Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Marc Short is Interviewed about Pence's Testimony; Parkland School Reenactment; Sailors Accused of Spying for China. Aired 9:30- 10a ET

Aired August 04, 2023 - 09:30   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:32:41]

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: For his day in court, Donald Trump was surrounded by lawyers and loyalists. Among them, senior campaign adviser Jason Miller, who worked for Trump in both 2016 and 2020. He is noted in the indictment as one of the people who cast doubt on Trump's claims of voter fraud, saying, quote, "it's tough to own any of this when it's all just conspiracy, s-word, beamed down from the mothership."

Boris Epshteyn has also been with Trump since 2016. He's a lawyer and was the communications director for Trump's first inaugural committee in 2022 - sorry, inaugural committee. In 2022, he admitted that it was part of the effort to find fake electors. He has testified before the Georgia special grand jury and was interviewed by the special counsel.

Susie Wiles is a big time Florida political operator who helped get Ron DeSantis elected but is now seen as Trump's top political strategist. A source tells CNN, she is the senior campaign official that Trump allegedly showed a classified map to at his New Jersey golf club. She has spoken to federal investigators several times.

Chris LaCivita is a long-time Republican operative best known for his role in the Swift Boat veteran group that attacked John Kerry back in 2004. He also started a super PAC to support Trump in 2020.

Finally, Trump campaign spokesperson Steven Chung. He was the director, for the record, director of communications for the Ultimate Fighting Championship before he joined the Trump campaign in 2016.

Kate.

KATE BOLDUAN, CNN ANCHOR: A man who was once part of Trump's inner circle and his running mate and is now, well, running against him and is also now a key witness in this third indictment, Mike Pence. He played a big role in the criminal case that is being built against his former boss, as we are now seeing in that indictment from his five- hour testimony to his own notes taken, those contemporaneous notes. The 45-page indictment laid out Pence's efforts to stand up to Trump's scheme to keep his seat in the Oval Office. Joining me right now is Marc Short. He's a former chief of staff to

Mike Pence. He also, Marc himself, testified before the grand jury, which ended up handing down this indictment to Donald Trump.

Marc, thanks so much for being here.

Let me start with this. Donald Trump's first utterance after being arraigned yesterday was this, this is a persecution of a political opponent. Is that how you see this indictment?

MARC SHORT, FORMER CHIEF OF STAFF TO VICE PRESIDENT MIKE PENCE: Well, Kate, I think that for many of us I think we do have concerns that the Department of Justice has had a different standard for Democrats and Republicans, whether that's Hillary or Hunter, or if where they prosecute Republicans.

[09:35:12]

But having said that, I think two things can be true, you can believe there's a bias, but also believe that everything that Donald Trump did around January 6th was absolutely wrong, and that his pressure to ask the vice president to disregard his oath to the Constitution is - is certainly a dereliction of the president's own duty.

And so I think you can have -- you can have the perspective that, yes, we're concerned about bias at the Department of Justice, but that doesn't mean that the president's actions on January 6th were any way justifiable or right.

BOLDUAN: A couple weeks ago Pence actually said to Dana Bash that he -- that the American people had lost confidence in the Department of Justice. And this is one of the things you're talking about right now. Do - do you -- does Mike Pence, do you think, have confidence that the Justice Department can handle this case against Donald Trump?

SHORT: Well, I - I think that he has said multiple times he had hoped it would not come to a prosecution. That, in his mind, it would be preferable for the American people to render judgment on Donald Trump and his actions on the date of January 6th.

But, look, there's - there's a lot of information still, Kate, that even though the vice president was a central component of this, there's also a lot of information that we're not privy to that the prosecution has, because during the period from Election Day until January 6th, to be honest, the vice president was leading the COVID task force, traveling the country, trying to encourage states to open up. He was traveling many time to Georgia.

BOLDUAN: Mike, I -- Marc, I totally get it, but I -- just on this point, you said two things can be true at once, you can have concerns over bias in a department but - but this. When it comes to this case, should the American people have confidence in the Department of Justice can handle -- have confidence in the Department of Justice handling this case against Donald Trump?

SHORT: I think it's important for the American people to have the facts and be able to render a judgment for themselves about the president's actions on that day. I think it's - it's tantamount to any -- anyone who is a voter to - to have the question of, do you want to have a president who disregards his oath to the Constitution stand in the Oval Office? And I think that the vice president's concern as well is believing that since the -- their term in office ended, that Donald Trump has wavered on so many of the things that were accomplished that were from a conservative principle perspective, whether or not it's life, whether or not it's Ukraine, whether or not it's the fiscal responsibility. And so that is the reason that he is looking to challenge him for the nomination.

BOLDUAN: Not getting an answer to the question if he has confidence in the Justice Department pulling through on this - on this prosecution.

We're going to move on, though, because I do want to ask you this.

John Lauro, one of Donald Trump's attorneys -- real quick, though -- actually, let me not move on. Why not answer that question? Is he going - is - is - are you and Mike -

SHORT: Well, because I - I --

BOLDUAN: Are you and - and/or Mike Pence going to -- going to accept the outcome of this criminal case if you don't have confidence in the Justice Department to handle this case?

SHORT: No, I don't -- I think that's -- that's very - that's a very different question, Kate. I mean, look, we - we testified both under subpoena. And it doesn't mean that - that - that - that - that necessarily there's a sense that the Department of Justice is unbiased in this. But at the same time, does it mean that they can have a trial in front of Donald Trump's peers in Washington, D.C., and render a judgment on him? Perhaps they probably can, Kate. But -

BOLDUAN: OK.

SHORT: That doesn't mean that we're going to sit here and absolve the Department of Justice for concerns that we think we have based upon what we've seen in the last, you know, several years about who they choose to prosecute and who they don't.

BOLDUAN: Not asking - not -- I was not asking for that. Just asking for that clarification.

John Lauro is one of Donald Trump's now attorneys. He was on Fox News last night. And I want to play for you what he says that Donald Trump was asking Mike Pence to do about the election and the - and the electoral votes.

Listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOHN LAURO, TRUMP ATTORNEY: Ultimately what President Trump said is, let's go with option d. Let's just halt, let's just pause the voting and allow the state legislatures to take one last look and make a determination as to the -- as to whether or not the elections were handled fairly. That's constitutional law. That's not an issue of - of criminal activity.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BOLDUAN: Is that what happened?

SHORT: It's a very disingenuous summation of - of what happened, Kate, because the reality was that after the Electoral College met on December 14th and confirmed Joe Biden as the victor, then the pressure campaign turned to - to Mike Pence. And throughout that the effort all along was to say, just reject the states in question. Simply dismiss them out of hand.

The prosecution has notes from senior advisers to the president who said, eventually, look, it's clear that Pence won't go along with this, so perhaps we can pivot to this other cockamamie idea which is, we could just push a delay and ask them to return it. There's no constitutional basis for the vice president to have authority to unilaterally choose which states to send back.

And - and, obviously, we wouldn't want Kamala Harris, if a Republican won say Nevada or Wisconsin, to send back to - to Democrat state legislatures.

[09:40:06]

And so it's -- it's absurd on its face.

But what's really important here is that was not the pressure campaign. The pressure campaign was to reject them out of hand. That was a last-minute pivot that sounds better from a PR perspective, Kate. But the push was to say, if there's a delay, then what we're forced constitutionally to do is turn this over to the House of Representatives to choose. And the theory was then that the House of Representatives, they're -- each state would get one vote. And there were 26 delegations controlled by Republicans and 24 by Democrats. So, the purpose was the same.

But to illustrate the stupidity even of that is this notion that, keep in mind, in that point in Wisconsin, there's one House Republican. So, that one House Republican, Liz Cheney, was not going to vote for Donald Trump to be the president. So, even the - even if you follow that through it didn't make sense.

But it was also -- the purpose of it all along was really -- it was really to say, have Pence just reject them out of hand. This has become a PR move to say, all we were trying to do was get him to send it back to the states. There's no process for doing that. And the purpose all along was to say, that would then push it back to the House of Representatives.

BOLDUAN: I need to ask you -- obviously one central question in this case is did Donald Trump know the claims of fraud that he was pushing were lies. Did he know that he legitimately lost the election? Do you think he did? SHORT: I know that his campaign gave him briefings that went through

what the returns were and explained to him where there were examples of fraud that they were insignificant and would not have made a material difference to the election. Whether or not he believed what his campaign told him or whether he chose to believe what some of the crazy lawyers were advising him, I don't know his state of mind, Kate, to - to - to make a summation on that.

BOLDUAN: Right.

SHORT: But I - I do know he was certainly briefed about it.

BOLDUAN: Nearly 70 percent of Republicans in the new CNN poll still believe that Joe Biden did not legitimately win the 2020 election. Whose fault is that?

SHORT: Well, I'd say that that's probably something that, Kate, has been building for, unfortunately, a couple decades of people losing confidence in the elections. I mean, something that - that I think has gotten less scrutiny is the fact that the last three times that Republicans have won presidential elections, Democrats have stood up in Congress to object to those results and object to the certification. But, obviously, never resulted --

BOLDUAN: Oh, come on, Marc, don't do this.

SHORT: Kate - no, Kate, it never resulted in something violent like January 6th did. But this has been happening --

BOLDUAN: Seventy percent of a party does not believe the last president was legitimately elected. You - you think that would not be the same?

SHORT: Kate - no, Kate, this has been happening - the undermining - the undermining -

BOLDUAN: Right, you think that would be happening in those -- after those last elections?

SHORT: No. Absolutely. The undermining of the confidence has been happening on both sides of the aisle, Kate. Nothing happened as serious as January 6th before. And, as I've said, Donald Trump was absolutely wrong on that.

But, unfortunately, there have been forces on both sides of the aisle pushing lack of confidence in our election results for a while.

BOLDUAN: I'm surprised on that one.

Marc Short, thanks for coming on.

SHORT: Kate, thanks for having me.

BOLDUAN: John.

BERMAN: Today, experts will reenact the deadly 2018 mass shooting at the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Florida with live gunfire. Why?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:47:35]

BERMAN: Very shortly, gunfire is set to ring out again at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Florida in a reenactment of the Parkland school shooting that killed 17 people on Valentine's Day in 2018. This is part of a civil lawsuit against Scot Peterson, the former school resource officer, who retreated outside for nearly an hour during the massacre. Now, he was found not guilty of criminal charges in June.

CNN's Carlos Suarez joins us live from Parkland in Florida.

Carlos, some families actually want this reenactment. Why?

CARLOS SUAREZ, CNN CORRESPONDENT: That's exactly right, John.

So, some of the family members believe that the reenactment will prove that there's no way that former school resource officer Scot Peterson did not know where the gunfire was coming from the day of the shooting. As you mentioned, back in June, Peterson was found not guilty on the criminal charges of his inactions the day of the massacre. This after prosecutors successfully argued during his trial that Peterson took cover outside of the 1200 building because he thought that there was more -- there was more than one gunman at the school and that he did not know where the shooting was taking place.

Now, earlier this morning nine members of Congress, Democrats and Republicans, they toured the 1200 building. They got a look at the three floors here at Marjory Stoneman Douglas where the 17 students and staff members were killed and 17 others were wounded in the school shooting. We're told that that tour just wrapped up a few minutes ago.

Now, some of the family members were in Washington, D.C. last week lobbying some of these very same lawmakers on a school safety piece of legislation. They're trying to get more funding for mental health services, as well as school resource officers.

Now, Max Schachter, one of the Parkland parents out here, his son Alex was killed in the shooting, he talked to CNN yesterday about the importance of not only the congressional visit but the reenactment as well.

Here's what he told us.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MAX SCHACHTER, FATHER OIF PARKLAND SCHOOL VICTIM: If we don't use this building to teach others and to educate and use it to prevent the next tragedy, you know, it's -- it's all - it's all for naught.

Every member of Congress, before they put their hand on the Bible, every school board member, every sheriff should walk through this building and understand what happens if you don't prioritize safety above education, because you cannot teach dead kids.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

[09:50:14]

SUAREZ: And so we're told that the reenactment is scheduled to get underway in about an hour. And, John, we're told at least 140 rounds of live ammunition are going to be fired inside of the 1200 building. We're told that this reenactment is going to be recorded on video and audio as part of the civil case against Scot Peterson.

Guys.

BERMAN: That really is remarkable.

All right, Carlos Suarez, in Parkland, thank you so much.

Kate.

BOLDUAN: Coming up for us, two U.S. Navy Sailors arrested for sharing sensitive information with China. We have new details on the espionage charges.

We'll be back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BOLDUAN: This morning, two U.S. Navy Sailors are under arrest, accused of spying for China. They allegedly shared sensitive military secrets with Chinese intelligence officers, including information about military exercises, weapons and radar. Prosecutors say the sailors chose cash over country.

[09:55:02]

CNN's Natasha Bertrand is at the Pentagon with more detail on this.

Natasha, what more are you learning about these sailors and the information they gave?

NATASHA BERTRAND, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yes, Kate, so prosecutors unsealed these indictments yesterday. And notably they are separate cases. But they are really remarkable in just how similar they are.

Prosecutors alleging that these two U.S. Navy Sailors, they shared sensitive military information with Chinese intelligence officers in exchange for thousands of dollars.

Now, in the first case that was unsealed yesterday against one of the sailors, Jinchao Wei, who was a machinist at Navel Base San Diego, essentially an engineer there. They say that he provided a Chinese intelligence officer with dozens of military manuals that could be useful to the officer to learn about U.S. Navy ships, including the USS Essex, on which Wei worked. He also provided them with details and photos of the layouts of these ships, as well as the weapons systems on them, according to prosecutors. And in exchange he received thousands of dollars over the course of February 2022 until the present day.

Now, in the second case, another U.S. Navy Sailor is accused of providing a Chinese intelligence officer with information about U.S. military movements and exercises in the Indo Pacific and for receiving about $15,000 for that information from this officer. He also allegedly provided photos an information of a U.S. radar system on a U.S. military base in Okinawa, Japan.

So, all of this underscoring, according to prosecutors, just how far China is willing to go to try to steal these military secrets from the U.S. Of course the U.S. military, of course, trying to clamp down on this kind of activity, Kate.

BOLDUAN: Natasha, it's good to see you. Thank you so much for bringing that to us.

Come up for us, six Mississippi police officers who called themselves the goon squad pleading guilty to torturing two black men. The new detail on the federal charges that they are now facing.

And authorities are expected to give an update on the Gilgo Beach killings next hour. We're going to bring that new conference to you once it begins.

We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)