, thank you so much.

With me now, Nathan Gonzales, the editor and publisher for "Inside Elections" which provides nonpartisan analyst of congressional and presidential campaigns. Good you could be with us. So what kind of impact will it have on this already crowded field?

NATHAN GONZALES, EDITOR AND PUBLISHER, "INSIDE ELECTIONS": I think Vice President Biden, I kind of assumed that he has been running all along. When you're polling as well as what he is polling, or polling at the top of the heap, then you can't ignore him. I think he starts as, if not the frontrunner, one of the frontrunners along with Bernie Sanders. But as Arlette laid out, there's a lot of unanswered questions. I felt a little built of deja vu during the lead-in in this because when talking about Vice President Biden, talking about his experience in Washington, I had flashbacks to Hillary Clinton's campaign when Democrats said she was the most qualified candidate ever for president. But the problem was people don't value that Washington experience because they don't trust Washington as much as what they might have 10, 20 years ago.

WHITFIELD: Right. It becomes -- some campaigns can be based on old versus new. Do you want the new blood, or do you want the same old thing that Washington has been accustomed to? That really becomes kind of a campaign direction for so many. But then what about these recent allegations of making some women feel uncomfortable. It used to be that Biden was described as being affable, and uncle Joe, and now you've got allegations like that which really frown on his style with people.

GONZALES: Two things can be true at the same time, that Joe Biden had no ill intent when dealing with women, dealing with people in that way. And also that that behavior is not appropriate anymore. I think that those can be true at the same time.

I think what will be interesting once he officially gets in, is what else comes out? Are there other new allegations or other women that come out? And how do his other Democratic opponents handle him? Traditionally in the campaign, if you're the frontrunner, you are usually going to be the subject of the attacks because people need to bring you down in the polls in order for them to go up. And so does that mean that they're going to go after Joe Biden on this sort of, on this sort of angle, or is it going to be on policy, or other issues that Arlette laid out in her package.

WHITFIELD: As it pertains to perhaps the stiffest competition for the president, is it Joe bide than President Trump would feel most threatened by?

GONZALES: I think that's the key, is that, despite, look, let's face it. Joe Biden didn't fit the Democratic Party anymore, demographically as an old white man. He doesn't fit ideologically to a party that is shifting to the left and becoming more progressive. But if he is viewed as the single candidate who is most likely to defeat President Trump, I think Democratic voters might smooth -- they might be willing to look past some of the areas where they don't line up with him because they're so determined to make sure President Trump doesn't get a second term.

WHITFIELD: So going back to that description you had of when you're the leader, people are looking for ways in which to cut you down, will the kind of cutting down of Biden, would that be coming in from within this very crowded Democratic field where many have already vowed that they're not going to turn on each other? Or is it the Republican opponent who is the incumbent?

GONZALES: Well, I mean President Trump is going to be firing tweets and doing all sorts of -- doing what President Trump does. I think at some point if the polls don't change, the it's going to be up to some of the other candidates to change the dynamic. And you might think that Joe Biden has a ceiling, he can't get above 25 percent. But 25 percent, if that is a locked in base, that is a lot in a field of 20 candidates. And if we go back four years, with candidate President Trump, he didn't have a majority of Republican voters until far into the primary season. But he did have a core group of about 25 to 30 percent that allowed to push him well into the race and push him through until the end.

WHITFIELD: In that case, we did see the cutting down, to use your words. There was a lot of cutting going on before he became the last one.

Nathan Gonzales, thank you so much. Happy Easter and Passover. Appreciate it.

GONZALES: Thank you, happy Easter.

WHITFIELD: We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK) [14:49:06] WHITFIELD: In his CNN original series, "Chasing Life," Dr. Sanjay Gupta is traveling the world, looking for secrets of better living. And this week, he is headed to Bolivia to find answers about heart health, an issue that has directly affected him, his family, and millions of Americans. Have a look.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SANJAY GUPTA, CNN CHIEF MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT: And while quinoa is a major export for Bolivia, I've heard there's another super nutritious grain from here that we should all know about. It is good for the heart, and I've heard delicious as well, in the right hands. To find it, I'm headed here, to Gusteau (ph) restaurant, to meet with restauranteur, Samaya (ph) Pradda (ph)

I was at the market today, and some of these grains I never heard of. And I look into this kind of thing, you know. Quinoa is one of my favorite foods. What are some of the other grains people here in Bolivia know but the rest of the world doesn't know about?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Amaranth. It is considered, scientifically considered all of the minerals and vitamins that you need, in just one small grain.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GUPTA: But if you had balance quinoa and Amaranth next to each other --

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Amaranth.

GUPTA: No question?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: No question.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WHITFIELD: Wow. Dr. Sanjay Gupta is with me right now. I'm all about the food, so I can't wait to hear about how this food really is a secret ingredient to a healthier life.

GUPTA: Yes. There are these so-called super foods, and that term probably gets used way too much. But in societies where they really have to focus on food because sometimes their health care systems aren't as robust as ours, Bolivia is one of the poorest countries in South America, they really study their food. And quinoa was so last decade according to the people down there. But Amaranth in terms of what the body needs to optimize it, not just prevent disease, that's a grain that they're really starting to consume a lot and recommend.

WHITFIELD: So this really is about being resourceful. It's a need to ingest the right things there, and you learn that as part of the lifestyle. This really isn't about the fancy new flavor, but it is because, as you mentioned, a more limited access to health care. You can't afford to be sick. GUPTA: We think about diagnosing disease, being able to treat a

disease, that's kind of the mindset in the United States. In most place, many places around the world, they don't have the luxury of that. So it is not even just about preventing disease, it is about optimizing. What is the right food for the right person at the right time? Can you get to that place? And that's how many places think about this.

WHITFIELD: So what is so fascinating, I can't wait to see this one, unlike the Japan one, I got a chance to see it ahead of time before it aired, but we're seeing in this journey, while in Japan, I guess medicating or almost treating your stress is really about your approach to life, finding outlets. Here, you're talking about being healthy by what you're ingesting, and this lifestyle choices that are really important.

GUPTA: No question. And for me, Bolivia was really about the heart. I worry about heart disease. I have a strong family history of heart disease. And we heard of this place deep in the Amazon Rain Forest where they basically had virtually no heart disease. I'm talking about indigenous tribes, Fred, that doesn't even have a health care system at all, and yet the biggest killer in the United States of men and women alike, we spend $1 billion a day on it, they're spending nothing, and they have virtually no heart disease.

WHITFIELD: Wow.

GUPTA: There's lessons to be learned out there, and that's another example.

WHITFIELD: Wow. So do you see, now, this is a grain, this Amaranth.

GUPTA: Amaranth, yes.

WHITFIELD: It looks like a quinoa and you're going to sprinkle or mix in with your food, or what are the things you can do with it?

GUPTA: can make all sorts of different dishes.

WHITFIELD: Or ingest it.

GUPTA: Yes, like quinoa, there are different things. I think one of the things that surprised me is because it has become so popular in Bolivia, they didn't want us to talk about. They're like, we like to keep it here in Bolivia, and as soon as you hear about it in the United States, we're going to have to start selling it.

WHITFIELD: Production. That's a problem.

GUPTA: Drink, foods, in all sorts of different things, it is just a part of their life. And oftentimes not just dinner, but beginning of the day, middle of the day, whenever. It is again, that optimization that they think, it tastes good, don't get me wrong, it tastes great. And you will see when you watch the show some of the things they do with it. But what drives is it is the optimization of the diet first, and palate comes after. WHITFIELD: Do you long for more of that Amaranth?

GUPTA: You can get it, you can actually get it.

WHITFIELD: You can get it in the States?

GUPTA: My wife and I have actually gone out and found it. And it is one of the wonderful things about this show is it is so actionable. I have been able to take things and directly incorporate it into my life. I saw it, saw it to be true, saw how it works, and now we can all benefit.

WHITFIELD: Feeling and looking more healthy.

GUPTA: I do definitely feel more healthy.

WHITFIELD: Excellent. I'm taking notes. I want to do what you're doing.

(LAUGHTER)

WHITFIELD: Dr. Sanjay Gupta, good to see you. Thanks so much.

GUPTA: Thank you.

WHITFIELD: And be sure to tune in, "Chasing Life" with Dr. Sanjay Gupta airs tonight, 9:00 p.m. eastern and pacific, only on CNN.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:58:24] WHITFIELD: He was a world class triathlete until he was hit by a truck and broke his neck. Dr. Sanjay Gupta has the story of his victorious road back in today's "Turning Points."

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

TIM DON, PROFESSIONAL TRIATHLETE: Ironman is exhausting. You're starting with a 2.4 mile swim, and then you're out for a 112 bike, and then a 26.2 mile run, a marathon.

SANJAY GUPTA, CNN CHIEF MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT: Tim Don is used to pushing his body to the limits. The tri-athlete competed in three Olympic Games and broke the world record for the Iron Man in 2017. But even record holders have setbacks. Tim's was particularly brutal.

DON: It was the Wednesday before the world championships in Kona. It was one of my last bike rides. I remember seeing the white truck, and the next thing I remember is about 25 minutes later I was in excruciating pain.

GUPTA: The truck hit him, breaking his neck.

DON: That's when my world got turned upside down.

GUPTA: In hopes of racing again, Tim chose one of the most uncomfortable forms of treatment, a halo. DON: The literally get four titanium screws and they tighten them

into your skull. Every day I had that halo there were times thinking I just can't go on.

GUPTA: But even with his halo in place, Tim began training in true Ironman form. Six months after breaking his neck, he completed the Boston marathon in less than three hours, and one year after his accident, Tim was competing at the Ironman World Championships in Kona.

DON: For me personally it was a victory. You just don't know what is going to happen, so to go back there and finish, definitely I've got my head held high.

GUPTA: Dr. Sanjay Gupta, CNN reporting.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

WHITFIELD: Inspiring champion. Thanks so much for being with me this Saturday. I'm Fredricka Whitfield. The news continues with Ana Cabrera right now.