Return to Transcripts main page

New Day

DOJ Looking into Coup Plot by Trump Allies; Pharmacies Not Giving 4th Dose to Vulnerable; Apple CEO Tim Cook Targeted by Alleged Stalker; Biden: Personal Sanctions for Putin Possible in Case of Invasion; Avenatti to Represent Self in Criminal Trial. Aired 6-6:30a ET

Aired January 26, 2022 - 06:00   ET

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

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: Good morning to our viewers here in the United States and around the world. It is Wednesday, January 26. I'm John Berman with Brianna Keilar.

[05:59:56]

Major news this morning in a story that CNN broke overnight. For the first time, the Department of Justice is publicly acknowledging that it is looking into a specific aspect of the plot from high-level Donald Trump allies to overturn the 2020 election. This was a CNN exclusive.

We learned that federal prosecutors are reviewing the fake Electoral College certifications from 2020 that falsely declared former President Trump the winner of seven states, states that he lost. This is the deputy attorney general, Lisa Monaco.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

LISA MONACO, U.S. DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL: On the issue you raised in terms of fraudulent elector certifications has been reported. We've received those referrals. Our prosecutors are looking at those. And I can't say anything more on ongoing investigations.

But more broadly, look, the attorney general has been very, very clear we are going to follow the facts and the law wherever they lead to address conduct of any kind and at any level that is part of an assault on our democracy.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN ANCHOR: The fake Electoral College certifications were signed by Trump allies, who falsely claimed to be the rightful electors in Nevada, Arizona, New Mexico, Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Georgia. Some of the bogus certifications were actually sent to the National Archives in mid-December of 2020 by top state Republican Party officials.

Evan Perez broke the story, and he is in Washington with more.

Evan, tell us the latest here.

EVAN PEREZ, CNN SENIOR JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: Well, Brianna, this is an important acknowledgment by the Justice Department, because as you know, they normally don't talk about what they're doing. They don't even tell us when they're looking at these types of allegations. So it was an important thing for the deputy attorney general to say that they're on the job, and they're taking a look at these certifications.

And certainly, we heard from states yesterday that had sent some of these referrals, including Michigan and New Mexico. And they said that they were gratified, because they believe that there could be some kind of federal crime. We don't know whether the Justice Department will ever get to that point.

But one of the things that has happened as a result of these false claims of vote fraud, is it is driving a lot of threats that are being made against election workers around the country. And it's making it hard to recruit people to do a job that is a very key part of our democracy.

Lisa Monaco, the deputy attorney general, talked a little bit about -- about those threats and the concerns they raise.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MONACO: I'm concerned about the really disturbing nature of the threats that we've seen. They've been disturbingly aggressive and violent and personal.

We set up an election threats task force. And you're seeing the fruits of some of that work. You saw an indictment just last week that is a result of that election threat task force. That case and that indictment and those charges were the first coming out of that task force, but they will not be the last.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PEREZ: And Brianna, John, you know, we -- you heard her there. It won't be the last. And that's one of the things that I think you will hear from Merrick Garland, the attorney general, is that this is seen as a broader effort to try to defend the American democracy, try to protect people against these types of threats.

KEILAR: All right. Evan, big developments. Thank you so much for breaking that story. Evan Perez.

BERMAN: Joining us now, former FBI deputy assistant director Peter Strzok. His book, "Compromised: Counter-Intelligence and the Threat of Donald J. Trump," is now out in paperback. Peter, thanks for being with us. Those words from the deputy director,

the deputy attorney general, Lisa Monaco, admitting, acknowledging an investigation into the fake certifications. Carefully chosen words. How do you read it?

PETER STRZOK, FORMER FBI DEPUTY ASSISTANT DIRECTOR: Well, absolutely. You know, in my experience, any time the Department of Justice or the FBI makes a comment on an ongoing investigation, particularly at a high level, those words ae very carefully chosen and scrutinized.

So certainly, when you hear them coming from the deputy attorney general herself, I have no doubt that the -- the intention and the plan to do than was -- probably went up to the attorney general and certainly the office of the attorney general.

And it's careful -- it's important when you're looking at a statement like that to read it very carefully. And there are two things I see in there.

One is that prosecutors are looking at it. And that -- what that means to me is that they're examining the allegations. They're looking at federal law. They're seeing what the elements of the particular crimes that might be involved are and where the evidence falls and doesn't fall.

And the second thing, the last point, is that, you know, she says that she can't comment anymore on ongoing investigations. Well, that means exactly what it says. That means that right now there are investigations, plural, that are open and ongoing within the Department of Justice about this matter.

So that's a very significant event. And to me, it indicates just how high this -- the level of investigation is now going within DOJ.

KEILAR: Even if this turns out, Peter, that it wasn't illegal but clearly was exploiting a vulnerability, what is the benefit of having this investigation?

STRZOK: Well, I think any time you have an investigation, one, you know, certainly, this is very different from the January 6th Committee. These are investigations of violations of criminal law.

[06:05:10]

So to get there, you have to meet a certain threshold to be able to open a case. And then certainly, when you open a case, you begin as an investigator, certainly, to develop a lot of information. And so whether or not you reach the threshold in any one particular event to charge a crime, you are gathering a great deal of information about what was going on.

And certainly, these can't be viewed in isolation. This isn't just a case in one state or in a different state or in a third or fourth or fifth or sixth or seventh state. You have to look at these -- and I'm certain DOJ and the FBI will -- in the context of a broad pattern of activity. And why that's important is, were these coordinated? Were these

planned in advance? And if so, who did that and what was their intention behind doing so?

BERMAN: One thing to make clear here is the reporting from CNN and others is that Rudy Giuliani was key in this effort, publicly so, to submit these fake electors. Boris Epshteyn, who was on the other day on TV, talking about this, publicly part of this.

So this really does get to the higher levels of Trump's political world. The acknowledgment that there is an investigation into them significant in and of itself.

But Peter, something else is interesting about this that you point out. The way this has come to light and the route this has taken is a little bit unusual. How so?

STRZOK: Well, when you look at the -- the source documents, these were found via Freedom of Information Act by a nonprofit information who posted the material back in March of last year.

So the question is, you know, that was 11 months ago. And the question in my mind is what is it that has occurred, you know, between then and now? The underlying documents, the underlying events were certainly not only public, but before they were released, they had to be processed through a Freedom of Information Act. So the government was aware of them prior to even turning them over to this nonprofit organization.

So the question on my mind is, what's been going on? Now, it could be a couple of things.

One, just those slates, false slates of electors wasn't enough to open a case, and there's other information that in the totality has caused the case or cases to be opened.

The other thing might be simply that there was so much going on at the time, that it's taken this long for the government to get its arms around just all the potential illegal activity that was going on. And only through efforts of folks like the January 6th Committee, only through the efforts of the ongoing investigations within the Department of Justice, do the broad scope of just everything that was going on come to light.

And finally, one point, last point, to your mention of Giuliani, there's an ongoing investigation of him in the Southern District of New York. And it may well be that, in the course of that investigation and all his links to Ukraine and all his electronic media that was seized, that additional legal process was obtained to get records out of his email, his devices, and that there is information in that material that led to these cases. But you know, that's speculation.

But the point is that Giuliani is absolutely key to a lot of this. He's got a lot of legal issues on a variety of fronts. And as you said, he was the president's attorney, and it doesn't get much closer than that. BERMAN: I hadn't thought about that, about the investigations possibly

being connected. A lot to chew on there.

Peter Strzok, thank you so much for being with us. Peter's book, "Compromised," out in paperback as of today. Thank you.

STRZOK: Thank you.

BERMAN: So new this morning, people with weakened immune systems say many many pharmacies are refusing to give them a fourth dose of the coronavirus vaccine, despite the CDC recommendation that they get it.

CNN's Elizabeth Cohen with us now. What's going on here?

ELIZABETH COHEN, CNN MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT: John, this is really terrible. The CDC recommends that people with compromised immune systems -- and there's about 7 million of them in the United States, people like this. They need to get four doses of COVID-19 vaccine.

So these are people whose immune systems are weak, because they have a certain disease, or they take a certain medicine.

But CNN has spoken with not one, not two, but a large number of immune-compromised people who say that when they've shown up to get their fourth dose, they've been turned away; that pharmacies, large pharmacies, small pharmacies, also pharmacies that are part -- that are part of hospitals, are saying, Fourth dose? What are you talking about? It's three doses.

They've brought printouts from the CDC. They've brought notes from doctors, and it doesn't help.

It's going to be straightened out, I think. Part of -- part of the reason why is that we've called and said, Hey, guys, what are you doing? And so people are rethinking this.

But part of the reason why, we're told, that there is this confusion is that the CDC has recommended these fourth doses in language that is, well, confusing.

I want you to take a look at what's on the CDC's website. And this is on the page for the public. This is not for doctors. This is just -- this is for the public.

They say, "After completing the primary series, some moderately or severely immune-compromised people should get an additional primary shot. Everyone 12 years and older, including immunocompromised people, should get a booster shot. If you are eligible for an additional primary shot, you should get this dose first before you get a booster shot."

It is confusing, I have to say. This advice came out in October. When I looked at it, I had to read it, like, 10 times to figure out what it says. I have read legal briefs that were simpler and easier to understand than this. I have read pages from medical textbooks that were simpler and easier to understand than this. And I have a master's degree in public health, and I read these things for a living. It was very confusing.

Here's what folks in the immune-compromised community wish the CDC would do. They wish they would say, look, if you're immune compromised, get two shots like everyone else, get a third shot 28 days later. Get a fourth five months, plus, later.

Because pharmacies and hospitals would see that, and they would then understand what it is that we are supposed to do.

We contacted the CDC. They said they stand by their wording but that they're working hard so that pharmacies understand exactly what it is they are supposed to do -- John.

BERMAN: The thing is, for the immunocompromised, three shots was actually the primary dose, and the fourth shot is the booster. Is that the issue here?

COHEN: Exactly.

BERMAN: But they write it like it's "Ulysses" by James Joyce.

COHEN: That's exactly it.

BERMAN: Yes.

COHEN: Right. Exactly. Exactly. And I should say, for people who took to Johnson & Johnson, it's a little bit different. That's a relatively small number of people. But that's right, John. Like, you and I got two shots because we're not immune-compromised. People who are immune- compromised, they're supposed to get three and then a booster later.

BERMAN: You just said it so easily. The CDC should be taking notes there. Transcribe what Elizabeth Cohen just said.

COHEN: I appreciate that.

BERMAN: Thank you so much for being with us.

KEILAR: We're now learning that a Virginia woman allegedly threatened, harassed and stalked Apple CEO Tim Cook for more than a year. A judge has now granted Cook a restraining order after court documents showed the woman not only trespassed on his property but also sent him disturbing pictures.

CNN's Alison Kosik is joining us on this story. Alison, what happened here?

ALISON KOSIK, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Brianna, you're talking about just some of the bizarre things that this woman allegedly did. Targeting Apple's Tim Cook, one of the most well-known CEOs.

We've learned that Apple won a restraining order against the woman, who allegedly has been threatening, harassing and stalking Cook for more than a year. This from a court filing late last week with the Santa Clara County Superior Court.

In it, Apple said the woman, who CNN is not identifying, has exhibited erratic, threatening, and bizarre behavior. The woman allegedly drove across the country from Virginia to California to make personal contact with Cook, and she trespassed on his property on two occasions.

The filing also says she claimed to be his wife and said they had twins together.

The court documents also say that for more than a year, the woman sent threats directly to Cook through email, on Twitter, as well, where she included pictures of a loaded gun and ammunition. She would actually tag Cook in these tweets and write private messages that insinuated she wanted a sexual relationship.

And between October and mid-November 2020, the filing says the woman sent the CEO nearly 200 emails that showed a significant escalation in tone, becoming threatening and highly disturbing.

It was in October of last year that police detained her after she trespassed on his private property where she allegedly told law enforcement she could be violent.

And that's not all. The filing also claims the woman tried to open fraudulent businesses under Cook's name. Last month, she demanded $500 million from Cook to, quote, "forget and forgive."

Apple says it believes the woman that we're talking about may still be armed in the South Bay of San Francisco and intends to return to the CEO's residence or locate him otherwise in the future.

There is a hearing on the matter, Brianna, scheduled for March 29 -- Brianna.

KEILAR: That is incredibly scary. Alison Kosik, thank you for the report.

Coming up, President Biden warns of personal sanctions against Putin if Russia invades Ukraine.

Plus, Michael Avenatti ditching his own legal team. He's going to represent himself in court, setting the stage for him to confront his former client, Stormy Daniels, on the witness stand.

BERMAN: The greatest clutch hitter of all time. The bat that broke the curse. The man who lifted an entire city on his burly shoulders, Big Papi, on your Boston Red Sox, headed to the Hall of Fame.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The baseball writers have elected you to the National Baseball Hall of Fame.

DAVID ORTIZ, BOSTON RED SOX PLAYER: Yes!

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BERMAN: All right. That's the good part. But huge controversy over who did not get in this year.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

[06:18:53]

JOE BIDEN, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I made it clear to -- earlier on to President Putin that if he were to move into Ukraine, that there would be severe consequences, including significant economic sanctions, as well as I'd feel obliged to beef up our presence, NATO presence and on the eastern front.

KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Would you ever see yourself personally sanctioning him if he did invade Ukraine?

BIDEN: Yes.

COLLINS: You would?

BIDEN: I would see that.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COLLINS: Definitive "yes" there from President Biden, threatening Vladimir Putin with personal sanctions, as our Kaitlan Collins asked that question, if Putin decides to invade Ukraine.

Let's discuss this with William Taylor. He's the former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, and he's currently vice president of strategic stability at the U.S. Institute of Peace.

Ambassador, thank you for being with us this morning. When you hear the president say that -- personal sanctions, yes -- is that something to gets Putin's ears to perk up?

WILLIAM TAYLOR, FORMER U.S. AMBASSADOR TO UKRAINE: Brianna, I'm sure it does.

Presidents in the past have not gone that far. We have hesitated to put sanctions on heads of state. President Biden yesterday said that he would consider that.

[06:20:11]

We also heard from administration officials talking about going to the top of the escalation ladder on sanctions. And that would be the top. There's no doubt about it.

We have to remember that the sanctions threats on President Putin, on the Russian economy, they are designed, they are made, those throats threats are made to deter President Putin from making a terrible decision to invade Ukraine, killing tens of thousands of Ukrainian military and civilians, thousands of Russian deaths, Russian soldiers would also die. This is very serious.

So this merits the kind of threat, the kind of possible sanctions on President Putin that President Biden talked about yesterday. Again, the idea, the goal, the intent is to deter him from making that -- that bad decision.

KEILAR: What would those sanctions, personal sanctions feel like for Putin?

TAYLOR: President Putin, like many Russian oligarchs, has many billions of dollars in -- in banks around the world. Certainly, in the United States. Certainly, in the U.K. This kind of sanction on him would freeze those accounts. He would not have access to the billions of dollars that he has put in foreign banks, No. 1.

The other kind of sanctions that could apply personally are on his travel. So he wouldn't get a visa to travel to the United States. Not clear that he would want one. But that kind of -- his family would also be prohibited from traveling. His family would not be able to go to schools in the U.K.

There are -- these personal sanctions have the effect of focusing on an individual and people around him. The oligarchs that are around him giving him advice.

KEILAR: So tell us where we are here. Because the U.S. has positioned that says an invasion is imminent. Ukraine is not going that far. What do you say?

TAYLOR: Brianna, the Ukrainian president, President Zelensky, is trying to keep a firm stance to the Russians. He has been unrattled so far. This big buildup on three of his borders, of President Zelensky's borders, is designed, I am sure, to try to intimidate President Zelensky. It's probably intended to intimidate President Biden and NATO.

So far President Zelensky, President Biden, NATO, the West has not been intimidated. They have not blinked. They have stared him down.

And yet there is this real threat of an invasion. Mr. Putin might actually invade. He's invaded before. We know that he is capable of doing this. He invaded Ukraine in 2014, first in Crimea, then in Donbass. So he's done this before. He's surprised us. He could do this again.

And so they need to be prepared. The Ukrainians need to be prepared. So he has, President Zelensky has this balancing act: avoid panic, maintain determination, and have the preparations, have his military be very prepared for every contingency.

KEILAR: All right. Bill Taylor, thank you so much, former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine.

TAYLOR: Thank you, Brianna.

KEILAR: And coming up, a showdown in the courtroom between Michael Avenatti and Stormy Daniels. He's representing himself, and she's likely to take the witness stand. So what should we expect there?

BERMAN: And a giant blinking sign of what might happen in the midterms. A huge turnaround on who says they are excited to vote.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[06:28:31]

BERMAN: This morning, something you almost never see in a high-profile trial, which could create huge courtroom drama. Lawyer Michael Avenatti has been granted permission to represent himself in his criminal trial that deals with accusations from his former client, Stormy Daniels. He is expected to directly cross-examine the former adult film actress in court.

She accuses him of cheating her out of $300,000 in book proceeds.

CNN's Kara Scannell joins us with the latest here. This is a huge risk for Avenatti.

KARA SCANNELL, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Oh, absolutely, John. I mean, a lot of drama in the courtroom already.

It was just after the lunch break that Avenatti told the judge there had been a breakdown in the relationship between him and his court- appointed counsel that went to the heart of his ability to mount a defense.

Now, Avenatti's court-appointed counsel had been recently cut off by the judge, who was -- he was doing cross-examination of the government's first witness. That was Stormy Daniels' book agent.

And outside the presence of the jury, the judge said that, in 43 minutes of questions, Avenatti's lawyers did not ask one relevant question.

So this clearly had gotten under Avenatti's skin. He said to the judge after the lunch break he wanted to represent himself. Up next was the government's next witness. They were going to begin their direct examination of Avenatti's former office manager. Avenatti said he wanted to directly cross-examine her, because he knew the most specific information about this, more than anyone else.

So after going back and forth, the judge allowed it. Prosecutors had said that they didn't object, but they noted that this could be a strategy at play. The judge said, yes, that one could argue this is some sort of gamesmanship. But he warned Avenatti, you need to abide by the --