Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

House Impeachment Managers to Use New Capitol Security Footage Today; New York Times Reports, Georgia Prosecutors Open Criminal Probe into Trump. Aired 10-10:30a ET

Aired February 10, 2021 - 10:00   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:00:00]

JIM SCIUTTO, CNN NEWSROOM: Top of the hour this Wednesday morning. I'm Jim Sciutto.

POPPY HARLOW, CNN NEWSROOM: And I'm Poppy Harlow.

In two hours, opening arguments begin on Capitol Hill in former President Trump's second impeachment trial. House managers are set to bring new evidence to the table today. CNN just learned moments ago that evidence will be never-before-seen Capitol security footage of the violence to demonstrate the extent of it that occurred on the 6th of January and the threat that the rioters posed to everyone at the Capitol that day. But will it change the minds of at least 17 Republicans needed to convict the president?

SCIUTTO: This is the Democrat's strategy, remind people, including the lawmakers of the fear, the violence that day. Six Republican senators did vote that the trial is at least constitutional after Lead House Impeachment Manager Jamie Raskin showed this, really just horrifying, 13-minute video recap of the day, the violence that took place during the January 6th insurrection, and the president's comments before and during.

A warning, this next particular clip, particularly disturbing.

They are attacking law enforcement there, attacking them.

We begin this hour with Manu Raju. Democrats have been talking about new evidence to begin the opening, really, of their larger case today. So you have new details. What is that new evidence?

MANU RAJU, CNN CHIEF CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes. We just heard from senior aides on the impeachment team who are telling us that they plan to unveil never-before-seen video of the January 6th riot. They're saying this is coming from Capitol security footage.

I asked them, did this also come from the Metropolitan Police Department here in Washington or from Capitol police, they would not say. But they say this is Capitol security footage that will be presented today showing exactly how bad things were, the violence, the destruction, the death that was left in the wake of that January 6th riot.

Now, what the Democrats are planning to do is break this up into essentially three different parts. Today, they're going to get into everything that led to the run-up to the January 6th riot. That's going to be the culmination, what happened on January 6th. But they're going to talk about Donald Trump's efforts to sow discord and suggested that the election will be fraudulent in the run up to November 3rd.

And then everything after November 3rd will be the second, essentially, part of this presentation the House Democrats are going to make, how Donald Trump invited everybody to come to the mall -- to the Ellipse on January 6th, how he tried to urge folks to, so-called, Stop the Steal when they were to come to Washington that day and ultimately ending in his speech to his supporters that led to the riot here in the Capitol. But what we will see here for the first time today is what they're saying, never-before-seen footage.

Now, their presentation will be broken up into 16 hours. It's going to be eight hours today. And we're told from Democratic impeachment manager aides that they are not expected to use the full 16 hours. That means tomorrow, they're going to wrap up their presentation at some point.

It's still uncertain whether or not they'll actually call witnesses. I asked them that. They declined to say. I am told separately that they're only going to seek witnesses if they feel like they need to respond to something the Trump team will say.

We do expect the Trump team then will have two days to present their side of the case, eight hours a day. We don't expect them to use their full 16 hours either. So we could be moving quickly to a vote about whether to acquit or convict Donald Trump as soon as this weekend. There's some talk, guys, of potentially a Saturday night vote to acquit Donald Trump, to convict Donald Trump. Of course, 17 Republican senators would need to break ranks.

At the moment, that does not seem unlikely but Democrats are hopeful that the security footage could change some minds today. Guys?

HARLOW: Okay. Saturday night vote, there goes your weekend, Manu, not that you were expecting to have one anyway. Thank you.

RAJU: Or Sunday too, possibly.

HARLOW: You're going to have a great birthday next year, Manu. Sorry, you had to spend it covering this yesterday.

Okay. Let's bring in our colleague, Laura Jarrett. Laura, what I think is interesting about this new video that is about to come is that what they showed yesterday, compelling in a way it was compiled but publicly seen before. What's coming today apparently no one has seen, even lawmakers.

LAURA JARRETT, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Right. So I think that that will be more compelling evidence. And anything that lawmakers can do to sort of drive home the substance of what happened here, I think, works in the House impeachment manager's favor.

[10:05:07]

We cannot forget that the jurors in this case, of course, are also the victims here. And it has a human impact on them.

But one of the things I'm looking for today and for the next couple days is what evidence do the House Democrats have that speaks to the president's mindset. Because, really, that's what this case is about. There's so much evidence that we've seen so far about the mindset of the MAGA mob. But what about the president? What about the things he said leading up to that rally on January 6th? What do they have on that score?

SCIUTTO: Laura, a lot of focus, even among Republicans, to the subpar performance by Trump's team yesterday, not just presentation, but in terms of contesting the chief argument here from the Democratic House managers. Do they have a new argument today?

JARRETT: Well, I think everyone generally agrees that the performance yesterday was underwhelming, mostly because they just didn't appear prepared to meet the gravity of the moment. They know that the facts are really bad, and so they tried to pivot to the law. They hinged everything on this constitutional argument that the president can't be tried as a former president. But they know, even if that's not laughable in its face, it's legally dubious at best. They know there is precedence saying otherwise, and so then they tried to defer to other things.

And they tried to make an argument that in order to invite disqualifying President Trump from future office, they actually would be disenfranchising the voters. Take a listen to what one of the president's attorneys said about this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DAVID SCHOEN, DEFENSE ATTORNEY FOR DONALD TRUMP: My overriding emotion is, frankly, wanting to cry for what I believe these proceedings will do to our great, so long enduring, sacred Constitution and to the American people.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

JARRETT: So, putting emotions aside, the problem with that argument is that the Constitution explicitly contemplates disqualifying somebody who has been impeached and convicted. That is squarely within the lawmaker's power. So I think that argument fell flat.

But then Schoen, the defense attorney, tried to spin a little more and he made this claim also last night.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SCHOEN: It's a matter of tricking the American people, to play as if the rioting was going on in real-time with the speech. What's the purpose of that? Why do we want to trick the American people? And, listen, they have great entertainment value. People are glued to a movie that's made professionally like that. That's not going to advance the cause -- any cause of good in the country.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

JARRETT: So, here is the thing. It can't be a trick if it's true. And we know that at least some of the people left the rally early that day to go to the Capitol.

Now, would it have been great if the video that the House Democrats had shown yesterday had all kinds of extensive timestamps? Sure. But bigger picture here, the defense needs to figure out a way to mount an effective case to show that the House Democrats haven't spoken to that issue of intent.

So I think you want to watch to see them shift away from what happened at the substance of the Capitol to the president's mindset.

SCIUTTO: We'll see. We'll be watching. Laura Jarrett, thanks very much.

JARRETT: Thanks, guys.

SCITTUO: Well, joining me is one of the senators who will be sitting as a juror in the impeachment trial, senator from Maryland, Ben Cardin. Thanks so much for taking the time this morning.

SEN. BEN CARDIN (D-MD): Jim, it's good to be with you.

SCIUTTO: So, there's a conventional wisdom in Washington, which is sometimes right but sometimes wrong, that the outcome of this trial is set in stone, that there will not be 17 Republicans. And while I know that is unlikely, it was notable to hear Senator Mitch McConnell say today that this is a vote of conscience, in effect, giving his conference the ability to vote how they see fit. I wonder, have you spoken to GOP colleagues who say that their mind is still open here?

CARDIN: And I think what Senator McConnell is absolutely right, this is a vote of conscience. We are jurors. We took a separate oath to weigh the presentations with an open mind. And this is -- there's no more serious charge than inciting an insurrection in our country. So, no, I have not talked specifically with Republican colleagues about how they will weigh the evidence, but I would hope that they recognize that this is a moment that they have to exercise their constitutional responsibility.

SCIUTTO: The Democrats' strategy here seems to be at least partially, perhaps principally a visceral one, right? Show the violence, remind those folks in the chamber who were inside the building as this was happening that this is truly dangerous, and remind them of the president's comments before and as this was happening. But they don't plan currently to call witness, right? I wonder, do you think -- can the visceral evidence change minds here or do they have to mount a lengthier case if they want to have hope of convincing Republicans?

CARDIN: Clearly, the point that you make about what the president's intents were is very, very important.

[10:10:01]

And, yes, we talk about what happened leading up to January 6th, the fact that the president was saying so many things that were wrong about the November 3rd elections and how it was stolen, et cetera.

But I think a critical moment was when he saw the violence taking place in the Capitol, what did he do? And we saw the tweets that were presented yesterday. The fact that he did not call them out, the fact that he said nice things about the protesters, again, it raises the question as to whether the president really was very happy by what he saw. And that's the case, that's clear intent of incitement. So I think that's going to be a very important information that will be presented in the next few days.

SCIUTTO: Watching Republicans' reaction to the president's defense yesterday, it seemed that they were less moved by it, right, with the exception perhaps of Bill Cassidy, than just embarrassed by it. And I wonder, given the politics today, does the president need a defense for most sitting Republican senators?

CARDIN: Well, I can't answer that. I think each senator is going to have to answer that question themselves. Yesterday, was about the jurisdiction, and the argument was so clearly one-sided that we do have jurisdiction for the trial. Yet it only motivated a change in one vote. So, clearly, there is a challenge we have during this impeachment trial as to open minds. I think we recognize that.

But I would hope at the end of the day that we look at the information, we look at what the president did before, during and after, and render an independent judgment as to whether he was inciting an insurrection.

SCIUTTO: Things move slowly, as you know, in Washington. They don't turn on a dime. But we did see six Republican senators yesterday vote to try the president, and one of them who previously had voted against, that means Senator Bill Cassidy. We did see ten Republican House members vote to impeach the president. We saw 11 votes to remove Marjorie Taylor Greene from her committee assignments, right? We saw a vast majority of the House Republican conference vote to back Liz Cheney even after she voted to impeach the president.

I just wonder do you -- you've been around Washington for a while. Do you sense a change, a turn in support for the president within the Republican Party?

CARDIN: Well, I think there is a bipartisan acknowledgment that what the president did was wrong, what he was doing in encouraging a crowd to gather, his words that he used, the fact he told them to march on the Capitol, and then we saw the results of that action. I think that motivated all of us to say that this is absolutely outrageous.

My Republican colleagues were pretty clear on January 6th about the president's conduct. We heard them say that directly on the floor of the Senate and House. The challenge now is will they stand up for what they believe the evidence shows, even if it has a political consequence in their state and district. And that's an issue that only they can answer.

Clearly, to me, this is a moment of conscience. This is a moment where you have to vote based upon what the evidence shows. And I would hope that all my colleagues will take advantage of that and vote their conscience.

SCIUTTO: We'll see. Final question on another topic, because COVID relief, top of the mind of the president. President Biden and his administration continuing forward under reconciliation, which, of course, would not require Republican votes. It seems to me that the Biden administration is making a bet here. These are popular policies, and almost daring Republicans to vote against it when it comes up here. Are negotiations dead from your vantage point?

CARDIN: No. I think negotiations are continuing. We're working very aggressively on the COVID relief package. We know we have to go -- we have to meet the challenge. So we have to go big. We have to meet the challenge that's out there in controlling the COVID virus and dealing with the economic consequences to American families and businesses.

And we know that Republicans agree with us on this. We hope that we can get them to vote with us. We know the American people agree with us as to dealing with this COVID relief package on the virus, dealing with it on trying to get our schools open safely, helping state and local government, helping renters who can't pay their rent, helping those who are uninsured, helping small business. All these issues are clearly challenges that we need to meet now, and we need to meet that now. And we hope Republicans will join us.

SCIUTTO: Yes, probably easier to vote for money than to vote to convict the president. Senator Ben Cardin, always good to have you on the program.

CARDIN: Thanks, Jim.

HARLOW: Significant breaking news. The New York Times just reporting that prosecutors in Fulton County, Georgia, have launched a criminal investigation into former President Trump.

[10:15:00]

Why? Because of his January phone call to the Georgia secretary of state calling on him to find the votes and also threatening him. This now makes for a second state behind New York to open criminal proceedings against the former president. Much more on this, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

HARLOW: Breaking news. The New York Times is just reporting that prosecutors in Fulton County, Georgia, has launched a criminal investigation into former President Trump's January phone call with the Georgia secretary of state, remember, the one where he told Secretary Raffensperger to, quote, find the votes and also, Jim, threatened him. [10:20:12]

SCIUTTO: Yes, to find just enough votes notably to overturn the results in that state's election.

Boris Sanchez joins us now from Florida where the former president is, as well as Legal Analyst Elie Honig with us here too.

Elie, I wonder if I could begin with you here. The significance of this, the prosecution according to The Times led by the Fulton County prosecutor, recently elected, also a Democrat, would be the second state after New York where the president faces criminal prosecution. Significance of this, likelihood of it leading to something?

ELIE HONIG, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Well, it's absolutely significant any time there's a criminal prosecution. Could it lead to something? Sure. I've looked at the Georgia laws. Essentially, it's a crime under Georgia state law to ask or solicit any person to count votes that were not actually cast.

Now, Donald Trump, if this comes to fruition, will surely defend himself saying, but I honestly believe that I had won the state. However, if you remember the language of that call down to Brad Raffensperger, the secretary of state, look at Donald Trump's language. He says, I need you to find these votes. And how many? 11,780, one more than he needed to win the state.

So there's a real threat here. And, look, it's also not the only problem Donald Trump is facing. We've got ongoing investigations by state prosecutors in New York as well.

HARLOW: So, Elie, let's let the people listen to the president in his own words. Here he was.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, FORMER U.S. PRESIDENT: So, look, all I want to do is this. I just want to find 11,780 votes, which is one more than we have, because we won the state.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HARLOW: Okay. So because of that and the other comments on the call, what I'm seeing here is that there are three different state laws that this may have broken, and some of them could be felonies, criminal solicitation to commit election fraud, conspiracy charge and then also intentional interference with someone's election duties.

Felony charges, I mean, play that out. If he were to be convicted on these, could that result in jail time?

HONIG: Yes. Well, felony charges mean they're punishable by more than one year in prison as a maximum sentence. But, yes, look, if you violate -- these are serious felonies, to interfere with an election. It would ultimately be up to the judge. But I think a prosecutor would be well-founded in pushing for jail time. Now, I want to say this. This is important too. There's nothing a pardon can do about this. I know President Trump is out office and he can't issue a pardon anymore, but he can't issue a pardon. Actually, the only person who can issue a pardon on Georgia state charges is the Georgia state governor, who I know the president has had a sort of up- and-down relationship with. So, interesting dynamic in play there.

SCIUTTO: Boris, with the former president in Florida, it's been CNN's reporting that the president has been genuinely concerned about legal liability, criminal liability following the impeachment trial. Any reaction from the president's team yet?

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN CORRESPONDENT: None yet, Jim. We are working to get that. But you're absolutely right. People close to the president have been increasingly worried that he may face criminal charges as a result of his actions, not only on this phone call to the Georgia secretary of state but across the board with his last few remaining months in office, and even before that as well.

The concern here is that Donald Trump has largely exhausted his legal options when it comes to representation. No reputable attorney at this point was willing to stick their neck out for President Trump in this impeachment case. That's how he wound up with this third-string team that ultimately embarrassed him yesterday during the impeachment proceedings.

The president has been told about this repeatedly. Allies to the president, one of them telling CNN that he is f'd if he faces criminal charges. They are well aware of the potentially serious consequences of his actions, the legal ramifications he could face and the bare bones team that he has around him, largely because he has driven away other representation through his own actions, Jim and Poppy.

HARLOW: That's a really interesting point, Boris.

Elie, I can't ignore the irony here, that the president is now the subject of a criminal investigation for a phone call in which he accused the Georgia Republican secretary of state and his attorney for criminal action and threatened them.

HONIG: Yes. Poppy, that's an important part of that phone call, right? He threatens them. He says, well, you may be in criminal trouble. But I also want to say, good on the Georgia prosecutors here, the Fulton County D.A. Because it's an intimidating thing to even open an investigation on somebody as powerful as the former president, Donald Trump.

But prosecutors, and I mean this to the Georgia state prosecutors, to the Manhattan D.A., to the Department of Justice, you have a job to do.

[10:25:01]

And the job is not always to take the easy way out or to shy away from a tough fight. So, at a minimum, I think prosecutors have an obligation to open cases and take a serious look, see where the facts land, see how it lines up with the law. But Fulton County D.A. is doing exactly what prosecutors ought to do in a case like this.

HARLOW: Thank you, Elie, thank you, Boris, both on this really significant breaking news.

We're going to take a quick break. We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:30:00]