Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

New January 6 E-Mails Revealed. Aired 1-1:30p ET

Aired December 14, 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 HOST: This new CNN special report, "Weed 6: Marijuana and Autism," begins at 8:00 p.m. Eastern and Pacific.

Thanks for joining us on INSIDE POLITICS today. Don't forget, you can also listen to our podcast. Download INSIDE POLITICS wherever you get your podcasts. We will see you back here this time tomorrow.

Ana Cabrera picks up our coverage right now.

ANA CABRERA, CNN HOST: Hello. I'm Ana Cabrera in New York.

We are now just minutes away from a full House vote to hold Mark Meadows in contempt of Congress. And if it passes, this case then gets referred to the Justice Department, meaning Meadows could become the first White House chief of staff to face criminal charges since the Watergate era.

Today's vote comes just hours after the select committee investigating the January 6 attack revealed explosive texts Meadows received as the Capitol was under siege, private texts from lawmakers, from FOX News hosts, even from the president's son, all begging then-President Trump's chief of staff to get Trump to do something, anything to stop the violence.

A sample of the frantic messages from unnamed lawmakers who were inside the Capitol on January 6: "We are under siege here at the Capitol. There's an armed standoff at the House chamber door. The president needs to stop this ASAP. Fix this now. We are all helpless."

At the same time, FOX News personalities were sending similar pleas to Meadows as well.

Brian Kilmeade texting: "Please get him on TV. Destroying everything you have accomplished."

Laura Ingraham saying: "This is hurting all of us. He is destroying his legacy."

And Sean Hannity: "Can he make a statement, ask people to leave the Capitol?"

And perhaps most stunning of all, Donald Trump Jr. joined the chorus. Here's Congresswoman Liz Cheney laying out some of the messages he sent to his father's chief of staff in the heat of the moment. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. LIZ CHENEY (R-WY): Donald Trump Jr. texted again and again, urging action by the president -- quote -- "We need an Oval Office address. He has to lead now. It has gone too far and gotten out of hand" -- end quote.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CABRERA: That Oval Office address never came.

As Congresswoman Liz Cheney stressed, it would be hours before Trump would heed those calls, three hours and seven minutes, to be exact. For three hours and seven minutes, a chaotic, violent, deadly scene at the Capitol played out.

Police officers were battered. The Capitol was ransacked, some of the people doing it carrying Trump flags and Confederate Flags, chants of "Hang Mike Pence" ringing out in the seat of American democracy. Three hours and seven minutes after getting these desperate texts, Trump released an impromptu address, telling the rioters to go home, and also saying -- quote -- "We love you."

These messages don't just expose the hypocrisy of Trump allies who have since tried to downplay January 6. These messages provide a crucial glimpse into just how much the White House knew about the riot as it was happening. They knew the Capitol was under siege, because people inside the building were telling them in real time, and the people closest to Donald Trump knew he was the only one who could call off the attackers.

So much to discuss here.

Let's bring in our CNN legal analyst and former federal prosecutor Jennifer Rodgers, CNN political commentator and former aide to President George W. Bush Scott Jennings, and CNN chief political analyst Gloria Borger.

Gloria, we still have Republicans whitewashing these attacks. These texts reveal that they know better. What's your reaction?

GLORIA BORGER, CNN CHIEF POLITICAL ANALYST: Well, my reaction is that these texts read deliberately by Liz Cheney last night are the receipts.

They're the proof that these people knew exactly what was going on and had been duplicitous about it with the American public, whether it's been on television or whether it's been talking to the media and saying that this wasn't so bad, et cetera, et cetera.

I mean, Meadows knew. The White House knew. Administration officials knew. Lawmakers knew. The president's family, most specifically his son, knew. And so we know that all of these people -- we know from one of these texts, when Meadows responded to Don Trump Jr. and said, "I'm pushing hard, I agree," when Don Jr. said this isn't enough. We also know, very importantly, that Meadows, if he's telling the

truth to Don Jr., was trying to get the president to stop it, to say something, to do something. And he did not, which is exactly what the committee is investigating.

[13:05:08]

CABRERA: And, Jen, all these messages come from people who aren't in the administration. And they were sent to and from Meadows' personal devices, his personal accounts. He voluntarily gave them to the committee.

Why wouldn't he sit for questions on all this?

JENNIFER RODGERS, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Well, that's a great question, Ana.

I mean, he did the dance for a while, saying he would sit for questions. He had a date to come in, and then he refused. Ultimately, I think he was trying to walk a very fine line between being loyal to Trump and loyal to himself, frankly, because he, as we now know, was right in the middle of all of this. And so he has exposure too.

So, he's trying not to give the select committee information that will ultimately be harmful for him and harmful for Trump. But he doesn't want to get a criminal referral for contempt of Congress either. So he really has been trying to do that dance.

Ultimately, though, his giving over of all of those documents as non- privileged is a real problem for him, because there is absolutely no legal, legitimate reason why he can refuse to come in and speak about those. And that's really the basis now for this referral for contempt of Congress to DOJ.

CABRERA: Right.

And we expect that vote to happen again any minute now, potentially within the hour or next couple of hours, but today, this afternoon.

And, Scott, I want to highlight one text from an unnamed GOP lawmaker. I quote here: "Yesterday was a terrible day. We tried everything we could in our objection to the six states. I'm sorry nothing worked."

Scott, this lawmaker seemed to be saying it's a terrible day because the effort to overturn the election failed, not because of the deadly violence at the Capitol. How messed up is that?

SCOTT JENNINGS, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Yes, it's -- there were some people who were so invested in this, that their judgment became so clouded, that they couldn't see what was happening in the larger context here, which was, A, these members of Congress don't have the ability to just award the presidency to anyone they see fit, regardless of what legal memos say. Nor does Mike Pence, which he, fortunately, rejected that advice.

And, B, I think some of these members were so interested in catering to a narrow group of people that they lost sight of their role, their constitutional function, their constitutional role, their role to the oath of office that they take.

And it is so unfortunate that not only did they do that, but also, based on these text messages and based on everything we have seen, the president did that as well. I mean, it's quite clear. I mean, I have said this since January the 6th. I think he violated his oath of office on that day.

And when you see these members of Congress who were feeding into it, and then you see what the White House did, and when you see what he did personally, all flowing from the idea that he may have violated his oath of office, it's extraordinarily disappointing. And it's heartbreaking. And I'm no less angry about it today than I was on that particular day.

By the way, I will just say, these FOX hosts and others, I mean, they had two eyes and a TV. They could see what was happening. Any of us that were watching it or in the Capitol experiencing it in some cases, anybody could see what was happening and who was responsible for and who had the power to stop it.

And I think, as we look at it all today, Donald Trump failed. He failed.

CABRERA: Yes.

The power to stop it, let me pick up on that, because the committee keeps stressing this 187 minutes of Trump's inaction, right? Mark Meadows disputed that claim, though, last night, even after all this was revealed. He was on Newsmax. Listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MARK MEADOWS, FORMER WHITE HOUSE CHIEF OF STAFF: What they have done is had a contempt vote. We have tried very hard in a very transparent and accommodating way to share non-privileged information.

QUESTION: Right.

MEADOWS: And what we found out tonight is that not only did that just get disregarded, but then they tried to weaponize text messages, selectively leak them to put out a narrative that -- quite frankly, that the president did not.

And I can tell you, this is -- the president did act. This is all about -- it's not about holding me in contempt. It's about coming after President Donald Trump. And, sadly, that's what tonight's vote was all about.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CABRERA: We know it was hours before Trump released that video statement, telling the rioters to go home. And remember, in that same statement, he told the Capitol rioters, "We love you." We know the National Guard response was delayed, but there is still a

lot we don't know about what was happening in the White House during the attack.

Gloria, if Trump was actively trying to stop the violence, wouldn't you think he and his allies would have made sure the public knew about it?

BORGER: Yes, I think so. And I think it's quite obvious that he wasn't trying to stop the violence.

I mean, they're gathering all the strings that they can -- that they can gather, but it's obvious that the president had to be pushed into doing what he finally did. He had to be pushed into issuing any kind of statement.

[13:10:05]

Mark Meadows is clearly getting a lot of pressure from people on Capitol Hill, even from his friends at FOX News, et cetera. But if it were up to the president alone, who knows what would have happened?

But it is remarkable that, after handing over non-privileged information, that Meadows would not even appear before the committee to discuss what he had handed the committee, because they have a lot of questions about those texts and those e-mails that, quite frankly, he should be able to answer.

So, it's kind of remarkable to me that Mark Meadows goes out there and says, well, the committee is really playing a game with me. I think that, in fact, he should be given credit for handing over what he handed over, because he did hand over a lot of documents.

CABRERA: He has, 6,000 documents, we're told, 6,000 records...

BORGER: Exactly.

CABRERA: ... including these text messages and other things, like that 38-page PowerPoint that he was utilizing in some kind of e-mail fashion.

But maybe he is concerned about his own legal exposure here. Congresswoman Liz Cheney returned to a very revealing question about a legal point today. Watch.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CHENEY: This brings up another point. Mr. Meadows' testimony will bear on a key question in front of this committee. Did Donald Trump through action or inaction corruptly seek to obstruct or impede Congress' official proceeding to count electoral votes?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CABRERA: She was pointing to a specific criminal statute there, Jen.

Could this probe result in criminal charges, based on Trump's inaction or others' inaction?

RODGERS: Well, the first question, Ana, is, will it results in a referral from Congress for criminal action? That's the first step.

And I think the answer to that is yes. She really was reading, effectively, the language from the applicable statute. And if they find that Donald Trump, in fact, was responsible for this march to the Capitol that ended up obstructing an official proceeding, then they may make that referral to DOJ.

Now, whether DOJ actually charges that is another huge question. I haven't yet seen any appetite by Merrick Garland or the Justice Department for taking this up. Usually, if DOJ was criminally investigating this, they would ask Congress to stand down.

So, to me, the fact that the select committee has been so active and so busy suggests that DOJ does not want to criminally investigate this, but it may land in their lap, and they may have no choice, other than to take a look when the select committee is done with their work.

CABRERA: Well, and, remember, the DOJ is still actively pursuing a lot of the Capitol rioters. And they have already brought 700 cases against those alleged rioters at this point.

Thank you so much done, Jen Rodgers, Gloria Borger and Scott Jennings. I appreciate the analysis and conversation.

Now I also want to bring in someone who knows the dynamics inside the Trump family, CNN contributor and Donald Trump biographer Michael D'Antonio.

And, Michael, let's just go back through the texts Donald Trump Jr. sent to Meadows in the throes of this Capitol attack. I quote here: "He's got to condemn this 'expletive' ASAP. The Capitol Police tweet is not enough."

And then he adds: "We need an Oval Office address. He has to lead now. It has gone too far and gotten out of hand."

Michael, what goes through your mind hearing these words from Trump Jr. not to his own father, but to his dad's chief of staff?

MICHAEL D'ANTONIO, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: Well, first of all, it is surprising that he didn't address the president directly to his cell phone. There could be a sign of something wrong there.

But Donald Jr. has always been, although it doesn't always look that way, the deviant member of the Trump clan. And, by that, I mean he's been willing to stand up to his father in ways that other people have not. So when you see especially that phrase he has to lead now, that indicates that he's saying his father has not been leading and that he's aware of it.

And then when he says that this has gotten out of hand, he indicates that he knows where the limits are in civil society, but his father does not. CABRERA: In all fairness, we don't know that Trump Jr. wasn't also

reaching out to his father at the same time. Do you think he was texting his father as well, perhaps, and it was just ineffective?

D'ANTONIO: I would hope so.

But it could well be that Donald Jr. has never had the direct line to the president in the White House that he would have had when they were in business together. Various chiefs of staff had tried to put down boundaries between himself -- between the president and others.

[13:15:04]

And I think it's possible that that's part of what's going on here.

CABRERA: How do you think Donald Trump is reacting to Don Jr's texts now becoming public?

D'ANTONIO: I think he's absolutely furious.

This is the young man, the child of his that has always been a bit of a problem. And I think he's probably cursing him either out loud or under his breath. This is a very bad moment for the former president. But I actually admire Don Jr. for what he did. I think a lot of Americans will admire it. It may be that he's staking a claim to being an individual on his own.

And I think that's a pretty good sign of somebody who's maturing and coming into his own.

CABRERA: Well, it's certainly different than what he puts out there in terms of his public persona.

D'ANTONIO: Yes.

CABRERA: He has been one of the most vocal proponents of Trumpism and its extremist rhetoric.

D'ANTONIO: Well, right.

But, you see, there's a big difference between trolling, being the guy who says the snarky things, and then watching people get beat up, watching people invade the Capitol, risking death. People died on January 6. I think Don Jr., in a way, as a guy who's an outdoorsman, who spends a lot of time with fellows who love guns and he finds in these rural areas where he does his hunting, that he knows that these people need to be spoken to in a way that discourages excess.

And I don't think Donald Trump, the president, former president, understood how far this could go. So he may be a great troll, Donald Jr., but it might be possible that he sees where the red lines exist, and his father doesn't see them.

CABRERA: Michael D'Antonio, I appreciate your insights. Thank you so much for making time for us.

D'ANTONIO: Great to be with you.

CABRERA: Much more on this ahead, including a closer look at how three of the biggest personalities at FOX News begged for Trump to stop the attack, but have since spent nearly every day whitewashing the insurrection.

Plus, more cities sounding the alarm over rapid surges in COVID cases, as a new study reveals two doses of the Pfizer vaccine offer much less protection against the Omicron variant.

And, soon, the parents of the student accused of shooting his classmates in Oxford, Michigan, will appear in court.

Stay with us. You're live in the CNN NEWSROOM.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[13:21:59]

CABRERA: They literally begged for former President Trump to stop the violence. Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham and Brian Kilmeade, three of the biggest stars on FOX News and conservative media in general, now exposed in newly released text messages from January 6 pleading with the former president's then-Chief of Staff Mark Meadows to get Trump to stop his supporters from attacking the Capitol.

This from Brian Kilmeade: "Please get him on TV. Destroying everything you have accomplished."

From Laura Ingraham: "This is hurting all of us. He is destroying his legacy."

From Sean Hannity: "Can he make a statement, ask people to leave the Capitol?"

And yet, in the months, weeks or even hours after they fired off those frantic text messages, those same people began shifting the narrative, trying to downplay the attack or deflect responsibility.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEAN HANNITY, FOX NEWS: We also knew that there's always bad actors that will infiltrate large crowds. I don't care if they're radical left, radical right. I don't know who they are.

LAURA INGRAHAM, FOX NEWS: There was certainly a lot of violence that day, but it was not a terrorist attack. It wasn't 9/11. It wasn't the worst thing that ever happened to America. It wasn't an insurrection.

BRIAN KILMEADE, FOX NEWS: The FBI will infiltrate groups, whether it's the mob or al Qaeda, and they will try to be one of them and unwind a pot before it takes place.

Do you think maybe perhaps -- and maybe you don't want to give away your series -- you find indications that the FBI was actually pushing for this invasion? (END VIDEO CLIP)

CABRERA: Here to discuss, CNN media analyst Bill Carter and NPR media correspondent David Folkenflik.

Thanks, guys, for joining me.

Bill, to learn that these messages were flying during the attack, and yet the message now and right after on FOX News about the attack has been so, so different, even after last night's contempt vote. This is what we saw when Mark Meadows joined Sean Hannity for an interview. Listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MEADOWS: This is about Donald Trump and about actually going after him once again, continuing to go after Donald Trump. There's never been an intent on my part. I have tried to share non-privileged information.

But, truly, the executive privilege that Donald Trump has claimed is his to waive. It's not mine to waive It's not Congress' to waive. And that's why we filed the lawsuit.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CABRERA: So this was an interview that came after we had all of these revelations about the text messages that were sent, including their own private text conversation, which had just been made public.

And yet they didn't even address that. Their viewers are being fed one message, but it's devoid of all the information, Bill. Are FOX viewers even aware of the facts?

BILL CARTER, CNN MEDIA ANALYST: Well, they're often not aware of the facts, because FOX and the other conservative media make a concerted effort to keep the facts from them when they are not favorable to Donald Trump.

This is an organization that is completely in the tank now for Trump. They're not doing news anymore. They're doing Trump-centric information.

[13:25:01]

I think the most telling thing about those texts, when the insurrection was going on, was that they were completely aware, these FOX hosts, the danger of that moment, but they weren't -- they didn't think about that the people that were under threat or the nation being in danger.

They thought about Donald Trump being in danger, his legacy being in danger. That's what they were out to protect, not the people and not even the congresspeople.

CABRERA: And, David, that Ingraham text was so revealing, right? "This hurts us all," she wrote, lumping herself in with the administration, with the GOP.

FOX News pretends to be a news organization. But journalists are supposed to hold people in power accountable, to be a government watchdog. That's clearly not what we have here.

DAVID FOLKENFLIK, NPR: Even opinion journalists, even those sympathetic to the president, even those sympathetic to a party, if you want to consider yourself a journalist, you have to acknowledge facts that go against your rooting interest.

Now, FOX goes back and forth as to whether opinion figures like Ingraham, like Hannity, even like the folks at "FOX & Friends," including Kilmeade, fall into the category of journalists, even opinion journalists, or not.

What you're seeing, however, is, as your question suggests, no separation of interest between Ingraham and her colleagues and Trump. And one more thing. We don't know whether or not they were talking about Trump's legacy as a way of appealing to his vanity to get him to stop.

What we do know is, they weren't sharing with their viewers the benefit of their perspective, their rawness, their insight that, this is a problem, this is a crisis, and this could get very, very dangerous.

CABRERA: And, as we all observed, during the last administration, some of these FOX News talents, sometimes, they served as Trump's informal advisers.

So, Bill, is it remarkable here that Trump this time seemingly ignored their advice?

CARTER: It isn't particularly surprising, because he doesn't really listen to anybody, if he's made up his own mind, even people he temporarily supports, because he doesn't really stick by anybody if they counter his opinions.

Let's face it. He won't even stick by his kids when they have to counter his opinions, as we saw with him ignoring his own son in this case. But I think, for FOX, they are so far now committed to this, it's their business plan to back Trump in every way.

So, within 24 hours, really that evening, they're out there saying, well, he had no control of this situation, it's Antifa or it's the FBI, whereas, in those texts, they clearly understood he had control of the situation. That's what that was all about.

But they can't tell their people that, because it might cost them viewers who would drive them to another conservative media. And it's a business plan to make as much profit as possible on what amounts to Trump acolytes.

CABRERA: Well, now, will they be held accountable is the question,

David, this morning here on CNN, select committee member Elaine Luria was asked about getting some of these FOX hosts under oath. Listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOHN BERMAN, CNN HOST: Any plans to call anyone from FOX to testify at this point?

REP. ELAINE LURIA (D-VA): We are calling many people. We can certainly invite them. They're free to contact the committee and speak with us. And we will be contacting other witnesses as time goes on.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CABRERA: David, within the halls of FOX, how do you think this is playing out or will play out as it moves forward? Is it business as usual? Are colleagues upset? What do you think?

FOLKENFLIK: My sense is that this was dismaying, falling hard on the heels of the announcement that Chris Wallace would be leaving to join your shop at CNN, the longtime political host of "FOX News Sunday," and after a series of disagreements about the direction of the network.

This fits into that, but it's on such a huge issue, the question of whether or not you can recognize the importance of this assault on the citadel of democracy, the U.S. Capitol, on the day where the transfer of power is being essentially -- there's a seal of approval, making it official from the vice president of the United States, that disruption.

You're not hearing about it on FOX. FOX made fun of other networks, including yours and MSNBC and others, for covering the hearings as a matter of import, while it is seeking to dismiss, diminish, deny, and even denounce the questions that are being raised by this committee and by others concerned about the implications of the workings of American democracy.

I think what -- FOX News is doing a disservice to its viewers to understand what is happening around them, but they're trying to hold on to them to give them, as Bill suggested, the red meat that they have shown that they want and for which, in a sense, they punished FOX for withholding after its call of Arizona for Joe Biden back in November of 2020.

FOX has ever since been trying to sort of double down on its Trumpiness, even as it's seeking to pivot, figure out how -- a way to pivot into a Biden era.

CABRERA: David Folkenflik and Bill Carter, I really appreciate you both. Thank you for joining us.

FOLKENFLIK: You bet.

CABRERA: A rapid surge at the worst possible time, coronavirus cases rising right ahead of the holidays.

And it comes as a new study reveals two doses of the Pfizer vaccine give only modest protection against infection from the new Omicron variant.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)