Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Interview With Arizona Secretary of State Adrian Fontes; Trump Due in Federal Court Tomorrow. Aired 11-11:30a ET

Aired August 02, 2023 - 11:00   ET

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

[11:00:12]

JOHN BERMAN, CNN HOST: Former President Donald Trump will report to a federal court tomorrow to face these new historic, unprecedented charges. And we have some new details on what you can expect to see.

KATE BOLDUAN, CNN HOST: And delay, delay, delay, it is a key defense strategy by Donald Trump's legal team past and present. What will it mean for this trial over his efforts to overturn the 2020 election as he's running to win that same office again in '24? And how much power does the presiding judge have?

BERMAN: The six co-conspirators listed in the indictment, who among them is maybe most likely to face charges? Who among them may be most likely to flip.

Sara is off today. I'm John Berman with Kate Bolduan. This is CNN NEWS CENTRAL.

Former President Donald Trump is expected to arrive at a Washington, D.C., federal court tomorrow to face the criminal charges connected to his efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election.

BOLDUAN: All signs point that point to Donald Trump once again pleading not guilty.

But new reporting also coming in suggests that his team of attorneys are looking to delay this case and this trial.

CNN's Evan Perez has new details on the president's court appearance tomorrow. He's joining us now.

Evan, what are you learning?

EVAN PEREZ, CNN SENIOR JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: Well, Kate, we expect that the former president is going to come to Washington tomorrow. He had the option to press to do this presentment or to do this first appearance via video link. He could do this by Zoom from his golf club in Bedminster, New Jersey.

Instead, he's going to -- he's likely to come here and do it in person. And so he is going to be learning -- he's going to be read these charges, and then we expect that he's going to plead not guilty. And then this begins the court process. Those four charges, of course, that you -- that you just read right there are what he is facing. The prosecution made it clear in this 45- page indictment that the former president had the right to challenge the election results, he had the right to even lie about fraud.

What he did not have the right to do, they say, is to engage in these multiple conspiracies, one to defraud the United States and the government from the ability to count the votes, defrauding -- obstructing the process of Congress to certify the election results, and, of course, denying the right of millions of Americans of their -- having their vote counted.

This is how Jack Smith put it yesterday after the indictment had been released:

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JACK SMITH, SPECIAL COUNSEL: The attack on our nation's Capitol on January 6, 2021, was an unprecedented assault on the seat of American democracy.

As described in the indictment, it was fueled by lies, lies by the defendant targeted at obstructing a bedrock function of the U.S. government, the nation's process of collecting, counting and certifying the results of the presidential election.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PEREZ: And one of the things that you see in this indictment is prosecutors tying the violence that you saw on January 6, tying it to the former president's effort to exploit that violence to try to find a way to remain in power.

They say, for more than two months following Election Day, the former president spread lies that there had been outcome-determinative fraud in the election and that he had actually won. So, you will hear, obviously, from the former president and his lawyers that this is an assault on free speech. That's what you will hear from them.

The prosecution here has really made this a very narrow case, guys. You notice that the co-defendants are not actually named. They're not charged with -- in this indictment. And it's clear what they want is to bring this case to trial as soon as possible, before the 2024 election. And now it's in the hands of this judge -- guys.

BOLDUAN: Yes.

BERMAN: Evan Perez, thank you very much. We both thank you. We will both thank you at once.

BOLDUAN: Evan, thank you.

BERMAN: Thank you.

(LAUGHTER)

BOLDUAN: Sorry, John.

PEREZ: I love you guys.

(LAUGHTER)

BOLDUAN: Now to those six unnamed co-conspirators.

CNN has been able to identify five of the six. They are not named, as they are not charged with any crimes yet, but that doesn't mean that they're out of the woods.

CNN's Jessica Schneider, she joins us now with much more on this.

Jess, if they are charged, what kinds of charges could they be facing?

JESSICA SCHNEIDER, CNN JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: Yes, Kate, they could ultimately face any number of charges.

It's likely that the charges could potentially be similar to the charges that Donald Trump is facing. He's facing conspiracy to defraud the United States, also charges relating to obstructing the certification of the election. So, maybe those are some of the charges that these co-conspirators could face.

[11:05:04]

Special counsel Jack Smith has made very clear that this investigation continues. So it's likely that at least some of these six co- conspirators could face charges, or, at the very least, maybe they're mentioned in the indictment under these Co-Conspirator 1, 2, 3, et cetera.

It could pressure them to cooperate with investigators. So, just to highlight a few of these co-conspirators here, CNN has identified Rudy Giuliani as Co-Conspirator No. 1. He's described in this indictment as an attorney who's -- quote -- "willing to spread knowingly false claims" and pursue strategies that other attorneys involved in the campaign just wouldn't after the 2020 election.

So, that description alone really indicates that charges could be coming here, because, of course, Giuliani was front and center pushing these election claim -- election fraud claims.

Co-Conspirator No. 12, we have identified as former Trump lawyer John Eastman. Notably, he circulated a two-page plan for Vice President Pence to overturn the election. And what's interesting here is that Eastman has already been trying to fight disciplinary proceedings in California as he tries to keep his law license.

So, on top of that, there could be more legal fights to come if he's indicted. And then Co-Conspirator No. 3, former Trump lawyer Sidney Powell, she too has faced ethics complaints in a few states about her conduct after the election. She's described in this indictment as really circulating claims of election fraud that even Trump acknowledged sound crazy -- sounded crazy. So this isn't the end, guys, with this indictment of the former

president. There could be a lot more to come. And Jack Smith talked about that yesterday, saying that this investigation is definitely not over.

BOLDUAN: All right, Jessica, thank you so much.

Joining us now for more on this is CNN legal analyst, former federal prosecutor Elliot Williams.

Elliot, let's start on the co-conspirators. I have a lot of questions for you, but let's start there. Rudy Giuliani spoke out last night, kind of reacting to the indictment, and also just what could be coming for him.

Let's listen to this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

RUDY GIULIANI, FORMER ATTORNEY FOR PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: Violating the right of free speech of an American citizen, never mind whether he was president or not. It could be anybody. It could be a homeless person. You don't get to violate people's First Amendment rights, Smith, no matter who the hell you are, no matter how sick you are with Trump derangement syndrome.

And this isn't the first time he has acted like an unethical lawyer. It should be the last.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BOLDUAN: He's not charged. He is an unnamed co-conspirator in this indictment.

What do you see in that reaction?

ELLIOT WILLIAMS, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: OK, this argument about free speech being on trial here: "Kate, I'm going to burn your house down."

If I if I say that to you, in seriousness, and then either take steps toward burning your house down, or actually you believe it, I could be charged with a crime. The idea that there are statements that are not criminal or may not be criminal is foolish. And that is simply not how the law works.

Now, certainly, in the United States, and particularly a candidate for office has broad latitude to speak.

BOLDUAN: Right.

WILLIAMS: But the idea that merely by uttering words absolves him from all criminal liability is silly. And he -- anyway.

BOLDUAN: But it's not just Rudy Giuliani making this case.

WILLIAMS: Yes. BOLDUAN: You have John Lauro, one of his attorneys, kind of saying the same thing. Let me play this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOHN LAURO, ATTORNEY FOR FORMER PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: So, at the end, our defense is going to be focusing on the fact that what we have now is an administration that has criminalized the free speech and advocacy of a prior administration during the time that there is a political election going on.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BOLDUAN: So, I think the question then, I'm curious -- and you're getting at it, though -- are, where are the beginnings and end, where are the boundaries of this First Amendment defense?

And how does this fit into what we see in this indictment?

WILLIAMS: Sure. It's a little blurry and fuzzy.

And, to be clear, many things in the law are going to be quite subjective. Now, as the bounds of a First Amendment defense, if the president were charged with just his speech on January 6, with saying, "We're going to March down to the Capitol and fight like hell," I think he'd have a really strong First Amendment case there.

He's a candidate for office making aggressive claims, but certainly nothing that is a slam dunk for saying that he incited people to violence. What the amendment does, though, is lay out a series of acts over a period of months around trying to subvert the will of the American voters and talking about conduct in seven states with fake electors and so on that goes far beyond simply the words that the president uttered on January 6.

So, I think they're -- look, it's a sound strategy from a defense attorney. It's probably what I would do if I were defending him. But I'm trying to sort of make it all about just the speech he gave on January 6, but it was far more conduct than that.

BOLDUAN: So, tomorrow begins the next, the more -- most immediate steps in the process, with him facing arraignment.

Timing of all of this, do you think -- do you -- I mean, it's impossible to guess, but do you think -- see this case as more or less complicated than a classified documents case?

[11:10:07]

WILLIAMS: I think, well, yes and no.

The classified documents case is really two cases, when you think about it, because, number one, you have got the classified documents portion of it. That's complicated. It could take a really long time to get that to trial, because you have to litigate it.

BOLDUAN: Yes.

WILLIAMS: But there's another portion of that, which is obstruction of justice, which is actually quite straightforward. And they could have -- if they just charged that, could have brought that to trial tomorrow.

This is, I actually think, less complicated, because you don't have all of that national security information that you have to fight about. Now, there will certainly be things that the defendants will challenge about this case.

BOLDUAN: Right.

WILLIAMS: But it is a little more straightforward...

(CROSSTALK)

BOLDUAN: Then what is -- what does a judge do in this? I mean, just I think it was last hour I was just going through how this calendar lines up with the political calendar.

Legal and political are not the same things. We do know that. But what's a judge to do?

WILLIAMS: Well, the judge will bring the parties into court and say, I'm setting this trial for June 15 or whatever. And the defendant will say, well, I have another trial across the country.

Then, now the judge can choose to delay her trial. She can talk to the other judges. They communicate with each other. But it's really a question of scheduling for individual judges as to what -- and to protect the defendant's rights to a fair trial. It's for his protection that they want to get any of these cases brought -- brought up as quickly as they can.

BOLDUAN: Real quick, just to go full circle, do you -- would you be surprised if no one else is charged, if these remain uncharged, unnamed co-conspirators?

WILLIAMS: I would be surprised if no one else of those six individuals was charged.

BOLDUAN: Yes. It's great to see you.

WILLIAMS: Great seeing you, Kate.

BOLDUAN: Thanks -- John.

BERMAN: All right, the jurist assigned to this case is Judge Tanya Chutkan. She was nominated by President Obama in 2014, confirmed by the Senate in a 95-0 vote.

Before that, she worked in private practice and as a public defender. As a judge, Chutkan presided over dozens of criminal cases involving alleged January 6 rioters. And she has repeatedly sentenced them to longer prison sentences than what prosecutors requested. In the case of Robert Palmer, a Florida man who attacked police at the

Capitol with a fire extinguisher, Judge Chutkan sentenced him to more than five years. And she handed down that sentence -- as she did, she said: "It has to be made clear that trying to stop the peaceful transition of power, assaulting law enforcement is going to be met with certain punishment."

In November of 2021, Judge Chutkan denied Trump's attempt to block the release of January 6 records to the House Committee investigating January 6. In that ruling, Chutkan wrote: "Presidents are not kings and plaintiff is not president" -- Kate.

BOLDUAN: Still ahead for us: how Donald Trump and his team are now reacting to these new charges and the defense that they are planning.

Plus, reaction to the indictments split down party lines on Capitol Hill, with many Republicans rushing to defend the former president, but many top Republicans in the Senate still silent. Why?

And the indictment claims that there were seven states that Trump targeted as he tried to cling to power, one of them, Arizona, whose secretary of state has been subpoenaed by the special counsel. The secretary of state joins us live just ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[11:17:48]

BOLDUAN: This morning, former President Trump and his team, their take on his third criminal indictment, they're calling it corrupt, pathetic and election interference, things that you have heard from him and his team before.

But now Trump's campaign is going as far to try and say that the indictment is reminiscent of persecutions in Nazi Germany, which is neither historically correct or even close to appropriate, so much so, the Anti-Defamation League called the comparison factually inaccurate and completely inappropriate and flat-out offensive.

CNN's Alayna Treene joins us live near Trump's Bedminster, New Jersey, home with much more on this.

You have been getting reaction and how -- what they have been saying in light of this indictment. Are you getting more wind of what their strategy, legal or political, is now running forward?

ALAYNA TREENE, CNN POLITICAL REPORTER: We have, Kate. And it's exactly as you would expect.

They're painting this latest indictment as entirely political. And they're labeling these charges, as they have with the previous two indictments, as part of a broader attempt to try and interfere in the 2024 presidential elections.

And I can tell you, from my conversations with Donald Trump's advisers and his allies, that they are very competent in that defense. Despite the unprecedented nature of these charges, Donald Trump is still the leading candidate for the Republican nomination. He is polling ahead of his 2024 rivals, and his base and his supporters are very much with him.

Now, a key point of that election interference defense is that they want to try and argue that the any potential trial should be delayed until after the 2024 presidential election. And one of Donald Trump's attorneys, John Lauro, spoke to that during an interview with CNN Kaitlan Collins last night.

Let's take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

LAURO: I need to look at what so-called evidence is going to be presented.

I could see this trial lasting nine months or a year. But it's going to take -- Mr. Trump is entitled to a defense. The government has had three years to investigate this, and now they want to rush this to trial in the middle of a political season.

What does that tell you?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

[11:20:00]

TREENE: Now, Kate, another key line of defense that John Lauro also spoke about during that interview last night was that Donald Trump was protected by the First Amendment and by free speech to peddle the false claims of election fraud.

But if you look at the 45-page indictment that special counsel Jack Smith filed last night, they point out that Donald Trump knew that he had lost the election, and yet he continued to peddle these lies anyway.

They also note that, yes, Donald Trump did have the right to challenge the 2020 election results, but he did not have the right to engage in a broader conspiracy to defraud the United States, nor did he have the right to try and obstruct the January 6 proceedings.

BOLDUAN: How is this playing with his supporters? Many now starting to react as this indictment is settling in.

TREENE: Well, as far as I know, and from -- I have spoken with many of Donald Trump's supporters, and they are very much behind him. They believe that he did not commit any crime.

I was with him at his rally over the weekend in Erie, Pennsylvania. And I spoke with some of Donald Trump's supporters as they were filing into the venue. And they argued -- they used the same rhetoric, really, that Donald Trump has been using, which that -- is that he is the target of political persecution, that he is a victim of an unfair Justice Department. And they really do believe that he did nothing wrong, Kate.

BOLDUAN: Yes, and even that, being before an indictment announced, you can anticipate that nothing has changed from that reaction since.

It's good to see, Alayna. Thank you so much -- John.

BERMAN: So, the indictment alleges that Trump and his campaign team, including some of these co-conspirators, pressured officials in seven states to help overturn the election.

Arizona is among the seven states in the alleged fake electoral plot. The special counsel's team issued a subpoena to the Arizona secretary of state's office back in may.

And the Arizona secretary of state, Adrian Fontes, joins us now.

Mr. Secretary, thank you so much for being with us.

Now that the indictment has been unsealed and we have all seen it, can you shed some light on what the special counsel's team was after from your office?

ADRIAN FONTES (D), ARIZONA SECRETARY OF STATE: Well, first, thanks for having me, John.

And, second, what they were after was evidence that helped them establish probable cause before a grand jury. Let's not forget, this wasn't Jack Smith or Joe Biden. It was the grand jury made up of citizens who determined there was probable cause to move forward.

And that evidence probably helped them put together the entire story that we see in this indictment, which is pretty damning. But if you're here in Arizona, and you were running elections, like I was in 2020, you already know that the big lie was a big lie. Now we have an indictment that illustrates it pretty clearly for the rest of the nation.

BERMAN: You say the big lie was the big lie.

And, in the indictment, the prosecutors point out that Donald Trump is entitled to lie to the American people. It's not a crime to lie to the American people. You need to have corrupt, illegal actions. What illegal actions do you think took place in Arizona?

FONTES: Well, the corrupt actions were an attempt to -- it was laid out pretty easily, asked the speaker of the House to call a special session to try to set aside the votes.

And that's the real problem that I see here is just disabusing Arizona -- the attempt to disabuse Arizonans of their right to vote. Look, Arizona voted a particular way. It may have not have gone the way Mr. Trump liked, and maybe he does have the right to lie, but he doesn't have the right to try to pressure the government to overturn American votes. That's the point where this becomes a problem. And the fact that he

tried with other people and other people helped him with this push, with this attempt to overthrow the government, that's where the conspiracy comes in.

If there ever was a reason to have the rule of law, to have people held accountable for crimes, this is it. This is going to be the true test of American democracy, whether or not justice can be meted out.

BERMAN: What has the impact of all of this been on the ground in Arizona in terms of the faith of the voters there?

FONTES: Well, I think, overall, voters can have faith that systems are systems, and they may not operate at lightning speed, but the bottom line is, our process guaranteed by the Constitution is a process guaranteed.

And let's not forget, Mr. (AUDIO GAP) defendant still has Fourth, Fifth, Sixth Amendment rights. He still deserves a fair trial. And I think he will get one.

The bottom line is -- and that's what we want, right? But, at the end of the day, folks here just want stable, reasonable, reliable government. They want folks who are going to be level-headed, apply the law, and move things forward, because the business of America is business, the business of Arizona is business. And folks just want to get about their own business.

I think Mr. Trump's grip on the Republican Party here is loosening. I think his grip on American politics is loosening. And I cannot wait for this country to be able to move forward and get on with the rest of what we need to do.

[11:25:11]

BERMAN: Do you expect the evidence that you provided will come to light in the trial when and if it takes place?

FONTES: Well, interestingly, a lot of what was provided was discovery from two prior cases, some of which was just discovery, was never presented publicly at a trial.

And, again, as I have indicated before, I'm not going to be a fly in the ointment to the prosecutors and speak directly to the details. They're going to get to choose how they build their case into a trial, if it happens. The defense will also be able to use any evidence disclosed in any way they see fit.

And, again, that's the process. It has to play out. We want it to play out. That's the faith, the civic faith, that Americans should maintain in our systems. I hold that faith true. I trust that this will be a fair process moving forward. And I'm just glad we got to play our small part to help move the chains.

BERMAN: Mr. Secretary, Adrian Fontes, great to see you this morning. Thank you so much for coming on. FONTES: Thanks for having me.

BERMAN: Kate.

BOLDUAN: Arizona is so at the center of all of that and all of this.

So, how will all of this impact that 2024 presidential election, near term, far term, all of it? The Trump team is trying to turn his legal troubles into a political advantage. Will it work?

We will be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[11:30:00]