Return to Transcripts main page

Don Lemon Tonight

What Donald Trump Did During The January 6 Riots; Secret Service Under Pressure; Heat Wave Sweeping Across U.K. And U.S.; Uvalde Parents Wants Chief Arredondo Out; House Members Arrested For Protesting At The SCOTUS; People Have Doubts On Secret Service's Account. Aired 10-11p ET

Aired July 19, 2022 - 22:00   ET




LAURA COATES, CNN HOST: Hey, thanks for watching everyone. I'll be back tomorrow night. DON LEMON TONIGHT starts right now. Hey, Don Lemon.

DON LEMON, CNN HOST: I was eavesdropping.

COATES: You were.

LEMON: I was eavesdropping. Yes.

COATES: What'd you learned?

LEMON: I was eavesdropping on your conversation? So, I, I think, I think it was Doug Jones who said the problem is, is that everyone, it was, it was like during the 2016 election, everyone in the green room would say one thing about --


LEMON: -- the former president, or before the cameras are rolling the commercial break. And then all of a sudden, the lights come on and they say a completely different thing because it's beneficial to them to say it. And I think that, was it Doug Jones who said, he's absolutely right.

COATES: Doug Heye and Doug Jones. I mean, they, both of them, the two Dougs, they called themselves Dougie fresh.

LEMON: The two Dougs, yes.

COATES: When we were sitting there out here behind the cameras, by the way. But listen, the thing is, I -- it's irritating to me as somebody who would like to think that if you are asking for the opportunity to lead, then you at least have the wherewithal and the confidence and the integrity to say, I'm going to tell it like it is because I, I would, I would hope. And again, I recognize that what I'm saying, people are probably chuckling and going well, that's not how Washington, D.C. works, baby girl. And I say, well, that's how it actually should work.

LEMON: It should yes.

COATES: And don't call me baby girl. So that's not part of the whole conversation here.


LEMON: You call yourself baby girl.

COATES: I know, that's how this work, OK? I can say baby girl.

LEMON: But you can no, you're right. I would say Polly, you're being pollyannish, but look, you're right though. That's how it should work, but we all know that that doesn't happen. And until, until we see some evidence, I'll believe it when I see it. How about that? That's, I'll believe it when I see it.

I keep hearing a lot of people saying, well, things are changing. People are backing away, but we'll see, we'll see how it plays out. The midterms are coming up and we'll have more evidence of it.


LEMON: Thank you.

COATES: Pollyanna doesn't work for me either, but thank you.

LEMON: All right, baby girl.


LEMON: I see. I'm sorry.

COATES: You get a pass. You get a pass. You get a pass. You get a pass, Don Lemon.

LEMON: You get a pass, OK.

COATES: You get a pass and you can get a pass.

LEMON: I was going to say, you sound like Oprah in the red dress and everything. I'll see you tomorrow. This is --

COATES: Thank you.

LEMON: -- Don lemon. I think she's speechless. This is DON LEMON TONIGHT.

And we've got a lot more on the headlines from the investigation coming up tonight, including those fake electors and the missing texts, the Secret Service under fire. And all that before we even get to the January 6th committee's big prime time hearing on Thursday, just days away with witnesses we have never heard from before.

In Georgia, all 16, so-called fake electors who were part of a Trump backed plot to replace Joe Biden's legitimate electors with fake Trump supporting electors, which is not a thing, right? Not a thing that you can't just replace electors in your -- if your own guy loses. All 16 of them are now targets of a criminal investigation in Fulton County.

And that is a clear sign that the investigation is heating up. And then there's the Secret Service. Turning over thousands of documents to the January 6th committee, but none of the potentially missing texts from January 5th and January 6th. Not one.

They say they haven't been able to recover any of the texts that were lost during a phone migration, but they're still trying.


UNKNOWN: Has the Secret Service informed the committee that these text messages that are in question are gone forever? Do you know that definitively yet?

REP. JAMIE RASKIN (D-MD): I've not been, I've not certain that any members of the committee have been fully apprised about it. And so, you're asking the question that we're asking, we're trying to determine where those texts are and whether they can be recovered and retrieved.


LEMON: There may be, may be legitimate, but I mean, it does sound fishy, right? Here's the thing. These are texts that should be part of the government record. That's why the National Archives joined a growing list of federal agencies and officials demanding answers about the missing texts. Texts from the day of one of the worst attacks in our democracy ever, texts that could have revealed the real time communications of agents around the then president.

And they're just gone? Missing? Just can't find them. Lost in a phone. After Congress informed the Secret Service twice that it needed to preserve and produce documents related to January 6th.

Now imagine what they could have told us about what went on in the SUV when the then president demanding -- demanded his agents take him to the capitol.


CASSIDY HUTCHINSON, FORMER AIDE TO White House CHIEF OF STAFF MARK MEADOWS: The president said something to the effect of, I'm the effing president, take me up to the Capitol now.


LEMON: Imagine what the committee could have learned about that moment. And now just oops and oops. Right? some people get that one. Even after everything we have seen and heard. That's crazy.

Ryan Nobles is here. He's on Capitol Hill for us this evening. Good evening, Ryan. [22:05:01]

Two key figures inside the west wing will testify on Thursday. What can we expect?

RYAN NOBLES, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes, that's right, Don. We know that Thursday's hearing is going to be focused on that 187 minutes while Donald Trump was in the White House. And the Capitol where I'm standing right now was under siege from his supporters.

And what the committee said that they're going to focus on is what they described as Trump's dereliction of duty. And two of the people we're going to hear from in live witness testimony include members of the White House team were in and around the Oval Office on that day, Matthew Pottinger, who was a former national security advisor and, Sarah Matthews who was the deputy press secretary.

These are both individuals that resign their posts after what happened on January 6th, but they will be the only voices. There will also be eclipse from these closed-door witness depositions, from people we're told that we have not heard from yet, that will give unique insight into what the former president was doing, or more importantly, not doing while his supporters were storming the Capitol.

LEMON: Ryan, also, former Trump White House aide, Garrett Ziegler met with the 1/6 committee today. He may be able to provide some additional information about that heated Oval Office meeting from December 20th. What do you know about that?

NOBLES: Yes, this is an interesting character in all of this, Don. This is someone who took it upon himself to welcome in Sidney Powell and Michael Flynn into the White House for that really heated meeting in December where they tried to make the case to Donald Trump, that he needed to continue to push on and fight the election results despite all the advice that he was getting from his professional staff and advisors at that time.

And of course, it led to that tweet that the former president set out the following day, encouraging his supporters to come to the White House. Garrett Ziegler was later, you know, had his ability to bring guests into the White House revoked by Mark Meadows after Meadows learned that he had brought those two individuals into the White House on that night.

So, Ziegler is just another one of these flies on the wall. You know, Don, a lot of these low-level staffers, they may not necessarily have a lot of power inside the White House. They might not have had a lot of sway as it comes to Donald Trump, but they were there as things were happening and they can provide insight that the committee is looking for. And we expect to hear from some of them during this hearing on Thursday.

LEMON: Are you, I was just going to say, are you the only person in the Capitol seems like you use are, and then two, three people just walked behind you. But. NOBLES: Yes, I was for about, you know, right up until you started talking to be, Don. Now there's a whole crowd of people coming by. They heard I was talking to you, I think. And they wanted to give, say hi to Don lemon.

LEMON: Tell them I said, hey. All right. Thank you. Hey, thank you. I appreciate it, Ryan.

Now I want to bring in CNN legal analyst, Elliot Williams and Olivia Troye, former advisor to Vice President Mike Pence.

Good evening to you, guys, working fairly late. It's 10 o'clock, not so late. Glad to see both of you.

Elliot, so many moving parts right now when it comes to January 6th. I mean, let's start with these 16 fake Trump electors.


LEMON: They've been told that they are now targets of this criminal probe. They were initially told that they were considered witnesses. What does this escalation mean? Should they expect charges? Do you see it as an escalation?

WILLIAMS: Yes, it -- it's definitely an escalation, Don. It doesn't mean that they necessarily can expect charges, but they should not be surprised if they get charged. Merely being brought in as a witness is exactly that. They are sought for their testimony when they are a target, that means that they're being investigated, and could be the subject, you know, and, and could ultimately be charged.

Now look, oftentimes when people are targets of investigations, that's not where it ends. It can either expand to other targets at their level or up the chain. And I think we know what that means. You know, and other people that that could ultimately reach namely, the president of the United States, we will see.

LEMON: Olivia, got something, man. Let's look ahead to Thursday's prime time January 6th hearing. Thursday's deputy -- excuse me, Trump's deputy national security advisor, Matthew Pottinger and the former White House aides Sarah Matthews, both resigned on January 6th.

And as Kaitlan Collins has noted here, both had proximity to the West Wing that on that day. What is it? What will it mean to hear firsthand information on Trump's inaction on that day?

OLIVIA TROYE, FORMER HOMELAND SECURITY ADVISER TO VICE PRESIDENT PENCE: Yes, I think it'll be a very critical firsthand testimony to really hear it. These are two staffers who played a very critical role in the Trump administration. I worked very closely with Matt Pottinger. Obviously, we worked on national security issues together, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic onset. And Sarah Matthews as deputy press secretary had a pretty significant role.

And so, these are inner circle to the Oval Office. These are people who have been in numerous meetings with the president and who witnessed firsthand what went down that day in the hallways, what conversations were had. And I have no doubt that hopefully we'll hear a corroboration of Cassidy Hutchinson's testimony, and we're probably going to learn a lot more details that are going to be an incredibly upsetting to all of us.


And I say that just because I've sat there in these hearings in person and each one of them, I think just gets to me at the core, especially when you're sitting in the room with members of Congress and capitol police officers who live that day first hand, and watching their reaction as they hear these accounts of people who witnessed all of this.

And so, I think, I think Thursday night will be incredibly important and I do hope that the American people are watching and listening to what really happened.

LEMON: Olivia, you're the perfect person to ask this question because it's often asked legitimately by some, and then by others who are like, you know, trying to point the finger at other people saying, you should have done this. You should have done this.

And I'm talking about the National Guard. While the capitol was under attack, we all remember asking where is the National Guard? And Jonathan Karl's book "Betrayal" he does outline how Pottinger asked Mark Meadows if it was true that the White House had blocked the deployment of the National Guard. Meadows told him that it wasn't true, and that he had given instructions to get the guard there. Do -- what insight could Pottinger be at here?

TROYE: Well, certainly he would be coordinating across the national security apparatus. It's either him or Robert or Brian in the moment. And so, he would be having these conversations with DOD. He certainly has the authority. He's got, you know, as we say, like the red switch, direct connection to cabinet level people.

And so, I think for Matt Pottinger to really ask that question, that means he's getting inside knowledge from a department in the U.S. government saying we don't have the go or we haven't heard it. Or he's hearing from people at a very single level at the National Guard.

And also, was he hearing it from the former vice president? Mike Pence. Was he hearing it from that staff? And so, I think those are going to be details that I think Matt Pottinger will able, will be able to speak to.

LEMON: Yes. I asked that because he had folks on the other side saying Nancy Pelosi should have called the National Guard, but it wasn't, that's not --


LEMON: That's not how it worked.

TROYE: That's not how it works. LEMON: Yes. Elliot, Pottinger also reportedly involved in

conversations related to the 25th amendment. How important will it be to know who was involved in all of these conversations?

WILLIAMS: Look it, I don't think that's relevant. Jo -- Don, I almost called you, John.


LEMON: That's right.

WILLIAMS: I don't think it's relevant to the judge.

LEMON: It's not the worst thing that I've been called?

WILLIAMS: Snap. No, but I don't think it's relevant to questions of criminality, which is sort of what everybody is talking about here.


WILLIAMS: What, what crimes, but also just, you know, the former president fitness to serve, that multiple members of the cabinet were repeatedly and staff, senior staff were repeatedly talking about removing the president and what they could do.

Now, you know, the operation of the -- of the 25th amendment for folks who don't know is that a majority of the cabinet can, in effect, band together and oust a president of the United States. And it is reported that members of the cabinet were talking about this at the time. It all speaks to president, former President Trump's fitness to serve even in places where his conduct may not have risen up to the level of being a crime.

LEMON: Olivia, you know, we -- we -- did you want to respond to that, Olivia?

TROYE: I, you know, I'm sorry I have to smirk because I'm thinking about some of these cabinet people that were thinking about invoking this amendment, but yet some of those are going to be speaking at the -- at the rally at the speech that Donald Trump is giving.

So, what's happened to that moral compass that apparently surfaced during that time. Where is it now when you're continuing to support this person?

LEMON: Well, I mean, do you have an answer for that or do you can, that's a question that you can't answer yourself.

TROYE: I ask myself that every day.

LEMON: Yes. So do I, and, but I talk to myself a lot, but still, that's important. What happened to those people who all said this was wrong and the president bears responsibility? And then all of a sudden, they're found at the Mar-a-Lago kissing the ring. Go ahead, Elliot.

WILLIAMS: What they said was and I oop. And you knew you got that one. Didn't you?

WILLIAMS: I got that reference when you made it, my friend, I did.

LEMON: Google it, guys. Just go to the internet. You'll figure it out. Elliot, so I want to ask you about the missing Secret Service text messages.


LEMON: I mean, we're going to talk in detail about it in just a moment here. But these texts from January 5th and sixth are still missing.


LEMON: Again, there could be a legitimate reason it could be, but how does? Look, I think it's fishy.


LEMON: I think it's, you know, it's questionable, there's something's up.

WILLIAMS: I think absolutely it's fishy and questionable just because the timing and the dates just don't make sense, Don. The bigger picture issue, I think it's a failure of government. Because the Secret Service, like many law enforcement agencies puts it in the hands of individual officers to determine when to back up their own data.

Because what they said was in this scenario, they said, hey, everybody, back your data up, you're getting new phones in effect in this what's called a data migration. It wasn't, you know, was required. But it was up to them to do it themselves.

And that just isn't a great way to store government data, to put that sort of, incentive or power in the hands of individual agents or officers, they could have required that they use certain phones or certain apps that stored messages and data. Because text messages don't automatically get saved or stored. And I think people don't know that.

So that's the failure here. And really, it's the kind of thing that Congress ought to take a look at, or the inspector general, this independent body that investigates a Secret Service ought to take a look at.


But it's just a failure in how government works. You just shouldn't be putting agents in the position of deciding whether to store their own data. When there are circumstances when it comes up and people need to look at it like today.

LEMON: And Olivia, they should know better. I mean, look at --


LEMON: -- remember the whole text messages with this was a different agency but with Peter Strzok, right?


LEMON: And I mean, they played such a big role in all this, you know, people were screaming about Peter Strzok and the text messages and whatever. And then here we have another agency in government. And text messages could play a big role, but all of a sudden, they're gone.

TROYE: Yes. And I have a couple of thoughts on this. I mean, first we, we talk a lot about accountability. And I really think there needs to be accountability for a federal agency here. If we let them off the hook on this one, then I think that, you know, all bets are off. I think we're -- we're not holding them accountable.


LEMON: What is accountability, Olivia, with this one?

TROYE: Well, that's a good great question. When I, you know, and I think it's accountability at the leadership level first and foremost. I mean, you're putting the onus on these agents to back up their text. But also, I've got to say, if you are a Secret Service agent and you're making constant real time security decisions in that role, you're playing a critical role in the national security apparatus.

You're protecting the life of the president. You're protecting the leaders of the country. And you decided that those text records were not important enough to save even for historical purposes. They decided that, hey, I'll just go ahead and delete them. I'm just not, I'm sorry, I'm -- I'm just really confused by that. I'm confused about the judgment call on that one.

And I'll tell you this, like, people watched me pack up my office when I was in the White House and I was leaving, and also, I handed over everything willingly knowing I didn't want to make the mistake of keeping something potentially illegally not knowing myself. So, I made sure to really do it everything by the book.

And so, I just find it hard to believe that you would be serving in that role and right around those dates specifically that are significant in the history of our country.

WILLIAMS: And one more thing, Don. It's not just --

TROYE: That they'll move on.

WILLIAMS: I'm sorry, Olivia.


WILLIAMS: It's one more thing. It's not just a good government thing. There's actually a legal reason often to save things like text messages, because often they need to be turned over to defendants in investigations and so on. This is an obligation that our government puts on banks when we investigate them but isn't preserving its own data.

LEMON: Yes. But if you, if you lose information like that, I mean, that could, that could lose you the case. Right?


LEMON: Then it could say that cross the evidence out. Right?


LEMON: Throw it out.

WILLIAMS: There's practical reasons.


WILLIAMS: But also, you're required under law to turn a lot of things over.


WILLIAMS: When, when you know that they're in that you're a prosecutor or an investigator and they're in your possession. So again, it's just a, it's, you know, backing up everything Olivia said, it's just sort of a moral or it's like social failing, but also a big legal one, too.

LEMON: Thank you both. I enjoy the conversation. So many questions, right? So many questions.

WILLIAMS: Thanks, Don.

LEMON: So many questions about those potentially missing Secret Service texts from the day of the insurrection and now the National Archives getting involved, demanding answers, but is there any way to recover the texts?



LEMON: The Secret Service turning over thousands of documents to the January 6th committee, but not any of the text messages potentially missing from January 5th and the day of the Capitol insurrection on January 6th. Now the National Archives demanding answers telling DHS that they need to explain whether text messages were deleted. And if so, why?

So, joining me now to discuss is CNN law enforcement correspondent, Whitney Wild and Jason Baron, he's the former director of litigation for the National Archives and Records Administration.

Good to see both of you. Again, thank you so much for joining. Whitney, the Secret Service telling the committee that they aren't currently aware of any text messages that were requested and then lost. But how does that line up with everything else that we have been learning?

WHITNEY WILD, CNN LAW ENFORCEMENT CORRESPONDENT: Well, there's these two competing narratives. So, Don the inspector general clearly thinks that there are text messages that he should have received through his investigation, but did not. The Secret Service, however, is maintained that they have been fully compliant. They have handed over everything that the various entities who are investigating them have asked for.

However, they say they're continuing to conduct forensic examinations of cell phones to be absolutely sure that nothing was deleted, that shouldn't have been. So, there are still a lot of outstanding questions, but at this point, sources within the Secret Service telling us that they -- that nothing was deleted that was supposed to be handed over to the I.G. and it wasn't done maliciously, rather anything that would've been deleted was just happenstance because of this ill-timed e-mail migration, Don.

LEMON: OK. So, Jason, I wonder what you think about this if that explanation holds water or if that'll work, because the National Archives has given the Secret Service 30 days to explain what happened here. I mean, how should that kind of information have been handled, especially given their relation to January 6th?

JASON BARON, FORMER DIRECTOR OF LITIGATION, NATIONAL ARCHIVES & RECORDS ADMINISTRATION: The National Archives will, I'm sure, do a very good job of asking questions of DHS, they certainly will, you know, expect a full answer from the agency and then they will follow up. There may not be anything that the National Archives can do if the texts were in fact on phones that were essentially tossed away.

There is a, some residual question of whether a commercial service that was involved in the text messaging that DHS used, whether something could be recovered from them. But I doubt that those messages have lasted until now. And so, I think, at the end of the day, NARA is going to be left with finding that there are gaps and recommending some form of best practices that would --


LEMON: So, no way to recover these texts?

BARON: I don't think so if, in fact they'd been, if they were not manually uploaded --


BARON: -- by individuals at DHS to an internal server.

LEMON: Wow. Wow. Wow. Whitney, sources telling CNN that before the, this migration happened, several congressional committees told the Secret Service to hold on to information and that employees were told twice to back up their phones. I mean, this should have been avoidable.


WILD: Well, you'd think so. I mean, Don, as you point out, they were told that to back up their phones they'd have to do it themselves. As you point out, they were told this in December, they were told it again in January. And also, they were told how to do it.

So, but again, you know, as the previous panel pointed out that this was really incumbent upon the individual agents to make the decision that what they had on their phones qualified for having to be saved. And it, at the end of the day, it was really on the honor system, but yes, you're right.

I mean, pretty much immediately after the January 6th riot, 10 days or so, there were congressional committees who were saying, this was a really big deal. Save all your records. We want to investigate it. That doesn't seem to jive with how that message landed within the Secret Service, because clearly, this e-mail migration went forward and some people may not have, you know, backed up their -- their cell phones.

But the question, Don, still remains, was there anything that should have been handed over that was deleted?

LEMON: Right.

WILD: That is an outstanding question at this point.


LEMON: Right? They were trying to do it themselves. Go ahead, Jason.

BARON: Don, I have a lot of sympathy for extremely busy Secret Service agents. They don't come to work. They come to work to save the president and to help the country not to do record keeping.

And so, the issue is, is that Congress passed a law in 2014, that requires that these kind of text messages, electronic messages forwarded to an official system that does archive it, but it does, the law doesn't work for, many types of the new types of electronic messaging, as well as ephemeral message like WhatsApp and Confide and Signal all sorts communications, very difficult for individuals to just upload or to make sure that they're archived.

So there needs to be some further thought, some further legislation. The Senate oversight committee has been looking into it and had a hearing about it earlier this year, about how to improve the law, to make sure that there's automatic capture of text messages in this type of situation.

LEMON: Well, Whitney, the question is what could this law data mean for the investigation? Right? I mean, these texts could be crucial, especially in light of recent testimony. Look at what Cassidy Hutchinson said, look at what supposedly happened inside the SUV. WILD: Right. Well, I mean, that's exactly it, Don. They could like

anybody's text message, you know, who's in a chaotic situation, they could reveal the real time reaction to what agents were seeing on the ground. They could explain why certain decisions were made or certain decisions were not made.

But Don, I will say it's also entirely possible that some of that information was captured in some of the -- in some of the records that were handed over. So, what we know is that the Secret Service has maintained over and over that they've handed over volumes of e-mails. Almost 800,000 e-mails, as well as around 7,600 teams chats about work, about operational planning.

So, you know, it's entirely possible that some of these key details that the I -- the I.G. and others think they, you know, think are crucial to this investigation may be captured in other places that they haven't had a chance to review yet.

There's so many outstanding questions here, Don, but the reality is that, that sort of candid reaction, you know, it's just, if that was transmitted in a text message between agents as Jason points out, the likelihood of that coming back is extremely, extremely unlikely.

LEMON: Whitney, Jason, thank you both very much. I appreciate it.

Extreme heat warnings, record high temperatures in multiple cities, 100 million Americans, 100 million Americans in danger zones. Look at that map. Wow. We'll go to some of those places right after this.



LEMON: A record breaking heat wave scorching Europe and the United States. OK. The U.K., look at this, seeing the hottest days on record with temperatures breaching 104 degrees. The heat also leading to raging wildfires all across the country, as well as in France and Spain. More than 1,100 people in Spain and Portugal have died as a result of the extreme.

And it's not letting up anytime soon with temperatures expected to hit as high as 105 degrees tomorrow. Here at home in the United States, more than 100 million people are facing an excessive heat warning or advisory, including in Texas and Oklahoma.

Cities air setting record highs today with temperatures ranging from 105 to 115 degrees. Extreme heat will last across the U.S. for the next few days.

And tomorrow, the heat index will surpass 100 degrees in numerous cities across the south. Look at that. Wow. Those record-breaking temperatures show how much of a crisis this heat has become. But now some cities are hiring chief heat officers.

So, joining me now, Jane Gilbert, the chief heat officer for Miami- Dade County and David Hondula, director of Phoenix's Office of Heat Response and Mitigation.

I'm so glad you guys are here. It's an important story and it's, it's very, very dangerous. Jane, you're up first. Miami is among the cities included in the danger zone. We have seen hundreds of heat-related deaths in Europe. What do Americans need to know about the toll this can have on someone's health?


JANE GILBERT, CHIEF HEAT OFFICER, MIAMI-DADE COUNTY: Yes, so heat is it's critical that people take the precautions necessary. If they do have access to A.C. to stay inside during these excessive heat days. If they don't, to have windows open with a fan to cool off their extremities, their feet, their hands, and cool -- cool ice baths, put cold towels on the back of their necks and to check on their friends, family, and neighbors.

Elderly young children, people with certain health conditions can be more vulnerable to the heat. It's really important to check on those people and make sure that they are, they have the ability to take care of themselves.

LEMON: Yes. Look, I know it's summer and people are going to say it's summer. Of course, it's happened to look at these temperatures. I mean, this is unusual, David. A Louisiana police officer died this weekend from a heat-related illness.

Last week in Arizona a UPS driver collapsed from hot temperatures. What signs should people be on the lookout for when it comes to heat- related sickness?

GILBERT: So, the first thing is --


DAVID HONDULA, DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF HEAT RESPONSE AND MITIGATION FOR PHOENIX, ARIZONA: So, thanks for having me, Don, to talk about this important issue, Don. The heat can affect everyone. We're all at risk. And unfortunately, one of the first symptoms of heat exhaustion is that we become a little disoriented, little confused. So, please, trust your body. If you're feeling any suggestion that you might be in in trouble, take it easy. Find a way to take a break.

But as, Jane mentioned, please also try to look out for community members, particularly the most vulnerable, particularly folks who might not have access to regular shelter. If we see somebody sleeping, for example, out in the sun on a hot surface, don't assume they're just taking a nap. There could be a real medical emergency there and a call to 911 might be necessary.

LEMON: These extreme temperatures are happening all over the globe, Jane. We saw what's happening in Europe. Do you think people understand how high the stakes are and how quickly things have changed?

GILBERT: Well, I know, I know people are feeling it, right? They're seeing the news, they're feeling it, but you know, it's going to continue to get higher. We have almost doubled the number of days with a heat index over 90 degrees here in Miami than we did in the 1970s.

And we're getting many, many more days with the heat index at the more extreme levels of 103, 105, that is not only concerning to people's health but their pocketbooks.


GILBERT: Our outdoor workers can't work as long. They lose work time. People can't afford this A.C. the higher electricity costs. It's both a health and economic crisis.

LEMON: I just got a text from a friend, my friend Tina in Dallas at 111 degrees here in Dallas, electric bill $561. And it hurts. I mean, you know, it's not just that, but this is costing folks as well and the power grid, David. I mean, people are going to have to pay bigger utility bills and it takes a toll on the power.

HONDULA: Yes, we've got a lot of work to do at all levels of government. I'm so proud in Phoenix to have been able to join Jane and colleagues from across the world in this new approach to addressing heat at the local government level with new offices, new people who are dedicated to focus on this problem.

But we need to be thinking about up the ladder as well. Historically, our national utility assistance conversation has focused on heating in the cold season, and that's certainly a critical need as well. I think we found ourselves a little under resourced to provide cooling resources to people in the summer.

I know in Florida that they're strapped, in Arizona, we're strapped, and Texas were strapped. So, I think, I think there's more of a role that federal government can play in helping support our communities get through these really hot summers.

LEMON: So not to mention, Jane, the infrastructure here. I mean, we need to upgrade our infrastructure as well.

GILBERT: Absolutely, not only to protect the grid, but also to cool our neighborhoods. So, we're getting increasing heat in our cities not only because of climate change, but because of our development patterns with less vegetation, less trees, more pavements.

This is something that both David and I are working on in our cities to really ramp up the number of our tree canopy. We're focusing it on those areas that need it the most. The areas with our highest urban heat islands are well-documented to be also where we have the most people showing up for emergency room visits for heat.


GILBERT: So, it's -- and just this weekend, our medical director saw elderly who had been waiting at a bus stop and in the emergency room. And just waiting it from waiting at a bus stop. And so, it's definitely infrastructure. We need shelters in those bus stops. We need -- we need trees.

So, it is also making sure our electrical grid can handle these temperatures. But it -- it's also about cooling our neighbors.

LEMON: Well, I mean stay cool. I mean that. Thank you both. I really appreciate you joining.


HONDULA: Thanks, Don.

GILBERT: Thank you.

LEMON: Thank you. And everybody be safe out there. This is serious stuff. You know, his fate will be decided in just a few days. Sources telling CNN the Uvalde school district is expected to fire their police chief. Stay with us.


LEMON: So tonight, the school board in Uvalde, Texas nearing a decision on the fate of district police chief Pete Arredondo for his role in the disastrous police response to the mass shooting at Robb Elementary School that killed 19 children and two teachers.

A source saying the board has told Arredondo it will meet on Saturday and is expected to vote to fire him.

Let's go right now to CNN's Shimon Prokupecz for the very latest. Shimon, good evening to you. Tell us more about your new reporting on Uvalde school police chief Pete Arredondo.


SHIMON PROKUPECZ, CNN CRIME AND JUSTICE REPORTER: Yes. So, Don, we've learned that there were discussions through the day about how to proceed in terms of Pete Arredondo. And a decision has been made that they do not want to keep him. They know they have a problem. The school board, they understand that it's time to let him go.

And so, there's a process now underway for that to happen. It's going to take a few days. I'm told that there's going to be a school board hearing. We should see a notice perhaps tomorrow that there will be a school board hearing on Saturday. And that is when the decision will ultimately be made.

He has a few days here to decide now whether or not he wants to resign before Saturday, but by all accounts, from everything that our team here on the ground is told that it is expected that he will not be the school police chief for much longer, Don.

LEMON: But he could resign, no indication of that, right? Before that Saturday meeting, but no indication.

PROKUPECZ: There's no indication. That's right, as of now, Don.

LEMON: Yes. So last night's contentious school board meeting and parents wanted to see Arredondo fired but today, watch this.


BRETT CROSS, UVALDE SCHOOL SHOOTING VICTIM'S PARENT: If he's not fired by noon tomorrow, then I want your resignation and every single one of you board members, because you all do not give a damn about our children or us.

RACHEL MARTINEZ, UVALDE PARENT: The current staff is incompetent and liable for the already massive failure. You need to clean house. You need to start from zero.

JAZMIN CAZARES, UVALDE SHOOTING VICTIM'S SISTER: What are you guys going to do to make sure I don't have to watch my friends die? What are you going to do to make sure I don't have to wait 77 minutes bleeding out on my classroom floor just like my little sister did?


LEMON: So that was last night. They wanted him to resign by the day. Is frustration completely boiling over because there's been so little accountability here?

PROKUPECZ: Yes, no, that's exactly right, Don. That's the problem. And what's really remarkable and really, I have to say, I've been with these families. I've been at these school board meetings before I've been at the council meetings.

I've never seen the families speak out like they did last night and it was just incredible to watch because you could really start to sense that the more information they get, the more they're told, the more answers they're demanding, they're starting to unite. They're starting to get together and demand the change that they all want. And also, the accountability.

And we really started to see that last night, you know, many of them were afraid to speak out in the beginning as they were starting to learn information. The thing that's happening here is with the release of that body camera footage, the hallway footage, this report, they're really starting to learn information and it's not sitting well with them. And it shouldn't.

Their kids are afraid to go to school. Parents are afraid to send them to school. And they're talking about having virtual classes. So, what they want is changed. They want to feel safer, but they also want even school personnel. They want other people fire. They want a new police department, so they're still going to keep going. But this is certainly the first step in what they feel will be some accountability for Pete Arredondo.

LEMON: Yes, Shimon Prokupecz, thank you, sir. I appreciate it.

Seventeen members of Congress arrested today protesting for abortion rights in front of the Supreme Court. Stay with us.


LEMON: Dozens of abortion rights protesters descending on the Supreme Court this afternoon to protest the high court's landmark decision overturning Roe v. Wade. Capitol police ordering the protestors to cease and desist their actions and arresting those who sat in the street.

Police said that they arrested at least 35 people, including 17 members of Congress. Among those taken into custody, New York Democratic Alexandria Casio- Cortez. There she is in green scarf there, and Democratic Representative Ayanna Pressley, again wearing it right there in your screen, of Massachusetts.

California Congresswoman Jackie Speier tweeting after her arrest, proud to march with my Democratic colleagues and get arrested for women's rights, abortion rights, the rights for people to control their own bodies and the future of our democracy.

Next, they got thousands of documents, but not the potentially missing texts. Where did the Secret Service texts go? Plus, Steve Bannon on trial. We're going to tell you what went down in court today.



LEMON: The Secret Service turning over thousands of documents to the January 6th select committee, but not including text messages potentially missing from the insurrection and the day before. Sources tells CNN that the Secret Service told the committee that they're currently unaware of any text messages that were not retained, which of course raises even more questions about the National Archives. And the National Archives wants answers.

I want to bring in now CNN legal analyst, Carrie Cordero and law enforcement analyst and former Secret Service agent Jonathan Wackrow. Hello to both of you. Thank you for joining us this evening.

Jonathan, the Secret Service says text messages from January 5th and 6th are still missing. You say it is a bad look for them, but we're talking about an insurrection here. Why wouldn't the agency protecting the president and the vice president, you know, and, you know, members of our government be sure to save every single piece of information from that critical day.

JONATHAN WACKROW, CNN LAW ENFORCEMENT ANALYST: Don, this, you know, this disclosure that these text messages are still missing really is an unforced error by the Secret Service. They should never be in this position today, but yet they find themselves here. Because they know that they are bound by regulations to preserve all records of their activity. And that includes every single text message, e-mail, electronic communication.

And what happened today is, you know, this admission by the service just compounds the problems that they face because there's no resolution, right? We're sitting here, there was a subpoena. The inspector general went up and spoke to the January 6th commission that led to that subpoena.

There's critical information that's missing and it's still not resolved. And the result of this is optically the public just, in public it raises more doubts about the Secret Service. So, they need to act very quickly right now, starting tomorrow to start bringing some level of resolution, you know, to these text messages.

And here's what I want to hear from the Secret Service very quickly. First, what exactly was the data that was lost? We're talking about text messages, but I want to know the context of those -- of that data. Does that data have any nexus to direct activity in Washington, D.C. on January 6th?

Second, how exactly was it lost? Right. We're putting a lot of responsibility on individual agents and officers saying that they were, you know, it was their responsibility, but what was the redundant system there?


There should have been a level of redundancy in backup to ensure that data was not lost.