Return to Transcripts main page
Erin Burnett Outfront
Apple: Trump's DOJ Demanded Data on 73 Phone Numbers and 36 Emails as Part of Leak Probe that Targeted Lawmakers; Rep. Jackie Speier (D-CA) Discusses About the Subpoena to Apple and Microsoft to Gather Data Ordered by Former President Trump; Putin: "Trump is an Extraordinarily Talented Individual," Says Relations with U.S. at "Lowest Point" in Years; Interview with NYC Mayoral Candidate Eric Adams. Aired 7-8p ET
Aired June 11, 2021 - 19:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[19:00:00]
SANJAY GUPTA, CNN CHIEF MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT: ... and you want to make sure that you have vaccines available, especially for school aged children at that point.
WOLF BLITZER, CNN HOST: We certainly do. All right. Sanjay, as usual, thank you very, very much. And to our viewers, thanks very much for watching. I'm Wolf Blitzer in THE SITUATION ROOM. Have a nice weekend.
Erin Burnett OUTFRONT starts right now.
ERIN BURNETT, CNN HOST: OUTFRONT next breaking news, Apple speaking out after the Trump Justice Department subpoenaed the company and secretly seized data from Democratic Congress people. New details about just how sweeping the subpoena was. This as we learn Microsoft was also subpoenaed for data, this time in connection to Capitol Hill staffer.
Plus, breaking news on Vladimir Putin, he is speaking ahead of his high stakes summit with President Biden, comparing Biden to Trump who Putin calls an 'extraordinarily talented individual'.
And death threats like your family will be killed very slowly, intruders breaking into relative's homes. It's just some of what Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger and his family have endured just for standing up to Trump's lies about the election. Secretary Raffensperger is my guest tonight. Let's go OUTFRONT.
And good evening. I'm Erin Burnett.
OUTFRONT tonight the breaking news, CNN is learning just how broad the Trump Justice Department's subpoena to Apple was. The DOJ demanded 73 phone numbers and 36 email addresses. We're just getting this information right now from Apple and we're just learning that the DOJ under Trump subpoenaed Microsoft as well for the data of a Capitol Hill staffer.
This all comes after the revelation that the Justice Department's subpoenaed Apple for data from accounts belonging to at least two Democratic members of the House Intelligence Committee, Congressman Adam Schiff and Eric Swalwell, as well as their staff, family members, even a minor.
The goal was to track down who was leaking classified information about contacts between Trump associates and Russia. And the whole investigation was kept secret. Apple said ordinarily they would tell people if this happened, but they couldn't because there was a gag order, non-disclosure order, it was revealed renewed three times, three times, three years. Tonight, Democrats are demanding more answers.
Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer and Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Dick Durbin ordering former Attorney Generals Bill Barr and Jeff Sessions to testify adding, "If they refuse, they are subject to being subpoenaed and will be compelled to testify under oath."
CNN is learning tonight that former Attorney General Bill Barr pushed investigators in the DOJ to quickly complete leak investigations, even bringing in outside prosecutors the raised eyebrows in the DOJ because the probes were not moving quickly enough for him.
However, Barr is trying to distance himself now from this data seizure from the Congressman from all of this Apple business. In a phone interview with Politico, the former Attorney General said he didn't recall getting briefed on the subpoenas there. Adding that while he was Attorney General he was quote not aware of any congressman's records being sought in elite case.
There are many questions tonight, but one thing is certain, former President Trump used the Department of Justice to go after his list of enemies like Adam Schiff.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I think Adam Schiff is the biggest leaker in Washington.
This total maniac shifty Schiff, he's a total maniac.
Little Adam Schiff, a lot of crooked politician, he's a corrupt politician.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BURNETT: Trump also has lashed out repeatedly at Swalwell calling the Congressman, his insult a loser. News of the secret record seizure also comes though after we're learning the Trump Justice Department had collected data of reporters here at CNN, The New York Times and The Washington Post. Those organizations like Schiff and Swalwell have, of course, been at the receiving end of Trump's personal attacks.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: The media is on the opposition's party side, and I actually said to myself, I say they treat me so unfairly. (END VIDEO CLIP)
BURNETT: It appears and it's very hard to see this in any other way. Trump was using the power of the government to investigate his so- called enemies. Well, that is completely unAmerican. A president, the executive branch, is not allowed to use the government to go after their personal enemies. It's just not how this country works. It is not how the system is set up. No American president should do it.
Evan Perez is OUTFRONT live in Washington. So, Evan, Apple now speaking out on this. Apple, the company whose big advertising campaign is based on privacy, what are they saying tonight?
EVAN PEREZ, CNN SENIOR JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: Well, the portrayal that we have from this very extraordinary statement from Apple is not normally you see these kinds of statements from companies that are subject to these orders, Erin, and what it gives you this impression is that the government was going on a fishing expedition. It's an extraordinary broad demand.
As you mentioned, 73 phone numbers, 36 email addresses that were the targets of this request. And what's more, they were asking for data going back to the inception of the accounts all the way to the present time when they received the subpoena.
[19:05:01]
The subpoena was received in February of 2018. Again, that is like extremely broad request for all kinds of data about who the owners of these accounts were communicating with. And what Apple said that, as you mentioned, they not only got the subpoena, they also got a nondisclosure order, a gag order which said that they could not disclose this to the customers and they renewed it for three years before, just before President Biden took office.
Suddenly, it appeared that the Justice Department lost interest. We also heard from Microsoft saying that they received a request from the Justice Department as well for data belonging to a congressional staffer. In the case of Apple, we know that at least two members of Congress, we also know staffers and some of their family members, including one teenager was part of this request.
BURNETT: So it's pretty stunning and it's stunning what Apple is saying. I think one thing you just said in there, I want to make sure it doesn't get lost, they were requesting emails, information from February 2018, back to the origination of the accounts.
PEREZ: Right.
BURNETT: I mean, that could be a decade. It could be more. I mean, it's incredible just to think about what that could mean. I mean to the point you're making about how broad it was, I just want to underscore it. But Evan, I know you've been talking to sources, and we hear bar distancing himself. Do you have any idea tonight who ordered this investigation? PEREZ: Yes. This is a baby that's an orphan. Nobody wants to take
ownership of this, and I think that's the reason why you saw today, Merrick Garland, the Attorney General and Lisa Monaco, the Deputy Attorney General asked for this to be investigated by the Inspector General and that now is underway, Erin.
From people that I talked to, Bill Barr, the former Attorney General has told people that he had no idea that this has been done, because this was done back in 2018. He takes office in 2019. It is true that once he took office, he was very much focused on trying to get some of these leak investigations completed.
But according to someone familiar with his thinking, he never got an instruction from President Trump. He says that this was never discussed with the President.
BURNETT: All right. Evan, thank you very much.
And I want to go now to Democratic Congresswoman Jackie Speier, because she sits on the House Intelligence Committee, obviously, with Mr. Schiff and Swalwell. So, Congressman, we know the subpoena sought information. This is just the news we're just getting right now here literally coming in, 73 phone numbers, 36 email addresses. Apple says it informed affected people on May 5th, after the gag order, which had been renewed year after year finally wasn't renewed. Do you know for sure, at this point if you were targeted or not?
REP. JACKIE SPEIER (D-CA): Well, I don't know for sure, but to my knowledge, I was not targeted. If we received an email from Apple that I saw it as spam and just discarded it, maybe I was, but I doubt it. But what it does show us, Erin, is that this was such a widespread investigation, unrelated even to when these members served in Congress, if they were going back to the initiation of these email and these phone numbers.
So there is two violations here and we'll find out very soon whether or not the president and William Barr and others were engaged in a constitutional denial of rights for members of Congress. First of all, it is a co-equal branch of government. There's a separation of powers in the Constitution. There is a provision to make sure that a vindictive judiciary or a vindictive president cannot take action against Congress.
Secondly, there's the speech and debate clause, which gives members immunity in their work. They can speak on the floor. They can be fact finding, and not be subject to subpoenas. So the fact that they went to a grand jury, not to a judge to issue these subpoenas is telling, because the grand jury is private. They're made up of civilians, not necessarily lawyers at all. And so the questions that might be asked by a lawyer or a judge are asked under those circumstances.
BURNETT: Yes. Right, which is obviously crucial given what you're saying. And also given the fact, as I keep saying, now we've learned from Apple just now that this goes back to the beginning of whenever these email accounts started to exist. So they were trying to get information of whomever Adam Schiff or Eric Swalwell and others were communicating with over years and years and years.
One thing I'm curious about, though, Congresswoman, and maybe you can help me on this, we understand that Chairman Schiff and others were notified in May that their information was collected. And by that, I mean, according to Apple tonight, May 5th.
[19:10:01]
This is all just coming out now. Did he tell you at that time or do you think he should have told the committee sooner given the gravity of what we're talking about?
SPEIER: He did not tell us until today. I mean, we didn't know about it until it broke last night in The New York Times. And I think he recognizes that the committee members should have been made aware of it before. It is fundamental to the operation of the Congress, that there'd be this independence and the fact that this went on, it speaks to the President Trump's banana republic outlook on what he was running. He ran the country like he ran his business like he was an autocrat, like at total control.
BURNETT: To your raising his name, do you think the order to do this came directly from Donald Trump or do you think it was more likely that people were doing it because he made it very clear actually with the some of the public statements I showed and certainly private conversations that this is what he would want?
SPEIER: So we know what his modus operandi is. He will go through a third party until he doesn't get results and then if he doesn't get results from the third party, he'll go directly. So he had replaced people within the Justice Department that would be his lap dogs. And it was in fact, a violation of his obligation to recognize that the attorney general's office was not his private attorney, and that it belonged to the people of this country.
So we'll find out, I mean, we're finding out more and more information as the day goes on. I was under the impression it was only 12 people, now it appears it's much more than that. So calling it a fishing expedition is almost too benign. This was a wholesale efforts to intimidate and bring down the chair of the committee and of (inaudible) ...
BURNETT: All right. Congressman, I appreciate your time. Thank you very much.
SPEIER: Thank you, Erin.
BURNETT: And hearing Congressman Speier, I want to go to Daniel Goldman, who was the lead counsel for House Democrats during Trump's first impeachment, also a former Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York. So you know all of the rules here. Daniel, let me just ask you like what we're finding out here tonight, I'm literally looking at this wire.
Apple gets the subpoena from the DOJ on February 6th 2018, 73 phone numbers, I'm sorry, 36 emails. We're finding out Microsoft gets one. We now don't know if there are other. Although, Apple is clearly saying tonight, they believe that similar requests were sent to other technology companies, plural, and internet service providers, plural. Do you think that we even know at this point how many people were targeted? Who was targeted in what way?
DANIEL GOLDMAN, FMR. HOUSE INTEL LAWYER, WORKED WITH SCHIFF DURING TRUMP'S FIRST IMPEACHMENT: No. I'm sure we don't know everyone. And Apple probably doesn't necessarily know everyone. I mean, one of the big questions to me is where did those numbers and those emails come from. The Department of Justice and the FBI has access to a lot of them, but not all the time would they understand different family share Apple - children or parents and we don't know how wide the net cat was cast.
And I, having some experience working on that committee and understanding some of the issues that went on in that Congress that 115th Congress during the course of the Russia investigation, we know about Devin Nunes' midnight run to the White House. And I was privy to witness some other efforts by Republican staff members that were very suspect.
I'd be very interested to know whether any republican staff members of the House Intelligence Committee was the source for some of those numbers or information that underlied the subpoena.
BURNETT: I'm really glad you raise this point, because I think we do kind of gloss over, well, they asked for this, but you're saying well, where did they get the information to ask for which would so - a level of, I mean, I'm not using the word legally, but collusion, cooperation. What do you make of the point that Congresswoman Speier was making? Do you think this is significant that they went to a grand jury where there would be people who weren't lawyers and wouldn't know that this was out of line, necessarily, as opposed to going to a judge? Does that signal that the DOJ knew that this was bogus?
GOLDMAN: Well, they had to get a gag order from a judge so they weren't evading a judge entirely. I'd love to see the application for that gag order as well because that would have to outline some of the evidence that they have, a gag order supporting their subpoena.
I want to caution everyone though, it is not illegal on its face for the Justice Department to subpoena records from Congress people.
[19:15:00]
I understand and work very closely with Congresswoman Speier and I understand why she would be upset about this from a separation of powers' angle.
What is problematic from a separation of powers' angle is not that there was a subpoena. Chris Collins, the representative from New York, who was convicted of insider trading, Duncan Hunter, there were members of Congress who have been convicted of various crimes, corruption and insider trading.
But what really gnaws at me about this one and that differentiates it is that this is a highly suspect leak investigation that ultimately yielded nothing. And so what is the basis? What is the predication for issuing that subpoena? That is an open and very important question, because if there wasn't much of one, then this really does turn into a political banana republic type of effort to smear rivals of the President.
BURNETT: Right, president take out his enemies using the apparatus of the wheels of justice.
Thank you very much, Daniel Goldman.
GOLDMAN: Thank you.
BURNETT: And next, why this exchange between then Sen. Kamala Harris and Bill Barr is taking on new importance.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KAMALA HARRIS, VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Has the President or anyone at the White House ever asked or suggested that you open an investigation of anyone?
BILL BARR, FORMER ATTORNEY GENERAL: I wouldn't ...
HARRIS: Yes or no.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BURNETT: Plus, breaking news, just days before the meeting with President Biden, Russian President Vladimir Putin speaking out and making a surprising comparison between Biden and Trump.
And OUTFRONT inside look at the biggest mayoral race in the country, one that's raising questions about one of the top candidates whether he actually lives in New York City, so does he? Eric Adams, Democratic candidate for mayor is OUTFRONT.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[19:20:25]
BURNETT: Tonight, the White House weighing in on the news that former President Trump's Justice Department subpoenaed Apple and also Microsoft for data from members of Congress, and staff and family members.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JEN PSAKI, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: Let me be absolutely clear, the behavior, these actions the President finds them absolutely appalling. He ran for president in part because of the abuse of power by the last president and by the last Attorney General.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BURNETT: So just how much of Trump's bidding did Bill Barr do? Paula Reid is OUTFRONT.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
PAULA REID, CNN SENIOR LEGAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT(voice over): William Barr was one a former President Trump's most loyal advisors.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: We have a great Attorney General and he's working very hard.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
REID(voice over): But lawmakers, judges and former justice officials have all accused the former Attorney General of wielding his power to help his former boss, amplifying political talking points.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BARR: I guess you could - I think there's a spying did occur.
TRUMP: I think what he said was absolutely true. There was absolutely spying into my campaign.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
REID(voice over): And spinning the results of the Mueller investigation.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BARR: No evidence of the Trump campaign collusion with the Russian government's hacking.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
REID(voice over): Even Robert Mueller himself wrote to Barr complaining that he failed to fully capture the context, nature and substance of the investigation. Barr's predecessor, Jeff Sessions, was repeatedly attacked for not protecting the President's interests in the Russia probe.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: He took the job and then he said I'm going to recuse myself. I said what kind of a man is this.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
REID(voice over): Barr was accused of trying to even protect the President's associates like Michael Flynn and Roger Stone who were both charged in connection with Mueller's investigation.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BARR: I agree the President's friends don't deserve special breaks, but they also don't deserve to be treated more harshly than other people.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
REID(voice over): Former President Trump repeatedly called for investigations into the officials connected to these probes.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: Somebody has to get to the bottom of it.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
REID(voice over): Barr repeatedly tap prosecutors to review issues of political significance to the President, including tasking U.S. Attorney John Durham to look at the origins of the Russia probe.
In May 2019, Barr was unable to answer whether the President or any other White House officials had directed him to pursue investigations into specific individuals.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
HARRIS: Attorney General Barr, has the President or anyone at the White House ever asked or suggested that you open an investigation of anyone?
BARR: I wouldn't ...
HARRIS: Yes or no.
BARR: Could you repeat that question?
HARRIS: I will repeat it. Has the President or anyone at the White House ever asked or suggested that you open an investigation of anyone? Yes or no, please, sir.
BARR: The President or anybody else?
HARRIS: It seems you'd remember something like that and be able to tell us.
BARR: Yes. But I'm trying to grapple with the word suggest. I mean, there have been discussions of matters out there that they have not asked me to open an investigation, but ...
HARRIS: Perhaps they've suggested.
BARR: I don't know. I wouldn't say suggest.
HARRIS: Hinted.
BARR: I don't know.
HARRIS: Inferred. You don't know.
(END VIDEO CLIP) (END VIDEOTAPE)
REID(on camera): That exchange is taking on new significance now that we know that Trump Justice Department sought subpoenas from members of Congress, their staff and even their families. Now, Senators Chuck Schumer and Dick Durbin are demanding that Barr and Jeff Sessions come back to testify under oath about those subpoenas and leak investigations. And if they refuse, the Democratic lawmakers say they will issue subpoenas, but that Erin would require the support of at least one Republican on the panel.
BURNETT: Paula, thank you very much.
And I want to go now to John Dean. He was the White House Counsel for former President Richard Nixon, also the author of Authoritarian Nightmare: The Ongoing Threat of Trump's Followers. So John, from Jeff Sessions to Rod Rosenstein and Bill Barr, one thing was consistent across all of them, Donald Trump did everything he could to use the Justice Department for his personal aims to fight his own political wars.
JOHN DEAN, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: It certainly was. And I must say that a lot of people are comparing that with Nixon. Nixon didn't have that kind of Department of Justice. I was just thinking as you were doing the setup piece, that during the worst lead of Nixon's presidency was a so called Pentagon papers, a massive leak of classified documents.
[19:25:06]
I got a call from the Oval Office the day after he learned that and could the Department of Justice bring a criminal action for this called over found out the short answer was, they could, but they won't. So Nixon couldn't use the department as he wanted to.
BURNETT: So in a sense, what you're saying is or maybe not in a sense, you're saying this goes beyond what Nixon did?
DEAN: It is beyond Nixon. Yes. It's Nixon on stilts and steroids.
BURNETT: So what do you make of how direct Trump's involvement in this was? I mean, we know Barr was happy to do Trump's bidding many times. We heard all of that in Paula's piece. At the end of his tenure, though, Barr did stand up to Trump in some ways, Trump pushing the big lie that the election was stolen from him. Barr eventually said, we have not seen fraud. And Barr then resisted pressure to have John Durham speed up his probe into the Russia investigation. Trump wanted that out before the election, kept pumping it and Barr slowed it down.
So I'm just I'm just raising the question here of is it more nuanced than it appears to be in terms of who was the one doing Trump's either explicit or implicit bidding?
DEAN: Well, it's obvious early on, Barr was very willing to do his bidding. The memo he wrote to get the job says I'm ready to execute your presidency like a unitary executive presidency should be, which means no bars hold. Go anywhere you want to go. I think you're the king. And he did that.
It's quite clear, he didn't have to be told on many things. We now know there are countless examples of norms he was willing to break. At the end, however, he realized that this may be too far. He probably saw the handwriting on the wall before the rest of us that this man was never going to concede and he wasn't ready to go there.
But I think Bill Barr has to testify. I'm surprised the Department of Justice hasn't come out with a statement, but a little bit more transparent on this. I hope they're getting their act together, because this is going to be very troublesome.
My Twitter feed is just blazing with people disappointed with justice and their response to this so far.
BURNETT: All right. Thank you very much. I appreciate your time, John.
DEAN: Thank you.
BURNETT: And next breaking news, Russian President Vladimir Putin speaking out right now, fawning over Trump just days before his meeting with Biden.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
VLADIMIR PUTIN, PRESIDENT OF RUSSIA: I believe that former U.S. President, Mr. Trump, is an extraordinary individual, talented individual.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BURNETT: And the wife of Georgia Secretary of State revealing the threats she and her family have received because of Trump's big lie. Threats like we plan for the death of you and your family. Secretary Brad Raffensperger is my guest.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[19:31:52]
BURNETT: Breaking news: Russian President Vladimir Putin speaking out during an interview with NBC news ahead of his summit with President Biden. In this interview, just crossing now, he compares Biden with former President Trump.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
VLADIMIR PUTIN, RUSSIAN PRESIDENT (through translator): I believe that former U.S. president, Mr. Trump, is an extraordinary individual, talented individual. Otherwise, he would not have become U.S. president. He's a colorful individual.
President Biden, of course, is radically different from Trump because President Biden is a career man. He's spent virtually his entire adulthood in politics. Just think of the number of years he spent in the Senate. A different kind of person. It is my great hope that, yes, there is some advantages, some
disadvantages. But there will not be any impulse-based movements on behalf of the sitting U.S. president.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BURNETT: When asked what his message is for Putin, Biden telling reporters, quote, I'll tell you after I deliver it.
Phil Mattingly is OUTFRONT with Biden in Falmouth, England, tonight.
And, Phil, you know, they're both sending messages ahead of this high- stakes meeting. It's interesting that Biden's message is to sort of say, I'm going to be quiet and Putin is choosing to do something he hasn't done in several years, which is actually to come out and put words out there.
PHIL MATTINGLY, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Yeah, look, I don't think there's any question about it. A little high-stakes kind of geopolitical gamesmanship going right now on ahead of a very high stakes meeting. And whether it's the president staying quiet to some degree but his top advisers making clear he's going to be very clear and very direct on issues of importance to the U.S. that may put the president of Russia in a bad position, and Vladimir Putin lavishing praise on the president's predecessor or taking further action with the Russian court designating as an extremist group led by the opposition leader Alexey Navalny.
There's no question they're laying groundwork here. And I think there's also no question that heading into this meeting, there's really no sense of certainty about whether there will be any outcome whatsoever and I think that's an important point, Erin. When you talk to U.S. officials about what they're hoping to get out of this meeting, they don't think there's going to be big deliverables. They don't think this is going to be game-changing for the relationship and don't necessarily think that's the intent of this meeting. Instead, it's to put the two men in a room, let them talk face to face. Certainly there will be disputes in areas where they disagree.
But what's most important for U.S. officials and President Biden's top advisers right now is to get some sense of a road map forward. They'll consistently talk about stability, predictability with the relationship, something that doesn't exist right now. That's what they want more than anything else. Whether they get it, we'll have to see in Geneva in a couple of days.
BURNETT: All right. Well, I mean, it is interesting to see this positioning. We haven't seen anything like this in a long time. Certainly ever when it comes to U.S. press and Putin speaking out ahead of the summit.
The Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov spoke to our Matthew Chance and he accused the U.S. of not cooperating with them, on things like cyber crime, which is an incredible thing to say, right? It takes something incredible, right? Three recent major cyberattacks on the U.S. all tied back to Russia. Matthew Chance is OUTFRONT.
Matthew, that is a remarkable comment from the Kremlin spokesman.
[19:35:02]
And I know you discussed several important issues with him, including the case of opposition leader Alexey Navalny. What else did he tell you?
MATTHEW CHANCE, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yeah, a remarkable comment, Erin, but, you know, not an entirely unexpected one given that the Kremlin and Vladimir Putin is going to this summit with President Biden with absolutely no intention whatsoever to change his position on any of the outstanding fraught issues that there are between two countries, whether that's Alexey Navalny and the crackdown on dissent here in Russia or the military buildup in ukraine and the threat Russia poses to that country or whether it's cyber warfare or any of the other issues that are being discussed.
The Russians are going there, they say, to explain the situation, not to negotiate it, not to discuss it. I put it to Dmitry Peskov, whose Vladimir Putin's spokesman, the fact there wasn't going to be a joint news conference at the end of the summit, which would be usual, and something the Russians said they wanted initially when they sets out on this journey towards developing this summit was a major setback for Russia, because one of the reasons they wanted the summit is to show Vladimir Putin on an international stage sharing a platform with the U.S. president.
But the Kremlin pushed back on that saying that was not the reason that they were having this summit at all.
Take a listen to what Dmitry Peskov had to say.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DMITRY PESKOV, KREMLIN SPOKESMAN: The main reason for him is a poor state of relationship between our two countries and a critical level of this relationship that demands -- that demands a summit between our two countries because this is the only way to -- this is the only way to arrange an evaluation of the situation in our relationship, to prevent further -- further degradation.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CHANCE: As to what can be achieved, the Russians saying, the Kremlin saying don't get your hopes up or make expectations too high -- Erin.
BURNETT: All right. Matthew, thank you very much live from Moscow tonight.
Next, the family of Georgia's secretary of state enduring death threats because of Trump's big lie. Secretary Raffensperger is next.
And a New York City mayoral candidate doing damage control. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MAYA WILEY (D), NYC MAYORAL CANDIDATE: I am not prepared to make that decision in a debate. I am going to have a civilian commissioner.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[19:41:17]
BURNETT: New tonight, I quote, you and your family will be killed very slowly. We plan for the death of you and your family every day. Someone in your family is going to have a very unfortunate incident.
Trisha Raffensperger is the wife of Georgia's secretary of state, Brad Raffensperger, and she is breaking her silence to "Reuters", sharing some of the disturbing and horrifying threats that her and their family has endured all because her husband spoke the basic truth, stood up to Donald Trump and his big lie that the election was stolen from him. Said facts about what happened in Georgia.
OUTFRONT now, Brad Raffensperger.
And, Secretary, I appreciate your time. And, you know, frankly, I'm sorry to be speaking to you under these circumstances.
But it takes a lot of bravery and it's so important to speak out about it. I mean, why is Tricia deciding to tell us all of this now, to share these threats publicly?
BRAD RAFFENSPERGER (R), GEORGIA SECRETARY OF STATE: Well, I think it was helpful really for her to do that probably to get it off her chest but then also just to let people know that it's not just her, it's election workers, people all over this country, people sometimes married to an official, but sometimes it's the election worker themselves.
And at the end of the day, we need to get the message out that this is not acceptable. This is not acceptable behavior to threaten the wives, the children, the family of people that work for the government or even the government workers. They didn't sign up for this. They're employees.
And I don't believe that elected officials sign up for these death threats either. It's time that elected officials on both sides hold our sides accountable. So, if you're on our side of the aisle, on the right side, we need to hold our people accountable and we need to clean up our backyard just like the left needs to clean up that backyard.
Everyone wants to talk about the other person's backyard. We need to clean up our own backyard. We need to start having honest discussion and we need to start putting integrity not just back in elections, to make sure we have integrity there, but also in our elected leaders.
BURNETT: So, you know, Tricia talks about how your family actually went into hiding, Secretary. This is incredible. Again, I know it's hard to share it, but I think it is so powerful.
You actually had to go into hiding in late November. Intruders broke into the home of your daughter-in-law. That same night, members of the far right pro-Trump group, the Oath Keepers, were found outside your home, so they were actually there. We've never known any of this before.
You know, I mean, this just -- I'm raising this point because this isn't just threats, right, this is actually showing up. I mean, what else can you tell us about this? It must have been terrifying.
RAFFENSPERGER: Well, at the point we realized we didn't know how many people were going to show up that weekend, but seemed apparent to us they were casing our house, seeing what kind of security measures we had. So we just decided we'd take an early Thanksgiving vacation and that's what we did.
BURNETT: So you tragically lost your oldest son Brenton at the age of 37 in 2018, a loss that nothing could ever replace. I know your wife told "Reuters" that that terrible loss weighed heavily on her amid these threats. She told "Reuters" and I quote, Tricia, I hesitate to say this because I'm afraid someone might use it against me, but, you know, I have lost a child. I don't ever want to go through that again.
Because of these threats, I know you and Tricia stopped seeing Brenton's young children, right, your tie to your son.
RAFFENSPERGER: Yes.
BURNETT: To feel such fear, Secretary, it brings tears to my eyes. It's truly sickening.
RAFFENSPERGER: Well, we just never wanted to have our grandchildren over here and all of a sudden, a situation arose. Even if it wasn't a violent thing, just people screaming and hollering and shouting at me and my grandchildren hearing that, you know, just think about the emotional scars that would -- could happen to them, but also what if they're actually in physical danger.
[19:45:10]
So that's why we took a several month break of having the children over there until things started calming down a little bit. As you read at the top of your piece, some of those threats came in as late as April 24th. I understand that it's still going around and the rest of the country, other states, other state election officials are still being threatened also.
BURNETT: April 24th. Just to be clear, April 24th of this year, right? Six weeks ago.
RAFFENSPERGER: Exactly. Yes.
BURNETT: So, someone used a fake email address and used your name and tried to make it appear that messages were coming from you and these were awful things also, you know, about Tricia. One of them read: I married a sickening whore, I wish you were dead.
You and your staff believe the motive for this I understand, Secretary, was to force to resign, which is to break you. But you haven't resigned --
RAFFENSPERGER: No.
BURNETT: -- and you kept standing up for the truth of the election and that it was -- that that was the fair outcome in Georgia. You're running for re-election.
I'm sure that was -- that was a very thoughtful and deep conversation to get to that. After everything you've gone through, what made you decide to do that? I want to stay in this, I want to be a public official, I want to keep running?
RAFFENSPGER: People are questioning my integrity. We made sure we ran an honest and fair election. Am I disappointed in the results? Absolutely, I'm a Republican, a conservative one.
But my job is to make sure we have a fair vote. And people are trying to push us off our program, our plan, and I'm not going to do that. I need to stand for integrity.
What is really, I think, embarrassing as a Republican is that we have people that are on our side of the aisle that could do such shameful things and say such shameful things that are so vile. I always thought that, you know, we were the people that -- you know, our party was better than this.
When you start seeing this, we, everyone on my side of the aisle needs to hold people accountable. We need to watch what we say and we need to make sure that what we say is respectful. We can have disagreements, political disagreements, but at the end of the day, we need to come together and talk to each other like fellow human beings because it is something -- we have to understand that this is not -- this is bigger -- you know, this country is bigger than just one person, for every single office.
We've had great presidents, we've had great congresses and we have people in different positions, very important positions, but the country has always been bigger than just one person and one time.
This is a big country. And we need to get back to -- we need to run hard for our elections and when we lose, we need to leave and we need to leave quietly.
BURNETT: Thank you very much, Secretary Raffensperger. I appreciate your time, your honesty and my best to you and to Tricia as you talk about this. Thank you.
RAFFENSPERGER: Thank you, Erin.
BURNETT: And next, an inside look at New York's mayoral race. One top contender forced to invite the press into his apartment to prove that he lives in New York in the borough of Brooklyn. That candidate, Eric Adams, is next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[19:51:01]
BURNETT: In tonight's "Inside Look", America's biggest city is about to elect a new mayor. And of the top issues that person will face is a troubling rise in crime in New York City. Hate crimes are up 111 percent for this time last year. That's doubling. The number of shootings increased 68 percent, murders are up almost 12 percent.
This is really crucial. The city is a financial capital of the world and all of this is front and center. People are going to stay in New York, are they going to leave? It impacts the whole country. Early voting kicks off tomorrow in this crucial race, and Jason Carroll is OUTFRONT.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The five leading Democratic candidate --
JASON CARROLL, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Facing off on the debate stage, the man or woman poised to be the next mayor of New York City. The subject of rising crime and police reform a key topic.
Eric Adams, a retired former captain in the NYPD, considered a top contender in the race initially planed to skip a debate and attend a vigil for a 10-year-old boy whose death has become another reminder of the surge of gun violence in New York City, but he reversed course and attended the debate as fighting crime has been a central issue for his campaign.
ERIC ADAMS, NEW YORK CITY MAYORAL CANDIDATE: No one on this stage can tell you that they have put their life on the line to save New Yorkers. No one else can do that. I can say that.
CARROLL: The candidates were asked if police reform meant taking guns away from officers. Four of the five candidates said no, they would not. But when pressed, here is how candidate Maya Wiley responded.
WILEY: I'm not prepared to make that decision in a debate.
CARROLL: Today, Wiley released a statement saying in part, no one is seriously talking about taking guns away from cops, of course, I don't support that. Wiley former counsel to Mayor Bill de Blasio has recently gained momentum among the contenders running in the progressive lane of the party. Last weekend, she scored the high profile endorsement of Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.
DEBATE MODERATOR: Questioning his residency.
CARROLL: A few tense moments as Adams took fire from all sides about whether he actually lives in the city he wants to lead.
ANDREW YANG, NEW YORK CITY MAYORAL CANDIDATE: He spent months attacking me for not being a New Yorker. Meanwhile, he was attacking me from New Jersey.
WILEY: It is absolutely clear that New Yorkers want a mayor who is fully forthcoming and fully honest.
KATHRYN GARCIA, NEW YORK CITY MAYORAL CANDIDATE: It is a where is Waldo moment, but I know that the voters care deeply about the issues that are facing this city.
CARROLL: A story published in "Politico" questioned whether Adams who is currently the Brooklyn borough president, actually resides in New Jersey, where he co-owns an apartment with his partner.
Adams had been facing so much scrutiny about his residency, he gave reporter a tour of his basement apartment in the Brooklyn townhome he owns earlier this week.
The candidate finding some levity at the end, all asked if they could name a landmark after former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, what would it be?
ADAMS: Rikers Island.
(LAUGHTER)
DEBATE MODERATOR: Ms. Wiley?
WILEY: Do we have a dump we can -- out of state --
GARCIA: We do not.
WILEY: I know, I know, I know.
YANG: An anchor at the bottom of the sea.
SCOTT STRINGER, NEW YORK CITY MAYORAL CANDIDATE: Affordable housing development, formerly Trump Tower. We could call it Giuliani way.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
CARROLL: Now, at one point, the candidates were asked to describe themselves in one word and Adams described himself as a workaholic. Garcia said she is a fixer. And Yang described himself as determined.
But, you know, Erin, you talk to folks in and around the city, asked them to describe this field of candidates and the word that you often hear is lukewarm and time is running out for these voters again early voting starting tomorrow -- Erin.
BURNETT: All right. Thank you very much, Jason. We're going to be speaking to these mayoral candidates over the next few days. Early voting starts tomorrow, as Jason says, and it's a race that matters for the country.
So, OUTFRONT now, Democratic candidate for mayor for New York, Eric Adams, joins me.
[19:55:02]
And, Eric, I really appreciate your time.
So let's just get to the bottom of this. The debate opens like this with these questions about whether you actually live in the borough of Brooklyn. So, you took reporters on a tour of your apartment. You released your E-ZPass records showing you went to New Jersey six separate weekends since last summer.
"Politico" then says those records don't explain five other times when you dialed into campaign events from New Jersey.
So, can you settle this issue once and for all in terms of where you spend your time? You know, how many days on average do you spend in that Brooklyn apartment that you showed reporters?
ADAMS: First, I live in Brooklyn. I was a state senator in Brooklyn. I'm the Brooklyn borough president. I was a police officer in Brooklyn. I live in Brooklyn.
And I am insulting the public to constantly talk about a conversation of where I live when we have over 100,000 children that don't have a place to live.
The next 12 days, I'm focused on the campaign. That is why people said give us your E-ZPass records. I did. I opened my home, which I normally don't do because I'm a private person with my family. I did.
I moved beyond that. I have a city that I'm trying to be the mayor to run that we have real problems in this borough, and that's my focus. And I answered that question over and over again with a great level of transparency. I am a Brooklynite and I love being a Brooklynite.
BURNETT: So your challenger Maya Wiley got a major endorsement from Congresswoman Ocasio-Cortez and she's trying to clear up a moment from last night's debate, and she failed to say whether she would take guns away from police officers.
She's criticizing your approach in that statement today and says, quote, no one is seriously talking about taking guns away from cops. Of course, I don't support that. Eric thinks the solution to every problem is a badge and a gun. Sometimes armed police are the solution, but some problems we actually make worse when we bring in a cop who isn't trained for the situation rather than a mental health specialist.
I guess that's a way of saying refund, refund more mental health instead of cops. What do you say to her?
ADAMS: Listen. My story is clear, Erin. I'm a young man, 50 years old, arrested and beat by police officers. Instead of saying, why it was me? I said, why not me?
I went in to the police department, I fought for reform and public safety together. I am known for testifying in federal court. The case Floyd against NYPD, the judge mentioned me in her ruling. I am known for what I did as a state lawmaker and dealing with the abuse of stop and frisk. I'm also known for dealing with violence in our city.
So Ms. Wiley, she knows that. She knows my record and she can't distort my record.
I was really disappointed and alarmed when I heard her hesitate on the answer, will you take guns away from police officers, while we're experiencing upticks in gun violence, 10-year-old children are shot and killed. We're seeing shootouts on Upper West Side, assassinations in Park Slope.
This is not the way you approach this issue. It sends a wrong message.
The prerequisite to prosperity for this city is public safety and justice. That is going to impact our economic recovery.
BURNETT: So you were the only candidate last night who expressed concerns about the new state law legalizing recreational marijuana. I wanted to play that moment.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ADAMS: I'm concerned about the marijuana laws altogether. It was imperative we lay out a very clear understanding that this can impact on how you respond. It can impair your judgment.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BURNETT: So recent polling, Siena College polling, 59 percent of voters in New York support recreational marijuana, 69 percent of Democrats.
It's popular. You know that. You knew that when you said that, like anybody who lives in this city, you smell pot every time you walk around, just like I do and everybody else.
So you decided to take a stand on this despite -- that's not what people want to hear and it's not what your voters want to hear but you took a stand anyway. I'm curious as to why. Why you chose to do that?
ADAMS: You know, because that's Eric Adams. You know, people say all the time, Eric, I don't agree with everything you say and do but you know what, you have New York grit. You're going to do what you believe is right.
I am in support of legalizing marijuana. I am saying, when we do that, let's not send the wrong message that it's all right to smoke a joint before you do an operation. It's all right to smoke a joint before you drive a car or on your way to school.
We need to be clear with the message. With legalization, let's put in the right parameters that we're not going to create a harmful environment in the process.
That is what responsible adult leadership would show and people need to know of the impacts of smoking if you're smoking too much and that is what I'm saying. But I support legalization and I also support the funds that are
raised from it that goes to those who are harmfully impacted by it.
BURNETT: All right. Eric Adams, thank you very much. Appreciate your time tonight.
ADAMS: Thank you.
BURNETT: And to our viewers know, we're going to be speaking to the other leading mayoral candidates over the next week. Thanks for joining us.
Anderson starts now.
