Return to Transcripts main page

Anderson Cooper 360 Degrees

McCarthy: Members Are Not Going To Be Stripped Of Their Committee Assignments For Voting Against Me; Source: Idaho Suspect Seen Multiple Times Wearing Surgical Gloves Outside PA Home, Was Placing Garbage Bags In Neighbors Bins; Buffalo Bills Safety Damar Hamlin Awake, Neurologically Sound. Aired 9-10p ET

Aired January 05, 2023 - 21:00   ET




ANDERSON COOPER, CNN HOST: Another night, for the history books, with only one thing for sure. The 11th vote was not a charm, tonight, for Kevin McCarthy's bid, to become Speaker of the House.


CHERYL JOHNSON, CLERK OF THE UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES: No nominee having received the majority of the votes cast, a Speaker has not been elected.


COOPER: And with that the 11th rejection done with about three hours shy of the 11th hour, in the third day of his failure, to become a Speaker, the call went up to end the proceedings, until noon, tomorrow.


JOHNSON: The question is on the motion that the House stands adjourned, until noon, tomorrow. Those in favor say aye. Those opposed--


JOHNSON: Those opposed, no.



JOHNSON: In the -- in the opinion of the Chair, the noes have it.


JOHNSON: The yeas and nays are requested. Those favoring a vote by the yeas and nays will rise.


JOHNSON: A sufficient number having risen, the yeas and nays are ordered. Members will record their votes by electronic device.


COOPER: When the counting was done, the motion to adjourn prevailed. The day ended without Congressman McCarthy having won over a single holdout, despite more arm-twisting, well into the evening.

CNN's Manu Raju, spoke with him, a short time ago. He joins us, again.


MANU RAJU, CNN CHIEF CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes, he -- Kevin McCarthy still believes that there is a path to the Speakership. Despite losing 11 times, despite seeing the first multiple-ballot Speaker election, occur, in a century, and seeing this many of the ballots, since the middle 1800s, he still believes he will get there.

Because, behind-the-scenes, there have been intense negotiations, over the last day, of negotiations, with some of those members, who have so far blocked his ascension, to the Speakership proposals, to give them more power, more leverage, more sway, over the Speakership, including one proposal to allow one individual member, to vote, to call for a sitting Speaker's ouster, something that he had previously considered a red line, something he conceded on, something that some of his own fellow Republicans are concerned, could weaken the Speakership, assuming he gets there.

Now, immediately after the 11th failed vote, he came out. I had a chance to speak with him, along with some other reporters. And we asked him about all these issues. He defended the concessions he's made. He said he will not become a weaker Speaker.

And when we asked him about whether this will be done, by tomorrow, he indicated it probably wouldn't.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Perhaps, let's say, tomorrow night?

REP. KEVIN MCCARTHY (R-CA): No, no, I'm not putting any timeline on it. I just think we've got some progress going on. We've got members talking. I think we've got a little movement. So, we'll see.

RAJU: Have you had to walk back the threats that you'll strip committee assignments from these members?

MCCARTHY: We're not -- we're not stripping. I didn't make those threats.

RAJU: Was that a mistake, to make that threat?

MCCARTHY: I didn't make that threat.

RAJU: Mike Rogers did.

MCCARTHY: Yes. Well, you're saying I made the threat. So, let's be very clear. I did not make the threat. And no, members are not going to lose their committee assignments.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You then sure going to Conference, sir?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: How long do you think this is going to drag out for, at this point?

MCCARTHY: I'd love to know. But we're working through, and we made good progress today. So, we'll continue to talk.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Did your remaining (ph) members vote for you?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Why at this stage would it take this long, in negotiations?


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I mean we're three days into this. This is the longest since the 1850s.

MCCARTHY: Well, I have the longest speech on the floor. So apparently, I like to make history.

RAJU: Are you concerned? I mean, you're giving -- you're giving one member, the power to oust you, if you're a Speaker.

MCCARTHY: That's the way--

RAJU: Aren't you going to--

MCCARTHY: That's the way it's always been, except for the last year. I think I'm very fine with that.

RAJU: You think you're fine--

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: But doesn't this undercut your potential power of the Speaker?

MCCARTHY: Hasn't cut -- hasn't undercut the power of all the other Speakers?

RAJU: But it was used over John Boehner?

MCCARTHY: So, why would it -- so why would it cut my--

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: But we haven't been in this position since 1859.

MCCARTHY: I'm not -- I'm not--

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I mean, doesn't that inherently mean that you would be a weaker Speaker?

MCCARTHY: No. No. You'd only be-- UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Explain.

MCCARTHY: You'd only be a weaker Speaker, if I was afraid of it. I'm not a weak -- I'm not a weaker Speaker.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Are you concerned that there might be more than four, who will just never vote for you, among the Republicans?

MCCARTHY: No, I think we'd get there.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Do you plan to go into Conference?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Are you worried about losing votes from moderates, if you give too much away?

MCCARTHY: Everybody's involved in it. You've got to get there, completely. I mean, look?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Mr. McCarthy, do you--

MCCARTHY: Can I finish his answer, first, his question? Thank you.

Look, this is a new thought we're going to have to have. We have a five-seat majority. So, it's not one side is going to get more than other. It's the entire Conference is going to have to learn how to work together.


So, it's better that we go through this process, right now, so we can achieve the things, we want to achieve, for the American public, what our commitment was. So, if this time takes a little longer, and it doesn't meet your deadline, that's OK, because it's not -- it's not how you start. It's how you finish. And if we finish well, we'll be very successful.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Do you plan to go into Conference, Mr. McCarthy?

RAJU: You've been doing this for two months, though. Why did -- why didn't -- weren't these sorted out before January 3rd?

MCCARTHY: Oh, we tried to sort it out. Thank you.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Mr. McCarthy, do you plan to go to Conference?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Thank you for stopping.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Mr. McCarthy, do you plan to go to Conference?


RAJU: One of the reasons why this is going to take a little bit longer, as he said, is that even if there is a deal that has reached, and it appears, there's one that has to be reached, with a handful of those holdouts? That does not get him the magic number of 218 votes.

Perhaps, it can bring along maybe 10 Republican members, but certainly not all of them, which is why behind-the-scenes, there is going to be a furious effort, to get those other remaining holdouts, to resolve their concerns. And that could take some time as well.

And the other complicating factor is several members, of the House Republican Conference, have left town, or plan to leave town, tomorrow, because of various family issues, and the like. And they won't have the number of votes they need, to elect Kevin McCarthy, Speaker, on Friday. So, it appears very likely, this drags into the weekend, into next week, and we'll see, maybe even longer.


COOPER: Manu Raju, appreciate it. Thanks.

Now, back with our panel.

I mean, first of all, just if they don't have enough people, tomorrow, will they just try to adjourn it, first thing, when they get together, tomorrow?


What they -- what they as -- I don't think they're going to jeopardize anything. He's been getting 200 votes. I don't think if he gets 196--


AXELROD: --so long as -- so long as--

COOPER: Right.

AXELROD: --the number doesn't drift in a way that Hakeem Jeffries could win. I think they want the time to continue to negotiate.

Although, I think, what you'll find, it's a very awkward day, to be going through this battle, two years to the day, after the Insurrection, at the Capitol. And I would imagine that the nominating speeches, for Hakeem Jeffries, are going to very much focus--


AXELROD: --on that anniversary.

COOPER: Karen, would Democrats have a motivation, to intervene, to help get McCarthy, over the finish line, at some point?

KAREN FINNEY, FORMER SENIOR SPOKESPERSON, CLINTON 2016 PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Absolutely not, certainly not, tomorrow. Let's just be honest, certainly not, tomorrow.

Because again, think, to David's point, think about what that contrast is going to look like. You're going to have, on one side of the screen, President Biden, the Vice President, a very somber day, and remembrances. And then, you'll have these speeches, the nominating speeches, for Hakeem, I agree with David.

But then you've got these holdouts. Is it five? Is it six? Is it seven? Is it eight? We saw, earlier today, Biggs doing fundraising emails, right, who -- some of whom, if chaos is their brand, they see, tomorrow, actually, as an opportunity, to continue to say, "We are the ones, who are stopping Kevin McCarthy. We are the ones, who are standing up for," whatever it is they think they're standing up for.

And again, I just think we need to take a step back here. I mean, the other thing, where the reason why I don't think Democrats can be in a position, yet, to help Kevin McCarthy is, I think we have to acknowledge, this is a complete failure, of Kevin McCarthy's leadership abilities.

The fact that we are -- I mean, you heard him saying, to Manu, "We did negotiate. We have been negotiating." And here we are, three days later. And the numbers really haven't shifted--


FINNEY: --very much.

DAVID URBAN, FORMER TRUMP CAMPAIGN ADVISER, REPUBLICAN STRATEGIST, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: That assumes you have people, on the other side that want to negotiate, right? So, we started this--

FINNEY: Exactly.

URBAN: --we started this a long time ago, right?

FINNEY: That's right.

URBAN: Assuming you have a rational actor, sitting across the table, from you, saying, "Here's what I offer. What would you like to offer in return?"

FINNEY: That's right.

URBAN: Right? When you say, "Here's what I'd like to offer," and somebody says, "Screw you," across the table, you can't really negotiate, right? So, and I think that's where we are, at some point.

And we don't know, to your point, Karen, until we actually know the definitive number of people, right, if it's four, five, six, seven, eight?


URBAN: It's a lot of speculation going on.

When would Kevin McCarthy walk away? Like, we don't know what that number is. If we know that number is eight of people -- nine people that are never going away, he may end up going away a lot sooner. If there are four or five people, Kevin McCarthy is never going to go. I think he's going to grind them down.

AXELROD: You know what's striking, when he said, "Well, we have only a five-vote majority, and that makes it difficult," and so on? Well, Nancy Pelosi had a five-vote majority, as well. And there were people, who ran, pledging not to support her, for Speaker.

And as she has, over the last two decades, she managed to put the puzzle together. And nobody remembers the Speaker's vote, from January 3rd of 2021.

COOPER: And how did she put that puzzle together?

AXELROD: Person by -- person to person asking, what people needed? What assurances they needed. She also, she suggested to a couple of people, they vote present. It reduced the threshold she needed. She won with 216 votes. The point is she was a very deft leader.

And this is a leadership test for McCarthy. And frankly, he's not doing very well. Last thing on this, though, we've been beating him up all day, because it has been a failure, on his part, and he didn't look particularly confident, there.


But when Jamie Gangel said, "Well, why do people stick with this one man?" and when Adams (ph) said that, the answer is, he's done a lot for a lot of these members. He's raised a lot of money, for them.

URBAN: Yes, right.

AXELROD: He recruited a lot of them. His PAC spent $350 million, his super PAC, in these campaigns. Those -- that's the kind of currency -- that currency binds you. And so, they may not respect him, in some ways. But they feel some loyalty to him. I think they like him, many of them like him. So, that's why they're not just they're not rushing to the doors, here.

SCOTT JENNINGS, FORMER SPECIAL ASSISTANT TO PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Just texting with a member, who has been communicating with McCarthy, since he came out of that meeting, with the 20.

I guess they're producing a document, tonight. They're quite confident that a large chunk of that 20 is going to come home. But there's not really a plan, for these intransigents, for these people, who say they're never-evers.

The hope would be that if a Scott Perry, and a Chip Roy, comes out, swinging it, and says "We got everything we could have ever possibly wanted," that it really puts that holdout group on an island.

Now, the trouble is, they're already on the Island of Misfit Toys! I'm not sure, what putting them on a different island is going to mean to them. But that's where we are, is there's a plan, for some of the holdouts. But there is no plan for the five to eight.

URBAN: Yes. But again, you need to know the specific number.


URBAN: You got to count noes, of this, and know how many there are, and then you develop a plan, based on that, right? The plan for five is different than the plan for eight, right, so.


AXELROD: I think he must be seeing his life flash, before his eyes, because this is exactly what happened in 2015.


AXELROD: The same -- a group of people, in the Freedom Caucus, denied him, the Speakership that everybody thought that he would get. And he spent all these years, catering to them, and appealing to them. And now, he's in the same position.

COOPER: Yes. Everyone, stand by. Next, a live report, from the White House, and what the President makes of all this.

And later, the, frankly, stunning details, from authorities, on the evidence, that, led to the arrest of the alleged killer, of four University of Idaho students.


COOPER: Some late reporting, just in, a source familiar, with the matter, telling CNN that House Republicans are scheduled to hold a conference call, tomorrow.

The source telling us that Kevin McCarthy and his allies have wanted to avoid another in-person conference-wide meeting, after yesterday's meeting led to private tension, spilling out, into public view. The thought (ph) now being a call could potentially minimize that.

So with that, and the House adjourned, until noon, tomorrow, want to check in quickly, on the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue.

CNN's Phil Mattingly is at the White House, for us, tonight.

So, what is the view, from the White House, from President Biden?


PHIL MATTINGLY, CNN CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Yes. The White House officials, Anderson, have made very clear they don't want to engage, on this issue. As the President has said, several times, "This is a Republican issue. This is not my problem, at this point in time."

And, to some degree, the public actions that we've seen, from the President, have very much tracked with that.

Holding his normal schedule, trying to really demonstrate an almost unintentional contrast, on some level, that the White House is working on the implementation, of the major laws, they passed, in their first two years. Talking about policy issues, laying out in detail, kind of a roadmap, for what the President is going to be doing, in the months ahead, as House Republicans can't seem to get their act together, on the first issue that they need to deal with.

But behind-the-scenes, officials make clear, they are watching this very closely. It's on every single television, inside the White House, throughout the course of the day. And, to some degree, you've seen the President go through an evolution of emotions, as he's watched this play out.

I think there's certainly been a level of confusion, definitely a level of frustration very much so, a level of concern, particularly in how foreign countries, or others, may be viewing the United States, and the ability of the U.S., to actually govern itself, given what we've seen on the House floor.

But today, there was also a sense of just general befuddlement, I think, when he was asked by our colleague Jeremy Diamond, how he was watching things, play out.

Take a listen.


JEREMY DIAMOND (ph), CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Are you still watching the Speaker's race?

JOE BIDEN, PRESIDENT, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: I'm monitoring -- I'm -- I'm following with great -- how can I say it?


BIDEN: Attention.



MATTINGLY: The smile and the laugh, saying a lot there, particularly because officials, Anderson, have made clear, the President is not amused by this. He does not find it funny or see any level in schadenfreude on what's been happening, right now.

But there's no doubt, when you talk to officials, given how this continues to drag on, with no clear end game in sight, at least at this moment, to actually get this over the finish line? On some level, all you can really do is laugh.

COOPER: Is the Administration saying anything about potential national security impacts, or economic impacts, the longer this goes on?

MATTINGLY: Yes, it's been an interesting dynamic, over the course of the last several days, as we look at the repercussions, of what not having a Speaker, in place, actually means. National security is one of those issues that's been affected. Now, White House officials have said that they've tried to kind of unofficially continue to brief members of Congress, to ensure that the critical members, on the critical committees, are aware, of what's going on.

But there's a reality here. Until members are sworn in, they do not have access to the secure facilities, they need to read classified documents, to receive classified briefings, at the highest level.

Some meetings, with top Military officials, and Intelligence officials, with House Republicans have been canceled, up to this point. And some House Republicans have made very clear, their frustrations, about that very issue.

It's one issue, when you hear -- when you talk to White House officials, they say, "Look, it's not a huge problem, right now. But if it compounds over the time, it certainly could be." More than anything else, they just want this to end, to some degree, Anderson.

COOPER: Yes. Phil Mattingly, thanks.

Back now, with the panel.

I mean, it's interesting to hear, from President Biden, David. He's obviously an institutionalist.


COOPER: He served in Congress for many years.


COOPER: Does he benefit from this? I mean, does the White House benefit from this--

AXELROD: Well -- well, look?

COOPER: --from just a political standpoint?

AXELROD: I think that -- I think that Biden was elected, in certain ways, as an antidote, to the chaos, of the Bush years, because he is an institutionalist, and he's seen as a calming influence.

COOPER: Right.

AXELROD: I think Democrats did better than expected, in the midterm elections, for the same reason. There was a contrast between Trump and some of the extreme election-denier candidates, and Biden, as a calmer influence.

And so, the contrast here, Phil said, they didn't intend to set -- they may not have intended to set up a contrast. If they didn't, they should claim they did. Because, it was pretty deft, to be out there, yesterday, in Kentucky, with Mitch McConnell, and Governor DeWine, dedicating a bridge. It's pretty deft, and appropriate, as well, to be out, tomorrow,

commemorating January 6th, and because it obviously was a hugely important date.

But the contrast is going to be clear, and particularly, because some of the players, in this drama, in the House, were the very people, who were involved in, in some way, in the activities, surrounding the Insurrection.

So, I think that he does benefit from it. But I think he's wise not to chortle about it, not to claim credit -- not to celebrate it. I would say this, of all Democrats. Because, at the end of the day, I don't think the American people are viewing this, as amusing. I think they're viewing it as pathetic.


AXELROD: And they don't want people looking like they're seizing political advantage from it. I think setting up a contrast is the right way to go.

COOPER: So, tomorrow, if there's a conference call, in the morning? You said there might be a paper being circulated, tonight.


COOPER: What's the?


JENNINGS: Well, I mean, the hope would be that overnight, you reel in as many of this 20 that you can get, and then when they gavel in tomorrow, at noon, there's a vote pretty soon after that, that really shows you how much progress is made. And then--

COOPER: So, some of the 20 peel off?


And then, to David's point, then you start to get a real sense of "OK, who are the truly intransigent?" Is that four, five or eight? How many truly are never going to be persuaded? And then, you can start to make a plan from there.

So now, how many votes will that take tomorrow? Will this document and this conference call, and these overnight conversations, be persuasive? How many more hours, or how many more ballots will they have to go through, to get to that point?

But, at some point, you have to get clear on the algebra. "How many do I have? How many affirming? And how many are against, me?" And that's what we don't truly know--


JENNINGS: --inside that 20 with this deal that's apparently been cut. URBAN: And you're not going to get there, because you have four or five folks, not there tomorrow, right?

FINNEY: Right. That's right.

URBAN: Because of absence, and so.

AXELROD: But they will be able to see if there are new--

URBAN: Yes, no -- no, no correct.

AXELROD: --if there are new coverts.

URBAN: Absolutely. But you're not--


URBAN: Don't expect to see Speaker--


AXELROD: Oh, no, yes.

URBAN: --McCarthy, tomorrow, right?


URBAN: At any point.


FINNEY: But, guys, hey, think of it this way, though, with, for Kevin McCarthy, he's going to go through all of this.

What's to say that Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday of next week, let's say, he becomes the Speaker, tomorrow, let's pretend that could happen? That we're not back here all over again, because, the one person, who decides to say, "He's out, we don't let -- he broke his, the deal that we agreed to," and we're not right back here. I mean, that's -- it feels like things are so fragile.

And David, you keep talking about grinding it out. But the thing about negotiating with people, right, is the more you're grinding it out? Sure, you could be building trust. But you're also eroding trust. You're also deepening the grooves of those hardened feelings, of the resentment that people already -- some already seem to have, about McCarthy.

And so, I mean, I just think it's important that we remember, while we're in the details, and the devil in these details matter, in the big picture, where we end up, it's going to matter greatly, for this country, in terms of our ability to move forward.

URBAN: I don't think he's building trust.

AXELROD: Right. URBAN: I don't think McCarthy's building trust here.


URBAN: I think it's a matter of -- when I -- grinding it out? It's grinding it down, right? So who's going to win? It's a battle of wills, at this point, right? And who's going to blink? Who's going to bend? We know--


URBAN: We know some people aren't going to bend, right?

JENNINGS: And I think he's -- I think he's building -- if it's true, he's convinced, Chip Roy, and his faction, to come over? He obviously did build some trust with them. And now, I mean, some of it maybe transactional.

URBAN: I think it's more transactional, right?


JENNINGS: But you have to trust that--


AXELROD: "I want this. You give me that." There's a lot of blandishments involved.

JENNINGS: But you have to trust that you're a man of your word. I mean, you have to trust that the person you're doing a deal with will actually do it.

URBAN: Well -- well they reduced it to writing. I'm not so sure, how much trust there's a -- it's not a handshake.


URBAN: It's the Magna Carta.

COOPER: I know you all want to stay here much longer. But I have to wrap it up.

URBAN: Please! Please! Please!

COOPER: David Urban, David Axelrod?

AXELROD: We're already here till noon!

COOPER: Karen Finney, Scott Jennings?

AXELROD: We want to watch the gap (ph).

URBAN: We heard -- we heard that the New Year's Eve getting--


COOPER: Thanks so much. Coming up -- we've got some pickle juice for you!

Want to touch on some of the other major news of the day, including the first appearance, in an Idaho courtroom, by the suspect, charged, in the murders of four University of Idaho students. Also, newly released evidence, authorities say, connects him to the killings.



COOPER: We got more breaking news, tonight.

A law enforcement source, tells CNN that the lone suspect, in the murders of four Idaho college students, was seen, cleaning his car, quote, "Inside and outside, not missing an inch," end quote.

This was outside Bryan Kohberger's parents' house, in Pennsylvania, after the murders. He was seen wearing surgical gloves, at the time, and also seen with garbage bags, and placed it, in the neighbors bins. And we'll have more on that in a moment.

Today, Kohberger appeared in an Idaho courtroom, for the first time. He did not enter a plea. However, authorities released an affidavit that details the evidence that led to his arrest, on four counts of first degree murder.

CNN's Gary Tuchman has been following this, now, for a long time. He has more.


GARY TUCHMAN, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Bryan Kohberger, in a Moscow, Idaho courtroom, only a five-minute drive away from the crime scene.

JUDGE MEGAN MARSHALL, LATAH COUNTY, IDAHO MAGISTRATE: The maximum penalty, for this offence, if you were to plead guilty, or be found guilty, is death, or imprisonment for life. Do you understand?


TUCHMAN (voice-over): Charged with four counts of murder, the accused killer with zero visible emotion on his face.

Just before his initial court appearance began, the unsealing of the probable cause affidavit, with disturbing and potentially damning information.

JAMES FRY, MOSCOW, IDAHO POLICE CHIEF: There was other people home, at that time.

TUCHMAN (voice-over): We've known two of the roommates were in the house, on the morning of the murders. But, it was a mystery if either of them heard or saw anything.

Now, we know. A roommate with the initials D.M., told investigators, she was in her room, and heard crying.

The affidavit, prepared by a Moscow, Idaho Police Corporal, has this disturbing detail.

"She opened the door for the third time after she heard the crying" and "a figure clad in black clothing and a mask that covered the person's mouth and nose walking towards her. D.M. described the figure as 5'10" or taller, male, not very muscular, but athletically built with bushy eyebrows.

The male walked past D.M., as she stood in a "frozen shock phase." The male walked towards the back sliding glass door. D.M. locked herself in her room after seeing the male. D.M. did not state that she recognized the male."

The affidavit says that earlier when D.M. heard crying from one of the victim's rooms, "She heard a male voice say something to the effect of "It's OK, I'm going to help you."

It's not clear if the intruder ever saw D.M.

D.M.'s description helped provide valuable information, when Police found a Hyundai Elantra, in an apartment building, 15 minutes, across the state line, in Pullman, Washington.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes, there was a mass shooting, you know?

TUCHMAN (voice-over): And learned the owner matched that description.

And the affidavit has this chilling set of details. The Police officer saying, as he entered one of the bedrooms, "I could see two females in the single bed in the room." Both Kaylee Goncalves and Madison Mogen "were deceased with visible stab wounds. I also later noticed what appeared to be a tan leather knife sheath laying on the bed next to" Madison Mogen's "right side.

The sheath was later processed and had 'Ka-Bar,'" which is a company that makes Military and tactical knives, "'USMC' and the United States Marine Corps eagle globe and anchor insignia stamped on the outside of it. The Idaho State lab later located a single source of male DNA left on the button snap of the knife sheath."


And according to the affidavit, last week, "Pennsylvania Agents recovered the trash from the Kohberger family residence located in Albrightsville, Pennsylvania."

DNA from Kohberger's father was retrieved. Police say the father's DNA proved that what they found in the murder house is the son's DNA.

Police have determined the murders were carried out between 4:00 AM and 4:25 AM. "A review of footage from multiple videos obtained from the King Road Neighborhood showed multiple sightings of Suspect Vehicle 1 starting at 3:29 AM and ending at 4:20 AM. Upon review of the video there are only a few cars that enter and exit this area during timeframe."

All details on the affidavit are specific. It's still not clear if Police know of a motivation for the killings, or if the accused murderer knew any of the victims. But based on the affidavit, it appears the accused murderer targeted this house.

Between June, and the date of the murder, in November, the Police officer says Kohberger's cell phone signal was received 12 times, near the house of the victims, over a period of five months, before the stabbings. "All of these occasions, except for one, occurred in the late evening and early morning hours of their respective days."

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: We are adjourned.

TUCHMAN (voice-over): These details only add to the pain of the victims' family members, some of whom were in court, for this hearing.

SHANNON GRAY, GONCALVES FAMILY ATTORNEY: It's obviously an emotional time, for the family, seeing the defendant, for the first time. This is the beginning of the criminal justice system. And the family will be here, for the long haul.


COOPER: And Gary Tuchman joins us now, live, from Idaho.

I mean, Gary, the details, in that affidavit are really stunning. I mean, it seems like he, I don't know if stalking is the right word, but he was certainly casing that property, for a long time, late at night, and the early morning hours, over the course of several months.

Did anything else stand out to you in the affidavit?

TUCHMAN: Yes, there is a detail, Anderson that stands out to me. And that's this.

According to the affidavit, Police say, Kohberger's cell phone signal was again detected, five hours, after the stabbings, in the same neighborhood, where the house is.


TUCHMAN: Basically, the inference is that the alleged killer went back to the house, after the sun came up.


TUCHMAN: Anderson?

COOPER: That's -- that's something!

Gary Tuchman, appreciate it.

I'm joined now, by Mary Ellen O'Toole, a retired FBI Special Agent, and legendary profiler.

Also, John Miller, CNN's Chief Law Enforcement & Intelligence Analyst.

John, some of your reporting, we want to start with that. We mentioned in the intro, to Gary's report, about what the suspect was allegedly doing, in his family's home in Pennsylvania. It involves garbage bags. What have you learned on that?

JOHN MILLER, CNN CHIEF LAW ENFORCEMENT & INTELLIGENCE ANALYST: So, just to give that some context, Anderson, you've got the Pennsylvania State Police, and FBI surveillance team, in a rural area, where it's very hard to do surveillance, because strange cars would stand out.

So, they're watching the house, from a distance. And what I'm told by the law enforcement sources, that Kohberger comes out a number of times.

He cleans the car, extensively, almost as if you were going to clean it, to sell it as a new car, inside, outside, every inch of it. And during much of these trips, in and outside of the house, the source says, he's wearing surgical gloves. This is what they're observing in the surveillance.

The other thing is there's a period, where he comes out at 4 o'clock, in the morning, with two bags of garbage, walks by their own garbage, and puts it in the neighbors bins. So, when they did the trash cover, to recover his garbage, they took that as well.

And, of course, that is the search that led to the recovery of DNA, which then matched to the sheath, and the knife, according to the affidavit.

COOPER: And it's that familial DNA, they found, the father's DNA, so they could tell it was the son, which, as you and I have talked about is, can be controversial.

MILLER: It can be. And there's only 12 States that allow that as that kind of evidence. But that was to reach probable cause.

The first thing they did, when that SWAT team, went through the door, and took him into custody, was they had another search warrant, which allowed them to take hair, and swabs, and collect his DNA, from his person, which is now, in the process, of being matched, in that lab. So, they're going to get from a highly probable statistical answer, to one that's going to be fairly certain.

COOPER: Also, John, we've been waiting for more than seven weeks, for the details that we learned today. What do you make of the evidence, the timeline of the investigation?

MILLER: So, that's really interesting, Anderson, because people have been talking about why did this take so long, when actually, if you look at the timeline, you can actually see a process. Let's walk through it for a second.

November 13th is when you have the murders, and that is the starting point for Police.

10 days later, they get the DNA confirmation.

November 25th, they've now looked at the video, and they know they're looking for a white Hyundai. Kohberger's car is located at Washington State University, and he becomes a part of the focus, because of the car.

Once they have the cell phone profile on him that shows he's been in the neighborhood, and that's December 7th, he becomes of high interest.

By December 23rd, they see that Kohberger's cell phone has been hitting near the crime scene.

And December 28th, they get that DNA match.

December 29th, they make the arrest.


So, what you see is while Police weren't telling us a lot, and they were asking, for the public's help, and they were going out to the media, every couple of days, with an update? There was a lot going on, behind-the-scenes, between the Moscow Police, a small department that doesn't have a lot of experience, in homicide, the Idaho State Police Homicide team, and the FBI, which brought kind of unique resources, in terms of cell phone tracking, video analysis, profilers, and so on. A lot of work went into this.

COOPER: Mary Ellen, based on what we learned, in the affidavit, what stands out to you?


And the first thing is that we've all been commenting on the fact that here's a PhD, studying in criminology, and he left behind a very significant piece of evidence, from which they were able to extract DNA.

Then, you have the information from cameras. And then you have the information from the cell towers that pinged on his phone.

These were mistakes that are not consistent with somebody that is smarter than everybody else, and knows more than anybody else.

So, I think, it puts into perspective for me that just because you're studying for a PhD in criminology does not allow you to commit the perfect crime. The forensic and the behavioral evidence was there, and they discovered it.

COOPER: The returning, what seems to be -- I don't know, if it was returning to the scene, or staying in the area, the cell phone pinging, that Gary Tuchman talked about, several hours after the murders were committed? What do you make of that?

ELLEN O'TOOLE: Well, looking at that, in connection with some of the other things that have surfaced, on this case, originally, you could look at it, and say, well it's naivete, it's lack of experience. And it could be some of that.

But I also think it's a sense of arrogance. And I also think it could be a sense of "I'm smarter than the Police are, and they're never going to be able to tie me to the case." And that will remain to be seen, based on his behavior, in the courtroom.

But I do think there -- that arrogance is really bleeding through, in a variety of the photographs that we've seen, and in the videos that we've seen on him. So again, it depends -- it really is going to come down to his behavior in the courtroom.

COOPER: Yes. Mary Ellen O'Toole, John Miller, I appreciate it. Thank you.

Coming up, more on this case, a former federal prosecutor, and criminal defense attorney, examine the evidence against the suspect, in these four murders, and discuss how solid the case may be for prosecutors.



COOPER: Want to look more, at the evidence our Gary Tuchman reported on, earlier, that led to the arrest, of Bryan Kohberger, on four counts of murder -- of first degree murder, in the killings of those four University of Idaho students.

The affidavit, which was just released today, describes DNA found on a knife sheath, at the crime scene, a surviving roommate, who saw a man dressed in black clothing and a mask, and the suspect's phone used near the student's home, at least a dozen times, since June, or pinging, I should say.

I'm joined now by criminal defense attorney, and CNN Legal Analyst, Joey Jackson; and CNN Senior Legal Analyst, Elie Honig, a former Assistant U.S. Attorney.

So, Elie, I mean, there's certainly a lot of evidence, pointing to the suspect. They have this familial DNA, tied to the crime scene, phone records, indicating he traveled to the area, the night of the murders, a vehicle matching the make and the model that the suspect drives, seen near the crime scene.

What do you make of this, as a case, for the prosecution?

ELIE HONIG, FORMER ASSISTANT U.S. ATTORNEY, SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NY, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: Well, Anderson, there is more than enough evidence, to justify this arrest. And I believe there's enough evidence to convict here. This is a really powerful document. The star witness here is the DNA.

The cops have already been able to establish by a 99.9998 percent that the DNA they found, at the crime scene, on that knife sheath, is this suspect's DNA. They did that connection through the DNA of the father, which they recovered in the trash.

And, as John Miller said, they now have the suspect's DNA, and they'll test that. And if that's a hit, and it's at least 99.9998 percent, likely, then they'll have essentially a 100 percent match.

On top of that there's all the other corroborating information, relating to the car, the cell phone, the bizarre movements, of this person, throwing out his trash, in someone else's cans, at 4, in the morning? I think it's a strong case. I'd be confident as a prosecutor.

COOPER: Joey, what about you? I mean, for the defense, what do you make of the charges, the suspect is facing, and potential defense is?

JOEY JACKSON, CNN LEGAL ANALYST, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Yes, there's a lot to overcome. There's no question about it.

In addition to what Elie rightly pointed out, there's other two pieces of evidence, I think, that'll be used.

The first is the affidavit speaks to the issue of a shoe print that is in the direction of his movement, that apparently a person, an occupant of the premises saw him, right, in the mask, et cetera, the bushy eyebrows, in addition. So, they're going to test that shoe print.

In addition to that, apparently he reregistered his car or switched the registration, from Pennsylvania to Washington, only days after. So, what is that about? Is that consciousness of guilt?

And then, you have, from a defense perspective, there's going to be an attack on the DNA. How did the DNA get there? When did it get there? Was it contaminated in any way? Could it be that what is not his DNA? Defense will certainly be looking to that.

There'll be experts with respect to the cell tower and whether or not the pings are appropriate, or whether or not they can be scientifically proven, not to be his.

So, there's no question, to Elie's point, this is a very powerful case. And I think the defense has their work cut out for them, in terms of really whittling away the compelling and damning evidence that exists, tonight.

COOPER: And Elie, just so I'm clear, I mean, this information that we're talking about, this comes from the unsealed probable cause affidavit. That's not, and correct me if I'm wrong, that's not all of the evidence that investigators potentially could have collected so far, right?

HONIG: You're absolutely right, Anderson, in two respects. First of all, you want to put enough, in the affidavit, so you can

establish the probable cause that you need for an arrest. Sometimes, as a prosecutor, or Police officer, you hold back certain pieces of evidence. You may not want to reveal them now.


The other thing is we used to say, "Your investigation continues until that jury comes back with a verdict."

So, I assure you, they have much more work that they will be doing, to further build out this case.

COOPER: Also, Joey, because there's still a lot we don't know, namely the suspect's relationship, or imagined relationship, or one, attempted relationship, to any of the victims, or motive? There could be other missing pieces that fall into place, at the preliminary hearing, next week, or in the course of the ongoing investigation?

JACKSON: Yes, very true. If there is a hearing, whether it's waived, and, we do not yet know. But make no mistake about it, and without question, he will be even surveilled, now. Anything that he says potentially in prison, we know that's recorded.

Will there be information that's gleaned from that for investigators as they continue to move forward? Are there -- is there other information that'll come out? Why was he surveilling them, apparently, and why was his car noted around the locations, where they were, for the timeframe in which it was? And so, we don't know everything?

But I can tell you that certainly, an affidavit is a bare bones document. And what I mean by that is you simply need to establish probable cause. I think the affidavit -- what does that mean, right, probable cause? Reason to believe that a crime was committed and he committed it. And so, it clearly does that.

And to your question, Anderson, which was a very good one, the reality is, is that there is much, much more -- just like the Police were not forthcoming, with the public, for good reason? You want to protect the integrity of the investigation. I'm sure there's a bevy of other information that I think may connect him to this case, establishes guilt, and again, cut out a lot of work, for the defense, to do, in demonstrating that he is not guilty.

COOPER: And Elie, is finding a motive essential for prosecutors? I mean, obviously they like to have a story to go with evidence.

HONIG: Right. So, there's an important difference between intent and motive. You do have to prove intent, which just means the person intended to kill, essentially. You do not have to prove motive.

You'd like to show the why, the motive, but you don't have to. Sometimes, you can't. Sometimes, the motive is inexplicable, bizarre. They do hint a bit at the motive here. They talk about how they actually use the phrase, "Stalking," in the affidavit. So, you do not have to show motive. It's good if you can. But it's not required. COOPER: All right, Elie Honig, Joey Jackson, appreciate it. Thank you.

Still to come, some great news, we want to share, regarding the health of Buffalo Bills' Safety, Damar Hamlin, who as you know, collapsed, and suffered cardiac arrest, after he took a hit, Monday, in playing football.

Dr. Sanjay Gupta joins us next with the details.



COOPER: Few moments ago, we learned the NFL has officially canceled the game, between the Buffalo Bills and Cincinnati Bengals.

The decision to not resume the game comes just three days after a severe hit, as you know, to Bills' Safety, Damar Hamlin, caused him to collapse on the field, during the team's Monday Night Football matchup, and suffer cardiac arrest. The League is also planning to recognize Hamlin, prior to each NFL game, this weekend.

The biggest news today, though, is doctors say Hamlin is neurologically sound, and moving his hand and feet.

They also say he had one question, on his mind, when he woke up.


DR. TIMOTHY PRITTS, UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI MEDICAL CENTER: Last night, he was able to emerge and follow commands, and even asked who had won the game.

When he was communicating with us last night, and then, again today, that's been in writing.

And, you know, to paraphrase, one of our partners, you know, when he asked, "Did we win," the answer is "Yes, Damar, you've won. You've won the game of life."


COOPER: I'm joined now by CNN Chief Medical Correspondent, Dr. Sanjay Gupta.

I mean, that is certainly a true statement.

How promising is it to you, Sanjay, that he was able to follow commands, and ask, I mean, talk about the game, even while being partially sedated, and on a ventilator?


I mean, two and a half days, since the injury? That's when they gave this press conference. And that's pretty good recovery, especially given that a day earlier, a day and a half earlier, he was having severe respiratory distress, needing to be put on his chest, and his abdomen, sedated, even in a state of a hypothermia, meaning cooling his body down, to try and basically slow down its metabolic demand.

So, there was a lot going on with him, to be able to, the next day, be so communicative, to be, and have the wherewithal, not have -- not be amnestic, have amnesia to the event, to know that it was a football game, and even ask in writing, "Did we win?"

He still got a breathing tube in, so he can't talk. But that's -- it's a really good sign. I mean, you worry that if someone has not gone with oxygenated blood, for some time, what will be the impact on the brain and the spinal cord? And so far, it looks like there is no impact, no negative impact, which is good news.

COOPER: Yes, our colleague, Dr. Tara Narula, spoke to one of Hamlin's doctors, who said that he showed signs of acute respiratory distress syndrome.

What does that tell you?

GUPTA: Well, so acute respiratory distress, if you sort of think about the lungs, like two sponges, when you start to get fluid, into the sponges, what happens? The sponges become boggy, and it's harder to transfer oxygen, into those sponges. That's essentially what acute respiratory distress is.

And based on that visual, I just sort of gave you, you can understand why a breathing machine even is hard. It's hard to push air, into these boggy lungs. That's a -- it's a challenging thing, in the ICU, to care for. And I should point out he is still considered critically ill. But that's essentially what ARDS or Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome is.

Looks like, he's improved from that as well, given that he's now back on his back side, and able to communicate, as we were just describing.

COOPER: Do doctors know yet if he's suffered a concussion?

GUPTA: I don't think the doctors will know that yet. They say that they don't know, in part because that's really more of a clinical diagnosis, something that you would do, when the breathing tube is out, and you can really do that assessment.

What they did say is that scans of his brain, and spinal cord, did not show any evidence of injury. You don't see that with concussion. Concussion by definition has a normal scan. But they'll have to evaluate that probably after he's recovered more, from this acute injury.

COOPER: And, I mean, is it known yet exactly what caused this?


GUPTA: No, I mean, the doctors were asked about that. They talked about the fact that he had a cardiac arrest. That was confirmed. One point that they did make, was that when they first ran out to the

field, to evaluate him? He was obviously had collapsed. And then they said that during the evaluation, he lost his pulse, meaning that he didn't -- he had a pulse, initially, when the team started to evaluate him, but then he lost his pulse, at some point, during that time, when he's out on the field.

And that's when CPR, and obviously the defibrillation process sort of began. But that's kind of -- and he also had a breathing tube placed, while he was still on the field.


GUPTA: So, we couldn't see a lot of that, Anderson. But all of that was happening, in that swarm of people there.

COOPER: Yes, it's just incredible, still! Sanjay, appreciate it. Thank you so much.


COOPER: The news continues. "CNN TONIGHT" with Laura Coates is next, right after a short break.


LAURA COATES, CNN HOST, CNN TONIGHT: Well, good evening, everyone. I'm Laura Coates. And this is "CNN TONIGHT".

And well, here we go again! They're going to come back and do it all over again, in a couple of hours.