Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

President Biden Signs Gun Measure Into Law; January 6 Committee Set For Next Hearing. Aired 2-2:30p ET

Aired July 11, 2022 - 14:00   ET

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

[14:00:00]

ALISYN CAMEROTA, CNN HOST: Hello, everyone. I'm Alisyn Camerota. Welcome to CNN NEWSROOM. Victor is off.

The next televised hearing in the January 6 investigation will happen tomorrow. CNN has learned the committee plans to zero in on the roles of extremist groups and their possible connections to Donald Trump and his advisers.

We expect to hear testimony from Jason Van Tatenhove. He's a former spokesperson and self-described propagandist for the extremist group known as the Oath Keepers. A new Department of Justice court filing is revealing the extensive planning of that far right militia group, including a death list and attempts to obtain weapons ahead of January 6.

Also today, former Trump strategist Steve Bannon having a sudden change of heart. He faces possible jail time. And now, just days before his criminal contempt trial, he says he is willing to testify before the January 6 Committee after all.

So let's start with CNN congressional correspondent Ryan Nobles.

Ryan, what are investigators hoping to reveal to the public during tomorrow's hearing?

RYAN NOBLES, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Alisyn, I think it's really twofold.

First, they want to make it clear that those right-wing extremist groups that came to the Capitol on January 6, the Oath Keepers, the Proud Boys, the 3 Percenters, they came here with a specific intent, and that was to cause chaos and even use violence if it meant accomplishing their goals.

And they're going to show that there was premeditation here to basically establish the fact that what happened on January 6 wasn't just a protest that got out of control. And then, after they establish that level of premeditation, they want to show that they were also not acting alone, and that they had very specific coordination with people very close to Donald Trump.

And that includes some of these intermediaries like Rudy Giuliani, Roger Stone, and others, but could extend even to officials that were working inside the White House. Listen to what Congressman Jamie Raskin had to say, as a preview to this hearing happening tomorrow.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. JAMIE RASKIN (D-MD): Well, one of the things that people are going to learn is the fundamental importance of a meeting that took place in the White House on December the 18th.

And on that day, the group of lawyers, of outside lawyers who have been denominated team crazy by people in and around the White House came in to try to urge several new courses of action, including the seizure of voting machines around the country.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

NOBLES: And Raskin has a special insight into what's going to happen on Tuesday, because we're told that he is one of two members of the committee that are going to direct the panel tomorrow. He will be joined by Congresswoman Stephanie Murphy of Florida, who will ask most of the questions of the witnesses and lead their presentation.

Alisyn, this has obviously a better point that Raskin has been talking about for a long time, that these right-wing groups played a big role in causing all the chaos on January 6. Tomorrow, we will see if the committee has evidence that they had direct connections to people close to Donald Trump.

CAMEROTA: OK, that will be fascinating.

And, Ryan, the committee was expected to wrap up their public hearings this week. Has that now changed?

NOBLES: Yes, so, Alisyn, there were some preliminary plans for the committee to hold their hearing that relates to the 187 minutes of the Capitol siege and what Donald Trump was or was not doing during that time during a prime-time hearing on Thursday.

Now, the committee never officially advised it. They never officially made it known that they were going to have that hearing. But I'm now told that they have decided to postpone that hearing. And it could be because of this big deposition that they had last Friday with former White House counsel Pat Cipollone. They obviously talked to him for more than seven hours.

He's someone that has unique insight into what was happening in the West Wing on January 6, so it could be just a matter of them processing that information to make it a part of that hearing. We should note, though, Alisyn, we could see some of that deposition from Cipollone as soon as tomorrow.

Committee members have said publicly that he also had some insight into the hearing topic tomorrow, and his deposition could be a part of that hearing.

CAMEROTA: That would be really interesting. OK, Ryan Nobles, thank you very much for teeing all of that up for us.

So the Department of Justice is also learning new details about the Oath Keepers and what they had planned for January 6.

CNN's Whitney Wild is following that part of the story for us.

So, Whitney, there are all sorts of alarming disclosures in this new court filing. What have you learned?

[14:05:00]

WHITNEY WILD, CNN LAW ENFORCEMENT CORRESPONDENT: Well, the Department of Justice says that members of the Oath Keepers planned extensively before January 6.

A group of nine Oath Keepers are charged with seditious conspiracy. All nine have pleaded not guilty. Prosecutors say they found evidence that shows at least three chapters of the Oath Keepers held training camps prior to January 6 focused on military tactics, unconventional warfare and hasty ambushes.

Prosecutors also allege that investigators found a handwritten document with the words "Death List" that included the name of a 2020 Georgia election official and a family member of that official. Another member of the Oath Keepers allegedly tried to have someone build multiple rifles prior to Biden's inauguration on January 20.

They also say that at least one Oath Keeper transported explosives to the D.C. area. That's in addition to the firearms and a month's worth of food that prosecutors say this group brought to the D.C. area leading up to January 6.

Through this investigation, law enforcement has seized two illegal short-barrel firearms grenades, and discovered bomb-making recipes. All of this, Alisyn, discovered as they were doing search warrants on homes of several Oath Keepers.

CAMEROTA: And then, Whitney, there's a member of the Capitol Police who was injured during the insurrection, and he wrote a new op-ed in "The New York Times" today. So what's he's now saying?

WILD: Well, Sergeant Aquilino Gonell says that the former president betrayed his oath to the Constitution.

He wrote: "I just wish we had all been able to testify sooner, right after January 6, when we might have had more impact. The enabling of Mr. Trump needs to stop now. He should not only be banned from running for other government offices. He should never be allowed near the White House again," Alisyn.

CAMEROTA: OK, Whitney Wild, thank you very much for that reporting.

Well, Steve Bannon, a key Donald Trump ally and top adviser, now says he's willing to testify before the January 6 Committee. But prosecutors are skeptical of his sudden reversal. The Justice Department says Bannon's last-minute change of heart is -- quote -- "irrelevant" to the criminal contempt of Congress case against him set to begin in just days.

CNN justice correspondent Jessica Schneider joins us now.

So, Jessica, this federal judge has just ruled on some important issues surrounding Bannon. What have you learned?

JESSICA SCHNEIDER, CNN JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: Yes, Alisyn, he's in the midst of issuing a series of rulings right now that will affect how this trial proceeds.

We're still waiting to hear if in fact it will begin one week from today. But, so far, the federal judge in this case, Carl Nichols, he's actually taking a hard line against Steve Bannon and his lawyers, sort of in favor of the government, at least as it pertains to executive privilege.

So the judge has just ruled that the government here only needs to prove that Steve Bannon willfully and deliberately defied that subpoena back in October of last year. They're saying -- the judge here is saying that Steve Bannon cannot bring any extraneous information.

He can't say that he was relying on the advice of counsel when he defied that subpoena. He can't say he was relying on those claims of executive privilege asserted by then-President Trump, former President Trump here, the judge here saying that Steve Bannon can say that he was mistaken about the date, that he believed he didn't have to comply exactly on the date that was specified.

But, so far, Alisyn, the judge here is taking a hard line against Steve Bannon. And it comes after a weekend where there's been a flurry of developments in this case. We saw over the weekend that the -- former President Trump wrote a letter to Steve Bannon saying that he was waiving that executive privilege, that Steve Bannon would be free to testify to the committee.

Bannon's lawyer saying he wanted to do a public hearing where he would testify. The committee not yet committing to that. But then how this all played into his criminal trial for contempt of Congress that's supposed to move forward in just a matter of days, prosecutors then motioned to say, we are going to exclude all of that evidence that you want to now testify, that you believed, whether rightly or wrongly, that executive privilege would come into play.

And now, so far, the judge is ruling on the side of the government, saying that Steve Bannon basically can't rely on that when trying to prove his own case, and that the government here, when they move to trial, whenever that may be, if it is indeed on Monday, the government just has to prove, Alisyn, that Steve Bannon did not comply with that subpoena.

And Bannon can argue that maybe it was a matter of dates that he just got confused. So we're still waiting for more information from that judge, including whether that trial will be delayed or if it will, in fact, start one week from today -- Alisyn,

CAMEROTA: OK, Jessica Schneider, thank you for explaining all of that.

Let's bring in now Dave Aronberg. He's the state attorney in Palm Beach County, Florida. Juliette Kayyem is a former assistant homeland security secretary and CNN national security analyst. Nia-Malika Henderson is our CNN senior political analyst.

Great to see all of you.

Dave, Bannon now wants to help. He suddenly has changed his tune and he wants to help testify. Why is he doing that? And does he think it is going to help him in his criminal contempt case?

[14:10:02]

DAVE ARONBERG, PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA, STATE ATTORNEY: Yes, Alisyn, he's panicking.

It is interesting how these MAGA warriors, who are all hopped up on testosterone and Kool-Aid, they all talk tough until they start seeing their name emblazoned on an orange jumpsuit. And I think that's what's happening here.

Bannon is getting scared. This is an obvious ruse to say, I'm going to testify now because the former president has finally waived executive privilege. But that would mean he had the privilege to begin with. It wasn't his to waive. A former president cannot waive it. Steve Bannon, he doesn't have executive privilege. He stopped working for the White House in 2017, years before January 6.

But he wants to raise these defenses as an attempt to put some reasonable doubt in at least one juror's mind. That gets you a hung jury. And if you put reasonable doubt in all their minds, it's an acquittal. But I don't think it's going anywhere. And I think it shows the desperation of Steve Bannon, who sees that he's quickly running out of excuses.

CAMEROTA: Juliette, I understand why Bannon would want a public hearing, because I think that based on what we have seen on his podcasts, et cetera, he likes to turn things into a circus. He likes chaos.

JULIETTE KAYYEM, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: Yes.

CAMEROTA: The committee, I think, is wary of that.

But they want to ask him, I would imagine, about something very specific, a very specific prediction that he made on his podcast the day before January 6.

KAYYEM: Yes.

CAMEROTA: So, just to remind everybody, here's what he said.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP);

STEVE BANNON, FORMER WHITE HOUSE CHIEF STRATEGIST: All hell is going to break loose tomorrow. Just understand this. All hell is going to break loose tomorrow. It's not going to happen like you think it's going to happen, OK? It's going to be quite extraordinarily different.

And all I can say is, strap in. The "War Room" posse, you have made this happen. And, tomorrow, it's game day. So, strap in.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CAMEROTA: How was he so confident about that?

KAYYEM: Because he knew.

I mean, it's -- this was an insurrection in plain sight, if we were -- if people were only willing to look at it. And, unfortunately, the president had a bunch of people around him either too afraid to confront him or to come forward until 18 months later, as we're seeing in the January 6 Committee hearings, which have been incredibly successful in Unearthing something that was planned, directed, every verb that we have been wary of using, planned, directed, motivated, inspired, everything, by the former president of the United States, Donald J. Trump.

And that's where I think the committee has been very successful. they're going to focus on two dates, I believe, the ones that sort of changed the moment, January 5, of course, as Bannon can't keep his mouth shut about this thing. I mean, that's the amazing thing. He can't keep his mouth shut. He's sort of telling us what's about to happen.

But I want to go back to December 19. That becomes the most important day for those of us who had been following Trump's sort of increased call to violence. December 19 was the tweet that said "Will be wild" out to the Oath Keepers and the Proud Boys and others. Come January 6, he gave a date, he gave a time, he gave a place. And he said, "Will be wild."

We know from testimony, and we will probably find out more, that that is when the Oath Keepers and the Proud Boys and the other terrorists began to organize seriously. So this is going to be a big day tomorrow.

CAMEROTA: Yes. And, Dave, I will ask you about that in a minute, if that's enough evidence that Trump was inciting the crowd.

But, Nia-Malika, first, back to that executive privilege claim, it doesn't apply, number one, but since Donald Trump is waiving it, why would he want Steve Bannon to testify now?

NIA-MALIKA HENDERSON, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL REPORTER: Well, apparently some of the information that's coming out, that Donald Trump never even invoked executive privilege to begin with. So now he's waiving something or claiming to waive something he never even invoked. But we also know that Donald Trump is watching the hearings very closely. And he is upset that there isn't more of his side being aired, that there was not more of his talking points and conspiracy theories around the 2020 election. This is where Bannon comes in. This is why Bannon is saying he wants a public hearing, because he wants to rail against the globalists and the deep state and advance some of those crazy theories around the 2020 election.

Donald Trump has missed the fact that there aren't more Republicans on this committee. They, of course, dropped out at some point. So -- and you can see that he has so far been upset about the headlines that have been quite damning around his inaction January 6 and around some of the days that are leading up to January 6 as well.

And we're only going to find out more in these hearings tomorrow.

CAMEROTA: So, Dave, about that tweet that Juliette was just talking about -- so just to remind everybody, I can pull it up. Donald Trump said on December 19: "Big protests in D.C. on January 6. Be there. Will be wild."

Is that strong enough evidence to show that Donald Trump played a role in inciting the insurrection?

ARONBERG: It's not enough. You need more. But you got more with Cassidy Hutchinson's testimony that Donald Trump allegedly knew that his supporters were armed that day at the Ellipse and he wanted them to march the Capitol while armed.

[14:15:00]

Remember the testimony that said that they should take away the metal detectors because they're not there to harm Trump. So, who are they there to harm? The people counting the votes.

And so that kind of testimony can be quite damning and could lead possibly the charges of obstruction of an official proceeding, conspiracy to defraud the United States, seditious conspiracy and, yes, incitement of a riot.

CAMEROTA: So, Juliette, new information comes out every week.

KAYYEM: Yes.

CAMEROTA: And the Justice Department has just released these new details about how the Oath Keepers brought explosives to the D.C. area around January 6, and they say another member had a death list that included the name of a Georgia election official and his or her family members.

KAYYEM: Yes.

CAMEROTA: So how significant will this testimony tomorrow be of this former propagandist, as he calls himself, for the Oath Keepers?

KAYYEM: Right. Very significant. He's going to basically confirm what the Department of Justice already knows, which is these were heavily armed men. Remember, the Oath Keepers, also, we know from the documentary that was shown in the first hearing met with the Proud Boys the night before on January 5. So you have the two different terror groups who are getting together the night before the insurrection.

So I think that's one important aspect. But there's another reason why this information is coming out. And it's a reminder to everyone that people are talking. Oath Keepers, a bunch of them have pled. Some of them are cooperating with the government. They are clearly telling what they know.

So part of this is also the sort of carrot stick that you see going on with the January 6 Committee, which is, we know so much more than you think we know. And this ship is sinking. This ship is sinking. They're telling everyone, you don't want to be the last one off.

And I think that's why Cipollone did testify last week, and it's why the committee members have said people have come forward since Hutchinson's testimony. The purpose of this is to make it clear that, ideologically and in terms of radicalization, that Trump's -- Trump's hate has piqued.

And I think that's a really important message to get out there, legal arguments aside.

CAMEROTA: Nia-Malika, we can never forget how many dozens of police officers who were trying to protect democracy, trying to protect the Capitol were injured, I mean, grievously injured that day.

And so one of them, U.S., police Sergeant Aquilino Gonell, has this "New York Times" op-ed in which he tries to speak directly about President Trump's role.

He writes -- quote -- "Of course, I would never have imagined that an American president would not only come -- would not only not come to the aid of law enforcement officers defending the Capitol, but encourage that crowd to march on it. Instead of being notified about the danger, my colleagues and I were kept in the dark and thus walked into an ambush unprepared."

I mean, again, just the whitewashing of what happened to police officers that day just continues to be stunning.

HENDERSON: That's right.

And we have seen the images from that day of police officers battling that mob, that mob that at some point wanted to hang Mike Pence. We also have the image of Donald Trump doing nothing, of aides saying, listen, shouldn't he call this off? Shouldn't he issue a tweet? Shouldn't he tell these folks to go home?

And Donald Trump just sitting there watching it unfold on TV, apparently, and I'm sure we will hear more about this as the hearing goes on. And this is certainly one of the things that this hearing is trying to portray, Donald Trump as not only the person who incited the mob, but also was fine seeing it unfold on television.

And as they are ransacking the Capitol, here he is just watching TV, later saying at some point, oh, you were filled with love., and this was a great day, a day that live on forever. And so it's just a damning indictment of a sitting present that he's able to sit there and watch those folks not only go after police officers, but also threaten the lives of his sitting vice president, as well as other members of Congress.

CAMEROTA: Well, tomorrow will be very interesting to see what the committee wants to show the public.

Nia-Malika Henderson, Juliette Kayyem, Dave Aronberg, thank you very much.

Be sure to join us for our special coverage of tomorrow's hearing on the January 6 insurrection. It starts at 11:00 a.m.

And this Sunday night, Drew Griffin has a new investigative piece into Steve Bannon and his master plan to reshape the U.S. government and the Republican Party. This is a CNN special report. It's "Divided We Fall." It airs at 8:00 p.m. only here on CNN.

All right, well, President Biden touted the bipartisan gun safety law, but admitted there is still much more to do.

And today marks one week since that mass shooting at a July 4 parade in Highland Park. The latest on the investigation there just ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:20:12]

CAMEROTA: A rare event in Washington today, a bipartisan gathering to recognize the first major gun reform legislation in 30 years.

The president hosted lawmakers, as well as families and survivors of mass shootings in Uvalde, Highland, Park Buffalo, Sandy Hook, and others.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOE BIDEN, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: The provision of this new legislation is going to save lives. And it's proof that today's politics, we can come together on a bipartisan basis to get -- basis to get important things done, even on an issue as tough as guns.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CAMEROTA: CNN chief White House correspondent Kaitlan Collins joins us now.

So, Kaitlan, I know that the president was confronted by an angry Parkland father in the crowd today. Is he getting pushback about this law? KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Well, that's

who his audience was today, Alisyn, here, as they we're having this moment, this ceremony marking the fact that this is the most significant gun legislation in three decades to be passed.

[14:25:05]

But there were parents there, including the father of one Parkland victim shooting, who was killed in 2018, Manuel Oliver, who were not happy with how this went down, and the fact that this was seen as a celebration of sorts of this legislation, because they argued that basically it hasn't gone far enough.

And so at one point in ceremony, shortly after the president had started speaking, we saw Manuel Oliver, who was on CNN earlier today talking about this, talking about how he believes the White House and the federal government needs to do more when it comes to guns, he stood up briefly. And President Biden paused his comments. He listened to what he said.

And you saw him shouting at the president, saying that he has been telling the White House he believes they need to do more on this. And, obviously, he has a personal stake in this and has been through an unimaginable tragedy of losing his own son in a school shooting like this.

There were other parents there from the Parkland shooting who also lost children in that who said that they believe the president delivered a forceful statement today, but also President Biden himself, Alisyn, acknowledging that this legislation that was passed, while it is remarkable because, as you noted, it was bipartisan, and it was the most significant gun safety legislation to be passed in 30 years, President Biden himself said he also believes they need to do more.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BIDEN: It's a call to action to all of us to do more.

Assault weapons need to be banned. They were banned.

(APPLAUSE)

BIDEN: I led the fight in 1994. Then, under pressure from the NRA and the gun manufacturers and others, that ban was lifted in 2004.

I'm determined to ban these weapons again, and high-capacity magazines that hold 30 rounds and that let mass shooters fire hundreds of bullets in a matter of minutes.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COLLINS: Of course, this ceremony was being, Alisyn, one week after that shooting in Highland Park that left seven people dead at the Fourth of July parade. And President Biden said he's determined to ban assault weapons once

again. But, right now, the reality is that they do not have the votes in Congress to do that. There has been questions, of course, about it. But, right now, that is not a political reality. But it does come as the president, of course, is facing these very challenging political headwinds where people in his own party are not just calling on him to do more when it comes to guns, but also on abortion rights and whatnot, just several months out from the midterm elections.

CAMEROTA: OK, Kaitlan Collins, thank you very much for that.

So, in Highland Park, Illinois, community members held a moment of silence for the seven people killed in the mass shooting at that parade one week ago today. Church bells tolled for each victim.

CNN's Camila Bernal is there for us.

So, Camila, people want to know still if the parents of this shooter could face any charges, because we know the shooter's father helped him get that gun license. So what's the latest on that?

CAMILA BERNAL, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Hey, Alisyn.

Well, because this investigation is still ongoing, nothing is off the table at the moment. But what we do know is that the state's attorney here in Lake County is saying that he doesn't believe there is criminal liability here, this despite that, yes, he sponsored the gun license and despite the disturbing details that we have learned when it comes to a lot of the interactions that this family had with police, the threats that the shooter made.

So, because a lot of members of this community have heard those details, it's frustrating. They want to see more accountability than just the shooter, but the states -- or the county state's attorney explaining his reasoning behind saying that right now it doesn't seem like an option. Here's what he said.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ERIC RINEHART, LAKE COUNTY, ILLINOIS, STATE'S ATTORNEY: There's not a criminal liability that's directly attached to -- quote, unquote -- "vouching" for somebody else. But we're looking at all of the evidence.

There's a mountain of evidence to go through in terms of who knew what when. There's different ways to look at potential criminal liability in this case, I don't want to say much more other than that, but there's not a per see violation of law if you vouch for somebody in a FOID card, and then they ended up doing something terrible like this.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BERNAL: And our affiliate WLS did speak to the family's attorney. They acquired a new attorney.

And the attorney was saying that he just does not believe and is confident that the parents will not face any charges. But, again, there's still a lot more to learn from this shooting and from the background and from who was responsible, because a lot of signs were there.

And, unfortunately, those red flag laws were not triggered. And that's what has so many people here upset -- Alisyn.

CAMEROTA: Camila Bernal, thank you very much.

All right, now to this: finally some relief for drivers. After months of soaring costs, gas prices are now falling. Will that last? Is it a trend?

That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:30:00]