Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Democrats Take First Steps to Remove Conspiracy Representative from Committees; Senate GOP Pile on House Republicans Over Conspiracy Mess; Officer Killed in Mob Riot Honored in U.S. Capitol Rotunda. Aired 1-1:30p ET

Aired February 03, 2021 - 13:00   ET

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

[13:00:00]

JOHN KING, CNN INSIDE POLITICS: We'll see you back here this time tomorrow, we hope.

Don't go anywhere, Brianna Keilar picks up our coverage right now. Have a good afternoon.

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN RIGHT NOW: Hi there, I'm Brianna Keilar, and I want to welcome our viewers here in the United States and around the world.

We are beginning with breaking news in the civil war inside the Republican Party. Just as House Republicans are about to hold a critical meeting about the future of their party, Democrats are now deciding that they will take the first steps needed to remove Republican Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene from her committee assignments.

Greene's list of offenses before she entered office runs pretty long here. It includes embracing QAnon conspiracy theories, endorsing the execution of top Democrats, and harassing a school shooting survivor.

The Georgia Congresswoman has so far refused to apologize for any of it. Leading House Democratic leaders to begin the process that they say will push her out of the Education and Budget Committee assignments that she holds.

Moments ago Democrats said this about House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. HAKEEM JEFFRIES (D-NY): Why would Kevin McCarthy continue to associate himself and the Republican conference with someone who leader Mitch McConnell has characterized as a cancer? The last time I checked, cancers need to be cut out and not allowed to metastasize. And Kevin McCarthy has the ability to do the right thing he should.

(END VIDEO CLIP) KEILAR: But Greene will not be the only urgent topic the Republicans will need to address when they meet here in a few hours. Wyoming Congresswoman Liz Cheney, who is a leader among the House GOP, is under threat of being ousted as House Republican Conference Chair, which is the third rank in leadership there, for voting to impeach former President Trump in his second impeachment. She has been shoring up support behind the scenes, and that includes from Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell.

Republicans are facing a critical reckoning. Will they encourage, quoting one GOP senator, the kooks of their party, AKA Greene, or those who vote their conscience, like Liz Cheney, or continue to try to get away with doing both?

Joining me now, we have CNN Congressional Correspondent Jessica Dean and CNN Special Correspondent Jamie Gangel.

Jessica, Democrats are taking the steps after House leadership from both parties were not able to come to an agreement about Greene late this morning. Tell us what happened.

JESSICA DEAN, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, we know that as a result of that conversation between House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer and House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy that Democrats decided to move forward with this resolution that they will put to a full House vote tomorrow to strip Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene from her committee assignments.

The two were talking in hopes from Kevin McCarthy's side that perhaps they could strike a deal. Perhaps she could be stripped from one committee, that would be the Education and Labor Committee, and not the Budget Committee. But it turns out they were not able to make a deal. Thus, Democrats are moving forward in their actions.

So what does that mean? That means later today, there will be a House Rules Committee. I'm told by Representative Taylor Greene's spokesperson that it's undecided if she will talk on her behalf. She is allowed to speak at that meeting on her behalf. And then that will go to a full House vote tomorrow where it only needs a simple majority to pass in the House.

Now, go back to House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy for a second, because he could still act. We don't know what he's going to do. He and Marjorie Taylor Greene had a long conversation last night that went late into the night. The Steering Committee was involved. That's who would decide on the Republican side whether or not to strip her of her committee assignments.

She didn't take any of our questions yesterday. I was outside her office just about an hour ago, trying to ask her some questions. She didn't answer anymore then. So it remains to be seen if Republicans will act before the Democrats do.

And one more thing to keep in mind, Brianna, people on both sides of the aisle do say, look, this would be setting quite a precedent. Stripping someone for their committee assignments for things they said or did before they were put into office, and so there is talk about what that will do down the line. But that's where we stand right now, Democrats making this first move to strip her from her committee assignments, and then Republicans waiting to see what House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy will do.

And there is growing agitation from some Republicans for him to be decisive. This waffling, him not making decision is really starting to bother some of them. They worry it's going to elevate the more fringe parts of their party. Brianna?

KEILAR: Yes, it's an interesting argument. The precedent argument, I think, Jamie, it might be a little more clear if she disavowed these things she said. She hasn't. And so I wonder how important something like that may be in this meeting that we're expecting to hear about. But we're not expecting to see it certainly or you hear it. But what should we expect out of this scheduled gathering of the House GOP conference?

[13:05:00]

JAMIE GANGEL, CNN SPECIAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, to your point, not only has she not only disavowed it but she doubled down this morning. Her Twitter feed looked like something Donald Trump might do, no apologies.

But just to follow-up on Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, just before we went on the air, I got a phone call from a very influential Republican fundraiser blasting Kevin McCarthy for not removing her from these committees. The source said to me, this is a huge embarrassment, quote, a failure of leadership. He has lost control. You don't speak to Marjorie Taylor Greene. You take her off the committee.

So, that is -- we've been talking a lot about how the Republican Party is facing a reckoning. My sources are saying that Kevin McCarthy is also facing a reckoning on his leadership.

The other thing we're going to see this afternoon at the 4:00 meeting is what happens with the third ranking Republican in leadership Liz Cheney. And I think it is likely we will see a vote because Freedom Caucus members like Jim Jordan, Matt Gaetz, Andy Biggs, would like to see her removed from her leadership position.

I don't expect that she is going to be backing down at all on her vote for the impeachment. My understanding is from sources close to her that she sees that this is about the Constitution, not about politics.

KEILAR: Real quick, Jamie, I mean, does it seem like there are enough votes in the House GOP conference to get rid of her from that post?

GANGEL: So it's a good question. We don't know. But here is the thing. The Freedom Caucus has been saying to reporters, we have a hundred signatures, we have 120 signatures. But they haven't produced any signatures at all. And this could be a recorded vote, but it's more likely to be a secret ballot. Right now, my sources do not think they have the votes to remove her. KEILAR: Interesting. So there will be Republicans who maybe did not vote to impeach Donald Trump, but they will back Liz Cheney in her ability to have done that. That's very interesting.

Jamie Gangel, Jessica Dean, thank you so much to both of you.

GANGEL: Thank you.

KEILAR: House Republicans will be meeting here in a few hours to decide the fates of Congresswomen Liz Cheney and Marjorie Taylor Greene, Cheney, a member of GOP House leadership for joining several other Republicans to vote to impeach Donald Trump a second time, Greene, the GOP's most well known new member of Congress for her past comments and actions propagating conspiracy theories and lies with little remorse for them now that she is in Congress.

Usually, Senate Republicans would mind their own beeswax about what is going on on the other side of the dome, but they're speaking up because this moment isn't just about the House, it's about the future of the Republican Party.

Minority Leader Mitch McConnell in the Senate without using her name calling Taylor Greene and her loony lies a cancer on the party. North Dakota Senator Kevin Cramer says, personally, I'd have a hard time supporting her positions on the school shootings being staged and being on the Education Committee. Real authority has moral authority, he said.

Senator Marco Rubio says, anyone who argues the Parkland School shooting, which, of course, happened in his state, was actually a false flag operation perpetrated to mobilize public support in opposition to gun rights, as Taylor Greene does, is, quote, either deranged or a sadist. Rubio added, those were real families, those were real children that died.

His Florida colleague, Rick Scott, who was Governor of Florida during the shooting says, that her comments are completely wrong and very disappointing. Completely wrong and very disappointing is what you might say when you accidently get someone else's takeout order, someone spinning a conspiracy theory about the worst high school shooting in U.S. history, which happened in your state while you were governor, then confronting a kid who survived it is unconscionable.

South Dakota Republican Senator John Thune says of the House GOP, quote, do they want to be the party of limited government and fiscal responsibility, free markets, peace through strength and pro-life or do they want to be the party of conspiracy theories and QAnon?

But her views and her conspiracy laid in videos were known longer before she was elected in November. It's certainly a question that many Republicans could have asked during the Trump era.

Someone who did speak up then, Senator Mitt Romney, he says, quote, our big tent is not large enough to both accommodate conservatives and kooks. Then the arguments get a little bit more creative, and that starts with Senator Lindsey Graham, a Trump sycophant and apologist, who was very curious to learn more here.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM (R-SC): Are these folks accurate (ph)?

[13:10:00]

I want to hear from here. Before I judge what to do about here, I want to know what the facts are. It means they're not accurate postings. They have been manipulated.

She'll have to tell me is it accurate. I haven't seen the videos.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KEILAR: Now, some of these incidents are on video and the Congresswoman does not allege they were manipulated. Some of these comments are on her social media accounts, though she has tried to cast doubt by saying other people have access to her accounts.

Among the things, right, that Marjorie Taylor Greene is responsible for, she pushed QAnon quackery that Trump was the leader who would take out a satanic pedophile cult in government and Hollywood. She is a 9/11 truther. She questioned the attack of the Pentagon saying, quote, there is never any evidence shown for a plane, end quote, going into it.

She's accosted a Parkland survivor, a survivor of one of the biggest mass school shootings in U.S. history, after questioning whether the attack was actually a false-flag operation carried out to mobilize people against gun right, a claim that she reversed this week in an interview after her committee assignments were at risk when she said, quote, these are not fake.

And then before joining Congress, she appeared to endorse the execution of Speaker Pelosi and other Democrats. She suggested the 2018 midterms when the first two Muslim women in Congress were elected were part of a, quote, Islamic invasion of our government. She has called Jewish Democratic donor George Soros a NAZI. She falsely claimed former President Barack Obama is a Muslim. And she also suggested that Obama and Democrats were coordinating a war to overthrow Trump.

We can be certain if this were a Democrat, Lindsey Graham would be banging his gavel in the Judiciary Committee and booking his appearances on Fox with more speed than Maverick and Goose, may he rest in peace.

Then there are the senators who play dumb. Chuck Grassley says, he doesn't know enough about her. He says, quote, there are 435 members of the house I have a hard time keeping track of what 100 senators are doing, so you have to ask somebody that's followed it better than I have. When CNN started to read Greene's comments, he interrupted and said, quote, I don't want to comment on your interpretation of her comments, I want to hear what she said, end quote.

If crazy is infiltrating the party that you are in, that you're a leader of, better study up, don't you think?

Now Rubio and others are trying to blame the media for elevating conspiracy theories, like Marjorie Taylor Greene, even though it was Republicans who elevated this dangerous nonsense from the White House to Congress, despite knowing that Taylor Greene's embrace of quackery, some high-profile Republicans endorsed her candidacy anyway.

As President Donald Trump called her a future Republican star and a winner, the House Freedom Caucus gave her the stamp of approval. Greene saying, quote, I started getting phone calls from the most conservative members in the House Freedom Caucus, Debbie Meadows, Mark Meadows' wife, Jim Jordan, Andy Biggs.

Here is Jordan in his own words.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. JIM JORDAN (R-OH): Marjorie Greene is exactly the kind of fighter needed in Washington to stand with me against the radical left now with President Trump to take on Nancy Pelosi and drain the swamp.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KEILAR: Former Chief of Staff Meadows feigned ignorance when he was confronted about QAnon and the president embrace of the group last year.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MARK MEADOWS, FORMER WHITE HOUSE CHIEF OF STAFF: I don't know anything about it. I don't even know that it's credible. If we want to talk about conspiracies, let's get back to talking about how the FBI and others within the FBI spied on the Trump campaign.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KEILAR: It is just not believable, because the White House chief of staff would certainly know that the FBI had labeled the QAnon conspiracy, a potential domestic terror threat, long before this in May 2019.

The Georgia Republican Party congratulated Taylor Greene on her primary win. House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy put his feet on both sides of the line at the time.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. KEVIN MCCARTHY (R-CA): Well, let me be very clear, there is no place for QAnon in the Republican Party. I do not support it. And the candidate you talked about has denounced it.

(END VIDEO CLIP) KEILAR: Now, McCarthy was so fired up over this willing to take a stand that he remained neutral in her primary. And now he's at the center of this mess.

But the perfect example of how Republicans normalize this, listen to Republicans -- Arkansas' Republican governor.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: She's long embraced conspiracy theories like QAnon, voiced support for executing Nancy Pelosi. Does she -- is she fit to serve and should she be on the Education Committee?

GOV. ASA HUTCHINSON (R-AR): Well, first of all, the people of her district elected her, and that should mean a lot. They elected her and she's going to run for re-election and she'll be accountable for what she said and her actions. And ten --

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Given her history, is she fit to serve?

HUTCHINSON: I'm not going to answer that question as to whether she is fit to serve because she believes in something that everybody else does not accept.

[13:15:01]

I reject that.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KEILAR: Two things here. When you can't draw a line on someone over their support of murdering an elected leader, do you have the courage to draw a line on anything? And also McCarthy kept saying that voters will hold her accountable for her actions. She was elected despite her belief, for some voters perhaps because of his beliefs.

But the award for most creative and most absurd in these remarks from Republicans comes from Senate Republican talking about this conspiracy chaos, and it belongs to newcomer Tommy Tuberville. When CNN asked him to comment, he ducked it. He said this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. TOMMY TUBERVILLE (R-AL) (voice over): I haven't even looked at what all she's done. I'd have to hold back a statement on that. Travel in this weather it's been a little rough looking at any news or whatever.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KEILAR: Well, since he is following the weather so closely, he knows that it is cloudy with a 100 percent chance of B.S. in Alabama today and that low-pressure system might be swinging all the way up to Washington, D.C. today.

Ahead, an alarming new study shows how younger adults are responsible for most of the spread in this pandemic.

Plus, as the Capitol police officer who died during the siege is honored today, the investigation into his murder is hitting obstacles.

And the constitutional expert who testified in Donald Trump's first impeachment trial reacts to the defense in his impending second impeachment trial. This is CNN special live coverage.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[13:20:00]

KEILAR: A somber ceremony today on Capitol Hill honoring fallen Capitol Police Officer Brian Sicknick, who died as a result of injuries he sustained in the January 6th insurrection. Sicknick's remains today lying in honor in the Capitol's Rotunda, which is a privilege typically reserved for government leaders. Among the attendees at today's ceremony, Vice President Kamala Harris.

And we have been learning quite a lot about this officer here in recent weeks. He was from New Jersey. He had volunteered for the New Jersey Air National Guard when he was just a teenager, deploying to the Middle East before being honorably discharged and becoming a police officer. Sicknick was living his lifelong dream of being in law enforcement when he died at age 42 following the siege on the Capitol.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi spoke in the Capitol Rotunda before Sicknick's colleagues and his family.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. NANCY PELOSI (D-CA): Our promise to Brian's family is that we will never forget his sacrifice. We must be vigilant, as what President Lincoln referred to as the harsh artillery of time. We will never forget.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KEILAR: Sicknick's family releasing a statement thanking congressional leadership for bestowing this historic honor on our fallen American hero.

And a month after the deadly attack, investigators are struggling to build a federal murder case in the death of Officer Sicknick.

Let's bring in CNN's Whitney Wild on this story. Whitney, what are the obstacles here?

WHITNEY WILD, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, there is just a lack of evidence. That's the bottom line here. There's a little we know but a lot we don't know.

So let me run through what we do know. We know that he was in the riot. We know he sustained injuries, then went back to his office where he collapsed. We also know he died the next day. But other than that, Brianna, we just don't have very much information. The cause and manner of death has not been released.

Further, there had been some earlier reporting that he had perhaps been hit with a fire extinguisher. We now know from law enforcement sources who were saying that medical examiners didn't find any evidence of blunt force trauma.

Further, they have been combing video frame by frame but they're having a hard time finding any moment he would have sustained an injury from a rioter. So they're just having a hard time figuring out how exactly he died.

There is one theory that he perhaps interacted with a chemical irritant, that that might have contributed to his death, but, again, there is no video to show the exact moment when that would have happened to pinpoint who is responsible.

And then finally, Brianna, what's making this all much more complicated is the possibility or at least the consideration that if he had a pre-existing medical condition, that could complicate the prosecution here. We don't know if that's the case. But it's one of the things prosecutors are thinking about as they try to comb through the very little evidence they have.

And the bottom line here is that while he's lying in state, there is this open-ended question of will anyone see justice for his death, Brianna.

KEILAR: All right, certainly it's not a closed case yet, so we will know that you'll keep an eye on that. Whitney Wild, thank you so much.

In their 80-page pretrial brief, House impeachment managers argue that Donald Trump is personally responsible for inciting the deadly attack on the Capitol. The former president's lawyers offered their defense in a 14-page filing with a legal twist, quote, the 45th president believes and, therefore, avers that as a private citizen, the Senate has no jurisdiction over his ability to hold office and for the Senate to take action on this averment would constitute a bill of attainder.

So let's discuss this, because that probably doesn't make a lot of sense to lay people out there. And let's talk about it now with Harvard Law School Professor Noah Feldman.

All right, Prof, you've got to explain this to us. Because I do want our viewers to know, you are one of three constitutional scholars called to testify before the House Judiciary Committee in the first Trump impeachment inquiry. So, people may notice -- they may recognize you for that. But as you have the ex-president's lawyers here saying that if the Senate proceeds with the trial, it is a Bill of Attainder, what is a Bill of Attainder?

NOAH FELDMAN, CONSTITUTIONAL SCHOLAR WHO TESTIFIED IN TRUMP'S IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY: It's a red herring, or at least it's a red herring in these circumstances.

[13:25:00] A Bill of Attainder is a rarely heard of concept, because it goes all the way back to England before the Constitution. And it's basically when the legislative body picks someone person out or a group of people and announces that they are going to punish them and without a trial. And it does it by passing a bill, both Houses have to pass it, and then it being signed by the president in the United States or agreed to by the king in the old English system.

And that's, of course, not what's happening here. This is an impeachment which is not a Bill of Attainder. And, in fact, part of what makes it an impeachment is that the president of the United States has nothing to do with it. The impeachment is voted by the House and then it's voted on in trial by the Senate and it never goes to the executive branch unlike a bill. So that's the most simple way to explain why this is not a Bill of Attainder, although there are other reasons why it's also not.

KEILAR: You've written a very interesting new op-ed and in part of it, you say that this is just a bizarre legal argument. Why is that?

FELDMAN: You know, it looks like Trump's lawyers are just doing anything they can to throw around some constitutional sounding language to distract attention from the main impeachment charge here, which is that the president systematically subverted democracy over a course of months and that that culminated in incitement of the attack on the Capitol.

That's a very serious charge. And so if you're defending Donald Trump, you want to distract attention from it as much as you possibly can. And that means throwing around somewhat indefensible ideas like that you can't try the president after he's out of office. And it also means throwing in somewhat goofy, outlandish language, like the idea that doing so would be a Bill of Attainder.

KEILAR: What about the defense argument saying that the trial should be dismissed because the Constitution, quote, requires that a person actually hold office to be impeached? Is there a precedent here?

FELDMAN: Well, first of all, the Constitution doesn't require that. You can read the Constitution. It doesn't say anything of the kind. The Constitution does say that if you're in office, you can be removed and you can be barred from further office. But it's silent on the question of trying people after the fact. And that's because it was ordinary at the time of the framing of the Constitution to try public officials after they were out of office.

Virginia, for example, in fact, had a rule in place that you could only impeach the governor once he was no longer the governor. And they actually almost used that against Thomas Jefferson, who had been the governor of the state.

So, the framers were not saying that you could only do an impeachment in a trial of a sitting president. They were saying you could also do one of a sitting president in addition to doing someone out of office. And there is actually a precedent.

KEILAR: So there is a precedent. I mean, that's very interesting and you explain, that you break that down very clearly.

In their brief, Trump's lawyers insist the former president's remarks are protected by the First Amendment. Are they?

FELDMAN: No. You know, if Donald Trump were being tried criminally, he could argue that his conduct did not count as incitement under the First Amendment. And there is a rule, Supreme Court case called the Brandenburg case, that says that if you're going to be convicted of a crime of incitement, the government has to show beyond a reasonable doubt that your actions or your words rather were directed in incitement and imminently caused incitement.

Now, that might actually be true of Donald Trump, you know? I mean if you read what he said as inciting the crowd, and the crowd did subsequently go and commit an act of violence, you might even be able to try him criminally. That would probably be a closed case.

But that legal standard doesn't apply in impeachment. An impeachment requires the high crime and misdemeanor, which means a political crime, not a crime that's otherwise in the statute books. And so the First Amendment doesn't protect Donald Trump's speech in that way.

KEILAR: We don't really know what's going to happen with witnesses in this impeachment trial. Do you think they're going to be called in? And if they are, who do you think should be called?

FELDMAN: You know, I think it's very possible that they won't be called. The case that the House managers made is pretty self- explicating, you know? Watch the video of what the president said, watch the reaction of the crowd, watch what happened, and you'll get a lot of what you need to know about the events that took place.

Basically, everything that's alleged against the president took place in public. None of it was private. And so it doesn't require the kinds of testimony of putting the picture together that we had, for example, in the last impeachment. So I think that's probably the way it's going to go.

I think it will be fine to have witnesses and I think it's a bad precedent, honestly, to have trial with no witnesses like we had the last time. The last time that was because the Senate Republicans wouldn't allow there to be any witnesses. This time, the Senate is in Democratic hands and they have to make a strategic choice of whether witnesses will strengthen their case or not.

KEILAR: All right. We will be watching. I know you will be watching very carefully.

FELDMAN: I will.

KEILAR: Noah Feldman, thank you very much for being with us.

FELDMAN: Thanks for having me.

KEILAR: President Biden meeting with Senate Democrats just a short time ago as the party moves forward on their COVID relief package without Republicans.

Plus, new audio of what Biden told House Democrats about the amount of stimulus checks that would be going out.

And a new study shows how younger adults are responsible for most of the spread in this pandemic.

[13:30:01]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)