Return to Transcripts main page

New Day

Committee Begins to Share Info with DOJ as Probe Intensifies; Committee: Trump Incited Attack after 'Unhinged' White House Meeting; Surveillance Video from School Massacre Released. Aired 6-6:30a ET

Aired July 13, 2022 - 06:00   ET

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

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN ANCHOR: Good morning to viewers here in the U.S. and around the world. It is Wednesday, July 13, and I'm Brianna Keilar here with John Berman this morning.

[06:00:01]

Eye-opening new text messages, potential witness tampering by a former president, and a bruising, unhinged meeting in a bid to keep Donald Trump in power.

The January 6th Committee laying out fresh evidence of Trump's involvement with the attack on the Capitol. And while yesterday's hearing did not draw a direct link between Trump and right-wing extremists, new evidence revealed the former president planned for a march on the Capitol and wanted it to appear spontaneous.

The hearing also highlighted Trump's influence on rioters. The nation heard from two witnesses: Jason van Tatenhove, a former Oath Keepers spokesman, and Stephen Ayres, a rioter in the Capitol attack. They described how they were radicalized by right-wing groups and Trump himself.

Ayres later apologized to a group of Capitol Police officers who were injured that day, but not everyone accepted it.

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: There was a text exchange with Trump's former campaign manager that caught the audience and viewers off-guard. Brad Parscale wrote someone else, essentially, that Trump's rhetoric killed someone and blamed his former boss and that text for the deadly violence.

And for the first time, we saw clips of testimony from former White House counsel Pat Cipollone. He described a chaotic Oval Office meeting laced with profanity, screaming and fantasies on how to overturn the election.

The panel's vice chair, Liz Cheney, closed the session with a huge new piece of information, saying that Trump tried to contact a witness who has not yet appeared before the committee; and the committee referred this to the Justice Department.

All of this putting these hearings in a new place. These are some of the key moments.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. LIZ CHENEY (R-WY): The draft tweet reads, "I will be making a big speech at 10 a.m. on January 6th at the Ellipse South of the White House. Please arrive early. Massive crowds expected. March to the Capitol after. Stop the Steal."

REP. JAMIE RASKIN (D-MD): And the committee has also learned that Stewart wrote, Stop to buy weapons on his way to Washington and shipped -- and shipped roughly $7,000 worth of tactical gear to a January 6th rally planner in Virginia before the attack.

JASON VAN TATENHOVE, FORMER SPOKESPERSON FOR OATH KEEPERS: I do fear for this next election cycle, because who knows what that might bring, if -- if a president that's willing to try to instill and encourage, to whip up a civil war amongst his followers using lies and deceit and snake oil.

PAT CIPOLLONE, FORMER WHITE HOUSE COUNSEL: I opened the door, and I walked in. I saw General Flynn. I saw Sidney Powell sitting there. I was not happy to see the people who were in the Oval Office.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Explain why.

CIPOLLONE: I don't think any of these people were providing the president with good advice, and so I didn't understand how they had gotten in.

ERIC HERSCHMANN, FORMER WHITE HOUSE LAWYER: Flynn screamed at me that I was a quitter and everything, kept on standing up and turning around and screaming at me. And at a certain point I had it with him, so I yelled back, Either come over or sit your "F"-ing ass back down.

CIPOLLONE: If your question is did I believe he should concede the election at that point in time, yes, I did.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Mr. Parscale said, quote, "This is about Trump pushing for uncertainty in our country, a sitting president asking for civil war. But a woman is dead and, yeah, if I was Trump and I knew my rhetoric killed someone."

When Ms. Pierson replied, "It wasn't the rhetoric," Mr. Parscale said, Katrina, yes, it was."

When you arrived on the Ellipse that morning, were you planning on going to the Capitol?

STEPHEN AYRES, CAPITOL RIOTER: No, we didn't actually plan to go down there.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: So why did you decide to march to the Capitol?

AYRES: Well, basically, you know, the president got everybody riled up and told everybody to head on down, so we basically were just following what he said.

CHENEY: President Trump is a 76-year-old man. He is not an impressionable child. No rational or sane man in his position could disregard that information and reach the opposite conclusion. And Donald Trump cannot escape responsibility by being willfully blind.

RASKIN: These hearings have been significant for us and for millions of Americans, and our hearing next week will be a profound moment of reckoning for America.

CHENEY: After our last hearing, President Trump tried to call a witness in our investigation, a witness you have not yet seen in these hearings. That person declined to answer or respond to President Trump's call, and instead alerted their lawyer to the call. Their lawyer alerted us. And this committee has supplied that information to the Department of Justice.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BERMAN: Again, that bombshell at the very end of the hearing yesterday, just one of the things that moved forward.

[06:05:04]

Joining us now, CNN senior legal analyst and former federal prosecutor, Laura Coates; CNN counterterrorism analyst and former FBI senior intelligence adviser, Phil Mudd; and CNN senior political analyst, John Avlon.

John, I just want to start with you. What moved? Where are we this morning?

JOHN AVLON, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: I think that hearing really connected the dots between Donald Trump and the attack on the Capitol, because while there are still missing links, we now know that that attack was not -- was premeditated. That it was not a spontaneous move to the Capitol, that it had been discussed and planned and circulated among Trump world, and some folks on the far fringes of Trump world, that there would be a march on the Capitol.

That's significant. It speaks to intent. This was not an accident; it was not a spontaneous attack.

KEILAR: Yes. They were expecting him to march, and even though it wasn't in his written speech, he'd ad-libbed about going to the Capitol. That was clear. He planned to say it. So it wasn't a total ad-lib. Why does that matter?

LAURA COATES, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: Well, because you're talking about intent and motive here. I mean, the idea of ad-libbing, if he's just essentially bucking the advice that he's gotten consistently that says, Look, you can't do this, it's illegal. You're going to find yourself in the wrong territory in terms of presidential history.

But more importantly, the voters have already voted. You are not the guy they want to choose. They don't like you to be the president of the United States.

So instead of following legal channels, instead of having there be the ability to actually use democracy, he tried to thwart it.

But I still don't think that they actually rose to the occasion truly, this committee. Their burden was not a prosecutor's burden, to essentially say here beyond a reasonable doubt, you have absolutely given me everything I need to prove that this person and this person were instructive about this committee and this mob.

But what they did do was show you different vantage points. That they are essentially saying over and over again, there's no confusing the issue here. He knew exactly what he was doing. He knew that he had to assemble this mob, because no one in their right mind actually believed that he had won the election. And so he had a captive audience, and he tried to exploit it.

That's the story of what happened yesterday. Not that there was this instruction that said, Donald Trump said, I want you to go here on this day and do this. Instead, it was, Go ahead, my minions, please go and do what Congress wouldn't do, the vice president could not do legally, of course, and what the court said put up or shut up.

PHILIP MUDD, CNN COUNTERTERRORISM ANALYST: Can I put it on the court record that I agree with Laura, mostly because I'm afraid of her?

COATES: Yes, and put that on the record, that you're afraid of me.

AVLON: Duly noted.

MUDD: I think there are two stories here. First, the arc of the story. When I first started watching the hearings, I thought this is going to be a semi-bipartisan, but not really, investigation into what was a clown show. I mean, people in a disorganized fashion getting out on the Hill.

My take-away from the hearings -- and this is the arc of the story from the election, Stop the Steal, to January 6th, is this is much deeper, broader and more organized.

That said, to pick up on what Laura was saying, if you look at the president's fingerprints on election denial, wow, everywhere from phone calls to direction of subordinates.

If you look at the president's fingerprints on direct connectivity to a group that went to January 6th, not so much. And on saying, Go down there and break windows. I'm not saying he's not morally culpable. He is. I'm just saying this story -- I'm with Laura -- is not quite as compelling as some of the other stuff we've seen from the -- from the hearings.

BERMAN: Can I just pick up on that and bring up what you said, too? Because -- and I'm not trying to parse what you said at all, John, because I think you're absolutely right, that we learned a lot more about the pre-planning, and what seemed to be discussions about a movement to the Capitol and that Donald Trump was going to call on them to move to the Capitol.

Is there an important distinction, though, between discussions about moving to the Capitol or, as Phil Mudd just said, breaking windows and attacking the Capitol?

AVLON: Look I think you're talking about unleashing animal spirits. The intent was clearly to intimidate members of Congress as they attempted to count the electoral votes officially, with the hopes that that somehow, that that pressure would bring about a change in trajectory.

But there are other details, I think, that do speak to intent even more directly than you all have said with respect. One, the phone call to Steve Bannon. Before he goes on air the day before and says what's going to happen is going to be quite extraordinarily different than anything you expect, buckle up, not disclosing that he had just spoken to the president, apparently.

Second, as a former speech writer, the fact that the president overrode his counsel to order putting back a calling out of Mike Pence in the speech, overriding all that advice, that does speak to something close to intent.

Now, can you get inside someone's mind unless they've testified? No. But all the evidence, the detailed evidence that we never would have had access to before certainly clears anything resembling a bar for this.

COATES: I don't think it's a factor of whether Trump intended for there -- people to go to the actual Capitol. Maybe he can say, which we could take with a grain of salt, what he intended to the full extent of it.

But there is, for the law -- and, again, the burden of this committee is not a prosecutor's burden.

AVLON: Yes.

[06:10:07]

COATES: The burden for this committee is not to prove beyond a reasonable doubt. It is to give transparency and to give the full disclosure of what happened leading up to it.

Having said that, they have proven that these people were inspired by Donald Trump. The law would require they were instructed by Donald Trump. And there is the gap of it.

You know, all of the thing that goes in the middle, I'm more curious about what members of Congress were involved. We heard a little bit more of that yesterday. I want to hear more going forward about if Twitter was aware.

You talked about earlier, if there's an Arizona congresswoman who was like, Can we get some more security, because these people think we're actually going to overturn the election; and they're going to do some damage, possibly, in this Capitol, then why was there a disconnect? Why does Twitter know more than, say, the security apparatus brass at the Capitol?

Those are the questions I want answered still. But inspiring, instructing, different.

KEILAR: He says peacefully once in his comments. Knowing what we know now, including these new data points from yesterday, how does that stand out to you, his motivation, Phil, in saying "peacefully"?

MUDD: Look, it -- there's a difference between what I think and what I know, and, again, I'm with Laura on this.

What I think, looking at this, is the same thing Mitch McConnell said. If you want moral culpability, that's there. I mean, if you're looking at this story, what we've done is to normalize this by saying, Well, he didn't exactly say break a window. People like me are saying, so maybe, you know, it's not as bad as we thought it was.

We're -- This behavior is unbelievable. But this is why we have a difference between the Congress and the Department of Justice, and why I'm uncomfortable with politicians suggesting what the Department of Justice should do.

Their burden is not to prove that he wanted or told them or directed them to go there. Their burden is to tell the American people, this is amazingly unacceptable behavior, and that bar, I think, they clearly met.

BERMAN: I just want to be clear, we're all scared of you, Phil. Just -- I let that slide. Let me just throw that out there.

COATES: Phil has a fear of periwinkle frilly dresses, apparently. I don't know why it is. Something deep in your childhood, but this apparent look.

KEILAR: He just said he would crush you.

AVLON: That's what he said. He just basically threatened to waterboard you.

MUDD: I should sprinkle you in my coffee and drink you for breakfast.

BERMAN: That's what I said. And I rest my case.

COATES: It's not even 7 a.m.

BERMAN: John Avlon, this meeting that took place -- and again, the timeline here is really interesting.

AVLON: Yes.

BERMAN: This meeting takes place hours before Donald Trump sends this tweet, which says, you know, come to the Capitol on January 6th; it will be wild. The descriptions of this meeting really are something.

AVLON: Yes. I mean, describing it as the most chaotic Oval Office meeting of the Trump era is the highest bar imaginable in the presidential pantheon, but this makes a strong case for it.

Look, you clearly have a group of outside advisers who are completely unhinged, as Pat Cipollone says, not even bothering to meet the basic standards of anything resembling evidence, arguing that the president should seize voting machines.

KEILAR: They come with a draft executive order.

AVLON: Yes. Yes, they do.

KEILAR: They're not just suggesting.

AVLON: Yes.

KEILAR: It's drafted.

AVLON: It's so totally crackers, but it's beyond that. This is -- this is -- this is banana republic stuff.

BERMAN: And don't we also have, by the way, Bill Barr saying that -- that the former President Trump was asking him about seizing voting machines?

AVLON: Yes.

BERMAN: You have Trump in on the notion of seizing voting machines.

COATES: And him, Bill Barr saying there's no probable cause to do what you're asking. I mean, remember, you actually have to have some reason to seize things. It's called the Fourth Amendment.

Also, the idea of having the federal government go into the states' purview. I mean, the Supreme Court has taken up a case for next term about whether even the state courts can interfere or decide to be the last step about whether the state legislature can decide about elections.

But the federal government was going to go in and seize them for what purpose? Based on flawed logic, based on the statements of Sidney Powell, who has told the courts already, anyone who would believe me --

AVLON: No reasonable person.

COATES: -- I'll use your word, "crackers" here, about the notion, believing in these notions.

But this was somebody who was supposed to be the special counsel?

AVLON: Yes.

COATES: To oversee what? And again, Pat Cipollone said put up or shut up.

MUDD: What I love about this is somebody spent 25 years in government as the revenge of the nerds. I mean, when the outsiders, the Trump -- when the Trump crew came in, they said people with me and the jobs I have, they're the deep state. You know who the deep state was? That was the attorney general, Barr, who was named by the president. It is the president's inner circle, including Cipollone and Barr, who come in and say, You can't do this. For all the people who like the president and say people like me opposed his agenda, I'm saying the deep state is his people. Love it. Revenge of the nerds.

BERMAN: Laura, can I ask, if the committee is presenting an argument, which is not a legal case. They say this; this is a political hearing. Has anything that we've heard or what we heard yesterday -- does it provide more for the Department of Justice to prosecute this as a crime?

COATES: Absolutely, but it depends on which person we're speaking about, of course.

[06:15:05]

We still have not had that direct connection in terms of the direct evidence that Donald Trump instructed. Having said that, we prosecute Trump instructed. Having said that, we prosecute cases based on circumstantial evidence all the time.

The idea of saying, Look, I didn't see it snow last night, but I woke up this morning and the grass was no longer green, gee, jury, what do you think happened last night? Well, this is part of the idea of what happened overnight. Where was the snow and who was sprinkling it over in Washington, D.C., and the nation?

This -- there is evidence there to more than suggest, but actually to prove that he had the knowledge to be aware that he was interfering with the election. And the Georgia case, for example, out of Fulton County, very, very big deal, that of course, there's no pardon that could excuse him from.

But this January 6th Committee is showing you, I believe, the culmination of election interference. What happens when you've exhausted the legal remedies in the channels; when you've tried to use democracy; and as a last-ditch effort -- they said more than once -- to try to use a mob to intimidate and thwart and interfere with an otherwise official proceeding, which of course, is the counting of Electoral College votes.

I think there is "there" there. But in terms of a direct link, they didn't say it. Does a jury require it? We'll see.

KEILAR: Does Donald Trump require it, to be deterred.

BERMAN: TBD.

KEILAR: TBD.

BERMAN: As we like to say.

All right. John, Phil, Laura, thank you all very, very much.

KEILAR: Especially you, Phil, and especially you, Laura.

BERMAN: We are going to speak with Jason van Tatenhove. He's the former Oath Keepers spokesman. He testified in front of Congress yesterday. Why did he break with the group? And we're going to talk about his warning about what he says will happen if Trump is re- elected.

Also, new reporting. What was Donald Trump doing while the nation was watching the January 6th hearings? Well, apparently, he was watching, too, intently, and he didn't like what he saw.

KEILAR: And there's chilling new video just released from the Uvalde school shooting.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Get in your rooms! Get in your rooms!

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KEILAR: The 77-minute video that reveals exactly what the police did or didn't do when they entered the building.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[06:21:29]

KEILAR: Chilling surveillance video taken from inside Robb Elementary school in Uvalde, Texas, on the day of the mass shooting has been leaked to the public. That shooting killed 19 children and the teachers.

The 77-minute video was released on YouTube by "The Austin American- Statesman," a Texas newspaper, which also edited the audio from inside the classrooms.

We do want to note that CNN is not airing the audio of the gunfire until the gunman is killed. Even so, this video is disturbing, and it is hard to watch.

The video begins with a truck crash near the school at 11:32 a.m., and the first shots fired outside of the school. Then a 911 call from a frantic teacher.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The kids are running! Oh, my God. Get in your rooms! Get in your rooms!

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KEILAR: One minute later, at 11:33, the gunman is caught on surveillance camera entering the empty hallway, unhindered. He walks in casually with his gun hanging down. He slows down around a corner there, keeps on walking towards the classrooms. A boy actually sees the gunman and begins to run as shots are fired.

And three minutes later, seven police officers arrive. Several heading down the hallway toward the classrooms, others hanging back.

And then a minute later, shots are heard. There are 16 rounds in total, and police are seen retreating. One of them appearing to touch his ear.

And then for the next 40 minutes, we see more officers arriving, heavily armed, and still they wait and wait and wait. One even uses the school-supplied hand sanitizer dispenser on the wall.

Then at about 12:50 p.m., about 74 minutes after the gunman first entered the school --

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

(GUNSHOTS)

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KEILAR: Joining us now is Uvalde County commissioner, Ronald Garza.

Ronald, I thank you for joining us. I know this is incredibly difficult to watch, and everything that your community has been through is so difficult. What is your reaction to this new video?

RONALD GARZA, UVALDE COUNTY COMMISSIONER: Brianna, thank you for having me on your show this morning. I viewed the video last night, and it was very revealing, very disheartening. You know, the community kind of knew -- we knew what kind of went down, but now we're seeing it.

And -- but we've only wanted the truth. We wanted transparency and, you know, this is what -- what's happening now. We wanted a thorough investigation, expeditiously. And as sad as this video is, it's just part of the investigation. And my heart really goes out to these families who -- who are viewing this video.

KEILAR: Is seeing it different than knowing it after all of the misinformation that we have heard from law enforcement over the course of the aftermath of the shooting?

[06:25:07]

GARZA: Yes, yes, the fact that we can see it now, you know, it just adds that missing piece to the puzzle. And it's just very heartbreaking to -- to see what went down, that tragic day of May 24.

KEILAR: Ronald, when you're watching this, you know, when -- when do you see that they should have gone in? And what do you see stopping them? Is it confusion? Is it fear?

GARZA: I think, you know, just everything that could go wrong went wrong that tragic day -- that tragic day of May 24. From what I see on the video, I think it was just miscommunication and just the fact that they just didn't act. They just didn't move.

I just don't know what was going through those policemen's minds that -- that tragic day, but you know, everything said, they just -- there was just no action on their part.

KEILAR: These -- these families, they've talked about how difficult it's been not knowing about the final moments of their loved ones, and yet, the final moments of -- of their children and their -- and the teachers are terrifying. What is it like for the community and for these families to see this video?

GARZA: Yes, you know, it's -- it's very sad. And you know, I know for the families -- I knew -- I knew two of the young children that passed away. I knew, really, one -- one young lady, one little girl that I knew very well. I've known the family for about ten years.

And I saw that -- that young little girl grow up. And you know, she won't be for -- with us anymore. And I know her parents, who are very dedicated, they were good parents, hard working. Always -- you know, they always groomed their kids well, they were well dressed, and very respectable children.

It's sad. I know it's sad for the family. It's sad for the community. But, again, this is just part of the puzzle, part of -- it's a part of healing and trying to move forward.

KEILAR: Commissioner Garza, thank you for being with us this morning. We do appreciate it.

GARZA: Brianna -- Brianna, the community here is focused on -- we're focused on the investigation, on healing, but now we're -- now the community, there's a movement for common-sense gun legislation. And we're trying to reach out to our governor and our state legislature to try to increase the age to accessibility of AR-15s from the age of 18 to 21.

So we're also trying to work on that end to -- to hopefully, that our legislature will listen to us and change the law for people that are trying to access or buy an AR-15 from 18 to 21 years of age.

KEILAR: Yes, and we're following that effort. We see in the video these police officers responding to the threat of that particular weapon.

GARZA: Yes.

KEILAR: Commissioner, thank you so much for being with us.

GARZA: Thank you, Brianna.

KEILAR: Ahead, we're going to speak with Vinnie Salazar, who is the father of Uvalde victim Layla Salazar. We'll get his reaction to that video and how we are seeing now police responding throughout the entirety of the shooting.

Former President Trump claiming few people are watching the House January 6th Committee hearings, but a source tells CNN, he's always watching.

BERMAN: And the beautiful pictures that triggered an ugly cry from a NASA scientist.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[06:30:00]