Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Justice Department Releases New Court Filings Against Oath Keepers Members; Abortion Activists Protest at the White House, Urge Biden to Do More; Latest Economic Numbers Paint a Confusing Picture; "The Good Liars" and the Power of Political Satire; Ukrainian Medic Released from Russian Captivity Speaks Out; Musk Wants Out of Twitter Purchase, Twitter Says Not so Fast. Aired 7-8p ET

Aired July 09, 2022 - 19:00   ET

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

[19:00:00]

PAMELA BROWN, CNN ANCHOR: I'm Pamela Brown in Washington. The top stories on this Saturday.

Militia training, bombs and a so-called death list. What the Oath Keepers were allegedly doing right before the Capitol riot. Also ahead for you tonight, a Ukrainian medic released in a prisoner exchange accusing her Russian captors of torture. And then I asked a former Federal Reserve governor if the Fed can get inflation under control without triggering a recession. Plus history has been made at the Women's Final of Wimbledon.

You're in the CNN NEWSROOM.

And we begin this hour with unsettling new allegations of a far-right extremist group and its preparation for violence ahead of the January 6th attack on the Capitol. According to a new Justice Department filing, at least one member delivered explosives to an area just outside Washington. And then another member allegedly had a handwritten document headlined "death list."

The Justice Department also says that chapters of Oath Keepers held training camps focused on violent military tactics.

I want to bring in CNN national security analyst, Juliette Kayyem, a former Department of Homeland Security assistant secretary, and she is also the author of "The Devil Never Sleeps: Learning to Live in an Age of Disasters."

Juliette, thanks for coming on. So as terrifying as the attack on the Capitol was, with this new information, do you get the sense that it could've been much, much worse?

JULIETTE KAYYEM, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: Absolutely. I mean, the amount of weaponry that the Proud Boys alone had, as well as the Oath Keepers, just suggests that they were ready for some sort of activity that would've been much more violent than what we saw. So then, the question is, why didn't that happen? And in some of the filings we've seen so far in particular, in the cases against the Oath Keepers, because remember, a number of the Oath Keepers have now pled. They have turned against leadership, so we're learning a lot about

what the planning was, they were waiting for some moments, some triggers, some activation from the White House, or from someone that they should begin the violent onslaught, that never happened. We don't know what that was. Was that Trump's presence on the Capitol? Was it some other person representing the interests of the insurrection? We just don't know.

And I think that's why a lot of people are anticipating learning a lot from the committee on Tuesday.

BROWN: Right, because the committee is holding this hearing focusing on the connections between the Trump White House and far-right groups like the Oath Keepers. How significant will it be if the committee can show a link between the White House and these groups?

KAYYEM: Well, it's very significant and I think we have to think about this as two different types of links. So one is going to be, could you make a legal case? I mean, in other words, did Trump direct these groups in the way that you would want to form a legal case? You know, were there communications from person X to person Y. And remember the Oath Keepers, for example, were the sort of security proxy for Roger Stone and others who had strong ties to the White House.

And so, we'll learn more about that, but another way to think about ties and I think this is where the January 6th Committee has been very successful, is to just talk about the nurturing and the directing that Trump was enabling in the months and the years before January 6th, but then became very focused that morning on January 6th, his silence and the lack of him stopping anything over the course of those hours.

All of those contributed to what you might call linkages, and so I view what the January 6th Committee is doing, is this sort of also a counterinsurgency campaign. They are really going after the violence that was nurtured and directed by Trump for years, and unless we call it out, it's going to continue to be part of our body politic in the years to come, whatever happened.

BROWN: Nine members of the group have been charged with seditious conspiracy. Do these allegations in your review bolster the government's case?

KAYYEM: Yes, absolutely because this is, and you know, first of all this isn't tourists. This isn't a sort of benign rally that got out of hand. I mean what you're showing, what the government is showing is pre-positioning of essentially military assets to stop the certification of a lawful election in the United States of America, and we've got to say it that way every time because it's so mind blowing about what they tried to do, is that's essentially what they were doing.

So all of the pieces begin to fit together. You stop Pence from doing what he wants to do, that was clearly a target, and Trump clearly wanted Pence to be stopped or harmed, and not exactly clear what. You stop the certification from happening, you create enough mayhem at the Capitol, and then, you basically say well, the election is not valid and you get the states to do whatever they were doing in terms of these false certification processes.

[19:05:07]

So all of those begin now to look like a really well-constructed plan for taking the election. That plan does not come from just anyone, right? I mean, this is the point here. All roads are leading to Trump, and that is where the January 6th Committee has been successful, that this isn't really about anyone else but Trump's willingness to defy the democratic processes of the United States, and I mean, you know, the nonviolent transition.

BROWN: Right. And that's a big reason why the committee wanted to speak with Trump's White House counsel, Pat Cipollone, who spent almost eight hours yesterday testifying before the January 6th Committee behind closed doors. Now I am told by sources that the committee did not ask him to cooperate Cassidy Hutchinson's testimony about Cipollone. As you'll recall, she had testified saying that he had warned staffers not to go up to the Capitol because they would be, they would face criminal charges.

He wasn't asked about that. And I'm told by sources that if he had been asked, he would've said no. But what do you make of the committee not asking him that?

KAYYEM: So I think -- I mean, I think that they're probably trying to tread carefully. They want to get from him what will be I think just -- that will provide information that they need from him specifically. I mean, in other words, what are the things that he noticed during that day, what was his reaction to that day, what was he seeing outside of his advice to Trump, and I think that is essential. But I also -- and helpful.

I mean all of these pieces are helpful to isolate Trump, I mean, who is the leader of a violent movement. I mean, this is just what they're doing. I think what is also important is if you look at the stretch of the committee and what they're doing, I think they'll probably do it this coming week is they're also showing that if you don't come forward now, we already have the information.

I think the fact that Trump's former White House counsel was now willing to go forward and wasn't five, five weeks ago when we started this, shows the success of the committee. People are getting off the ship and they should. I mean, in other words, as I say, Trump has peaked and, you know, you may not be the first to get off but you don't want to be the last. Trust me, you don't want to be the last.

BROWN: And he only did this, I'm told, because of the subpoena. He didn't do this voluntarily, did it because of the subpoena. But it's interesting on that note, you've heard committee members sort of call out to others in Trump's orbit who haven't spoken with them basically saying look, we know a lot, so come talk to us while you still can, right?

KAYYEM: Yes.

BROWN: Sticking with Cipollone here, I'm told by a source that he did invoke executive privilege a couple to a couple of questions from the committee.

KAYYEM: Right.

BROWN: The source also told me that the committee asked Cipollone a series of questions about pardons including potential pardons for the Trump family and whether Trump wanted to pardon himself. What do you think his testimony could mean to President Trump and those closest to him?

KAYYEM: Well, I think it can show what was happening in the White House that was unrelated to legal advice. He is there, right? So he sees what's happening, who's running around, who's doing what, who's saying what, that has nothing to do with legal advice. So that's clear. The second is, if he's not asked his legal advice about pardons but is seeing who is asking for pardons, right? So he can also testify to that.

So part of this is the January 6th Committee sort of making a calculation about what they want from whom? So if they just bump up straight against the lawyer-client or White House counsel and president claims, then they are not going to get anywhere with him. So they divert his attention and his testimony, and clearly got something out of him. Six, seven, eight hours is a lot of pleading the Fifth. Right? They got a lot of information out of him.

BROWN: Yes. I am told by a source that one of the things he said in his testimony was that he did not believe the election was stolen and, you know, that has been something the committee has been getting from various people in Trump's orbit, saying that, that exact thing that they knew that the election wasn't stolen and they told the president that.

KAYYEM: Right.

BROWN: Juliette Kayyem, thank you so much.

KAYYEM: Thank you.

BROWN: Well, abortion rights supporters marched to the White House today to protest the Supreme Court's abortion ruling. And some protesters even tied themselves to the White House fence, demanding that President Biden do more to protect abortion rights.

The demonstration comes just a day after the president signed an executive order aimed at expanding abortion access.

Joining me now is Rachel O'Leary Carmona, she is the executive director of the Women's March Organization, the group that organized today's protest.

Thanks for coming on. So the executive order President Biden signed yesterday, it expands contraception access, public abortion outreach, legal access for abortion patients and doctors.

[19:10:01]

Clearly, your organization is not satisfied. What more would you like to see the president do?

RACHEL O'LEARY CARMONA, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF WOMEN'S MARCH: First of all, thank you for having me on. I think that we need some clarity in terms of what is in the current executive order and we would like to see it go farther. We would like to see a public health emergency declared and we would like to see the whole of government commitment that he made in September, to be, you know, in fruition.

We think that it's great that HHS is going to have a 30-day plan. We would like to see that for all government agencies so that we would like to see the full might of kind of the Democratic presidency, you know, brought to bear on all of the institutions that we can so that we have the strongest, you know, response possible.

BROWN: You have criticized elected Democrats for not codifying Roe v. Wade into law before it was overturned. I want to play this clip of the vice president addressing that criticism in an interview with CBS yesterday.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ROBERT COSTA, CBS NEWS CHIEF ELECTION AND CAMPAIGN CORRESPONDENT: Did Democrats fail, past Democratic presidents, congressional leaders, to not codify Roe v. Wade over the past five decades?

KAMALA HARRIS, VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I think that, to be very honest with you, I do believe that we should have right believe, but we certainly believe that certain issues are just settled. Certain issues are just settled.

COSTA: Clearly were not.

HARRIS: No, that's right, and that's why I do believe that we are living, sadly, in real unsettled times.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BROWN: What do you make of her response?

CARMONA: I mean, I agree with it to an extent. I think that Roe versus Wade was settled law. However, we did see the writing on the wall with the packing of the court, with Kavanaugh, with Amy Coney Barrett. Folks who are put there to do a job to roll this back. And so we certainly should have seen the writing on the wall then.

We know that this is a part of a longer multi-decade plan from the GOP, and even if we missed both of those two things, there was the leak from the Supreme Court and so we knew which way the winds were blowing and so having a plan and whipping the Democratic Party to make sure that the folks who are holdouts not just on abortion rights but on the filibuster and the other things that are stopping, you know, senators from just doing their jobs, you know, is a missed ball.

BROWN: Right. You mentioned that it was leaked before. Of course the Democrats didn't have a vote to do anything at that point. But what more would you have liked to see them do ahead of the ruling actually coming out then?

CARMONA: Yes, I think that we would like to see pressure and a clear, you know, kind of plan for what happens to the Democrats who aren't kind of doing their jobs and who are holding up work, you know, inside of the Senate, particularly thinking through Manchin and Sinema and their, you know, obstruction of not just progress and not just acting on behalf of the American people, but you know, honestly, they're one of the biggest obstacles to Joe Biden's agenda as well.

And so I think we need to see, you know, a Democratic Party whipped by the president, using the bully pulpit, using every possible tool at his disposal in order to get the Democrats in line and serving the American people. I agree with the vice president, we are living in really difficult and challenging times. And so we need the folks who are supposed to be with us to fight for us.

BROWN: So you think that the president hasn't been doing enough, that he has been weak on this?

CARMONA: I think that the president can do more, and we are encouraged that he wrote the EO yesterday, encouraged that he did speak very strongly, encouraged that he did use the bully pulpit yesterday and we would like to continue to see that happen.

BROWN: I want to talk about these reports, protesters gathering outside of a restaurant where conservative justice Brett Kavanaugh was dining. This is after weeks of protests outside of Kavanaugh's home including one alleged assassination plot. There is this recent polling that shows a majority of Americans disapprove of these protests outside of justices' private homes.

Do you worry that these tactics could scare more moderate Americans away from the abortion rights movement? What do you think?

CARMONA: I mean, it's hard for me to say because we are not the folks who are planning that. But what I would say is that the antiabortion movement has pinned a lot of its tactics and a lot of its winds on the right to protest outside of private residences, outside of doctors' offices, clinics, et cetera. And so I think that the law should be applied equally. The Supreme Court itself said, you know, that those protest grounds are fair game. And so I'm not sure why, you know, there would be a double standard.

BROWN: Right. Well, for justices, it is a little bit different but what do you think about like protesting outside of the homes? I mean, that has been something we have seen and then of course going to the restaurant. What do you think about that tactic?

CARMONA: Yes, we've definitely seen that for folks who provide abortions and other folks who are, you know, in care services as well, so I mean, I think that whatever the law is, it should be applied equally.

BROWN: OK. Rachel O'Leary, thank you so much. Rachel O'Leary Carmona, we appreciate it.

CARMONA: Thank you so much.

BROWN: And you are in the CNN NEWSROOM. Up next, a former chief economist at the IMF says it is almost impossible for the Fed to keep inflation in check without tipping the U.S. into a recession. I'll ask a formal Federal Reserve governor if he agrees.

[19:15:04]

And political pranksters. The "Good Liars" on the art of satire with a straight face. You are not going to want to miss this segment.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: More people and more crime is committed and more people are killed with hammers every year than guns. Look at the facts.

JASON SELVIG, "THE GOOD LIARS": I will look that up. I don't think that's true actually.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: That is true.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BROWN: The latest U.S. economic numbers are painting a confusing picture. The Labor Department announced Friday that the U.S. economy added 372,000 jobs in June. The current unemployment rate is 3.6 percent, close to the 52-year low it hit before the pandemic. But inflation is at a 40-year high. It's creating high prices for everything from gas to groceries. And the president says he understands people are feeling the pinch.

[19:20:00]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOE BIDEN, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Now look, I know times are tough. Prices are too high. Families are facing the cost of living crunch. But today's economic news confirms the fact that my economic plan is moving this country in a better direction.

We still have a lot of work to do. I'm not suggesting there's a lot more work to do. But I am suggesting we're making significant progress.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BROWN: Randall Kroszner is a professor of economics at the University of Chicago's Booth School of Business. He is also a former member of the Federal Reserve Board of Governors.

Hi, Randall. So, look, let's look at the landscape right now. There is a labor shortage, but also inflation could lead to a recession. What are the odds that these two things would happen at the same time? RANDALL S. KROSZNER, PROFESSOR OF ECONOMICS, UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO

BOOTH SCHOOL OF BUSINESS: This is a really tough situation, so in the past typically what would happen is the economy would get kind of bubbly and effervescent. The labor market would get very tight. Then the Fed would have to put on the brakes, raise interest rates, and bring the economy down.

Now the Fed is raising rates at the same time the labor market is still really, really tight but that means that there is still a lot of wage pressure and that translates into higher costs, higher prices, maintaining pressure on overall inflation, and feeding into that cost- of-living crisis that the president was talking about.

BROWN: And all of this appears to be affecting consumer sentiment. The University of Michigan survey shows it at the lowest on record, and 79 percent of consumers say they expect bad times in the year ahead for business. So what do you think that means for the future and how this factors into the economy?

KROSZNER: So it's really tough because what households have is jobs but they don't have enough income to do what they want with those jobs which is to provide a good living standard for their families, and they're also worried that with inflation going up, with uncertainties of war, sanctions, other concerns, that the economy is going to go down and so their jobs may not be, you know, super secure now but a year from now they're not so sure.

So that probably means that they're going to pull back, demand will pull back, and that will only make it more likely that there will be a recession.

BROWN: Do you think that there is a way for this country to avoid a recession?

KROSZNER: We can hope that there could be, as the chairman of the Fed has said a soft or soft-ish landing that the economic activity would come down, the employment rate will go up a bit but we could bring inflation down without actually having a formal recession.

This is an unusual circumstance, harder to say whether we will be able to avoid a formal recession or not, but certainly we're going to have significantly less economic growth and probably higher unemployment by the end of the year.

BROWN: I want to ask you this question, Republican minority leader, Mitch McConnell, is blaming Democrats and economic stimulus for a labor shortage. Here's what he said earlier this week.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. MITCH MCCONNELL (R-KY): You've got a whole lot of people sitting on the sidelines, because, frankly, they are flushed for the moment. Now what we've got to hope is that once they ran out of money, they will start concluding it's better to work than not to work. That decision last year on a party line basis to drop $2 trillion on an economy was a gargantuan mistake. (END VIDEO CLIP)

BROWN: What do you think about that? Is he right?

KROSZNER: Well, certainly we've had an enormous amount of fiscal stimulus. Think back to March 2020, $3 trillion that was on a bipartisan basis, and that was perfectly reasonable. We (INAUDIBLE) economy down, we didn't know what was going to happen with the pandemic, and so providing a lot of support made sense. Then another $1 trillion in December of 2020 and another $2 trillion in 2021, that's a third of GDP. It does seem that, you know, was it really necessary to do those additional amounts? I think that certainly did contribute to a lot of economic activity, and higher wages, but also, it contributed to people having more money in their pockets because a lot of that stimulus was checks sent out to people's households.

BROWN: Right. So that means -- so what you're saying is that increased demand which could've impacted inflation essentially?

KROSZNER: Had two effects, one is increasing demand and the other is, as Mitch McConnell said, people will have more money than they otherwise would have had and so maybe more reluctant to come back into the job market.

BROWN: All right. Professor Randall Kroszner, thank you so much.

KROSZNER: Thank you.

BROWN: And coming up on this Saturday, two comedians using satire to expose political hypocrisy from politicians to everyday people. No one and no topic is off limits. I'll speak with the "Good Liars," up next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[19:29:13]

BROWN: Welcome back. A live picture here of the White House in Washington, D.C. 7:28 p.m. Eastern Time. Scattered showers here in the nation's capital. We so appreciate you spending a part of your Saturday evening with us. And I am so looking forward to this segment coming up.

Do current politics make you just want to cry sometimes? Well, the "Good Liars" want to turn that frown upside down.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SELVIG: Who would you rather have president? Joe Biden or Vladimir Putin?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Probably Putin.

SELVIG: And apparently I'm kind of low on cash right now. Do you think I could get an advance on the universal basic income? There's like $2,000 or $3,000 you could just give me now.

ANDREW YANG, FORMER PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: We have to make this out for everyone.

SELVIG: Could you just give me the money in your wallet?

[19:30:11]

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: More people and more crime is committed and more people are killed with hammers every year than guns.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BROWN: Which of course is not true.

All right. Joining me now with more on their cell satire, Jason's Selvig and Davram Steifler of "The Good Liars." I'm so impressed. You're just watching that clip like how you keep a straight face. It's just -- I want to learn your ways, because it's really incredible.

Okay, so this all started with you guys posing as investment bankers protesting the Occupy Wall Street Movement. You've been around since 2011. You released a movie in 2016, another in 2020 where you duped presidential candidates, Andrew Yang was far from alone. But you continue to get away with fooling people.

Jason, why do you think that is?

JASON SELVIG, "THE GOOD LIARS": The short answer is I don't know, but some people have caught on. The other day, we were at a Ted Cruz event and I asked him to sign a copy of "The National Enquirer" where Donald Trump planted the JFK assassination story with Ted Cruz's father, and Ted said that he had seen our silly videos.

And so I guess people are catching on, but not before I was able to, you know, ask him to sign it. So, I also get Ted Cruz is a big thing --

BROWN: But hadn't you pranked him before, too? Like, I thought I saw a clip of you pranking him previously, too, right?

SELVIG: Yes, it has been about --

DAVRAM STEIFLER, "THE GOOD LIARS": Probably about the fifth time.

SELVIG: That was the fifth time, I think.

BROWN: Why do you keep going after Ted Cruz? What is it about Ted Cruz, Davram that makes him such a ripe target for you?

STEIFLER: I don't know. It's almost no matter who we ask across the political aisle, even people will agree that he is kind of a strange guy, kind of makes them uncomfortable and that includes us and when we're on the road, and there's an opportunity to try and get an interaction with Ted Cruz we go for.

We just show up and see what happens.

BROWN: You've just got to go for it. STEIFLER: Yes, it doesn't always work out, but sometimes it does and it's worth it.

BROWN: I'd love to be in one of your like brainstorming sessions where you come up with these ideas. It's so interesting.

You don't just go out for political candidates. You don't go after people on the right and left parties. You've pranked Scientology, Chick-fil-A.

A couple of months ago, you went to the NRA convention and targeted its leader, Wayne LaPierre. Jason, let's listen to that.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SELVIG: And maybe these mass shootings would stop happening if we all thought a little bit more and we pray a little bit more. So, I'm asking everyone in this room, to think, to pray. Give your thoughts and your prayers and your thoughts and your prayers and your prayers and your thoughts.

And if we get enough of these thoughts and these prayers, these mass shootings will stop. So, I want to thank you, Wayne LaPierre for all your thoughts and all your prayers.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BROWN: I mean, honestly, you don't know whether to laugh or cry. How did you first of all, Jason, stand up there and do that without laughing? And do it so seriously? And you know, earnestly? And do you think Wayne LaPierre ever caught on?

SELVIG: Well, I -- it was kind of dumb luck that we walked into this event where you're actually allowed to go up and speak to Wayne LaPierre and I guess the Board of the NRA and I was just kind of trying to match the tone of some people that had spoken before me who were defending him.

One guy almost cried defending Wayne LaPierre. So, it was it was dumb luck that I was even able to get out there.

And to answer your question about Wayne LaPierre catching on, yes, you know, I think he's a pretty smart guy and I was looking at him and most of the time he is nodding and kind of staring at me and listening to me. And I think there was a little calculus that he did in his brain where he was like, "I don't want to interrupt this guy. He's probably making fun of us. But he's also saying our exact talking points. So if I were to interrupt him, I would be going against our own talking points."

BROWN: Hmm. That is. That is an interesting point. Yes, and I was watching people in the audience, too, like how they were responding to you once it became clear. Okay, something's a little different here.

I want to talk about another prank one of your pranks made news. You talked to a Missouri Governor candidate about his campaign ad saying that he was going hunting for RINO's -- Republicans in name only. Let's look at that.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ERIC GREITENS (R), MISSOURI GUBERNATORIAL CANDIDATE: I'm Eric Greitens. Navy SEAL, and today, we're going rhino hunting.

SELVIG: You're comparing these rhinos almost to as if you're running into them in nature or something right? It's a big game? Hunting?

GREITENS: It is obviously a metaphor.

SELVIG: No, of course, right.

GREITENS: It obviously shows that the left, right, which has no sense of humor and now they want to outlaw a metaphor.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

[19:35:06]

BROWN: So speaking of no sense of humor, Greitens complained to YouTube about your segment, Davram. It went down, but you appealed. It went back up. Meantime, his violent ad is still running. What do you think about that?

STEIFLER: It's just also odd. I can't believe this is where we are right now where there are political ads like this. But you know, you kind of alluded to it. I mean, he says the left has no sense of humor and then when the joke's on him, he launches a YouTube complaint, as opposed to taking it well.

But, you know, part of our conversation, he was saying, this is a metaphor, people need to understand it's a metaphor. But in the ad, he talks about hunting rhinos, and then he does a home invasion of a human house.

So whatever metaphor he had going, I think, is out the window and it just looks like it's a call for violence against other Republicans. So, I think probably some Republicans were also upset with it in addition to those on the left who have no sense of humor, I guess.

BROWN: Oh, yes.

STEIFLER: It is kind of being a snowflake, being a little bit of a snowflake about the whole situation.

BROWN: Ted Cruz, you're bringing in Ted Cruz again. Sorry, thought on snowflake and there's that whole thing -- but yes, you know, it is interesting and context is important, because he -- this is happening, this ad came out during the time when there was rampant mass shootings, right, where there was the Uvalde, shooting and Buffalo and so forth, too. So I think the context really matters.

I'm curious, Jason, who is easier to prank in your experience, conservatives or liberals? SELVIG: Well, I would say we have an easier time, I guess, blending in and getting involved in some of the conservative events. And also, there's just kind of a disconnect with reality with some of the people that we talk to on the far-right right now and that I guess, is ripe for comedy, unfortunately, sadly.

We'll talk to people that believe some pretty out there conspiracy theories. So I would definitely say the right, but that's not to say we haven't had some fun with people on the left. I loved that Andrew Yang prank and sincerely asking him for money. There's fun to be had on both sides.

STEIFLER: There is fun to be had on both sides, but I think the button downs and the khaki pants put us, you know, pretty, pretty squarely in the conservative crowd there and we don't get a ton of questions.

BROWN: So as we wrap up, I wish we could go on and on, because I just think your work is -- it's quite something. Why, Davram is it -- why do you think it's important to do this political satire and to raise awareness? I mean, we all get some laughs from it, but what -- do you think it has a bigger message or purpose?

STEIFLER: Yes. We absolutely do. I mean, that's why we're out there doing it.

I think there's a disconnect. I mean, Jason just talked about it a little bit. Between, you know, some people and reality like we're talking to these people. Oftentimes we find that our conversations, just by posing the normal questions, you would if you're talking to people repeating back to them what they say that they are contradicting themselves, that is hypocrisy or even outright just not reality.

The number of people we've talked to that say JFK, Jr. is actually the, you know, alive and is the Acting Vice President and the current President is Jim Carrey in a costume and this stuff has to be called out, I think, because --

SELVIG: Well, I would stop you there, because I actually believe in that.

STEIFLER: Jason believes --

SELVIG: That I do believe.

STEIFLER: Jason has been taken in by that one, it's pretty compelling the way Biden was kind of tripping off that escalator, so there might be some truth to that. I guess, the point is, if this stuff doesn't get called out, I think more and more people believe it and we like to think that the stuff that we do communicate to our audience.

Hey, whether you're a Democrat or Republican, can we all agree that this is too far? That this is too out there? And hopefully people can laugh at it, stay engaged in politics and end up just having views that are that are less, that are more based in reality, which is a fight that's going on daily right now. BROWN: All right. Jason, Davram, unfortunately, we have to leave it there. But thanks for coming on. You know, I don't often get to laugh. The news is so depressing these days, but thank you for giving me some laughs. We appreciate it.

SELVIG: Thanks for having us.

STEIFLER: Thanks for having us.

SELVIG: Appreciate it.

BROWN: Well, coming up, a Ukrainian woman just released by her Russian captors describes three months of hell.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

(TYRA speaking in foreign language.)

TRANSLATION: There was physical abuse and psychological pressure. The extreme psychological pressure did not stop for a minute all these three months.

This is an absolutely ruthless regime that wants to dominate the world.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BROWN: CNN's Alex Marquardt with more of that interview, coming up.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[19:43:59]

BROWN: Ukrainian authorities say three civilians are hospitalized, one of them a child, after a Russian missile attack in Kharkiv.

[VIDEO CLIP PLAYS]

BROWN: The strike hit a residential area of the city and severely damaged a two-storey building. Rescuers combed the rubble looking for survivors.

Meanwhile, Ukrainian medic is talking about her three months as a Russian captive. She says the physical and psychological torture was "nonstop."

CNN's Alex Marquardt is in Kharkiv tonight -- Alex.

ALEX MARQUARDT, CNN SENIOR NATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: Good evening, Pamela.

Well, a beautiful Saturday morning here to Kharkiv was shattered by the sound of a Russian missile strike in the center of the city. We went to the site of that attack and saw a huge crater in the ground and a two-storey residential building that had completely collapsed. Luckily, local officials say that no one was killed in that strike and it comes as Russian attacks are also spiking to the south of us, in the Donetsk region, as Russian forces try to push West and take more of the Eastern Donbas region.

[19:45:10]

MARQUARDT: And it is in Donetsk that recently, a volunteer paramedic who goes by the nickname, Tyra, a Ukrainian, was recently released after more than 90 days in captivity, being held by Russian and pro- Russian forces.

Now she has been hailed as a hero for her work on the frontlines with Ukrainian troops and civilians and she says that she was held in conditions that she compared to a gulag.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

(TYRA speaking in foreign language.)

TRANSLATION: There was physical abuse and psychological pressure. The extreme psychological pressure did not stop for a minute all these three months.

This is an absolutely ruthless regime that wants to dominate the world.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MARQUARDT: "Just stop resisting," that's what Tyra says her captors told her. Now of course, Ukrainian troops had been putting up significant resistance. We've spent some time with Ukrainian troops over the past few days, they say that they are ready to keep fighting the Russians and to push them out of their country, but what they need is more support from the West, more military aid.

The Pentagon is now saying that that military aid is on its way in the form of a new $400 million security assistance package. The biggest item in that package, Pamela is new HIMARS systems. Those are the more advanced, more precise, longer range rocket launching systems. The US had already given eight of those systems to Ukraine. This now brings the total to 12.

They will be giving Ukrainians more HIMARS ammunition, as well as 1,000 more artillery shells that the Pentagon says are a new type and more precise that they will be able to use in their fight against the Russians -- Pamela.

BROWN: All right, Alex Marquardt, thank you.

And coming up on this Saturday, Elon Musk says he is backing out of that billion dollar deal to buy Twitter. The Court battle now shaping up.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[19:51:21]

BROWN: A new twist in the $44 billion deal to buy Twitter Elon Musk now says he is out, ending the deal over a breach of the original agreement. He says.

CNN chief media correspondent, Brian Stelter, breaks it down. (BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

BRIAN STELTER, CNN CHIEF MEDIA CORRESPONDENT: Hey there. Yes, this battle between Elon Musk and Twitter now is going to the Courts. It could go on for a very long time as Musk tries to back out of an agreement to buy the social network for an estimated $44 billion.

This is a kind of unique situation, but it's a little bit like a homeowner who is selling a house, he has found a buyer, the buyer has signed in writing, agreed to buy the house, but then months later decided to back out claiming maybe that they found problems with the house. I don't think it is worth as much as they thought.

The problem is the contract has already been signed. The agreement has already been reached, and Musk is now going to have a hard time legally backing out of his agreement to buy Twitter.

That doesn't mean he's not going to try, however. And his filing with the SEC on Friday night indicates that he is going to try. He has assembled a team of lawyers to get him out of this deal. Whether he is asked to pay a breakup fee or renegotiate the deal, a lot of that remains to be seen.

But Twitter's Board says they will hold him to the original agreement. They want to cash out of their stock. They said: "The Twitter Board is committed to closing the transaction on the price and terms agreed upon with Mr. Musk and plans to pursue legal action to enforce the merger agreement."

The statement goes on to say, "We are confident we will prevail." So this is heading to court in Delaware. This could take a very long time to resolve itself.

And many Musk watchers expected it to end up this way. There was skepticism from the very beginning when Musk announced his takeover of Twitter, there was skepticism that he would follow through with it, and now, here we are with his favorite social platform, its fate now hanging in the air.

We know Musk uses Twitter to communicate. He loves to tweet out to his fans and followers and sometimes his detractors, but this is a situation he cannot tweet his way out of. This is going to be fought in Court and could go on for a while.

Brian Stelter, CNN, New York.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BROWN: All right, thanks so much, Brian.

Well in London, women's singles at Wimbledon wrapped up today in dramatic fashion, with both finalists aiming for their first title.

CNN's Christina Macfarlane was right outside Center Court.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

CHRISTINA MACFARLANE, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Pamela, history has been made here at Wimbledon today.

Elena Rybakina, has become the first tennis player from Kazakhstan to win a Grand Slam. The 23-year-old was born and raised in Russia, but started representing Kazakhstan in 2018 after the Russian Tennis Federation offered her little help with her career.

Now, she has won the sport's oldest and most prestigious championship and was today handed the trophy by the Duchess of Cambridge two months after Russian and Belarusian players were banned from competing here over the war in Ukraine, and she won it by mounting an impressive fight back after going a set down to Tunisia's Ons Jabeur, who herself was aiming to become the first Arab and African player to win a slam.

But Rybakina's power and remarkable service game forced her opponent to three sets, and then championship points to become the youngest single's Wimbledon champion since 2011.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ELENA RYBAKINA, WIMBLEDON WOMEN'S SINGLES WINNER: Thank you so much. I'm actually speechless because I was super nervous before the match, during the match, and I'm honestly happy that it finished to be honest, because really, I never felt something like this. And I just want to say a big thanks to the crowd for their support. It was unbelievable.

ONS JABEUR, WIMBLEDON 2022 RUNNER UP: Yes, I mean, Elena stole my title, but it's okay. I love this tournament so much and I feel really sad, but I mean, it is tennis. There is only one winner. I'm really happy that I'm trying to inspire, you know many generation from my country. I hope they're listening.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MACFARLANE: Tomorrow, the colorful and controversial, Nick Kyrgios, will attempt to win his maiden Grand Slam in the men's singles. But to do that, he will need to overcome one of the greatest on graphs, six- time champion, Novak Djokovic. On Wimbledon is 100th anniversary, it is a match not to be missed -- Pamela.

BROWN: All right, Christina Macfarlane thank you.

And stay with us. The next hour of CNN NEWSROOM continues right after a short break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[20:00:00]