Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Pat Cipollone Set to Testify to January 6 Committee; Highland Park Gunman Admits to Firing on Crowd. Aired 1-1:30p ET

Aired July 06, 2022 - 13:00   ET

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

[13:00:35]

ANA CABRERA, CNN HOST: Hello, and thanks for joining us. I'm Ana Cabrera in New York.

A chilling confession, a stunning admission, and just a pure lack of emotion. The 21-year-old gunman in the Highland Park parade shooting appeared in court today facing seven counts of first-degree murder. The details coming out of that appearance are, in a word, horrifying.

We're learning more about his actions that day, the weapon, and what he considered doing after unleashing the hail of bullets on innocent people at that parade,

CNN's Josh Campbell was inside the courthouse when the shooter appeared.

First, let's walk through your observations at this hearing. You describe his appearance as chilling.

JOSH CAMPBELL, CNN SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: It was incredibly chilling, Ana.

And this was the first live look that we were getting at the suspected gunman. Now, he was appearing via Zoom inside the courtroom behind me. He's obviously still in custody. And what was so chilling, just to begin with, is the prosecutor, as they laid out the potential -- or the actual charges so far in this case and potential charges in the future, they started by naming the victims, those who had been killed in this attack.

And as they were reading off the names, I was looking at the screen with the shooter, and he sat there with no emotion whatsoever. He was flanked by deputies dressed in all black. He would look down to the right, to the left every once a while, but zero emotion as they read out the people that he allegedly killed.

Now, the judge in this case determined that this suspect is still a continuing threat to the public. He revoked bail in this case. The suspect will remain in custody, the next hearing scheduled for later this month.

This comes as we're learning chilling new details about this attack, how it unfolded. Inside the courtroom, as the prosecutor was laying out the case, they said that the suspect went to the rooftop where this parade was going on and went through three magazines of ammunition.

He pulled out an assault-style rifle, prosecutors said, scanned that crowd, and eventually started opening fire, going through one magazine after another, each containing 30 rounds, a hail of bullets as these people were fleeing and panicked, again, seven killed dozens and dozens are injured.

One other just really striking detail we heard afterwards at a press conference a short time ago is police tell us that, as the suspect was on the run, there was this hours-long manhunt, that the suspect contemplated conducting another attack as he was in Madison, Wisconsin area. Police say that the suspect confessed that he drove up upon this crowd, a celebration of sorts.

And even on the run, he still had 60 rounds of ammunition still with him and contemplated whether or not he should open fire on that crowd, ultimately deciding not to. Of course, we will never know perhaps why he decided that. Only he knows. But it just shows you that there could have been yet more carnage here.

Now, as far as additional charges, prosecutors say that they're just getting started. There were obviously a number of people that were injured in this crowd as well. They expect to bring additional charges. And, of course, those life -- or -- excuse me -- those first- degree murder charges carry a life sentence, Ana.

cam OK, Josh Campbell, a whole lot of new information there. Thank you for bringing it to us.

Let's discuss with CNN counterterrorism analyst Phil Mudd and James Densley. He is a co-author of "The Violence Project: How to Stop a Mass Shooting Epidemic."

Gentlemen, thanks for being here.

Phil, first, your reaction to what all we just learned, the prosecutor saying the gunman voluntarily confessed to firing his weapon on parade-goers. And he also said he thought about carrying out another attack before he was caught.

PHILIP MUDD, CNN COUNTERTERRORISM ANALYST: Boy, let me hold my temper here.

There's one thing that I would think about here. And that is if you look at the emotional state of the individual, Ana, and the fact that, as we know now, in the past couple of days, police had been called to the home a few years ago because of concerns about weapons in the home, especially knives and suicide watch.

My first question as a former investigator analyst is, what did the family know when? Because if somebody wants to say with someone in this emotional state, with someone who's had this emotional state over years and was continuing to acquire weapons, why did nobody speak?

The second overall question or comment I would have about this is an echo of cases that I saw over time at the FBI, and that is the emotional state of an individual about to walk out the house and murder people. Experience is, those individuals focus on the event. They do not focus on the aftermath of the event.

[13:05:05]

It's so emotional to step out with a weapon and contemplate firing off that many rounds, that the emotion is invested in actually conducting it. And when the person in this case walks off the building, they don't always know what they can -- what they're going to do, remarkable as that sounds, Ana.

CABRERA: Wow.

I want to come back to the earlier warnings and those police responses to a couple of reports in 2019 involving this suspect. But before we go there, James, your thoughts? As somebody who studies mass shootings, what do you make of this confession? How does it fit into your research?

JAMES DENSLEY, CO-FOUNDER AND PRESIDENT, THE VIOLENCE PROJECT: Yes, I think it's, in some ways, unique, in as much that many mass shooters die on the scene.

And the point that was just raised around not having a plan for what happens next is often part of the plan, which is that they intend to die in the act. So it's only in some cases that we actually get this opportunity to understand this person after the fact, see them, and see their response and reaction to the crimes that they have done.

And, in many cases, I think it is a situation where those who live, perhaps the fantasy of the crime didn't live up to the reality of the crime. And then they are left sort of contemplating what they have done, why they have done it, and the implications of that now has.

So I do think that's a really important point that your colleague has also mentioned there.

CABRERA: And, Phil, you brought up the incidents months before the shooter got his guns. Again, this is in 2019. His family called police at least two separate times, we now know, worried that he was a threat to himself and to others.

In one instance, in September of 2019, a family member reported that the future gunman, as it would be, said he was going to -- quote -- "kill everyone." He said that. And police then removed 16 knives, a dagger, a sword.

And, yet, just a few months later, he buys his guns legally. He passes four background checks.

MUDD: I understand this, partly, but let me give you an answer that's going to make this more complicated.

The first is what I mentioned earlier. You have to ask the question about, A, whether the family knew he was acquiring the weapons, and why they didn't say something. If you want further action to be taken, when the police were first there, the family has to, at least in some cases, participate in a follow-up. Evidently, they did not.

The second is, before people talk about the police response in the years that follow and the background checks, as soon as the police want to take those weapons, that's going to go to a judge. And that's going to go to politicians, because that judge responding to the police request to take those weapons is going to say, was that a justified requests?

In states across the country, opponents of gun control are going to say, that individual doesn't have a felony conviction, that individual should have a weapon. This isn't on the cops. It's on the family, in my judgment, and it's on politicians who need to give support to judges to say, take the weapons.

CABRERA: I mean, here's the thing. It was the dad just a few months later who had to sponsor his son in an application to get these guns because he was then 19 and didn't have the qualification to go get a weapon his own, James.

Based on your research, how do you make sense of this specific shooter's family calling police, but then later sponsoring him to get guns.

DENSLEY: I think there's two things here, is -- one is, it's very hard for parents or family members, friends to actually contemplate that the person in front of them is a potential mass shooter.

We have got this sort of narrative around mass shooters as being monsters and madmen, when, in fact, they are our sons. They are our brothers. They are our classmates and colleagues. We have to get over that mental hurdle to see this as a possibility.

Secondly, often in the case of young shooters, they are getting access to firearms through their family, whether they steal them because they have not been securely sort of put in the house and safely locked up, or they are being gifted to them by family members. This is actually a common thread we have seen with younger shooters. And it's really a moment for intervention.

We need to be asking that serious question of why are people getting access to firearms when they're in a crisis? That's not the time to be getting access to it. Yes, a lot of the guns are up at home, and we have to put more barriers in place for those young people to get access to them. That's parents.

CABRERA: And, Phil, the type of gun used in this shooting is also important to this story. The shooter allegedly fired more than 70 rounds using that high-powered rifle similar to an AR-15, we are told.

[13:10:05]

I can't help but wonder, would a handgun had been able to do this? Would the gunman have been able to cause so much carnage in such a short amount of time, shooting from a rooftop, if he didn't have an assault-style weapon?

MUDD: No way.

Just look at a couple of statistics, and one thing, Ana, that I'd like to see in America. Those statistics involve things like -- and these are numbers. I'm an analyst, I do numbers.

Statistics would be number of weapons per 100 citizens in America. I encourage any viewer to look up that number. You will be astonished. We crush the number of Yemen. Yemen has far fewer guns per 100 person than we do. And then look not only at killings by weapon in this country, but a number that's never discussed. That is suicide by gun.

If you have a child who's thought about suicide in the past, and you authorize that child to bring a weapon into the house, you got to explain to me -- forget about the law -- why you would ever have that happen.

Final comment, what we need in this country that will never happen, bring in the U.K. and Australia, retired police commissioners, and ask, what happens in your country, when you remove weapons from households, and, in particular, in Australia, what happened when you put an assault weapons ban in your country?

The Congress will never do that, because they don't want the answer, Ana.

CABRERA: James, you co-created The Violence Project in hopes that researching these mass shootings will ultimately help to prevent a next tragedy.

What strikes you most so far about this shooting as a lesson to take away here?

DENSLEY: Well, we try and layer solutions to mass shootings at three levels, at the individual level, the institutional level, and then at the societal level.

At the societal level, just as the other guest is mentioning here, if you want to have a big impact quickly, it's around firearms, access to those deadly weapons, the large-capacity magazines and so on, which cause such death and destruction.

Now, going down to the individual level, safe storage of the weapons, or, in this case, the parents not actually sponsoring that purchase could have saved lives. At the institutional level, when we think about our schools, our workplaces, our communities, what could have been done to maybe spot the warning signs of violence in this case?

There seems to have been a lot of red flags. A lot of people knew something, but perhaps were afraid to speak out and do something about it. That's where the action is there as well. There's lots of things we can be doing. We don't have to sit around and wait for an act of Congress. We can all be part of the solution here. And that's the most important thing.

CABRERA: And then you talk about how nobody wants to believe somebody they know, they care about, a friend, a colleague, an acquaintance, a family member, is capable of such a horrific act, but it never hurts to speak up. Better safe than sorry, as the old saying goes.

James Densley, Phil Mudd, I appreciate the conversation. Thank you both for your insights and expertise.

Let's turn now our focus to the seven lives lost, including a couple watching the parade with their young toddler son, and also a mother who was fleeing the gunfire with her 22-year-old daughter.

CNN's Adrienne Broaddus us joins us with their stories -- Adrienne.

ADRIENNE BROADDUS, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Ana, there are so many memories behind each name. We know the names, but we're now starting to see the faces and hearing more about these victims, including Eduardo Uvaldo.

We learned through a GoFundMe page that his daughter created he attended the parade with his wife and other children. After his family made the decision to take him off of life support, he died this morning. His family tells us they attended the parade every year.

Cassie Goldstein was also at the parade with her mother on Monday. And Cassie says her mother, Katherine, was looking forward to attending the parade. And she describes what she saw and the final words she spoke to her mother after she was shot. Listen in.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CASSIE GOLDSTEIN, DAUGHTER OF SHOOTING VICTIM: I looked up and I saw the shooter shooting down at the kids. And I told her that it was a shooter and that she had to run.

So I started running with her. And we were next to each other. And he shot her in the chest. And she fell down. And I knew she was dead. So I just told her that I loved her, but I couldn't stop because he was still shooting everyone next to me.

She was just a good mom. And I got 22 years with her. And I got to have 22 years the best mom in the world.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BROADDUS: Cassie describing the final moments with her mother. They came here to celebrate. And she left grieving, like so many others -- Ana.

CABRERA: I'm so heartbroken for her.

[13:15:00]

And, Adrienne, also, the story about a 2-year-old who lost both of his parents, this is just so horrific. What more can you share about this?

BROADDUS: Yes, you're talking about 2-year-old Aiden McCarthy. He was here with his father, Kevin, and his mother, Irina McCarthy.

We heard from his grandfather, who spoke to the local paper "The Chicago Tribune." The grandfather says his daughter was the love of his life, his only child. She was everything. We know the father, Kevin McCarthy, used his body before dying to shield his 2-year-old son, Aiden, from gunfire.

Soon after, that child was walking around alone, and good samaritans took him in, until he was later reunited with his grandfather. He's now in the care of his grandparents. And the grandfather said, when he was reunited with his grandson, Aiden, he said: "Mommy and daddy are coming soon."

Now that grandfather has to tell that 2-year-old his parents are never returning -- Ana.

CABRERA: Just think about the fear a 2-year-old must have felt when all of this was happening. And now to think that he doesn't have his parents anymore. It's just so heartbreaking.

Adrienne Broaddus, thank you for your reporting.

They have a deal. A key witness just agreed to an interview with the January 6 Committee. What does former Trump White House counsel Pat Cipollone know?

Plus, anger building as Americans keep paying through the nose for just about everything. And now members of the president's own party are questioning if the White House is equipped to deal with it.

And a great big problem for Utah's Great Salt Lake. Now officials are calling for urgent action.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[13:21:10]

CABRERA: A key witness, a big deal. CNN has learned that former Trump White House counsel Pat Cipollone will testify behind closed doors, but on videotape, with the January 6 Committee.

Cipollone was with Trump on the day of the Capitol insurrection, making his testimony critical.

CNN's Ryan Nobles joins us now on Capitol Hill.

Ryan, when is this happening? And what kind of information is the committee seeking from Cipollone specifically?

RYAN NOBLES, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes, Ana, it's scheduled for Friday.

And the big thing they're hoping Pat Cipollone do is fill some of the gaps of the testimony that they have received from other White House aides, some of it which has been behind closed doors that we have seen clips through a videotape during some of the hearing, some of it live, of course.

The best and most obvious example is that of Cassidy Hutchinson, the former aide to the White House chief of staff, Mark Meadows, who frequently brought Cipollone up as part of her testimony.

And what they'd like to see is if Cipollone can explain the counsel that he gave the president and his top aides as it relates to having to try and stand in the way of certification of the election, and also their attempts to pressure the former Vice President Mike Pence to stand in the way of the certification of the election results, and then what they knew about what was happening here at the Capitol.

Of course, there's been testimony that the president knew that some of the rioters were armed, and yet he still wanted to go to the Capitol. So, his testimony is very important. Ana, we should say that there is some sort of a concern, though, about just how much he can reveal, because of privilege, both executive privilege and attorney-client privilege.

The committee has said that they were going to work those details out. That was part of the negotiation. So it seems as though both sides are in a place where they believe Cipollone can be beneficial to the investigation -- Ana.

CABRERA: And the American people, hopefully, as well can learn more about the inside workings around what was happening on January 6.

Stick around with me, Ryan.

I want to bring Renato Mariotti into this conversation. He's a former federal prosecutor, and now hosts the "On Topic" podcast.

Renato, first, your reaction to the January 6 Committee now securing this testimony that will be videotaped from Pat Cipollone.

RENATO MARIOTTI, FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR: Well, from a legal perspective, I think it's a very savvy move by the committee.

If Cipollone wanted to, he could hide behind privilege and create a lot of complications for the committee and make it very difficult for the committee to get his testimony. What I think happened here, based on the reporting we have seen, is that the committee wisely cut a deal with Cipollone.

They're getting everything they can get out of him. And it looks like from a "New York Times" report that it's going to be a lot about conversations with Clark and Eastman, people who weren't the president and so forth.

I think that's smart to get whatever testimony they can get out of it. And then, if they want to turn back and try to force him to say more, they can have that litigation, but litigating with an attorney over privilege is complicated, and they're wise to get everything they can get out of him now.

And so I think this is just a smart move by the committee.

CABRERA: We have seen some of these videotaped depositions played during the hearings that have happened up to this point.

Now we know there's an upcoming hearing next week. Ryan, what do we know about that next hearing?

NOBLES: It's going to take place on Tuesday, 10:00 Eastern time.

And the focus is going to be on these domestic extremist groups and the white nationalist groups that were a big part of causing all the chaos here on January 6.

And what Congressman Adam Schiff, who's a member of the committee, has promised, is that the committee is going to demonstrate at least some sort of a tie between these groups and those close to the White House. And so the question is, it through someone like Rudy Giuliani? Is it through someone like Roger Stone?

Could even Mark Meadows have been in conversation with some of the members of this group? And just how close was that relationship? Because, of course, the committee has already established on some level just how involved these organizations were, particularly when it comes to premeditation, what their plans were ahead of January 6.

[13:25:06]

This is them building the case that this wasn't just some sort of peaceful protest that got out of control. The next step of that is tying it to these administration officials.

Of course, Ana, we already know that many of these individuals have been indicted by the Department of Justice on crimes as serious as seditious conspiracy. So, the fact that the committee is making them a part of their investigation demonstrates that they're not just satisfied with what the Department of Justice is doing, that they want to tie this to individuals in Trump's orbit.

CABRERA: Renato, I want to pivot to a separate investigation right now, because the Georgia special grand jury that's investigating efforts to overturn the 2020 election in that state has now subpoenaed Senator Lindsey Graham and Giuliani and these other former top legal advisers to Trump.

So what does this tell you about where the investigation -- and this is the Fulton County DA investigation -- where it stands and where it's heading?

MARIOTTI: Well, it really looks to me like the Fulton County DA views the entire episode where there was a pressure campaign to get Mr. Raffensperger, the secretary of state in Georgia, to find votes or potentially change the outcome, alter the outcome of the election there, as a crime.

And so what I see is a very aggressive effort on their part to put a marker down that they want to investigate this. We don't know exactly why they -- the timeline is that they're doing this now, but it does -- all signs have pointed to the Fulton County DA being very aggressive to do this, which makes a lot of sense, given that she's an elected official and is concerned about this apparent crime in her district. CABRERA: Senator Graham's legal team says they are planning to

challenge this subpoena. His attorneys are saying they were informed through their discussions up to this point that Graham is -- quote -- "neither a subject nor a target of the investigation, simply a witness" -- end quote.

Does that make sense to you that he wouldn't be subpoenaed as a target? Is that how it usually works, that he would just be subpoenaed if he's a witness?

MARIOTTI: Yes, he would. What's unusual is why he wouldn't cooperate.

So I actually, Ana -- I'm a practicing lawyer. I represent clients all the time who are subpoenaed, pursuant to government investigations. I usually am trying to figure out whether my client is a subject or a target vs. a witness. If my client is a witness, I'm usually happy to bring them in and have them cooperate with the interview. Why not?

There's not as much of a downside if, really, they don't have liability for themselves. It's usually faster and more efficient to get it out of the way. The fact that Senator Graham is fighting this tells me he's willing to spend a lot of money to avoid being seen being a witness against Donald Trump.

CABRERA: So you think, ultimately, Donald Trump would be the target of this investigation? Is that what the different signals are telling you?

MARIOTTI: Yes, I do.

And I think that the incentives are different for the Fulton County DA than they are potentially for the attorney general, who may be concerned about how this is -- the impact it's going to have on the country as a whole. I think the Fulton County DA appears to me, from all public statements she's made, is full steam ahead.

And the obvious target here would be Donald Trump, because he is the one on -- on a recording with the secretary -- Georgia secretary of state, directing him as to what to do. And, frankly, people like Graham appeared to be, based on public reports, to be acting at the behest of the president.

CABRERA: Renato Mariotti and Ryan Nobles, thank you both for joining us.

MARIOTTI: Thank you.

CABRERA: Less than two hours from now, the president delivers a speech on the top issue for voters, the economy.

But is there anything the White House can do to get Americans out of this fix?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)