Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Capitol Officer Describes Facing Violent, Hate-Filled Mob; Ukraine Constant Street Fighting in Severodonetsk; Senior U.S., Chinese Defense Leaders Meet in Singapore; January 6 panel: Trump's Election Lies Led to Capitol Violence; FBI Still Looking for Pipe-Bomb Suspect a Year after Capitol Attack; January 6 Committee Holds First Prime-Time Hearing; U.S. Capitol Police Officer Describes Facing Mob To Jan. 6 Panel; Former Attorney General Bill Barr Says He "Did Not Agree" With Trump's Stolen Election Claim. Aired 1-2a ET

Aired June 10, 2022 - 01:00   ET

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

[01:00:00]

MICHAEL HOLMES, CNN ANCHOR: They were false.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. LIZ CHENEY (R-WY), JANUARY 6TH SELECT COMMITTEE VICE CHAIR: Those who invaded our capitol and battled law enforcement for hours were motivated by what President Trump had told them that the election was stolen, and that he was the rightful president. President Trump summoned the mob, assembled the mob and lit the flame of this attack.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HOLMES: Now, Cheney says witnesses have testified the former president angrily resisted when staffers suggested that he call an end to the insurrection.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CHENEY: Not only did President Trump refuse to tell the mob to leave the Capitol, he placed no call to any element of the United States government to instruct that the Capitol be defended. He did not call his Secretary of Defense on January 6. He did not talk to his attorney general. He did not talk to the Department of Homeland Security.

President Trump gave no order to deploy the National Guard that day and he made no effort to work with the Department of Justice to coordinate and display and deploy law enforcement assets.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HOLMES: Now the committee heard from Capitol Police opposite Caroline Edwards who was injured during the insurrection. They also played a video of mostly never before seen footage showing some of the most violent scenes on the day.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (INAUDIBLE) priority, we just had (INAUDIBLE) at Peace Circle breached the line. We need back up.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (INAUDIBLE)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: In 49 (ph) hours declaring a riot.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: 325 at 50B advice Capitol Police want to advise, they're trying to breach and get in to the Capitol.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Be advised the Capitol Police to start moving the resources inside 34 officers for.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HOLMES: More now from CNN's Ryan Nobles.

(BEGIN VIDEO TAPE)

RYAN NOBLES, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT (on camera): The January 6 Select Committee has now made its case to the American people showing a bit of what they've been working on behind closed doors for more than 11 months, laying out their thesis that former President Donald Trump is responsible for a plan that was hatched right around November 3rd of 2020 and culminated with the violence and chaos on Capitol Hill on January 6.

They believe that Trump is responsible for a plot to undermine the results of an election and prevent the peaceful transfer of power. And they told that story by hearing from some of Trump's closest allies, including his former Attorney General Bill Barr.

WILLIAM BARR, FORMER U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL: Repeatedly told the President in no uncertain terms. I did not see evidence of fraud. And that would have affected the outcome of the election. And frankly, a year and a half later, I haven't seen anything to change my mind on that.

NOBLES: Now that was just a taste of a lengthy deposition that Barr gave the committee and Barr made it clear that he told Trump repeatedly that there was just no evidence that he lost the election. And that's part of what the committee is attempting to prove that despite the fact that many people knew that these accusations of fraud did not have much merit behind them that Trump continued to push and was going to do everything he could to hold on to power.

What we saw on Thursday night was just a taste. The committee is planning several hearings, in fact, seven in all throughout the month of June, and they're going to lay out the case point by point as to why they believe that Trump's actions were squarely to blame for everything that happened on January 6, and also make the case that we were perilously close to democracy being severely threatened.

The next hearing will come on Monday. There will be three hearings next week, each one with a different theme connected to this overall investigation. The committee will then continue to work on their final product, pushing for a final report in the fall. Ryan Nobles, CNN on Capitol Hill.

(END VIDEO TAPE)

HOLMES: Donald Trump responding to the hearing on his social media platform calling the committee quote, political hacks who refuse to play the many positive witness and statements. He talks about and refuse to talk about massive election fraud and irregularities.

[01:05:00]

That's the way he put it. He ended his post by saying, quote, our country is in such trouble.

Well, joining me now from Los Angeles, Michael Genovese is the president of the Global Policy Institute at Loyola Marymount University. Good to see you, sir. It seems, you know, the messaging, the thread, if you like, of the hearing was really sort of showing everything leading to Donald Trump outlining the steps piece by piece. What were your takeaways from what you heard?

MICHAEL GENOVESE, POLITICAL ANALYST: There are several takeaways that I think are important one is the incredible power of Liz Cheney's commentary. She spoke for about 30 minutes, and she very carefully meticulously use Team Trump players, from Attorney General Barr to Ivanka Trump to eviscerate the President's case.

And so she took piece by piece the case against the president using the President's own team and their words to undermine the president. That was powerful.

The other thing was to actually see Attorney General Barr the tape of him. And what he said to the President, that I won't use the words but that basically that there was no fraud, that it's concocted that he didn't know what he was talking about. Those stood out to me as incredibly powerful moments.

HOLMES: And to that point about Bill Barr, I mean, to make the point about what Donald Trump had been told, including by Bob Barr. Liz Cheney played this clip from the committee's interview with the president's daughter. Let's have a listen to that.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CHENEY: Many of President Trump's White House staff also recognized that the evidence did not support the claims President Trump was making. This is the president's daughter, commenting on Bill Barr statement that the Department found no fraud sufficient to overturn the election.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: How did that affect your perspective about the election when Attorney General Barr made that statement?

IVANKA TRUMP, FORMER WHITE HOUSE ADVISOR: It affected my perspective. I respect Attorney General Barr. So I accepted what he sent was saying.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HOLMES: I don't know if he's still the favorite child, but Ivanka Trump, they're clearly saying she accepted the election results at the time when her father did not. And that sort of adds to that avalanche of evidence of people who've been telling Trump he'd lost, he'd lost fairly and there was no fraud. What is the impact of that sort of breaking of the ranks if you like?

GENOVESE: It was a delicious irony and using Ivanka Trump against her father, because they have been so close. And she has been such a loyal and devoted daughter and servant to his needs and his cause.

And so this is a kind of Italian (ph) we would go it's logica (ph), it's acid, that it burns the president to do something like this. And so, Ivanka's testimony that was taped and shown is simply in line with all of the other examples of Team Trump being used against Trump himself. And why are the Democrats there? They're not making the argument. They're not making the case. They're letting the Trump people make the case against Trump himself.

HOLMES: Yes, that's a really good point. In such a polarized electorate, how many minds do you think there are still to be changed? Or do you sense that when it comes to January 6, most voter positions are locked in, a lot of Donald Trump supporters were even watching this.

GENOVESE: In fact, some of the Trump supported networks that didn't air it, but our partisan voters have been hardened. And so you've got the hard right and the hard left, and they are not going to be swayed at all.

And there are very few persuadable members of the public. People who are still open minded enough who haven't formed an opinion. There are a few but not many. That is one of the target audiences that the committee is going after.

The other targeted audiences are, of course, the Department of Justice, which has thus far been quite kind of hesitant. And it's moving towards inviting the President is very unlikely. There's also the President himself as a target, can you sort of smoke him out? So there are a lot of different targets, but in terms of the public, very few are persuadable.

HOLMES: You know, of course, that the you know, the big lie that that led to January 6 is still playing out, you know, controversial changes in electoral laws in various states, restrictions on voting options and so on, all based around the big lie of massive voter fraud, which didn't exist. How does that fact play into the importance of these hearings?

GENOVESE: That's a consequence of what Donald Trump has the infectious nature of Donald Trump and the body politic. That is a kind of a virus that is spreading, spreading to the states, where, as you know, there is no one federal law for elections. There are 50 different laws in 50 different states plus the District of Columbia.

[01:10:00]

And so in all of these districts, you're seeing efforts made to undermine voting, limit voting to allow state legislators to cancel votes. What the committee hearings might do, and probably it's most positive contribution would be to take the lie and expose it even further. Donald Trump knew he was lying.

And today's hearing demonstrated that beyond question, and he used that lie to try to motivate his friends and his allies, and he used them for his own narrow purposes. And so to the extent that the committee can continue to push that, and show that demonstrated, that undermines I think efforts in some of the states to do what Donald Trump wants, which is to prepare the way for a 2024 race.

HOLMES: Michael Genovese in Los Angeles, so good to see you. Appreciate it.

GENOVESE: Thank you, Michael.

HOLMES: All right, we have much more to discuss. We're going to hear from Trump's former Attorney General again, who refused to go along with the big lie, and we'll talk about the possible legal consequences of Trump's actions. That's when we come back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[01:15:16]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CHENEY: We're at a moment of maximum danger for our republic, some in the White House took responsible steps to try to prevent January 6. Others egged the president on. Others who could have acted refuse to do so.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HOLMES: A powerful warning from the Vice Chair of the January 6 committee they're investigating the deadly attack on the U.S. Capitol. Liz Cheney stating that the sacred transfer of power has been honored by every U.S. president in history, except for one who tried you up and democracy.

Now, the bipartisan panel during its first Primetime televised hearing did not shy away from pinning the blame for the insurrection pretty squarely on Donald Trump. The committee has been delivering compelling new details that the American public hasn't seen or heard before.

One of the big takeaways this was not a peaceful protest that spontaneously turned rowdy. It was methodically planned event. And we're learning how key members of Trump's inner circle knew that the election was not stolen is what the former U.S. Attorney General testified to the committee a warning, the language does get a bit salty. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BARR: I had three discussions with the President that I can recall. One was on November 23rd. One was on December 1st, and one was on December 14th. And I've been through sort of the give and take of those discussions. And in that context, I made it clear I did not agree with the idea of saying the election was stolen and putting out this stuff which I told the President was bullshit.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HOLMES: Now joining me now from La Jolla in California, former U.S. Attorney Harry Litman, who is a legal affairs columnist for The LA Times. Harry first of all, you tweeted something earlier today and I wanted to quote part of it for people, you said this, the first job of the committee tonight is to return the country to the shocked appalled mindset we had on January 6, and that has for many since faded. Did they manage to do that Harry?

HARRY LITMAN, FORMER U.S. ATTOREY: And how and in pretty short order. The real core of that return to the sort of accurate hellishness of January 6, and the stunning surprise was the video by a documentarian that on the one hand recapitulated some of the overall attacks as we knew it, but had different angles, very effective sort of overhead angles, that and some of the actual statements by the mobster some of this -- sort of architecture of their crashing the gates, I thought really brought it home.

If I'm in the indication, I felt that same feeling in the pit of my stomach. My god, is this happening in this country as I felt back on January 6th.

HOLMES: Yes, it really highlighted the brutality in a way we hadn't seen before.

LITMAN: Yes.

HOLMES: I want to play a little bit of sound from Liz Cheney, who was pretty much a star of the show at the hearing. Let's have a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CHENEY: The White House staff knew that President Trump was willing to entertain and use conspiracy theories to achieve his ends. They knew the president needed to be cut off from all of those who had encouraged him. They knew that President Donald Trump was too dangerous to be left alone.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HOLMES: Now with your lawyer's hat on, what did you see that perhaps move the needle in any significant way in a legal sense? I mean, it really did feel like laying out a prosecution case, specifically against Donald Trump.

LITMAN: Yes, I think it did. Maybe it was designed to sort of put pressure on the DOJ. I have to say, as a lawyer as thinking about a prosecutor evaluating, there was a lot of Trump spring it on, a lot of Trump instigating, a lot of Proud Boys saying, We were invited by Trump.

The real sort of punch line that you're looking for as an agreement, that would be that Trump would have joined the conspiracy agreed with them. And then he took some act in concert with them.

Nevertheless, even without that agreement, just the mere fact of aiding and abetting, if you're asking about lawyerly terms, the impairment of the 1/6 hearing itself, that's a crime. That's a serious one.

But generally, they -- I thought they tried to draw the tie and the link between the riffraff on the ground and Trump and might have done it in a way that at least in this first year, earring doesn't quite stitch it up in the way that Department of Justice prosecutor might be looking for.

[01:20:06]

HOLMES: Well, that was going to be my next question whether you've seen anything that's come out --

LITMAN: Yes.

HOLMES: -- since January 6 with this hearing and earlier that could realistically lead to the former president being indicted. I mean, have you seen that? And of course, it's not over yet. There's still a lot more to come. But have you seen anything yet that would make you if you were sitting there as Merrick Garland the Attorney General go, maybe we should move on this?

LITMAN: Yes. So first, I want to say I used to work with Merrick Garland, and he'll just evaluate the facts as they are. So the rhetoric won't matter. But this was a new revelation tonight, Michael, that Trump was saying, you know, maybe our supporters have it right. Maybe Pence should be hanged, Trump saying the mob is doing just what it's supposed to be doing. Trump being angry at any advisors coming to him in telling them to stop the mob. Those all I think, go to the potential charge of being involved in impairing the hearing itself. And that, as I say, is a crime.

And we've also seen a lot of evidence of late that brings back the 1/6 brouhaha back to almost shortly after the election, and a series of plots, Cheney said there are seven different steps. So they clearly are zeroing in on Trump. And they've as much as said that the final hearing at which she will continue to be the star of the show, I quite agree with you. And it's at some potential political cost to her. So it's a real profile and courage.

That last hearing is really going to draw the strongest line they can about Trump's personal criminal responsibility.

HOLMES: You save a lot of Democrats saying we still don't agree with anything Liz Cheney says, in a policy sense, but man was that courageous? And yes, a lot of Democrats.

LITMAN: Good bless Liz Cheney, no doubt about it. You know, there's no reason any Congress members shouldn't have the exact same view. But when you see what the rest of her party is doing their disingenuousness, and they're kind of raw cynical obeys loans to Trump, she really, really stands out. And I hope and believe that history will reward her.

HOLMES: And apparently something else we learned was that a number of Republican congressmen, apparently after January 6 --

LITMAN: What about that, right. That's really --

HOLMES: And said were you partners? I mean, wow.

LITMAN: Amazing, right.

HOLMES: Yes.

LITMAN: You know, so why do you ask the President for part one, you know, he gives them out like candy and two, you think you may have criminal exposure. That to me, along with the two Trump quotes I mentioned, were the three big revelations of new stuff from a hearing and the kind of thing to make a person in the middle really stand up and take notice about --

HOLMES: Yes.

LITMAN: -- how close we came as a --

HOLMES: Yes.

LITMAN: -- country to really losing the hallmark of democracy, that peaceful transition of power.

HOLMES: That's the other thing on Twitter when it comes to those congressmen who wanted to part and give us the names.

LITMAN: We'll find out. Something to be aware of, you know, the DOJ has asked for this information, they will get it.

HOLMES: Yes.

LITMAN: The committee wants to make sure that they don't give it out prematurely. And the committee tonight was actually relying a fair bit on the department on the indictment that the Department filed a couple of days ago --

HOLMES: Right.

LITMAN: -- against Enrique Tarrio. So there's already beginning to be more of an informal sort of linkage between the different investigative harvests that the two bots have managed to do.

HOLMES: Good to see you, Harry. Got to run. We'll talk again. Harry Litman, appreciate it. LITMAN: Thanks. Pleasure.

HOLMES: All right. Still to come here on CNN Newsroom, much more on the January 6 investigation, including dramatic testimony from a Capitol Hill officer who stood her ground that day.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[01:28:09]

HOLMES: Welcome back. For the first time since the January 6 riots at the Capitol, we're learning damning new details about what was going on behind the scenes that day.

After months of exhaustive investigation and hundreds of interviews, the U.S. House Select Committee is laying out its case that the insurrection was not simply a peaceful gathering of Trump supporters that got out of hand rather, it was an attempted coup by Donald Trump's most militant supporters planned in advance and orchestrated by Trump as he stubbornly refused to concede the 2020 election.

Indeed, we learned in vivid detail that Trump had no intention of quelling the riot he helped start and became enraged when his closest aides begged him to intervene.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CHENEY: You will hear that President Trump was yelling and quote, really angry at advisors who told him he needed to be doing something more and aware of the rioters chance to hang Mike Pence, the President responded with this sentiment, quote, maybe our supporters have the right idea. Mike Pence, quote, deserves it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HOLMES: The committee also made public footage of that day that has not been seen before, showing an out of control mob intent on breaching the Capitol and willing to inflict bodily harm on the officers guarding the building.

Caroline Edwards was one of the officers trying to hold the line that day and was badly injured as a result. She was invited to speak as the first witness.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

[01:29:48]

CAROLINE EDWARDS, U.S. CAPITOL POLICE OFFICER: I was called a lot of things on January 6th, 2021 and the days thereafter. I was called Nancy Pelosi's dog, called incompetent, called a hero and a villain. I was called a traitor to my country, my oath and my constitution.

In actuality, I was none of those things. I was an American standing face to face with other Americans asking myself how many times -- many, many times -- how we had gotten here. I had been called names before but never had my patriotism or duty been called into question.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MICHAEL HOLMES, CNN ANCHOR: Caroline Heldman is a professor of critical theory and social justice at Occidental College in Los Angeles.

Good to see you, Professor. There's been such a buildup to this hearing. I mean to you, did it live up to expectations? What stood out to you in terms of the committee's strategy? The laying out of the case?

CAROLINE HELDMAN, PROFESSOR, OCCIDENTAL COLLEGE: Well, I think their very careful plotting, you know, step by step set-up was very good. It I think reminded people perhaps of a courtroom.

But what I found to be most effective was the video footage. I think, you know, bringing us back to that day, back to the trauma of that day, and then interspersing the time line with details of what was happening inside and outside.

I thought that perhaps the most powerful moment was the end of the first video they showed where they juxtaposed Donald Trump's words, saying that these were peaceful protesters, with images of violent insurrectionists beating police officers.

HOLMES: Yes. That's a really good point and it brings me to this point. You know, pretty much since the day of January 6th, Republican figures including Donald Trump and others have consistently played it down.

Let's have a listen to some of it.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You know, you didn't know the TV footage was a video from January 6th, you would actually think it was a normal tourist visit.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: They're actually nonviolent, peaceful Americans. Their only crime was supporting Donald Trump.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: But to say there were thousands of armed insurrectionists, you know, breaching the Capitol, intent on overthrowing the government was just simply false narrative.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HOLMES: I think we heard what the false narrative was. What does what we heard at the hearing do to what we just heard there?

HELDMAN: Well, if you're watching the hearing, which, you know, a lot of Republicans are not, there is no doubt, you can't look at this footage and you can't listen to this testimony and look at the evidence and most importantly, look at words coming from Donald Trump's advisers, inner circle, attorney general, and also, the language from the Proud Boys and other violent insurrectionists who made their way to the Capitol.

You can't look at that evidence and think that it was anything other than a violent insurrection and one that continues to be a threat to democracy if folks are not held accountable.

HOLMES: And that's an important point. How many Republicans were watching, maybe not many. How many minds can be changed, perhaps not many either in this polarized environment.

Taking the 30,000-foot view though, how important are these hearings? The process for America and its entire political system?

HELDMAN: I think it's of vital importance. Our founding fathers were concerned primarily about two things with the presidency. They were concerned a president would abuse their power and try to stay in office. And they were concerned that the president would whip up a violent mob.

And in this case we have evidence of both. In fact, the committee has been very clear that they are actually indicting Donald Trump here.

There are two audiences though, right? One is the American public in an attempt to kind of replay, you know, like the Watergate hearings -- 51 days in 1973, that really raised public awareness and got the public active and demanding something be done.

But there is also the Department of Justice. So Merrick Garland, the attorney general, was watching tonight. And this is intended to sway both of those parties with very careful evidence.

I was impressed by the lack of partisanship and by really laying out each piece of evidence and the use of Donald Trump's inner circle, and the words of his own people to make their case.

HOLMES: Yes. You made another great point there about, you know, with the DOJ might feel a little bit pressured by what it saw tonight. And to that point, when it comes to, you know, politicians and officials and so on, not the rioters themselves but those in authority. What are the dangers of this committee showing, you know, so clearly the malfeasance of people in power and nothing substantial happening in terms of consequence?

HELDMAN: Well, I have to say, I think that's actually the likely outcome. The standards for a criminal prosecution from the DOJ are much higher than the civil standards that this committee is using. And even though, you know, you could watch what happened on January 6th and listen to the president's words and yes, we're finding out more behind the scenes, but just watching it that day, it was pretty clear what happened.

[01:34:59]

HELDMAN; But I actually I think there's a strong likelihood that he will not be properly held accountable for his actions. I think the attorney general has to look at the possibility that that would incite violence across the United States, that it would further the divisions. And it is also just a much higher standard of evidence that is difficult to prove.

HOLMES: Professor Caroline Heldman, really appreciate your time. Thanks so much.

HELDMAN: Thank you.

HOLMES: And we will have more on the hearings in just a few moments.

But first, a street by street battle for a battle-scarred strategic city in Ukraine. That's coming up after the break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[01:39:53]

HOLMES: The latest now on Ukraine for you. Regional officials say Ukraine is still holding on to a third of the city of Severodonetsk. They deny Russian claims that it controls the city saying Moscow actually withdrew some troops.

But the officials say fighting is underway, street by street. And the humanitarian situation is critical.

To the northwest, five people killed in Russian shelling near Kharkiv. The Ukrainians say 14 others were injured after Russian forces struck residential buildings on Thursday. The goal, according to Ukraine, was to scare local civilians from coming back home.

And three foreign fighters have been sentenced to death by a pro Russian separatist region in eastern Ukraine. Two Britons and one Moroccan had fought for Ukraine before their capture in April.

Their attorneys say they will appeal. The court, of course, is not considered legitimate on the international level.

For more on all of this and what's been going on, Salma Abdelaziz joins me now from Kyiv. Good to see you there, Salma. Let's start with the latest on the battle for Severodonetsk which even the Ukrainians say is (INAUDIBLE) in this overall fight.

SALMA ABDELAZIZ, CNN REPORTER: Absolutely. President Zelenskyy says the fate of the Donbas and in many ways, the fate of Ukraine's frontline, this eastern front lie of course, in Severodonetsk. It has been used as the administrative capital essentially for the Luhansk region over the last several years since the conflict started.

And it is now essentially, you have Ukrainian forces that are outmanned. They are outgunned. This is an artillery war, Michael, and Ukrainian forces are running out of artillery.

So you can only imagine that right now, it is just a matter of competing time lines on the ground here. You have Russian forces that have for weeks now with their superior artillery positions, they have been grinding down Ukrainian forces. Ukrainians troops forced to pull back to these fortified positions. The only thing that could change the tide here is western weaponry, the arrival of more weapons, more artillery, and particularly, long range weaponry from the U.S., from the U.K., from other allies. But that could take many more days and weeks.

I just want you to take a look here. We're going to pull up the map. You could see this broader front line that brings the whole eastern front. Because regardless of whether Severodonetsk has fallen yet to Russian forces, what Russian troops are doing is they are creating realities on the ground. Facts are on the ground.

And those are that there is a land bridge essentially that you can see down that front line connecting Russia, all the way down through the Donbas through into those newly occupied southern regions of Kherson and Mariupol, down to Crimea and critically, of course, into those all important Black Sea ports.

That was the objective for President Putin is to gain that land bridge, that direct access to those warm water ports. In a speech just yesterday, President Putin was likening himself to Peter the Great, claiming that Ukraine has no sovereignty, claiming that these are territories that belong to Russia that Russia will win back.

And they're already repairing infrastructure along this land bridge, Michael. The flow of rails has begun. They're reopening ports such as in Berdyansk (ph), such as in Mariupol. So regardless of the tit for tat battles over every inch of Severodonetsk, Russia again is just barreling on ahead, claiming the lands and making use of them, Michael.

HOLMES: Yes. Putin bizarrely raising Peter the Great as a justification for what's going on, an incredible sort of interview he did or an address that he.

Salma, I'm going to leave I there, unfortunately. Good to see you, my friend. Salma Abdelaziz there in Kyiv.

Now, the Biden administration facing heavy criticism from some Latin American leaders over its refusal to invite some countries to the Summit of the Americas. President Biden telling the summit the future of the western hemisphere should be a democratic one.

But some leaders said they wanted representatives of autocratic nations such as Venezuela and Cuba included. And with Mr. Biden watching the prime minister of Belize called the exclusions incomprehensible.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOHN BRICENO, BELIZEW PRIME MINISTER: The summit belongs to all of the Americas. It is therefore inexcusable that our countries of the Americas are not here and the power of the summit diminished by their absence.

It is incomprehensible that we would isolate the countries of the Americas which have provided strong leadership and contributed to the hemisphere on the critical issues of our times.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HOLMES: The U.S. president said the summit was in his words, off to a strong start despite what he called disagreement over participation.

[01:44:50]

HOLMES: He also met with the Brazilian president Jair Bolsonaro who emphasized the need for reliable elections in his country. Mr. Bolsonaro has questioned the integrity of Brazil's electoral system in the run-up to a general election in October.

Now, in the coming hours, U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin and his Chinese counter part will be meeting in Singapore. This coming as tensions are growing over what Washington sees as China's increasingly aggressive actions in the region.

For more on this, I'm joined by CNN's Oren Liebermann. Good to see you there, Oren. Any big expectations for this meeting?

OREN LIEBERMANN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, the big expectation is in and of itself that there is this meeting. This will be the first time there is a meeting between Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin and his Chinese counterpart Minister Wei Fenghe. They've only spoken once on the phone back in late April. It was about a 45-minute conversation.

So part of this is just to open up those lines of communication. senior defense officials say that in part, one of the goals of the United States is to open up more lines of communication, and to perhaps at some point establish guardrails on the relationship between the world's two pre-eminent world powers the U.S. and China doesn't veer into conflict because of some unintended miscalculation or an escalation.

So that's what the U.S. us looking for. And not just at the highest levels of the militaries but also as sort of operational theater levels and at other levels between the U.S. and between China.

Again, to make sure that this doesn't veer off into conflict. The real question, is China receptive to this idea? Is this something they're willing to consider and willing to talk about? Or will this be two world powers with their representatives sitting in a room talking right past each other in and that perhaps a very real possibility.

The U.S. has underscored what it sees as China's extraordinarily unsafe and even dangerous activities in the region, the South China Sea and beyond. And we've seen that with U.S. allies. Australia and Canada saying the Chinese interceptions of their aircraft in the region were unsafe and dangerous.

But China simply insists that these were safe and professional and that the real problem here, the core of the issues in the region is simply the presence of countries that don't belong here, for example, the U.S.

And that's why you may well see a situation in which the U.S. and China simply talk past each other instead of making real progress. Now, of course, as we just heard from Salma Abdelaziz, Ukraine hangs over all of this. For the U.S. and Ukraine and Russia's invasion of Ukraine is an example of what happens when the world forgets about the international world order and larger countries simply ignore the sovereignty of smaller countries or smaller partners or other countries in the region, other territories in the region. Of course, the main idea there being Taiwan.

To underscore that, Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskyy speaking here tomorrow afternoon. Michael, you and I both well know he knows how to make a headline. He knows how to grab attention. Especially when countries here contributed arms and equipment to Ukraine.

So we'll see first what he says and then of course, later on this evening, what if anything comes from that U.S.-China meeting.

HOLMES: Yes. Great to have there on the spot covering all of it for us. Oren Liebermann, appreciate there on CNN.

Now, more than a year since the Capitol riots the FBI is still trying to solve another Washington crime. They are looking for a suspect who put pipe bombs around the Democratic and Republican committee offices.

We'll have details ahead.

[01:48:17]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I am not allowed to say what's going to happen today because everyone is just going to have to watch for themselves. But it's going the happen. Something's going to happen.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HOLMES: Foreboding words there before the Capitol riot. Meanwhile, the FBI investigating a mysterious incident that happened the night before the riots. Officials say an unknown suspect planted several pipe bombs near the Republican and Democratic National Committee headquarters in Washington, D.C. You may remember the case.

CNN's Brian Todd with the latest.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

BRIAN TODD, CNN CORRESPONDENT: While there is a significant amount of information out there on this person's movements and appearance on the night in question --

STEVEN D'ANTUONO, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR-IN-CHARGE, FBI WASHINGTON FIELD OFFICE: A face mask, a gray hooded sweatshirt and black and light gray Nike Air (ph) Max speed turf shoes with a yellow logo.

TODD: Authorities still don't know who this person is or why they left pipe bombs outside the Democratic and Republican Party headquarters the night before the capital insurrection.

What we do know is the suspect walked a nomadic path according to surveillance footage from the FBI which authorities say suggest they're not from the D.C. Area.

We know a dogwalker walked right past the suspect. And we have information that according to "The Atlantic", the FBI has interviewed more than 900 people in this case and has even done analysis on the way the suspect walks.

What we don't have is a name, a gender, or any indication that this person is anywhere close to being caught, even though authorities have been investigating for 17 months now.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This is a mystery. And frankly, we could use the public help in solving it. They need to drop a dime, as we used to say, and let someone know what they think.

TODD: Former Capitol police chief Terrance Gaynor says he doesn't think the trail has gone cold. Gaynor and other law enforcement veterans believe the FBI is still meticulously combing through the devices themselves which officials say were made with galvanized pipe and home-made black powder and attached to egg timers. And they're analyzing other clues.

D'ANTUONO: They're looking for bomber's signature. They're looking for any what we call trace evidence which is latent prints, DNA, hair fiber, things that may tie together to match the device to a specific individual.

TODD: The FBI has said the two bombs were placed near DNC and RNC headquarters between 7:30 and 8:30 p.m., just a few blocks from the Capitol on January 5th, but weren't discovered until around 1:00 p.m. On the 6th, just as rioters were breaching the Capitol.

[01:54:56]

TODD: What we've learned in recent months is how close one bomb came to potentially harming incoming Vice President Kamala Harris. Sources told CNN Harris' motorcade drove within a few yards of one of the bombs on the morning of the 6th, and that she was inside the DNC office with one of the bombs just outside for almost two hours before the device was found.

D'ANTUONO: These pipe bombs are viable devices that could have been detonated, resulting in serious injury or death.

TODD: Despite what we know of the case, despite a reward of $100,000 for information on the suspect, why hasn't the person been caught?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I think the person was very careful. Sometimes it takes a few days, and sometimes in this case it takes years in order to find the individual that perpetrated this type of act.

Todd: the analysts we spoke to say there is also that a possibility the person may never be caught. And that whoever the suspect is remains very dangerous.

We reached out to the FBI to see if they could provide any updates on the case. There were no updates that the bureau could make public.

Brian Todd, CNN -- Washington.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

HOLMES: Thanks for spending part of your day with me. I'm Michael Holmes.

Our coverage of the January 6 hearings continues with Kim Brunhuber next.

[01:56:05]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)