Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Federal Murder Probe to Be Opened in Capitol Police Officer's Death; U.S. Capitol Police Officer Dies from Injuries Suffered During Siege; U.S. Capitol Police Chief Resigns Amid Criticism Over Breach of Capitol Building; Calls for Trump's Removal Grow Louder; Trump in a Video Concedes Defeat Following Capitol Hill Riot; Interview with Representative Joe Neguse (D-CO) about Possible Second Trump Impeachment. Aired 9-9:30a ET

Aired January 08, 2021 - 09:00   ET

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

[09:00:00]

JIM SCIUTTO, CNN ANCHOR: Allies are abandoning the president as pressure grows to impeach him. You heard that right. For a second time in a year.

Hours from now House Democrats are holding a call to discuss their next move. The assistant House speaker told CNN a short time ago there could be a vote as early as mid-next week to impeach. And it is not just Democrats, Republican Senator Ben Sasse signaled that he will consider Articles of Impeachment as well.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. BEN SASSE (R-NE): The House, if they come together and have a process, I will definitely consider whatever articles they might move because as I've told you I believe the president has disregarded his oath of office. He swore an oath to the American people to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution. He acted against that. What he did was wicked.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCIUTTO: Remember another Republican Senator Mitt Romney voted to remove him from office in the last impeachment.

Also this morning, we are bracing for more administration officials to quit following the president's response to and incitement of the siege on the Capitol. Former DHS secretary Kirstjen Nielsen told me this morning, quote, "President Trump's actions recklessly incited fear, confusion and violence." Remember, incitement is illegal.

Five people are now dead as a result of a riot that the president's words encouraged.

So, Mr. President, your so-called concession that Biden won this election after weeks of you deliberately feeding lies to the American people, now blood has been spilled on Capitol Hill. That supposed concession too late. And time is running out for your supporters who stormed that building and bragged about it on social media.

We are on top of all the developments from the hill to the ongoing investigation of that deadly riot. Our team following all the latest developments across Washington. Let's begin, though, with a conference call among House Democrats slated to begin in just a couple of hours. CNN's Suzanne Malveaux is on Capitol Hill.

Suzanne, it's CNN's reporting that there is already it seems a strong push among Democrats, support for another impeachment vote. Is that what you're hearing?

SUZANNE MALVEAUX, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: There is a lot of emotion, Jim. There is a lot of frustration and there is a general sense here especially among Democrats but also Republicans that something has to be done. That the president has to pay in some form or fashion, and that they are looking at Vice President Pence, the 25th Amendment, invoking that and seeing that as less likely of an option here and something that Congress has to essentially take charge of.

So in about three hours or so you're going to see this conference call that's going to happen with the House Democrats to discuss that very issue about the impeachment proceedings that is becoming more and more likely to happen here, and this is not going to be the kind of thing that we saw in 2019 when we covered the first impeachment of President Trump, but something that is much more truncated and fast.

So they're looking at less than a two-week window here, a privileged resolution that would be drawn up that would allow to bypass what the normal process is when you have hearings and the House Judiciary goes to the House floor for a vote. It would skip these hearings, it would actually skip this investigation, and within a two-day window actually have the House be able to vote.

It's a simple majority for the president to be impeached. Democrats feel like they potentially have those numbers and that they could move this forward. Just take a listen to Representative Clark.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. KATHERINE CLARK (D-MA): We know that we have limited time, but that every day that Donald Trump is president of the United States is a day of grave danger. So we can use procedural tools to get Articles of Impeachment to the floor for a House vote quickly.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MALVEAUX: And so while this could happen next week, mid next week of course the next process would be to kick it over to the Senate for a trial. It is not likely Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell would call a trial to convict the president within that very narrow window of time. It is also not likely, but possible to have that two thirds majority necessary in the Senate to actually convict and remove the president from office.

But, Jim, it almost doesn't matter when you talk to lawmakers here. They just want to have it go on record that the president must be held accountable in some form or fashion, and that it would make history if he was impeached for a second time.

SCIUTTO: Suzanne Malveaux, thanks very much.

We have Jeremy Diamond as well.

Of course, Jeremy, you'll remember, the last time we did this last year, majority in the House impeached the equivalent of an indictment in effect. Only one Republican in the Senate voted to convict, that Mitt Romney.

[09:05:02]

We heard from Senator Sasse this morning saying he would be open to it. Are they outliers here if even this were to get to a vote in the Senate?

JEREMY DIAMOND, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: You know, it appears that way as of now, but clearly, Jim, as you can see there is growing support for some kind of action among Republicans against the president. There are calls for his resignation. You heard the former White House communications director Alyssa Farah making that statement earlier today on "NEW DAY."

But one thing is clear is that impeachment is more likely than invoking the 25th Amendment and that is because at this point a source close to the vice president is telling us that Vice President Mike Pence is highly unlikely to support efforts to use the 25th Amendment with a majority of the Cabinet members to strip the president of his presidential powers. But what is clear is that at least two Cabinet members I'm told just yesterday were having conversations with other members of the Cabinet discussing the possibility of demanding a Cabinet meeting to confront the president about his behavior and hanging over that meeting would be this idea of the 25th Amendment.

All of that, those calls for resignation, these discussions among members of the Cabinet, resignations from two Cabinet members, secretary of Transportation Elaine Chao and secretary of Education Betsy DeVos, all of that factored into the president's decision to ultimately release that video last night in which he finally acknowledged that he will not be president come January 20th at noon.

And we're also told that top aides to the president made very clear to him that if he did not release that video yesterday that he could face the prospect of being removed from office either through the 25th Amendment or through impeachment proceedings.

SCIUTTO: Jeremy, the D.C. U.S. attorney said publicly yesterday that the president and others, anyone who incited this riot, could be investigated for a criminal act. And I wonder based on your reporting is legal jeopardy also driving the release of that presidential video statement yesterday, his concerns about that?

DIAMOND: Yes, it does appear that the president has been advised and warned that he could face some kind of legal jeopardy based on his comments at that rally to that mob of supporters, many of whom ultimately stormed Capitol Hill on Wednesday. And so that is something very real for the president and something he was warned about before he ultimately delivered that video message last night.

So certainly factoring in. And we also know that beyond that, even before these questions of legal jeopardy relating to this, the president is concerned about his legal jeopardy more broadly and that is why sources have told me and my colleague Pamela Brown that the president has actually asked people and been talking to people in recent weeks about the possibility of pardoning himself, asking both about the legal ramifications of that, whether he can actually do it, a question that is unsettled in constitutional law, but also asking about the political fallout.

Remember, this is a president who wants to remain politically active, wants to retain a hold on the Republican Party, and certainly a self- pardon would factor into that, but it is something we're told that the president has been considering.

SCIUTTO: We should note that the Justice Department Office of Legal Counsel in 1974 issued an opinion that a president could not pardon himself, though as you note, of course, this has not been decided in court.

Jeremy Diamond, thanks very much. Remarkable that we discuss a presidential self-pardon as just another thing. But here we are.

Joining me now to discuss is Congressman Joe Neguse, he's a Democrat from Colorado. He's also a member of the House Judiciary Committee and co-chair Hf house Democratic Policy and Communications Committee.

Congressman, thanks so much for taking the time this morning.

Thank you, Jim. Good morning.

SCIUTTO: So you heard the comments from the deputy speaker this morning on this broadcast. To your knowledge and based on your conversations with Democratic leadership, is a vote likely next week to impeach the president?

REP. JOE NEGUSE (D-CO): Well, I can't confirm that. The leadership has certainly had multiple conversations and as you mentioned at the very top of the hour we will be having a very important caucus call in just a few hours where the entire caucus, the House Democratic Caucus, will have an opportunity to have a robust conversation about the appropriate next steps.

Obviously there are many in the caucus, myself included, who feel that action needs to be taken and that we need to, as a Congress, respond swiftly and respond urgently to this crisis that has developed over the course of the last 48 hours and that the necessary course moving forward would either be an invocation of the 25th Amendment which so many Republicans and Democrats have now called for or ultimately impeachment. And that's certainly something that I support as well as many of my colleagues. SCIUTTO: OK. So you support impeachment. Will you support an article

beyond condemning him for his behavior on Wednesday to ban Trump from ever running again? Do you believe that that should be one of the articles the House considers?

[09:10:00]

NEGUSE: I certainly think it should be part of the conversation. I think ultimately I'm not going to get ahead of, you know, my colleagues in the caucus as well as my colleagues on the Judiciary Committee. As you know, impeachment is a solemn undertaking under the Constitution, we have an obligation to discharge our oaths under the Constitution and certainly invoking that procedure as we did a year ago is an important step, it's a historical step, it's a step that we don't take lightly.

So we'll have a number of conversations over the coming days including here in just a few hours, and I suspect that that will be part and parcel to that conversation. But make no mistake, I mean, ultimately what this is about, you heard Senator Sasse I thought articulate very well the stakes. There is no question that this president has yet again betrayed his oath of office. I was in the Capitol.

SCIUTTO: OK.

NEGUSE: I was on the floor during the armed insurrection that developed outside of the Capitol and ultimately that breached our Capitol doors. And I never imagined that we'd have a president of the United States who would engage in the type of incendiary rhetoric that would create that type of situation.

SCIUTTO: Yes.

NEGUSE: Something has to be done.

SCIUTTO: Had to be fought apparently just to issue some condemnation of it. There is one of your Republican colleagues, Adam Kinzinger, who has publicly called for the president's removal. So far he is in quite a small minority, although Republican Senator Ben Sasse said he would be open to considering Articles of Impeachment. Have you had private conversations with Republicans that would indicate this would not be purely a Democratic enterprise if a vote were to go forward?

NEGUSE: I certainly have had many conversations with my Republican colleagues with respect to the 25th Amendment and I will tell you that I think there are members who are supportive of the invocation of the 25th Amendment. I appreciate and was heartened by Representative Kinzinger's comments earlier this week, as you said, standing up and saying the truth that this needed to happen and that ultimately Republicans needed to take responsibility and there needed to be accountability.

With respect to impeachment itself, again, I think those conversations are ongoing. It's an open question as to whether or not our Republican colleagues would concur in that. I certainly hope that they would, given the events of the last 72 hours, but we'll have to wait and see. SCIUTTO: Five people died as a result of this riot. There is now new

information that prosecutors will consider -- are now treating this as a murder investigation into the death of the Capitol Hill police officer who sadly died last night from injuries sustained there.

Who do you blame beyond the president's insightful rhetoric for the security response? You had hundreds of people break into the Capitol building, threaten the lives of sitting members of Congress. Who do you blame for that security failure?

NEGUSE: Well, Jim, first I would say my heart breaks for the loss of life and to learn this morning of the terrible death of a Capitol police officer.

SCIUTTO: Yes.

NEGUSE: You know, the rank-and-file police officers who protected us, those of us who, you know, were on the House floor and across the Capitol complex who risked their lives to protect members of Congress and their staff and my thoughts and prayers are with his family.

Look, clearly there were systemic security lapses that have to be remedied and obviously you see the consequences with respect to several personnel changes just the last 48 hours in terms of the resignations of the sergeant-of-arms at the House and obviously the chief of the Capitol Police.

I think the Congress is going to have to commence a significant undertaking and congressional investigation into what went wrong and how to prevent this from happening in the future. It can never happen again. The notion that a capitol was essentially stormed for the first time since the war in 1812, again, I never would have imagined that that could take place even as I was sitting in the House chamber delivering our opposition to the baseless objections that were being made to the electoral certification.

I don't think many of my colleagues necessarily recognized that this could happen in the United States of America, the center of our nation's government.

SCIUTTO: Let me ask you this. You say the president's rhetoric helped incite that violence. Even after those protesters stormed the Capitol, resulting in the deaths of five people, two-thirds of your Republican colleagues, two-thirds of them, still voted to reject the results of an election based on baseless claims of fraud which was the spark, right? That's the belief held by those folks. They believe that was the justification for them to storm Congress and, in effect, carry out an insurrection.

Do you hold your Republican colleagues in the House who voted for this even after the riot? Do you believe they share responsibility for this?

NEGUSE: Jim, I think they're going to have to explain their votes to their constituents and ultimately to the American people. It's hard for me to understand. It's hard for me to fathom as I said on the House floor, you know, at 2:00, 3:00 in the morning when we completed the certification, that some of my colleagues would continue in this, you know, baseless --

[09:15:00]

JIM SCIUTTO, ANCHOR, NEWSROOM: Yes --

NEGUSE: Enterprise of objecting to the lawful certification of electoral votes when literally someone lost their life a near 50 feet, 60 feet from the house floor where we were addressing this critical matter. I'm at a loss of words as to understanding how they could do that. Clearly, this president remains -- you know, continues to have a grip on parts of his political --

SCIUTTO: Yes --

NEGUSE: Party, and now is a moment for Americans of good faith, including Republicans, all -- you know, people on all -- people of all political stripes to stand up and come together and call this for what it is and speak --

SCIUTTO: Well --

NEGUSE: Truth about what's happening in our country. And I would say --

SCIUTTO: We'll see.

NEGUSE: It's important for us to also recognize people like Representative Kinzinger and other Republicans who are in fact doing that, and I hope that more will do so.

SCIUTTO: He remains very much in the small minority. Congressman Joe Neguse, we appreciate you joining the program this morning.

NEGUSE: Thank you, Jim.

SCIUTTO: Still to come, a federal murder investigation will now be opened into the death of a Capitol Hill police officer. The latest on the investigation into this deadly riot. That's what it was. And former first lady Michelle Obama says time for social media companies to permanently ban President Trump. They've done so temporarily. Will they? And Dr. Sanjay Gupta received his second dose of the coronavirus vaccine today. He joins us live. Those vaccines are going out. It's important to keep track of that ongoing story. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:20:00]

SCIUTTO: This morning, federal prosecutors have announced that a murder investigation will be opened into the death of a U.S. Capitol police officer who died last night from injuries suffered during the attempted coup on the Capitol building. That's right. Coup. Officer Brian D. Sicknick, 42 years old later died at the hospital after being injured while engaging with pro-Trump rioters. Sicknick is the fifth person to die due to Wednesday's violent insurrection. Also this morning, U.S. Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund has announced he will resign. It comes amid growing criticism of the lack of preparedness, and just a stunning security failures in dealing with the violent mobs who breach and stormed the capitol, threatening the lives of hundreds of U.S. lawmakers and staff.

The first federal charges have now been taken down in connection to the riot, more could be coming today, and the FBI is now investigating the president's involvement as well. You heard that right. The president's involvement. CNN justice correspondent Jessica Schneider joins me now. Jessica, a murder investigation under way into the death of the Capitol police officer, but also how seriously is the investigation of the president's involvement in this?

JESSICA SCHNEIDER, CNN JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: Yes, basically investigators, Jim, saying that no stone will be left unturned, and this includes the president. So right now, federal law enforcement, they're emphasizing that the charges already brought, the people already arrested, it's only the beginning. They'll be unveiling more criminal complaints. And as you mentioned, investigators are looking at all people who played a role in this insurrection including the president, the way he incited the crowd, plus Rudy Giuliani who also made calls during that pre-riot rally, he said go to combat and fight. He said this, he said let's have trial by combat.

So, investigators are looking into that. And then this morning, prosecutors unveiling more details about the people involved in this attack on the capitol, and some indications that it really could have been much worse. One man, prosecutors saying was arrested with a military-style, semi-automatic rifle, 11 Molotov cocktails that were ready to go. So that's just one person arrested, but nearly two dozen appeared in D.C.'s superior court last night on charges, several others appearing before a judge in federal court. Jim, these arrests, these charges, they will keep coming, they will keep appearing in court, we're expecting more appearances today as well.

SCIUTTO: I've had members of Congress say to me, imagine if those protesters had gotten weapons into the building, right? I mean, there was already one armed standoff that we discussed, but imagine shoot- outs in the halls of Congress, Jessica Schneider.

SCHNEIDER: And it could have happened, they arrested one guy with a semi-automatic, Jim.

SCIUTTO: Absolutely. Jessica Schneider, thanks so much. Well, joining me now to discuss the legal implications of all this as well as the security failure is Susan Hennessey; she's a former attorney for the National Security Agency. First, if I could begin, Susan, I've been speaking the last couple of days to current national security officials, former ones who were advising the Biden transition, and they are amazed and shocked at the security failure here. This was telegraphed that they were circling this date on the calendar for weeks, the president encouraged them to, and then he said on the mall, march to the Capitol right now, I'll be with you, he didn't join them, march to the capitol right now which they did. None of this should have been a surprise, and yet they -- SUSAN HENNESSEY, FORMER ATTORNEY FOR THE NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY: No

--

SCIUTTO: They invaded the Capitol building and threatened lives. How much of a security failure is this, and who is responsible?

HENNESSEY: You know, I mean -- it was clearly a significant and incredibly consequential security failure, and multiple layers of failure. I think really the way to think about it is the failure to prepare, the failure to recognize the threat in the first place. Basically, placing these officers in a position of being over-matched, completely overwhelmed, unable to control the situation.

[09:25:00]

And then once finding themselves in this really difficult position, failure to respond. Failure to provide --

SCIUTTO: Yes --

HENNESSEY: Reinforcements. You know, look, obviously, this morning, we're learning the news of this really tragic death of a U.S. Capitol police officer. You know --

SCIUTTO: Yes --

HENNESSEY: This story could have been far, far worse, and it's certainly not surprising that we're seeing resignations and dismissals this morning.

SCIUTTO: OK, let's talk now about the president's legal jeopardy here, right? For saying those words from the mall, go up there, show our strength, et cetera, encouraging them to go, not to mention weeks of spreading lies about the election which were in effect, the fuel for this, but also Rudy Giuliani, you know, urging a trial by combat, the language. From a legal perspective, what is the standard for President Trump or Rudy Giuliani to face charges for incitement, if that's the right legal word?

HENNESSEY: Right, so there are laws against incitement. Whenever you incite other people, encourage them to commit a crime, and they go out and commit that crime, you can be held responsible and criminally liable for that act. You know, the standards are quite high. And so, even if we have a moment in which we can say clearly, the president and people like Rudy Giuliani hold moral culpability -- moral culpability, moral responsibility for this. You know, there is a separate question about whether or not they will meet that legal standard. That said, comments like those from Rudy Giuliani saying, you know, calling for trial by combat, literal calls for violence, that is incredibly strong evidence on the public record, and it's not at all surprising that the U.S. Attorney has said that they are looking at any and --

SCIUTTO: Yes --

HENNESSEY: All actors who might have been involved in this, including the president himself.

SCIUTTO: Lower standard I imagine for someone like Giuliani, right, who might be -- disbarment, but I suppose, let's see what happens before that. I want to ask you now about the president's desire to pardon himself. This has been out there for some time, but it's CNN's reporting that one reason he finally conceded the election yesterday, though he did not mention President-elect Biden's name, was worried about his legal jeopardy, including from his actions on Wednesday. Now, the Justice Department office of legal counsel considered this back in 1974 when President Nixon faced a similar potential fate, and it was the OLC's opinion that a president could not pardon himself.

Now, I know, this has not been decided in courts, and if he does, it will very well be challenged there. But what does the law say here? Because I mean, you have two things in conflict, you have one, a president can pardon, but, two, a president delivers an oath to uphold the law of the nation. What does the law say about this?

HENNESSEY: Yes, so the notion of self-pardon while not formally decided is of course logically incoherent, completely absurd to think that the framers of the U.S. constitution intended the president to hold the ability to pardon himself. Really, because it's logically absurd because of precisely this moment, right? Situations in which you can imagine the president actually inciting some sort of insurrection against other branches of government. I mean, so I think the overwhelming weight of --

SCIUTTO: Yes --

HENNESSEY: Legislative history, constitutional precedent makes it clear that a self-pardon is constitutionally invalid. That said because the OLC memo on this, and OLC opinion is not binding what we might see is Donald Trump attempting to testify --

SCIUTTO: Yes --

HENNESSEY: Issuing a self-pardon. Ironically, that might actually backfire. At this moment, I think that it's really unlikely the Department of Justice will want to pursue charges against a former president for sort of normative reasons. They're not going to want to go down that path, however, if Donald Trump actually self-pardons, the inverse may be true --

SCIUTTO: Yes --

HENNESSEY: They may feel as though it's so important --

SCIUTTO: Interesting --

HENNESSEY: For the rule of law to challenge that, that they do feel more compelled --

SCIUTTO: Yes --

HENNESSEY: To ultimately bring charges. SCIUTTO: I just want to note, a lot of Republicans including the

president advertised that OLC opinion saying the president should not be indicted, serve his interest. We'll see if they are as wetted to the OLC opinion on a self-pardon. Susan Hennessey, always good to have you on. Well, one of the president's staunchest allies in the press says the time has come for him to resign. Remarkable to hear that. We're on top of it. That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)