Return to Transcripts main page

New Day

Ex-Aide Says, Trump Demanded Armed Mob Be Allowed to March to Capitol; Aide Says, White House Counsel Warned of Every Crime If Trump at Capitol; Committee Teases Evidence of Witness Tampering By Trump World. Aired 7-7:30a ET

Aired June 29, 2022 - 07:00   ET

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


(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[07:00:00]

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: Good morning to our viewers here in the United States and all around the world, it is Wednesday, June 29th. I'm John Berman with Brianna Keilar.

These are the headlines this morning in huge fonts, right on the front page of The New York Times, enraged Trump encouraged violence and sought to join mob, aide testifies. The Wall Street Journal, Trump knew mob was armed, sent it to the Capitol, staffer says. The headlines, and we are talking in big letters, this is the big font spelling out the new possible legal jeopardy that former President Trump finds himself in this morning.

Cassidy Hutchinson, a once loyal and trusted insider, painting a damning portrait of a former president that was unhinged before and during the Capitol attack. She describes a volatile and irate president who knew members of the crowd at his rally were armed and he still wanted them to march to the Capitol.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CASSIDY HUTCHINSON, FORMER AIDE TO TRUMP WHITE HOUSE CHIEF OF STAFF MARK MEADOWS: I was in the vicinity of a conversation where I overheard the president say something to the effect of, you know, I don't f'ing care that they have weapons. They're not here to hurt me. Take the f'ing mags away. Let my people in, they can march the Capitol from here.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN ANCHOR: This morning, you will hear from an array of attorneys, including several former federal prosecutors who will explain the significance of that testimony. According to Hutchinson, former White House Counsel Pat Cipollone warned about the criminal liability that Trump and others might face even before his rally.

This morning, Vice Chair Liz Cheney calling for Cipollone to testify on the record. And this morning is a whole new possible avenue of investigation, witness tampering, this after Cheney revealed messages received by some witnesses before their depositions. BERMAN: All right. Joining us now, one of those former federal prosecutors we just promised, CNN Senior Legal Analyst Elie Honig.

Elie, we played that sound, Cassidy Hutchinson saying she heard with her own ears Donald Trump saying that he wanted those people at his rally who he was told they were armed to get in and march to the Capitol.

ELIE HONIG, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: Yes, John. To me, that was the single most important and incriminating piece of testimony that we heard yesterday. This is firsthand testimony from Cassidy Hutchinson. It's the cleanest link we have so far between Donald Trump and the violence that ensued. This established he knew that crowd was not just angry but armed. He knew they were not there to harm him. In fact, he felt secure enough that he said, you can take down the mags, the metal detectors, and he knew they were headed for the Capitol.

And we have seen that speech that he made moments later on The Ellipse. Well, this puts that speech, we're going to fight like hell, you're going to go down to the Capitol or else you won't have a country anymore, this puts that speech in a whole new context.

And if you're thinking about what potential crimes could be implicated here, seditious conspiracy, that means to try to interfere with a lawful function of government, counting the ballots in Congress certainly counts by force. Up until now, that's been in question. If you credit Cassidy Hutchinson's testimony, you have that force element.

BERMAN: Because he knew they were armed, he knew that they were trying to get into the mags and they couldn't, right?

HONIG: Absolutely. That's what makes this a stronger potential case on seditious conspiracy.

BERMAN: All right. Cassidy Hutchinson also testified what she heard from the White House counsel, Pat Cipollone. Listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

HUTCHINSON: Mr. Cipollone said something to the effect of, please make sure we don't go up to the Capitol, Cassidy, keep in touch with me. We're going to get charged with every crime imaginable if we make that movement happen.

REP. LIZ CHENEY (R-WY): And do you remember which crimes Mr. Cipollone was concerned with?

HUTCHINSON: In the days leading up to the 6th, we had conversations about potentially obstructing justice or defrauding the electoral count.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HONIG: So first of all, A-plus lawyering by Pat Cipollone there. He is right on the potential crimes that they're committing, obstruction, conspiracy, things you and I have been talking about virtually every day on this program. It is remarkable to hear that the senior most lawyer, the White House counsel, recognized while this was happening, we are engaged in a crime spree, every crime on the books.

And it raises this important question, who else did Pat Cipollone say that to? I think it's hard to believe that the only person he told was a then 24-year-old staffer. Did Cipollone say that to Mark Meadows? Did he say it to Donald Trump? Realistically, the only way we will find that out is from Pat Cipollone.

But he pretty clearly is not going to be testifying in the committee.

[07:05:00]

He doesn't want to. The committee doesn't seem to have the political will to try to force him. Now, prosecutors could. They have much stronger subpoenas and they have much better ability to go into court and to try to force him.

And, John, the contrast here between an experienced D.C. veteran, a powerful person like Pat Cipollone, many others, Mark Meadows who refuse to testify, and Cassidy Hutchinson, this young professional who did something extraordinarily courageous and patriotic yesterday, it was hard to miss that.

BERMAN: Courageous testifying before the committee and before the country given what Liz Cheney told us at the end of the hearing, that she says she is seeing evidence of possible witness tampering. Listen to this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CHENEY: Well, what they said to me is as long as I continue to be a team player, they he know I'm on the right team, I'm doing the right thing, I'm protecting who I need to protect. You know I will continue to stay in good graces in Trump world. And they have reminded me a couple of times that Trump does read transcripts.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HONIG: Well, a lot of people have observed that that's how a mob boss talks. I have prosecuted actual mob bosses here in New York City. That is how they talk. And you know what else is really mob-like about this? It wasn't the boss, it wasn't Donald Trump conveying that message directly to Cassidy Hutchinson, it was some unnamed intermediary. That's how they do it.

Now, first of all, if we can prove who said that, that is textbook witness tampering, obstruction of justice, so DOJ ought to be taking a look at this. And the other thing is, remember, we were asking a few days ago why the emergency hearing, why this unscheduled hearing suddenly appearing. I believe it's because they feared that if somebody got in Cassidy Hutchinson's ear, a simple well-placed sentence could have completely knocked her off path, intimidated her and taken away her ability to testify fully and truthfully.

BERMAN: All right. Elie Honig, thank you for being with us this morning. I appreciate it.

KEILAR: The Secret Service thrust into the spotlight by Cassidy Hutchinson's testimony about an irate President Trump on January 6th. Officials say the agents involved are ready to testify under oath and dispute her account of an attack in the president's limo.

CNN's Josh Campbell is live in Washington. Josh, we should be clear, he was riding in the SUV that day, it's also the Beast, it's also a protected armored vehicle, a different vehicle than perhaps people are used to seeing. What is the Secret Service saying?

JOSH CAMPBELL, CNN SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: Well, Brianna, there were several stunning allegations that we learned of yesterday, including this incident that occurred as the president was preparing to leave in his motorcade from the rally to head to the Capitol. And it's the fact that he was intending to go to the Capitol that is key here. I will get to that in a minute.

But what this witness testified, Cassidy Hutchinson, yesterday was that she was briefed after the fact by Tony Ornato, who was then- deputy White House chief of staff. He's currently an executive with the Secret Service. And what she said was he told her that inside the vehicle, as Trump was getting ready to leave, he thought he was going to the Capitol. The head of his security detail said, sir, we actually have to go to the west wing. This is not a secure environment. There was some kind of altercation allegedly Trump had tried to grab the steering wheel of the vehicle, at one point lunging towards one of his security agents.

Now, an official with the Secret Service tells me that Tony Ornato disputes that and says that, no, he never briefed Cassidy Hutchinson on that incident. We're also told that the lead agent who was inside the vehicle says that the incident never happened.

We're told that the Department of Homeland Security after hearing this yesterday, the Secret Service and DHS reached out to the select committee and said, we want to make these witnesses available to testify. A spokesperson for the committee tells our colleague, Ryan Nobles, that the committee trusts the credibility of a witness who is willing to testify under oath and in public but is also willing to hear any information that others may have that would aid in their investigation.

Now, Ms. Hutchinson's lawyer also is challenging the Secret Service saying that they need to testify under oath. And, of course, that's important here. She's out here testifying in her own name under oath, under penalty of perjury. We haven't heard Secret Service officials doing that related to this incident. So, that will be key to watch, to see how that unfolds.

But, again, getting back to the idea that Trump was heading to the Capitol, I think that is the key issue here. The rest of this is somewhat of a sideshow perhaps, but we know based on that testimony yesterday that there were people in the crowd that were armed, we heard the radio traffic from officers, actually one, the voice of one desperate officer radioing, hey, we need to alert the presidential protective detail that there is an armed gunman in a tree. They need to be on high alert.

And so despite the fact that you had people in this crowd with weapons, Trump was still trying to lead this group towards the United States Capitol. I think that is key here, again, one of many revelations that we heard yesterday in this very stunning testimony.

KEILAR: Yes, and trying to get the magnetometers, the metal detectors, out of the way for them to come into the rally area closer to where he was. Josh Campbell, thank you so much

CAMPBELL: Thanks.

[07:10:00]

BERMAN: So, there were 15 times in this hearing that we learned that the potential for violence was discussed before January 6th. Listen.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

HUTCHINSON: He didn't look up from his phone and said something to the effect of, there's a lot going on, Cass, but, I don't know. Things might get real, real bad on January 6th.

He had expressed to me that he was concerned that it could spiral out of control.

CHENEY: Mr. Donoghue testified in our hearings last week, the email identifies apparent planning by those coming to Washington on January 6th to, quote, occupy federal buildings and discussions of, quote, invading the Capitol building. Their intelligence division sent several emails to White House personnel, including certain materials listing events like those on the screen.

Unlike previous post-election protests, the targets of the pro-Trump supporters are not necessarily the counter-protesters, as they were previously, but rather Congress itself is the target on the 6th.

HUTCHINSON: He had asked if he could speak with Mr. Meadows about potential words of violence that he was hearing that were potentially going to happen on the Hill on January 6.

I just remember Mr. Ornato coming in and saying that we had intel reports saying that there could potentially be violence on the 6th.

CHENEY: You also told us about reports of violence and weapons that the Secret Service were receiving on the night of January 5th and throughout the day on January 6th. Is that correct?

HUTCHINSON: That's correct.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I've got three men walking down the street in fatigues carrying AR-15s. Copy at 14th and Independence

HUTCHINSON: I remember tony mentioning knives, guns in the form of pistols and rifles, bear spray, body armor, spears and flag poles. CHENEY: So, Ms. Hutchinson, is it your understanding that Mr. Ornato told the president about weapons at the rally on the morning of January 6th?

HUTCHINSON: That's what Mr. Ornato relayed to me.

Ornato in one phone conversation had called me and said, make sure the chief knows that they're getting closer to the Capitol. They're having trouble stacking bodies.

There were many discussions the morning of the 6th about the rhetoric of the speech that day. In my conversations with Mr. Herschmann, he had relayed that we would be foolish to include language that had been included at the president's request.

Both Mr. Herschmann and White House Counsel's Office were urging the speech writers to not include that language for legal concerns and also for the optics of what it could portray the president wanting to do that day.

CHENEY: When President Trump left The Ellipse stage at 1:10, the staff knew that rioters had invaded the inaugural stage and Capitol police were calling for all available officers to respond.

HUTCHINSON: Once the president had gotten into the vehicle with Bobby, he thought that they were going up to the Capitol. And when Bobby had relayed to him we're not, we don't have the assets to do it, it's not secure, we're going back to the west wing, the president had very strong, very angry response to that.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BERMAN: Here with us now, former Federal Prosecutor Daniel Goldman, lead counsel on former President Trump's first impeachment, he is now running for Congress in New York, and Danya Perry, former federal prosecutor.

Danya, to you, a witness swears to this under oath, what do you do with it as a former federal prosecutor? If a witness told you this, that would set off what?

DANYA PERRY, FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR: It makes the case. I mean, she is a witness who has no ax to grind against the former president or any of the targets. She is not motivated to testify against him. She had everything to lose in testifying and she went out there. She was clear, she was strong and she gave some very damning testimony.

As, you know, we had heard about -- as she said -- from Pat Cipollone, there were all kinds of crimes that they were potentially on the hook for, but what we heard from her yesterday was seditious conspiracy.

BERMAN: Why?

PERRY: We heard that this was something -- you know, there's an effort to defraud the United States, there's an effort to impede or hinder the electoral votes. Those are serious crimes. But to do that by force, that's when you get into sedition and that is one of the most serious crimes that is in the statute books.

[07:15:01]

And we heard about the knowing use of force that Trump himself and some of those around him weaponized this crowd, this mob, and sent them in there knowing that they were going essentially to use force to stop the count. And that's as serious as it gets. And she was very clear in her testimony.

KEILAR: So, let's take that on the flipside. She's your star witness, you are a federal prosecutor, what are the vulnerabilities in your case in pursuing one against former President Donald Trump with her as your star witness?

DANIEL GOLDMAN, FORMER ASSISTANT U.S. ATTORNEY, SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK: Well, a lot of what she said is hearsay and it's probably not admissible. Every time she was saying what Ornato said to her, you would need Ornato's actual testimony. So, it was incredibly sensational, it was incredibly powerful, it paints a picture of a completely deranged and unhinged president of the United States. In fact, for me, this testimony is what you would want in a trial to bring the evidence to life.

I actually think legally there's a lot of other sort of more technical testimony about what Donald Trump's knowledge was, especially as it relates to the coup, but what she said yesterday just paints this really vivid picture. And if you were to go to trial, you want both. You want the technical evidence to get there, but you also want the impactful powerful evidence.

KEILAR: Let's be clear, in a trial, let's talk about what would have been struck, right? There is no valet talking even about what happened with the ketchup on the wall and what caused that, right? That would be admissible.

GOLDMAN: You would have to get more people to testify to that.

KEILAR: The entire incident inside the Beast, that's -- you would have to get that from somebody else?

GOLDMAN: Right. I mean, yes, but this is, again -- that's not critical evidence. I mean, it's great fun for us. I mean, not fun, but it's wild evidence to hear that this is the president of the United States grabbing the steering wheel of his car, throwing a hamburger against the wall, but it is -- it is not evidence that is going to make or break the case.

What to me jumped out so much from this is, yes, of course, his knowledge of violence. I'm not quite yet at seditious conspiracy because I'm closer there with Mark Meadows who wanted to go to the Willard Hotel the night before and clearly knew that there was something going on that he wanted to be a part of. And I think there's a lot more to investigate as it relates to Mark Meadows.

But Donald Trump gets -- this gets him closer to obstructing Congress. This connects him to the violence. This makes him know that the violence that was going to the Capitol to interfere with the electoral count was going to happen and that is obstruction of Congress.

We've already talked on this show about my views that he should be charged with conspiracy to overturn the election, but what really -- and I think Elie really put it so plainly earlier, that is just so remarkable is the number of times that Donald Trump was approached to say, hey, things are really bad, we need to stop it. And rather than stop it, he wanted to go there and join it.

BERMAN: Merrick Garland, I mean, what is he thinking this morning? Put yourself in Merrick Garland's seat, and it's not an easy one to be in at this point, but what do you think he's weighing?

PERRY: He -- it's been a question we've been asking ourselves for a long time now. It's hard to listen to that testimony and say, we'll take a pass. Whether it's seditious conspiracy, whether it's conspiracy to defraud the United States, he's got to be looking at this, it checks

off a lot of elements of a lot of these crimes.

And as Dan said, it also tells the story in very human, dramatic terms. I mean, the ketchup on the wall, first of all, that's almost a textbook case of circumstantial evidence, right? Don't they charge the jury with that? You can consider that evidence, you hear angry voices, you walk in, there's ketchup dripping down the wall, but that is the kind of thing that grabs a jury's attention.

So, we had all of that. We have actually, you know, ticking off the boxes for what criminal conspiracy is and then we have someone filling in a lot of the details that will matter to a jury. And, yes, as Dan pointed out, we do need other testimony. This should hopefully light a fire under some of these other witnesses.

GOLDMAN: Yes. I mean, I think it makes Merrick Garland's job easier. And I think that in the end, what these hearings are doing is it is making it easier for Merrick Garland to charge the case.

[07:20:05]

Because, remember, if -- when the DOJ charges the case, it is in an indictment, it is in a piece of paper, and you don't actually hear the evidence or know what's going on and in a federal trial, it would not be on television. So, we would never really see as the public what all the evidence is until the actual trial.

But now, we've seen the most powerful and sensational, and we've heard it and we understand it and there is a visual. So, if and when Merrick Garland charges it, the public understands what he's charging, and I think that makes his job easier.

BERMAN: Danya, Daniel, thank you both so much for being with us this morning.

GOLDMAN: Thank you.

BERMAN: So, how House Republicans are privately reacting to the revelations made during this hearing, all of this that you just heard. Also, Stephanie Grisham will be with us, the former Trump White House Press Secretary and Communications Director, she says testimony of the former president's aggressive behavior rang true.

KEILAR: Plus, Finland and Sweden one step closer to joining the NATO alliance. CNN live in Madrid for the NATO summit.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[07:25:00]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

HUTCHINSON: I remember Pat saying something to the effect of, Mark, we need to do something more. They're literally calling for the vice president to be f'ing hung. And Mark had responded something to the effect of, you heard him, Pat, he thinks Mike deserves it, he doesn't think they're doing anything wrong.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BERMAN: The testimony from former White House Aide Cassidy Hutchinson about former President Trump's actions on January 6th. Some Republican lawmakers tell CNN they are privately stunned and disturbed by the new revelations. One of the keywords there is privately, the other, of course, is the stunned part.

Joining us now CNN's Melanie Zanona responsible for some of this reporting live in Washington. Melanie, tell us what you're hearing.

MELANIE ZANONA, CNN CAPITOL HILL REPORTER: John, you are so right to point out the difference between what they're saying publicly and privately. Because, publicly, Republicans have really tried to downplay this testimony, but, privately, quite a few of them had admitted to me that they think this is really damaging testimony. And they were particularly alarmed by the fact that Trump knew the crowd was armed and dangerous and that he egged them on anyway and, in fact, wanted to join them at the Capitol.

I had one senior House Republican, someone who did not vote for impeachment, we should point out, told me they thought there was going to be indictments after this testimony potential for Chief of Staff Mark Meadows or for Trump himself. Another Republican was joking with me that after watching the hearing, they wanted to throw their lunch against the wall, which is something we heard Trump apparently did whenever he was angry.

And then another Republican said that they thought this hearing really shed light on Trump's state of mind on January 6. They said, quote, this does show how emotionally and personally involved Trump was in the January 6 events. He really cared about what was happening at the Capitol. He wanted to be a part of it.

Now, again, the fact that they are not saying this on the record, I think, is also really telling. As of right now, there are no signs that Trump's support at least on Capitol Hill is waning and all these Republicans that I talked to also said that they still don't think any of this is going to matter in the upcoming midterms.

But I will say at the very least, it seems like for the first time, Republicans privately are acknowledging that there could be some legal repercussions for Trump and/or his allies, John and Brianna.

BERMAN: That is interesting that they are saying it privately, not publicly yet. But, Melanie, terrific reporting, thank you very much.

KEILAR: And joining us now is former Trump White House Press Secretary, Communications Director and former Chief of Staff to First Lady Melania Trump Stephanie Grisham.

Stephanie, what was the biggest thing that stood out to you about the testimony yesterday?

STEPHANIE GRISHAM, FORMER TRUMP WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY AND COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR: Well, good morning, guys. Thank you for having me on. For me, it was the fact that he was told multiple times over and over again that people were armed and he still went on stage and directed them to the Capitol, where his vice president and, you know, many Americans were. So, that was the big takeaway.

I know that there was a lot of Cassidy's testimony that was kind of bombshell stuff, but I think that that was the biggest takeaway and I hope people will focus on that rather than some of the other more colorful aspects of her testimony.

BERMAN: We talked to the lawyers, these former federal prosecutors we've had marked through here today, and they all say the same thing you did, that testimony right there that the president had been told that these people were armed at his rally, said he didn't care, they weren't there to hurt him and still wanted them allowed in and then to march the Capitol. Legally, that might be the most pertinent thing. You said the other stuff you heard was sensational but it may not be too foreign to you given what you experienced over four years. She testified to the rage that she either saw or heard about from Donald Trump. What did you see on that front?

GRISHAM: Yes. I think that, you know, for me, I think I'm kind of numb to it. So, all of it rang true to me, his temper, her explanation of his temper and the things that she heard, him demanding to the Capitol and saying, I'm the president, take me there. I was at the receiving end of his ire many times. And as I've said many times before, his temper is swift and it is -- it's cruel. It's cruel and all of that rang true to me, also him demanding to go to the Capitol, like I said.

You know, when I spoke to the committee, a lot of the things I talked to them about was that day and how things would have worked operationally. And when I gave my testimony, Tony Ornato's name came up quite a bit. So, I do hope that he is going to come forward and testify under oath because then he will have to tell us, did the president know that people were armed. Because of all the people, Tony Ornato will know those details.

KEILAR: Really fascinating. And so they certainly want to hear from him.

This idea of him going to the Capitol, Stephanie, what would that have even looked like?

GRISHAM: Well, it would have been a very quick OTR.

[07:30:00]

But I am sure, just from my own experience, this is just me talking, I don't know this for a fact, I'm sure that they had planned something earlier.