Return to Transcripts main page

CNN This Morning

Trump Calls Top Allies To Strategize Against Jan. 6 Probe. Aired 7:30-8a ET

Aired July 19, 2023 - 07:30   ET

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

[07:33:00]

PHIL MATTINGLY, CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: This morning, Donald Trump and his team will continue strategizing ways to defend him against potential charges in the special counsel probe of his efforts to overturn the 2020 election. Trump has also downplayed legal challenges while he campaigned in Iowa last night. CNN's Alayna Treene is right down the street from Bedminster, New Jersey.

Alayna, what do you know right now? You guys have had some great reporting over the course of the last 15 or 16 hours but what they're doing this morning is they head in after that Iowa visit in terms of preparation for another potential indictment.

ALAYNA TREENE, CNN REPORTER: Right. Well, they are continuing to call lawyers and allies, and trying to figure out what exactly the potential case against the former president may look like. We also know that they are leaning into this politically. We saw Donald Trump's campaign blast off a fundraising email last night. We've seen them do this in the previous two indictments against him. Of course, he's not been indicted in this case yet, but they're already seizing on the political momentum.

And as for how Donald Trump is feeling. I think it's interesting to note that after his lawyers received this target letter on Sunday night, Donald Trump kept it unusually quiet. He did not share it widely within members, within his inner circle. And I think it shows that he's -- this is weighing on him. He recognizes how serious these charges are. And of course, as he said before, he does not want to be indicted.

And he echoed this sentiment during a townhall with Sean Hannity last night. Let's listen to that exchange.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP (R), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: No, it bothers me. It bothers me for everybody in this incredible sold out audience. And it's -- it bothers you. I got the letter on Sunday night, think of it. I don't think they've ever sent a letter on Sunday night. And they're in a rush because they want to interfere -- it's interference with the election. It's election interference never been done like this in the history of our country and it's a disgrace.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TREENE: So, Phil, he said he admitted that this bothers him, but he also put on him more defiant message in that townhall with Sean Hannity.

[07:35:04]

But as we've known from covering the past two indictments, the public face that Donald Trump is putting on is quite different from the one that he's feeling behind closed doors. He is very concerned about this. And I think we're going to continue to see that throughout the next couple of days as we see whether or not an indictment is coming. Phil?

MATTINGLY: All right, Alayna Treene for us, thank you.

ABBY PHILLIP, CNN ANCHOR: And our panel is back with us, Alyssa, Elie, and David Axelrod. Alyssa, I'm going to start with you.

From a legal perspective, this is obviously very serious. Do you see a smart, coherent, legal strategy, not a public relations one, but do you see the Trump world really getting their hands around the legal liability here?

ALYSSA FARAH GRIFFIN, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: I mean, Donald Trump's challenge, frankly, has been retaining quality legal counsel. And when you don't pay your lawyers on time, when you've got so many different cases that you're dealing with, and you're also somebody who's known to go on air and undermine your own case, it's challenging to retain good legal counsel.

But to Alayna's point, he's still going to try to win the public relations war around this the political war around it. And what he's going to do as we've seen already is trying to fundraise off of they're coming after me, it's an attack on you. It probably works in a primary, I don't see anyone standing up and challenging him in a major way with the exception of a few of the candidates that are pulling lower, but it's radioactive in a general election.

And that's just what stuns me when I hear that Kevin McCarthy's and Elise Stefanik defend him is if this guy is the nominee, this -- there is -- this is winning him no voters and as losing him even more in a general election.

MATTINGLY: That's actually been my biggest question throughout, particularly in terms of the Republican primary candidates refusing to attack or refusing to take this head on. Because I don't know what's going to change at any point. But we were talking about during the break that you can write kind of the progression of the day when an indictment letter comes out. You know exactly how --

DAVID AXELROD, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Yes.

MATTINGLY: Trump is going to respond to that. Kevin McCarthy is going to respond. Yes, exactly as we head in the potential number three, maybe with number four hanging out there. But it's a general election question, the end game here, and what is it? And maybe I'm giving too much credit that there is one? Other than when and --

AXELROD: First of all, you ask what -- just to build into that, you ask what his legal strategy is. His legal strategy is to try and force us into a general election, and hope that in a race with Joe Biden -- that questions about Biden, and his age and so on, will be such that he can win.

You know, Biden always says don't compare me to the Almighty, compare me to the alternative. Well, Trump is counting on the same theory. So that that is what the theory is. But there's no doubt that among voters outside of the Republican base, this aggregation of charges is a very, very serious problem for him. And I don't know what the solution is.

But in terms of his public -- what you say, call it a public relations strategy. I think part of what he's doing is a legal strategy. It's got a jury down in Florida. I'm sure they're hearing some of this. And you all he needs his one jury to say, I think they're being unfair to this guy. And he gets off.

So, look, we heard that January 6 Committee hearings, a lot of what we've seen -- or we're seeing unfold here was revealed and disclosed in those hearings. I'm sure Jack Smith has more. Trump knows he's got there. There are a lot of facts against him here. And he's pushing all the buttons trying to get out of jail here.

PHILLIP: One of the buttons he's pushing is attacking Jack Smith, calling him yesterday deranged. He's called him a lot of other things recently, too.

ELIE HONIG, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: Yes. Look, there's absolutely no call for that. I mean, Jack Smith has done nothing but handle this job professionally and in line with the book. He's done everything by the book. And believe me, I'll be the first to call out a prosecutor who does not.

So those attacks on prosecutors are nothing new for Donald Trump. They're incredibly damaging, and all we can do is call them out. And I think to David and Alyssa's point, this is where politics and law are going to collide -- I mean, over the next 18-16 months until the election.

And there's -- if there's one overarching legal strategy, it's to delay. I mean, that's Donald Trump's best bet. He got some good news on that yesterday from the Mar-a-Lago case where the judge did not set a trial date. She might -- she might set it soon.

PHILLIP: Was it goodness, though? She said it seemed like she had issues with December but not --

HONIG: Yes.

TREENE: -- also seemed to dismiss the idea of let's wait until after the election. HONIG: Well, I think what she resisted is I'm not going to now in July of 2023 set a trial date for after November of 2024. I think what's likely to happen is she will set a trial date. It will be later than December but it will be before the election. A trial dates move, they move back and that's like an airport delay. They'll move you back 45 minutes at a time until next thing you know, it's too late.

PHILLIP: Talk about a giant loophole, constitutional loophole, you can just run and win the presidency and get out of jail free.

MATTINGLY: You make it seem a lot easier than I think it is.

PHILLIP: (Inaudible).

MATTINGLY: Funny. All right. David, Alyssa, Elie, thanks, guys. Appreciate it.

PHILLIP: And Trump supporters say all of this will only help him in the polls. Harry Enten is here to show us what happened to his numbers after the first two indictments

MATTINGLY: And Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen says she does not expect the economy to enter a recession. We'll break down the data that's coming up next.

[07:40:03]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

MATTINGLY: Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen says that she does not expect a recession to hit the United States. Her comments come about a week after she wouldn't rule out one. And she's not the only economist to say that a recession and those fears are now dwindling. CNN Chief Business Correspondent Christine Romans is here with us.

And, Christine, the economy is chugging along and we are still waiting for this recession.

CHRISTINE ROMANS, CNN CHIEF BUSINESS CORRESPONDENT: Good morning. This has been the longest recession watch in memory. Last year, the conventional wisdom was there'd be a recession in 2023. Now that they're pushing that into 2024. If at all Goldman Sachs says maybe a 20% chance of a recession down from 25%. We saw retail sales that are growing yesterday, growing for the third month in a row. They've been all these dire predictions of a consumer that's going to be tapped out. But so far the consumer is still moving along here.

And let's listen to what the Treasury secretary said about a so called "soft landing" yesterday.

[07:45:09]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JANET YELLEN, US TREASURY SECRETARY: Growth is slowed but our labor market continues to be quite strong. I don't expect a recession. I think that we're on a good path to bringing inflation down.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ROMANS: So, you know, just six months ago, you'd be in the minority if you said that we would have a soft landing. And now more people are starting to say, that could be possible. I mean, look at the stock market, the Dow and the S&P are just 5% away from record highs and the highest levels of the year. So investors are not seeing some sort of a recession on the horizon.

And you heard the Treasury secretary there talk about inflation. I wanted to show you one of the big complaints has been that wages have been rising. But that fatter paycheck is more than made up for by the higher costs of everything you're buying. That's finally turned. You now have wages growing faster than consumer prices, inflation, and that is something that people will start to feel.

So I think there are storm clouds on the horizon, no question. More fed rate hikes. You're going to have student loan bills are going to be coming due in a couple of months. That could ding consumer spending a little bit. But those storm clouds on the horizon, right now, it's sunny skies.

MATTINGLY: Let me you dig into those numbers. You look at things like black unemployment, you look at things like the lower end of the economic spectrum. Those people are struggling with higher prices, but it's trending in the right direction. And the jobs for African American unemployment is at historic lows right now.

ROMANS: And that's been something that you've heard the White House talk about, and some of these really important demographic numbers within the labor market. We'll be watching to see if the labor market can remain strong.

There's still a lot of tightening, right? The fed isn't raising interest rates. We haven't felt all of that quite yet. And that may put a little bit of a damper on the job market.

MATTINGLY: (Inaudible) real quick.

PHILLIP: Yes. This is recession bartender formula. You'll love it.

PHILLIP: Thank you, my friend. Well, how are Republicans in Congress reacting to the news that Donald Trump could be indicted again? You're probably used to it, defiance and some optimism. Listen to this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. TIM BURCHETT (R-TN): Every time they indict him, his numbers go up, so.

REP. TROY NEHLS (R-TX): Donald Trump's the leader of our party, and Donald Trump is going to beat Joe Biden in 2024 for a second time. Why are they doing everything they can to prevent him from being on the ballot in 2024? I'll tell you why, because Donald Trump will win in 2024. And the left just they're scared (inaudible). (END VIDEO CLIP)

MATTINGLY: As you just heard some Republicans take the target letter sent by a Special Counsel Jack Smith will actually help the former president and his 2024 presidential bid. What's the data actually say? Well, CNN's Senior Data Reporter Harry Enten joins us now. Harry, what does it say?

HARRY ENTEN, CNN SENIOR DATA REPORTER: All right. So let's take the Republican side of the aisle first, all right. Trump's share in the GOP primary polls. Look at this, pre-New York indictment post, 46% in those national polls. Pre-post, look at that, he jumped up to 53%. So it helped him.

But the Florida indictment right in terms of the classified documents didn't actually help him. He actually dropped a few percentage points. But basically, I think the main thing to take away from this as Republican voters didn't really care about, certainly the Florida indictment. The New York well might have actually helped.

MATTINGLY: You know, the idea that -- I think IT (inaudible) the letters and guarantee that Trump will be indicted for the third time this year. But we do know the first two indictments had an effective, obviously showing the effect at this point. What are we looking for next?

ENTEN: Yes. So, you know, let's take a look at the general election. And I think this gives you an understanding here, which is you might have thought, OK, in the Republican primary, it might have helped him. But what about in the general election? Look at this, no change. 43% in the polls against Biden, pre 43%, post in New York. Look at Florida 43% pre, 44% post, right within that margin of error.

And I'll just note, what is the one thing that might impact Trump's approval or Trump standing, Republicans, in the general --

MATTINGLY: I would love to hear the answer to this question.

ENTEN: January 6 actually made an impact. Look at this. Job approval rating as president on January 5th was 43% overall, it dropped to 39% on January 20th, when he left office. Among Republicans, it's 89%, very high. 83%, still very high, but a clear drop. So we'll see if this potential third indictment, it could in fact have an impact. We'll just have to wait and see.

MATTINGLY: Thank you, Harry. Numbers matter.

ENTEN: Numbers really matters. And you matter too, Phil.

MATTINGLY: Thanks, buddy.

PHILLIP: All right. Trump is accusing the DOJ of serving as a weapon for Democrats as he braces for a possible third indictment. Now we'll talk to the lead counsel at one of Trump's impeachment trials about the legal trouble that he could be facing next.

[07:49:55]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

MATTINGLY: What has been our big story all morning, former President Trump appears close to facing his third indictment in a matter of months. He revealed he's a target in the special counsel investigation of efforts to overturn the 2020 election. Now, the Wall Street Journal and other sources report. The special counsel's target letter cites at least three statutes including deprivation of rights, conspiracy to commit an offense against or defraud the United States and tampering with a witness. CNN Chief Legal Analyst Laura Coates joins us now along with David Sean, he served as the lead counsel for one of Trump's impeachment trials.

And, David, I want to share with you in terms of your reaction to the three statutes that are being reported to have been in the target letter. What does that tell you?

DAVID SCHOEN, ATTORNEY FOR STEVE BANNON: Well, a couple of things. First of all, you know, by way of background, target letter is not required but it's informative. It's under Section 911 153 of the DOJ Manual. They encourage the prosecutors to give the target some notice. But an indictment wouldn't be limited to whatever is in the target letter. And as I say, it's not required.

What I would think in this case, if I were abetting person, and I'm not, would be as the charges be something like this. Conspiracy for sure, under Section 371, and that's a general conspiracy statute. But here the conspiracy probably is going to be something like, you know, related to the false selectors. And maybe Section 1001 false statements. I would think after that probably an obstruction charge and that's this defrauding the government that conspiracy charge also would require defrauding the government.

[07:55:05]

But in these cases, they'd have to show, first of all, under the obstruction charge that's Section 1512, which is a 20-year count, they'd have to charge -- show that he acted corruptly. But they also have to charge in this conspiracy count, that he believed that he lost the election and acted accordingly. I think the big thing with -- to turn up the heat, politically and sort of criminally, would be if they charged insurrection under 2383. And I say turn up the heat, well, that's a 10-year count instead of a 20 year count, the sort of juice, you might say, they think, at the end would be that the statute provides that a person convicted under that for insurrection couldn't hold public office, and that relates, again to the 14th Amendment Section 3.

But again, that has to be weighed against the qualifications for president in Article II Section 1, so I'm not sure that's a gimme anyway. But anyway, I hope I'm not being too technical. But I think those are some of the charges you would see.

MATTINGLY: Well, Laura is here and she understands everything you're saying. So we're good on the panel from the technical perspective. Laura Coates, CNN Chief Legal Analyst: Yes, yes. I loved it.

PHILLIP: I love the technicalities because we have to really get into the nitty-gritty details here as we get closer to a possible indictment. I mean, Laura, I want -- I do want you to react to what David just said, though, which is on this idea of that -- the intent here.

We know that Jack Smith has been looking at Trump's mindset. So as a lay person explained to me what he is looking for, and how he would prove it as it relates to what Trump intended when it comes to these January 6 charges.

COATES: Well, listen, every lawyer may think there are no at all, but none of us are actual mind readers. And the way that you actually get to the intent is either by direct evidence or statements that have been made, or circumstantial evidence or contextual clues, as in testimony from somebody else about what the person said.

We've already seen the January 6 Investigation Committee witnesses that several have talked about his direct statements, about believing he had lost the election but wanting to have a different course of action in the public square nonetheless, and so all of that will be a part of the conversation. But David's right in terms of the possibilities here. The world kind of is the legal oyster, according to whatever evidence has come in from the grand jury. For someone like Jack Smith, a special counsel.

You have not only the January 6 hearings but you also have as one of the charges that's laid out there potentially in a target letter tampering with a witness. That should be a red flag that tells you that somebody who has been meaningful to this investigation, had a kind of roadblock, where somebody tried to either interfere with their testimony, undermine it in some way, threaten or otherwise intimidate. And so for that to be outlined as a notice there suggests that there is likely somebody who is either cooperating or somebody who is a witness that they actually need, who is not able or was not able to fully have the opportunity to speak freely, and so that's a real concern.

But as far as how you understand all of this, a lot of this, of course, that conspiracy statements, the defraud, all these little buzzwords, legally, what it comes down to are three real buckets. What happened before January 6 and post-election, what happened on January 6, and what happened following January 6 for the investigation. The theme and connective tissue here is the behavior, the planning and the intent.

But Trump is not unlike many other defendants, where you have to prove one's intent and intent-based crime. It's not as if suddenly everybody else is able to have their mind read. You always have to use different evidence and the surrounding evidence to lead a jury to believe that you have proven beyond a reasonable doubt, that in spite of all common sense, all evidence available, all statements of a reasonable person, one's head was in this hand, nonetheless. That's really the course of action here. MATTINGLY: David, we've only got about a minute left, so we can't do statutes as much as I love them and impressed by them. But from a legal team perspective, do you feel like the president's legal team is going to have to get bigger? Are they set up to address something like this? Should it actually come to fruition?

SCHOEN: Well, I think that he needs some hardcore criminal defense lawyers. He doesn't have that yet but he will. I think, especially if the charges are brought in DC, you're going to see a much stronger team marshaled. That's going to be a very high profile case. I think, again, I'm no expert politically. I'm not an expert on anything, frankly. But I think that if they were to bring the insurrection charge, I think that the political fallout is going to be huge on that. I don't say that should guide whether they bring it or not, although I think it should be a prudential factor considered in.

But I don't think in any way, shape or form they fairly should be able to prove the Brandenburg factors under or the insurrection charge that's encouraging violence, intending to cause violence, knowing that it likely will produce violence that sort of thing. I think if you really parse his speech and other surroundings factors, that would not be a fair charge. The wildcard of course, is the jury. And I think that's why if you know, DC is particularly attractive to the special prosecutor.

PHILLIP: Yes. You need some lawyers who drink constitutional questions for breakfast. David Schoen and Laura Coates, thank you both very much in our coverage on CNN continues right now.

[08:00:00]