Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Air Travel Delays; New Video Shows Russian Attack on Shopping Mall; NATO Formally Invites Sweden and Finland to Join; Fallout From Explosive January 6 Testimony Continues. Aired 2-2:30p ET

Aired June 29, 2022 - 14:00   ET

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

[14:00:40]

VICTOR BLACKWELL, CNN HOST: Hello. I'm Victor Blackwell. Welcome to CNN NEWSROOM.

ALISYN CAMEROTA, CNN HOST: And I'm Alisyn Camerota.

So, what are the legal implications today of Cassidy Hutchinson's stunning testimony? She detailed Donald Trump's erratic behavior surrounding the violence at the Capitol and what his top aides were doing.

Congresswoman Liz Cheney now turning up the pressure on Trump White House lawyer Pat Cipollone to testify, after Hutchinson revealed that Cipollone was worried that he and Trump's entire team would face a litany of criminal charges if Trump went to the Capitol on January 6.

BLACKWELL: Hutchinson said the president knew his supporters were armed and tried to join them.

There are also new questions, though, about the former White House aide's claims that Trump lunged for the steering wheel of his presidential SUV when Secret Service agents, they told him he couldn't go to the Capitol. Now the Secret Service tells the committee that agents are willing to dispute that story under oath.

CNN's Ryan Nobles is on Capitol Hill.

Ryan, big day for the committee. Do we know what's next?

RYAN NOBLES, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, there's no doubt, Victor and Alisyn, that the committee seems to be razor-focused on Pat Cipollone, the former White House counsel, and his role in all of this.

And to this point, Cipollone has only had very base-level conversations with the committee. He has not had an extensive deposition under oath. And it's clear the committee wants to hear from him. They have said it publicly in one of their hearings.

And now the vice chair, Liz Cheney, taking it a step further, going to her Twitter, and specifically calling Cipollone out, saying that: "As we heard yesterday, the White House counsel, Pat Cipollone, had significant concerns regarding Trump's J6 activities. It is time for Mr. Cipollone to testify on the record. Any concerns he has about the institutional interests of his prior office are outweighed by the need for his testimony."

And there is so much that Pat Cipollone knows about. He was at the center of all of these discussions that were taking place after the election leading up to January 6. Just as an example, some of the things that committee might want to hear from him, they might want to know what his office did in the lead-up to January 6, the pushback that there may have been on Trump's attempt to install a new attorney general, what happened with the Jeffrey Clark meeting at the White House on Georgia, also the language that he used and that they were concerned about in Trump's January 6 speech, the way that he was telling him to dial things back.

Now, what we already heard yesterday in some of this testimony from Cassidy Hutchinson are some of the things that Cipollone did to try and prevent Donald Trump and his administration from breaking the law or making things worse.

Cipollone told Meadows, for instance, on January 6 that: "People are going to die and that the blood is going to be on your effing hands."

That was one of the things she testified to yesterday. And she also warned Trump that, if he goes -- went to the Capitol, that he could be at legal risk, and it also could be dangerous.

So it is clear that they need to hear from Cipollone. But, Victor and Alisyn, it's not going to be easy. He is an attorney. He understands what his rights are. And it is a very, almost unprecedented situation for a former White House counsel to testify in this form and fashion to a House committee that's organized by Congress.

CAMEROTA: Ryan, as you know, some in the Secret Service now are disputing Cassidy Hutchinson's account of what Trump did in that presidential SUV, where he lunged for the wheel and for the Secret Service agent.

So what's the plan to get to the bottom of it?

NOBLES: Yes.

Alisyn, let's first play what Cassidy Hutchinson said yesterday, so we have a frame of reference, and then talk about the debate after.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CASSIDY HUTCHINSON, FORMER AIDE TO MARK MEADOWS: The president reached up towards the front of the vehicle to grab at the steering wheel. Mr. Engel grabbed his arm, said: "Sir, you need to take your hand off the steering wheel. We're going back to the West Wing. We're not going to the Capitol.

Mr. Trump then used his free hand to lunge towards Bobby Engel. And Mr -- when Mr. Ornato had recounted this story to me, he had motioned towards his clavicles. (END VIDEO CLIP)

NOBLES: So it's important to point out a couple of things.

First, this is not Hutchinson saying that she witnessed this happening. This is her recounting a story that was told to her. But what we're being told by members of the Secret Service is that both Ornato and Engel are willing to testify under oath that Hutchinson's account of what happened is not what occurred and that they also did not tell her that story.

[14:05:01]

So there is a bit of a contradiction there. But it's also important to point out the distinction they're making here. They're claiming that there isn't a story about the president specifically lunging at the steering wheel or lunging at a member of his Secret Service detail.

What they are not refuting, which is important, is that the former president was mad and that he wanted to go to the Capitol. And that may be the more specific and more important part of this testimony.

And the other thing we should point out, Victor and Alisyn, is that if Engel and Ornato ended up testifying in front of the committee, they are going to be under oath. They have already had a conversation with the committee, but they probably have follow-up questions. Yes, they may ask about this specific incident.

But there may be a whole host of other things that the committee has questions about that could also be brought up as part of another deposition.

BLACKWELL: Certainly.

Ryan Nobles for us there on Capitol Hill.

Ryan, thank you.

Joining us now, CNN legal analyst and former federal prosecutor Elliot Williams and Renato Mariotti, former federal prosecutor as well.

Gentlemen, welcome back.

I want to get to this dispute later, but it's not really the headline here from the Hutchinson testimony.

Renato, let me start with you on the question of, does this testimony get DOJ closer to a case they can prove and get a verdict from a jury, specifically on the question of the awareness of former President Trump that his supporters had weapons and, according to Hutchinson, they were not for him?

What does that illustrate?

RENATO MARIOTTI, FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR: I think that is extremely important testimony, particularly for a potential incitement charge, because what this establishes really for the first time is that former President Trump knew that there were dangerous people in the crowd, people who are armed.

And when he says that they -- let them through the magnetometers, let them through the, essentially, the metal detectors, they don't want to hurt me, they're going to be marching to the Capitol, and the implication is that he understands that they may hurt people there.

I think that that is evidence that's powerful enough to at least cause the Justice Department to consider an incitement charge, so I think really powerful and important evidence of his state of mind.

CAMEROTA: Elliot, in terms of the Department of Justice, are they ahead or behind of where the committee is in terms of putting these pieces together?

In other words, that stunning testimony where Cassidy Hutchinson said that -- I will just read it to everybody -- that President Trump said: "I don't effing care that they have weapons. They're not here to hurt me. Take the effing magnetometers away. Let my people in. They can march to the Capitol."

Would DOJ have heard that before? Or was that news to them too?

ELLIOT WILLIAMS, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: You know, the thing with the Justice Department is, we don't know because their work operates in secret.

Look, I was a prosecutor for a while. So was Renato. All of these things happen outside of public view. Grand juries, for instance, operate in secret. So, on the question of, is the Justice Department ahead or behind the committee, the Justice Department has charged, what is it, 800 people with crimes already.

So, they're certainly moving along with an investigation, including charging very senior members of the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers. So I don't know, and I don't think any of us can really answer the question as to whether they have gotten this evidence or information.

Now, if they haven't, it's a bit of a problem, given that -- given how far and how much time has elapsed since January 6. But, again, by virtue of what Congress is, it is a public body. And they have a very different job and a very different charge than the Justice Department. And I don't think we should hold them to the same standard.

BLACKWELL: Elliot, for that detail about the magnetometers and all of the really jaw-dropping revelations...

WILLIAMS: Yes.

BLACKWELL: ... we heard from Cassidy Hutchinson, you say that the former president has a plausible defense for each of them.

WILLIAMS: Yes.

So here's the thing, Victor. You could certainly -- and I agree with Renato -- you could probably get to a place where you could charge him. But the argument that the president or any defendant would make in response is that, well, look, he was just obsessed with crowd size, because, if you look at the testimony -- the testimony Cassidy Hutchinson gave leading up to that point, she said that the president looked out at the crowd, saw that it wasn't big enough and said, well, eff it. I want more people there. Just get the magnetometers out of the way.

So you can see that it cuts both ways. Now, this is the kind of factor that all of us as prosecutors would have considered in deciding whether to proceed with charges.

Look, again, I want to be clear, you could still probably sustain a charge on a lot of these things. But he has an argument, and it's not a completely implausible one.

CAMEROTA: Renato, what do you think, I mean, since you think that was the moment that was the game-changer?

MARIOTTI: Yes, the reason I think it's a game-changer is from a legal perspective.

There's a First Amendment issue that really protects Trump's speech. Political speech is usually protected by the First Amendment. And unless he was imminently inciting lawless action, there's no case, because the First Amendment bars it, because speaking is permitted.

And so I think that this might get the Justice Department over the hump in being willing to charge. But I agree with Elliot that, in any case against the former president, it's going to be a challenge to prove beyond a reasonable doubt.

[14:10:08]

His state of mind is complicated. He talks sometimes in a word salad. There's always something that you could use to benefit both sides. And I think that it's not going to be an easy road, no matter -- no matter what the charge is.

BLACKWELL: All right, Elliot, let's talk about this dispute over details inside the SUV.

WILLIAMS: Yes.

BLACKWELL: This is after the speech on the 6th.

And what Hutchinson said was that the former president reached for the steering wheel and then lunged at an agent. Tony Ornato, who was then deputy chief of staff, disputes it...

WILLIAMS: Yes.

BLACKWELL: ... says Secret Service agents will go under oath to deny it.

You would assume that the committee investigators had this locked down if they know this is going to be a wow moment. Does this undermine the testimony, this dispute?

WILLIAMS: It does undermine the testimony. It's a credibility issue for the witness and it hurts the witness' credibility.

This happens all the time. Number one, this isn't a criminal trial. It does happen in criminal trials. It happens in congressional proceedings too. And audiences and juries judge witnesses harshly when they have these sorts of credibility slip-ups.

That said, Victor, it's very important to note that it doesn't negate the hour and 55 minutes of other testimony she gave, many of it quite -- much of it quite compelling and quite persuasive and, on top of that, to have what, is it, eight hours of testimony prior to that the committee had put on.

And so I think a lot of folks are fixating on the fact that there is a dispute here that the committee can clear up. And there's a dispute over this fact. But it doesn't -- it doesn't negate everything.

And the other point is that she was testifying truthfully, as far as we can tell, as to what she heard. Now, there's a dispute as to what she was relaying. But it was still honest sworn testimony. So, again, it's the kind of thing that can be cleared up pretty easily by the committee by putting those other witnesses on.

CAMEROTA: Renato, what's your thought on why the committee would have put that bit of information out there, if they hadn't buttoned up the other side of it?

MARIOTTI: I actually think that was an unforced error by the committee.

I actually think this is the danger of having a congressional committee out potentially in front of the Justice Department, whether by plan or not. If the Justice Department decided that they wanted to let the committee do this, I have to say, as prosecutors -- and I suspect Elliot did the same thing -- before you put a witness into the grand jury, for example, locked in their testimony under oath, you really made absolutely sure that there was nothing that was impeachable there, there would be nothing that wasn't buttoned down.

Because these are the sort of things that at least give the defense something to talk about, even though I think, in the end, it doesn't really matter here, for the reasons you had mentioned earlier, and Elliot.

So I think it was an unforced error.

CAMEROTA: Elliot Williams, Renato Mariotti, thank you.

WILLIAMS: Thanks.

BLACKWELL: President Biden holds a key meeting with Turkey's president. Now, the timing here is significant, as NATO formerly invites two new countries to join the alliance.

CAMEROTA: And with Russia's war on Ukraine grinding on, President Biden is beefing up the U.S. military presence in Europe.

That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:17:30]

BLACKWELL: Today, NATO formally invited Sweden and Finland to join the alliance.

CAMEROTA: The announcement came shortly after President Biden unveiled a plan to strengthen U.S. forces in Europe and held a series of critical meetings, including with Turkey's president, who initially had opposed the two nations' bid to join NATO.

CNN's Phil Mattingly is in Madrid.

So, Phil, what happened in that meeting with Erdogan?

PHIL MATTINGLY, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: It's interesting.

There is a lingering, simmering tension between the U.S. and Turkey in terms of their relationship, if managed, but definitely exists.

And you would have had no sense of that listening to President Biden's remarks at the top of that meeting with Turkish President Erdogan, lavishing praise on him for what happened over the course of the last 24 hours, President Erdogan signing off on a memorandum that would clear the way for the official invitation of Sweden and Finland to join NATO, something that underscores that, in this last 24 hours, the idea that President Putin may have invaded Ukraine because he thought NATO was adrift and perhaps could be fractured has been proven dramatically, catastrophically, to some degree, for the Russian sense of things, wrong in every way.

Obviously, the addition in the months ahead of two new members, including Finland, which has an 800-mile border with Russia, Sweden, which moved away from staying mostly independent in these matters, now joining moving towards joining NATO, but also the U.S. presence and the U.S. posture in the region and in the alliance.

President Biden announcing today the U.S. would have a permanent headquarters in Poland, new rotational troop deployments in places like Romania, two new destroyers deployed to Spain, fighter jets in the U.K., air defense systems in Germany.

The U.S., which over the course of the last decade has started to shift away from Europe, very much doubling down, really surging a troop and equipment presence in this continent, and to a degree we haven't seen since the Cold War. And it underscores what has happened just over the course of the last six months.

And it underscores the U.S. view and the U.S. effort over the course of those six months to really bring the alliance as close together as they possibly could to try and ensure that it was compatible not just for this moment, but also going forward, and really rallying the members of the alliance and now two new future members of the alliance to bring their own commitments into play as well.

There is no question about it. What President Putin has done in Ukraine, while there is no near-term solution for that, and, obviously, it is a catastrophe in any way, every way that we're watching play out on screens, from a long-term perspective, NATO is in a place it simply hasn't been in decades.

And that is in large part, if not entirely, because of President Putin's decision, guys.

BLACKWELL: Yes, a significant extension of the NATO border there along with Russia as well.

[14:20:04]

Phil Mattingly for us in Madrid.

Thank you, Phil.

CAMEROTA: So, we have some new video of the moment that a Russian missile struck a busy shopping mall in Central Ukraine.

Right there, you can see the structure completely engulfed after that by flames and heavy smoke. President Zelenskyy says as many as 1,000 people were inside at the time.

BLACKWELL: Officials say at least 18 people were killed, more than 50 injured, and dozens are still missing.

CAMEROTA: Well, the worldwide travel, air travel, woes continue. In the U.S., more than 500 flights have been canceled today alone. What this means for your holiday weekend.

BLACKWELL: And one senior House Republican who voted against impeaching former President Trump predicts big consequences after Cassidy Hutchinson's testimony.

That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:25:33]

CAMEROTA: Millions of Americans are getting ready to travel this weekend. Delta says it anticipates customer volumes not seen since before the pandemic.

But the ongoing surge in flight delays and cancellations could impact your plans.

BLACKWELL: Today is the second consecutive day of more than 500 flight cancellations in the U.S..

Richard Quest is a CNN business editor at large and anchor of "QUEST MEANS BUSINESS."

Richard, I took a round-trip flight down to the West Coast. I had two cancellations, five delays.

CAMEROTA: Whew.

BLACKWELL: Three gin and tonics to get me through it.

(LAUGHTER)

BLACKWELL: But why...

CAMEROTA: That's a lot of math.

BLACKWELL: Why is this happening?

RICHARD QUEST, CNN BUSINESS EDITOR AT LARGE: Last night -- I'm in London now.

And, last night, I flew over from Newark, United. We were just about -- we were late out the gate, but got here on time because of the winds. The reality is, the airports are heaving. The plane last night was packed to the doors, every seat. In fact, it was actually oversold. They were offering up to $1,500 for passengers to give up their seat and go on a later flight.

And the infrastructure can't cope. It is as simple as that. There are too many people trying to fly at the same time, at a time when the industry just simply hasn't rebuilt its capacity. Aviation is like a Swiss clock. It has interconnecting cogs that are finely tuned.

And what happened, of course, is, the pandemic gummed everything up. And they haven't managed to get it back together again to cope with the demand.

So, for instance, United is cutting flights out of Newark simply because they can't guarantee a reliable service. Delta is now saying to people, you can change your ticket, and, interestingly, you can change your July 4 plans, and there won't even be a fare difference. That's very unusual.

And that is an indication of how serious the situation is.

CAMEROTA: But, Richard, what are they doing to improve the situation?

QUEST: Well, there's no quick answer, Alisyn.

I wish I could sort of say, magic wand, all will be well. There is none, because you have got to reemploy staff who left the industry. There are security questions about -- you can't just suddenly take people on and have them as ramp -- carrying bags or check in people.

It's simply not possible. It's going to take time. And that's why, when I was at IATA in Doha -- that's the aviation, the airline organization, trade union, if you will -- just about every CEO in the world of foreign airlines said it's going to be a messy summer. We hope passengers will understand. We fear it's going to be inconvenient, but there's nothing we can do about it. We're doing all we can.

Every airport is at capacity. Every airline is at capacity. They don't have the staff. They don't have the infrastructure. And it will get marginally better over the summer. But it's going to take months before we really see a major improvement.

CAMEROTA: If only you had a magic wand, Richard Quest, everything would be improved.

(LAUGHTER)

CAMEROTA: I totally agree with that. Thank you.

(LAUGHTER)

BLACKWELL: All right, Texas and Wisconsin are two of the states mired now in legal battles after the Roe vs. Wade overturning.

The Internet searches for abortion medications reached record highs after the decision was initially leaked. We will talk about all of this next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)