Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

WSJ: Trump Target Letter Cites 3 Statutes: Deprivation Of Rights, Conspiracy To Defraud U.S., Witness Tampering; IRS Whistleblowers Testify On Interference Claims; Rep. Pete Sessions (R- TX) Discusses About IRS Whistleblowers' Testimony On Hunter Biden. Aired 3-3:30p ET

Aired July 19, 2023 - 15:00   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[15:01:50]

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN HOST: Former President Trump's legal team is trying to find out what evidence the Special Counsel has in their election meddling investigation. This as we're learning more about what's in that target letter the former president received, what it could all signal ahead.

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN HOST: And the Wagner boss who led the revolt on Russia appears to have been spotted in public for the first time in this very dark, grainy video. Details on Yevgeny Prigozhin's whereabouts and why Britain spy chief says that Vladimir Putin is forced to broker a deal to "save" his skin.

And on Capitol Hill, an important hearing, two IRS whistleblowers testifying before the House Oversight Committee about the Hunter Biden investigation. We'll speak one-on-one with a member of that committee.

We're following these major developing stories and many more all coming in right here to CNN NEWS CENTRAL.

KEILAR: It's a major sign that a third indictment of former President Donald Trump could be coming and coming soon. Multiple news outlets, including The Wall Street Journal, now report that the target letter sent to Trump regarding efforts to overturn the 2020 election is citing three federal statutes: Conspiracy to commit an offense against or defraud the United States, deprivation of rights and tampering with a witness.

The big question now is a third indictment coming and when might that happen. Joining us now, we have Senior Crime and Justice Reporter, Katelyn Polantz, and Senior Justice Correspondent, Evan Perez.

So Katelyn, let's start with you.

What more are you learning about the contents of this letter?

KATELYN POLANTZ, CNN CRIME AND JUSTICE REPORTER: Well, Brianna, the target letter doesn't normally reveal very much, but it does often when the Justice Department chooses to send one to someone that is the target of an investigation and very likely to face charges. They do tend to put in there the three possible or however many possible statutes the person may face.

And in the case of Donald Trump, there are several news outlets that have reported today that it's these three statutes that are three - there may be more - that the Justice Department is looking at charging Trump with. And what these represent is really the sweep of this investigation.

We've been saying it all along that the Justice Department is turning over stones all across the country, not just in battleground states, not just in the White House, not just what happened on January 6th, but they are looking at a conspiracy. So if that's one of them, that means two people.

It doesn't necessarily mean another person would be charged, but it means that there's an agreement between two people that prosecutors could try and charge. So Trump and another person working with them.

And then the other one that's really significant here is witness tampering. That case has been made many times against January 6th rioters. It's not just tampering with a witness. It's an idea of obstructing the congressional proceeding of January 6th. It's very likely what the Justice Department has looked at here.

We don't know exactly what the case will be until the Justice Department takes it through the grand jury, hands it up through the court. But this is a pretty broad set of things that can capture a lot of the activity that Trump was taking in 2020 after the election, the whole way up to and on January 6th.

[15:05:08]

KEILAR: We heard those allegations of witness tampering, whether directly or sort of indirectly from Trump coming during those committee hearings. So it'll be interesting to see where that may have landed.

Let's talk about the timeline here, Evan.

I think we go back to the first indictment. When it came to the documents case, it took roughly three weeks from the time that he received that target letter to the time that he was indicted. So we look at that and wonder is that going to happen again or might this play out differently.

EVAN PEREZ, CNN SENIOR JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: It's very likely that it's going to play out a lot differently. And one reason why it worked that way in that case is because Trump and his lawyers made a whole fuss about wanting a meeting with the Justice Department. They wanted a meeting with - Merrick Garland is who they wanted it with. They ended up meeting with the top career official in the Justice Department and they made their case as to why the former president should not be charged. They were not successful in that meeting.

That took a little time. That ate up some time. We had the Memorial Day holiday, of course. And then the Justice Department moved the case to South Florida because of venue reasons. Again, that's something that ate up a few days. They read in the grand jury down in Southern Florida on everything that this grand jury here in Washington had already taken testimony on.

In this case, it's a lot simpler. They - this is the grand jury that's been doing all of this work and so the deadline or the former president has until tomorrow to say he wants to come in and provide evidence to the grand jury.

After that, tomorrow, frankly, the grand jury could vote as soon as tomorrow to bring an indictment. And as for whether there might be other people, other people may not get target letters.

For instance, we know Jeffrey Clark, we know John Eastman. They were raided. Their equipment was seized. In the case of Jeffrey Clark, his home was searched. You don't expect that he would have to get a target letter. He knows he's been at the center of and a target of this investigation since that day.

So again, we don't know who else might be part of this. But as Katelyn points out, it's unlikely that it's just Trump that the Special Counsel is homing in on.

KEILAR: You're painting the potential picture here of something very dramatic, spanning multiple people, possibly. So it's going to be very interesting to see what ultimately it is.

Evan and Katelyn, thank you so much for taking us through that. Boris?

SANCHEZ: Now that Donald Trump has been identified as a target in Jack Smith's 2020 election interference probe, we're learning that Trump's legal team and advisers are working to figure out if there's any evidence and witnesses they're unaware of that may be strengthening the Special Counsel's case.

CNN National Correspondent, Kristen Holmes, is live for us in Bridgewater, New Jersey. She's just down the road from the former president's Bedminster golf club.

So Kristen, what are your sources telling you about this effort from Trump's legal team?

KRISTEN HOLMES, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes, Boris. I've spoken to a number of these Trump lawyers as well as these Trump advisers who are really just trying to figure out what exactly they have in terms of evidence and witnesses that potentially Trump's team did not know of. And that's because these potential charges that were laid out in this target letter seem to indicate that Jack Smith, the Special Counsel, is going to prosecute a much bigger case than Trump's team was originally believing to be.

And when I'm talking to these sources, it's more right now a conversation. They are kind of scratching their head, trying to figure out what exactly this is going to look like. There were times in the last several months, even, which they thought that Trump wouldn't be charged or they thought that he might be not charged, but be an unindicted co-conspirator.

Obviously, that doesn't appear to be the case now that he has gotten this target letter, but a lot of conversations going on. And one thing I want to point out here is that they have really been watching this investigation closely. In fact, a number of the witnesses are represented by lawyers who are paid for by Trump World. So just to give you an idea of how closely that they have been watching this investigation.

So again, now starting to wonder if there was something in there, some key evidence or some witness that they didn't previously know about.

SANCHEZ: And Kristen, perhaps not surprisingly, Trump is fundraising off of this target letter.

HOLMES: That's right. We received the first fundraising email last night and this is something that his team says works. And when we looked at the FEC filing, the campaign finance filings that came out last week, it does appear to be. He is raising money off of his legal issues.

It clearly is calling to some of these voters who are donating after any major event that includes an indictment or an arraignment and potentially a target letter and they are working with that.

Now, I do want to point out what I have often done when we are talking about this, which is even though Trump's advisers and allies tout these high fundraising numbers after an indictment or a potential indictment, as well as these high boost in polls after one of these events, there is also some concern that this is not going to be sustainable long-term.

[15:10:06]

And really, because this is so unprecedented, what this would even look like down the road as he continues to run this third presidential bid.

SANCHEZ: Yes, a lot of potential conflicts with campaign events and court dates.

Kristen Holmes from Bridgewater, New Jersey, thank you so much.

Let's bring in John Dean now. He's an attorney who served as White House counsel for former president, Richard Nixon.

John, thanks so much for being with us. What does it tell you that right now Trump's attorneys are trying to figure out if there's evidence Jack Smith has that they may not be aware of?

JOHN DEAN, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: Well, I think they should be confident that he has information they're not aware of. Grand juries are secret proceedings. They are very closely held. This is a very successful office in running a very tight ship. So I suspect they're looking for threads that they might pull on and learn a little bit more, but it's not likely to happen. It's going to happen in normal course of discovery in the case.

So the target letter mentions three federal statutes that Trump may go up against: Conspiracy to commit an offense against or defraud the United States, deprivation of rights and tampering with a witness. Which of those is the strongest in your view?

DEAN: Well, the conspiracy case is very strong. Federal prosecutors are very familiar with the law in this area. They're very successful in prosecuting these cases. So that - that's probably as close to a slam dunk as you're going to get.

The other cases that are referred to in the reporting on the letter are a little bit of a head scratchers. The deprivation of rights. Whose rights? Mike Pence? Voters? We don't really know. So it's not all - and the witness tampering, is this Cassidy Hutchinson? Or who - we don't know. So this is not a clear picture yet based on a little bit we've gotten from the letter.

SANCHEZ: So Trump is expected to decline the invitation from prosecutors to appeal - to appear, I should say, before the grand jury. Would you give him that advice against - presenting evidence against testifying?

DEAN: Absolutely. This is a man who is deeply challenged when telling the truth and he would just be compounding his own problems to go in and try to wing it somehow. So they're not - I think they'd throw their bodies down before they let him get in there and do it. But he might want to claim, of course, that he wanted to go in and talk to them because he was convinced he could talk them out of charging but it's just not going to happen.

SANCHEZ: So as we're awaiting a charging decision in the case about overturning the 2020 election results, Trump is actually seeing a judge over the classified documents case. I'm wondering which of the two you think presents the bigger challenge for the former president.

DEAN: They're both - we haven't seen, of course, the January 6th indictment, but it's going to be a - it's going to be a larger case. So that'll be - have its own challenges. The documents case is a very clean case, notwithstanding all the huffing and puffing about the time needed and what have you. This is a pretty laid down case.

In most instances, there would be a plea deal being worked out. Trump doesn't plead to anything, rather raises off of his difficulties, so he'll keep this going. But it is not an easy case to defend. The government has got overwhelming evidence of the obstruction. So I think he's going to have trouble with both cases.

SANCHEZ: John Dean, thanks so much for sharing your perspective with us.

DEAN: Thank you.

SANCHEZ: Of course. Brianna?

KEILAR: Happening right now on Capitol Hill, the House Oversight Committee is questioning two IRS whistleblowers about the Justice Department and Hunter Biden. We'll be speaking to a Republican member of that committee next.

And the man behind the short lived Russian revolt may have been spotted in Belarus. We'll have details on that and what Britain's spy chief says about the deal that Wagner boss - the Wagner boss brokered with the Russian president ahead.

And then later, story of survival that is straight out of a Tom Hanks' movie - you know the one we're talking about, "Cast Away." A man and his dog rescued after being adrift at sea for months.

You're watching CNN NEWS CENTRAL and we'll be right back.

[15:15:05]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[15:19:10]

KEILAR: Right now on Capitol Hill, the first public testimony from two IRS whistleblowers is underway and they are accusing the Justice Department of interfering with a years' long investigation of Hunter Biden. And they say the President's son got preferential treatment leading up to his plea deal last month on two tax related charges and a gun charge.

Let's listen to those whistleblowers' claims.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GARY SHAPLEY, IRS WHISTLEBLOWER: I watched United States Attorney Weiss tell a room full of senior FBI and IRS senior leaders on October 7th 2022 that he was not the deciding person on whether charge were filed. That was my red line.

I had already seen a pattern of preferential treatment and obstruction.

JOSEPH ZIEGLER, IRS WHISTLE BLOWER: It appeared to me based on what I experienced that the U.S. attorney in Delaware in our investigation was constantly hamstrung, limited and marginalized by DOJ officials as well as other U.S. attorneys.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KEILAR: Democrats pushing back on this hearing.

[15:20:01]

A top Democrat on the House Oversight Committee ranking member, Jamie Raskin, saying that the hearing today is just more political theater.

Joining us now is a Republican member of that committee, Congressman Pete Sessions of Texas, who now - no doubt disagrees with Jamie Raskin on that. Sir, you heard the claims from these whistleblowers. It is very much

the crux of their argument here or their claims here for their testimony that David Weiss, the U.S. attorney in Delaware, was hamstrung by higher ups at the DOJ. David Weiss says that is not true. Is Weiss lying?

REP. PETE SESSIONS (R-TX): Well, the question that's at hand is very simple, and that is, did these two lead investigators who work for the IRS, were they arbitrarily duped or did they - were they somehow fooled? And the bottom line is they have explicit emails, conversations and discussions that took place over years.

These are two men who work for the Internal Revenue Service. They'd taken the oath of office that all federal employees do and then they found out that what was being handled was they were being lied to. And then once they push their case, they then were mishandled as whistleblowers by the IRS.

This sits entirely, as you listen to their testimony, on main DOJ here in Washington, D.C. that made these determinations, up to and including stopping them from their investigation, asking questions and seeing where the information and what it led to, all the way to a special deal for Hunter Biden in the Department of Justice for what were felony matters. They were then treated as misdemeanors.

KEILAR: So David Weiss, the U.S. attorney who, to be clear, was appointed by former President Trump and kept on by Joe Biden, which is generally not customary, but of course, these proceedings were happening about Hunter Biden and he kept him on. He said that Merrick Garland granted him "ultimate authority" over this matter, including responsibility for deciding where, when and whether to file charges.

He also refuted claims made about his title overseeing the investigation. He wrote in a separate letter to Congress that he never requested special counsel status, but rather explored - becoming a special attorney under a different statute.

So I mean, let me ask you again, because that is obviously completely contradictory to what we are hearing from these whistleblowers. Do you think David Weiss is lying?

SESSIONS: Well, then you need to have whoever helped you for this presentation today and then there was a follow-up letter where he corrected himself and a third letter that corrected himself that said that he did not then have that ability, that he was provided with specific content that that would not be happening.

So he got back, honestly, with senators that were involved and the House Committee on Ways and Means and James Comer, Government Reform and Oversight, and sent three letters in total that corrected himself each and every time.

KEILAR: So you have reports of this committee that you were on, the Oversight Committee, that have not found a link between Hunter Biden. And I think it is fair to say that as you - we look at the behavior of Hunter Biden, it raises serious questions and we've seen that and he has this plea deal. But your own reports haven't found that ...

SESSIONS: No, you ...

KEILAR: ... if you - if I may, because this is the important point that I want to make, it's about the link between Hunter Biden and President Biden and that question of whether there is wrongdoing on the part of the President. Your own committee has not found that. Senate Republicans have not found that. Have you heard these whistleblowers draw any direct connection?

SESSIONS: As a matter of fact, this afternoon, we will hear very directly from these IRS whistleblowers that the Federal Bureau of Investigation briefed Hunter Biden's lawyers and gave them pre- information about what they could expect and what might happen.

So if that's not a direct link, I'm sorry, somebody woke up on the wrong side of the bed today. If you tell a person's lawyer, rather than telling them from official law enforcement within the Federal Bureau of Investigation, that is telling the client what he needed to know.

[15:25:09]

KEILAR: No. What is - but the direct link to President Biden, what is that? Have you heard proof of that?

SESSIONS: Well, the direct link to Hunter Biden is that these hundreds of cash ...

KEILAR: No, to President Biden - between Hunter Biden - have you heard of a direct link between Hunter Biden and President Biden and is there proof, actual evidence to back that up?

SESSIONS: As a matter of fact, there is, and it's the direct information where Hunter Biden was talking to the Chinese intermediary where he talked about his father not being happy and that they better get the money there quickly or the big guy would not be happy.

KEILAR: Sir, let me just - let me interrupt you on that.

SESSIONS: We use their own words.

KEILAR: And that is a WhatsApp text in the words of Hunter Biden who was - as we understand it - on drugs at the time. I'm not saying that it is not true, but we can't say that it is true. And I'm asking if you have corroborating information. Yes, he certainly invokes his father. Yes, that certainly raises questions about whether that is something that needs to be looked at.

But is that true - Hunter Biden saying that. Is he's trying to get some commitment from a Chinese businessman isn't necessarily proof. Do you have proof from these whistleblowers or in any other way, because your own committee in its May report and the Senate Republican report from 2020 isn't showing a direct link and that includes that WhatsApp text that you just mentioned. SESSIONS: The direct link is over five million dollars put into

accounts that were around the president's family. And that is undeniable, that millions of dollars flowed into the Biden family accounts. Did that accrue to the President ...

KEILAR: But that's not the president.

SESSIONS: Okay. All right. Look, here's the bottom line, Joe Biden was attempting to use his influence when he was vice president of the United States. The official - Department of Justice officials have chosen to ignore for over five years the information that was there, hundreds of reports from banks, just information that flowed forward that they did nothing about that was foreign money of influence.

KEILAR: If that is true what you say about him personally using his influence, that's a very serious claim that would need to be investigated and proven.

SESSIONS: It is a serious claim.

KEILAR: So where is your evidence?

SESSIONS: Well, we will go to them next, but it's also serious when you ask the President of the United States to appear before your committee. But it's - we're headed that direction.

KEILAR: Your own banking report in May, so this is recent, from the Oversight Committee found no link to President Biden. So you have been looking into this for some time.

SESSIONS: Okay. The - we have been looking into it since January. We're now in our seventh month. We are now receiving information about the accounts that the money went to. They are simply all the way around the Biden family and we have information that directly from Hunter Biden himself.

If I had that that said the President of the United States received this money, I'm sure you would hear about that. But Hunter Biden denied every bit of this and millions of dollars he did not report on his IRS forms, did not report what those relationships or what he - was done nor did he file as a person who was trying to receive influence from a foreign government while he was on the plane with the Vice President of the United States to visit these countries.

The bottom line is we will continue this investigation. The facts that we're developing today come directly from simply employees of the IRS who've been retaliated against for doing their job and that is a serious problem and against the federal law. And that is what our committee intends to keep investigating.

KEILAR: And we will keep watching as you do that. Obviously, these are - look, these are very serious questions about Hunter Biden's behavior. He is facing the prosecution because of that. The important thing we're trying to get to the bottom to - bottom of is that direct link to President Biden, because that is a serious allegation, certainly one that would require evidence to make here. [15:30:01]