Return to Transcripts main page

New Day

Kattie Hobbs is Interviewed about the Arizona Race for Governor; Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) is Interviewed about the January 6th Hearing. Aired 8:30-9a ET

Aired July 22, 2022 - 08:30   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[08:32:15]

KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN ANCHOR: Tonight, former President Trump and former Vice President Pence will both hold dueling events in Arizona. They're supporting different Republican candidates in the governor's race, and some say that this could move the divide in the party that already exists between Trump loyalists and those who are trying to move away from his legacy even further.

Joining us now is Arizona Secretary of State Katie Hobbs. She is a Democratic candidate for the upcoming Arizona governor's race.

And I just wonder what you make of the fact that both Trump and Pence will be there advocating for two very different candidates.

KATIE HOBBS, ARIZONA SECRETARY OF STATE: Well, the rival events that my two opponents are hosting with the former president and former vice president are just another example in their bitter primary where they are both just trying to be the most extreme versions of themselves in order to appeal to the most far right factions of their party. And in doing so, they've both taken positions that are so far out of the mainstream, they've made themselves unpalatable to everyday voters. They've spent this race arguing over drag queens and an election that happened 20 - or two years ago, instead of focusing on the real issues that matter to Arizonans.

And I've been traveling the state, talking to Arizonans about how we can bring people together to solve our toughest challenges, like rising costs, fixing our schools and protecting reproductive healthcare. That's why I'm in this race. And I need folks to join me at katiehobbs.org. At the end of the day, this race is not going to be about Democrats or Republicans, it's going to be about sanity versus chaos.

COLLINS: What do you make, though, of the divide between your two opponents, both who would like to be the Republican nominee, obviously, given, you know, one of them, the one backed by Trump, is an election denier?

HOBBS: Well, they're both very - there's very little difference between either of these candidates on their policy positions. Even Karrin Taylor Robson said in an interview last week that she couldn't name a single policy difference. She, too, has called into question the 2020 election, and has refused to say if she would accept both the results of the 2022 election or certify the 2024 election if she is governor.

COLLINS: What concerns do you have for the future of politics generally, but also mainly in your state, given what you saw last night, hearing from, you know, the efforts that the former president went to?

HOBBS: Well, I think the bar that we've set for elected officials, in terms of just upholding that -- their oath of office and the Constitution and not subverting our democracy is such a low bar.

[08:35:03]

And we're seeing candidates across the country, like my likely Republican opponent Kari Lake, who - who can't even meet that bar. She's continued to call for decertification of 2020 and, again, refused to say if she would certify the 2024 results if she's governor. And this is dangerous to our democracy.

It's clear the reason the former president is interfering in elections across the state by - or across the country by not - by endorsing candidates is because they're willing to subvert democracy in order to meet his objectives.

COLLINS: Arizona Secretary of State Katie Hobbs, thank you.

HOBBS: Thank you.

COLLINS: I have a feeling, John, that Trump might use that rally tonight, not just to push for Kari Lake, but also to respond to the committee hearing last night.

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: Look, there's a lot that he might address. He might address the committee hearing. He might address Mike Pence pretty overtly running for president in blind quotes about him from Pence world. It will be fascinating.

Next, we are going to speak with January 6th committee member Jamie Raskin about so many of the new revelations we heard overnight. Plus, what's ahead for the committee?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[08:40:20]

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Did you ever hear the vice president - or, excuse me, the president -

LT. GEN. KEITH KELLOGG (RET.), FORMER PENCE NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISER: No.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Ask for the National Guard?

KELLOGG: No.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Did you ever hear the president ask for a law enforcement response?

KELLOGG: No.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: So, as somebody who worked in the national security space, and with the National Security Council, if - if there were going to be troops present, or called up for a rally in Washington, D.C., for example, is that something that you would have been aware of?

KELLOGG: Yes, I would have.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BERMAN: So that was General Keith Kellogg, national security adviser technically to Mike Pence, but also someone who was in Donald Trump's inner circle, testifying about January 6th. And all morning, Kaitlan, you've been highlighting that as one of the moments you thought was super important.

COLLINS: Yes, Trump really liked Kellogg.

But I do think that was important also when you pair it with what Mark Milley, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, testified, which was, he said there was an effort that day by people who said, we need to get rid of this narrative that Pence is in charge. You know, we need to make sure people think it's Trump.

But really, you know, as the committee illustrated last night, Trump wasn't doing anything from the Oval Office study that he was sitting in right outside the Oval Office. And it was all of these calls and this scramble of, who is in charge of this, who is calling the National Guard, who is coordinating this response? And you heard not just that from Keith Kellogg, but also from Pat Cipollone, the White House counsel at the time, say he could not recall any conversations that Trump had made to assist in that effort.

So, when you -- Trump is actually pushing back using this point, saying that he did call -- that he blames Nancy Pelosi for not granting one of his requests. But he actually pushing back on this notion that Pence was the one who was actually helping coordinate the response that day.

BERMAN: All right, we are going to hear very shortly from a member of the January 6th committee about the main takeaways from last night, but also much more importantly what's next for the committee.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[08:46:22]

BERMAN: The January 6th committee wrapping up this round of hearings with Congresswoman Liz Cheney asking a question, but was it more than a question? (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. LIZ CHENEY (R-WY): Can a president, who is willing to make the choices Donald Trump made during the violence of January 6th, ever be trusted with any position of authority in our great nation again?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BERMAN: Joining us now is January 6th committee member, Democratic Congressman Jamie Raskin of Maryland.

Congressman, thank you so much for being with us.

That was how the vice chair of the committee closed the hearing with that question. My question to you is, to whom was that addressed, specifically?

REP. JAMIE RASKIN (D-MD): Well, I read it in two different ways. Obviously, it's a political question. But I think a lot of people probably didn't focus on the fact that it's a constitutional question as well because after the Civil War, during the reconstruction period, it was the radical Republicans who insisted on adding Section 3 to the 14th Amendment, which says that anybody who has sworn an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution against enemies, foreign and domestic, who violates that oath by participating in insurrection or rebellion shall never hold office again, either at the federal level or at the state level.

So, there's a constitutional answer to her question, and, of course, there's a political question in the event that Donald Trump were ever to appear on the ballot again, and that is addressed to the people, obviously. You could say there was a third possible meaning to it, which was that Liz Cheney was addressing her own party. And in some sense, you know, I think that most Democrats in the country were convinced of Donald Trump's guilt for inciting violent insurrection a long time ago in the impeachment and in the conviction process, even seven Republican senators joined 50 Democrats in the Senate. But I think she was addressing that also to her own party, which is what a lot of her remarks have been addressed to.

BERMAN: If Donald Trump can't be trusted, which I think was the assertion that Liz Cheney was making last night, and you also believe, who is going to prevent him or what would prevent him from being president again?

RASKIN: Well, we have to have this constitutional discussion now. We haven't had to deal with it since, you know, the last big insurrection, rebellion, succession in the Civil War and Congress did have to deal with it then. But, you know, the Section 3 of the 14th Amendment is not what we call self-executing. It doesn't leap off the page and execute itself. So, there would have to be a legal mechanism for courts to determine whether someone had, in fact, participated in insurrection against the union.

But, you know, insurrection was something that was very much on the mind of the founders. You can look at a lot of different provisions, including Article 1, Section 8, Clause 15, which gives Congress the power to call in state militias to put down insurrections, just like the republican guarantee clause says that we have to guarantee a republican form of government to the people. And, again, we have a responsibility to put down insurrections when they break out. So this is very serious business constitutionally.

So, we have to think about that as a committee. That's one of the things that we've got to talk about and Congress has to deal with. But then there's a political question, obviously, for the people, and, again, I think that Liz Cheney was addressing also people within the Republican Party.

BERMAN: So, the onus on the people. Perhaps the onus on Congress to take up the constitutional questions. And I'm cognizant of the fact that I'm speaking to a constitutional law professor here.

[08:50:02]

But also the possibility that she's placing some onus on the Justice Department, which would be a fourth audience by your measurement there.

Jeffrey Toobin was on the show earlier and raised the question, after hearing everything that this committee has laid out, how could the Justice Department charge so many of the people who broke down the doors and went into the Capitol, but not charge the person that the committee argues inspired them? How would you answer that question?

RASKIN: Well, the -- first let me just say about that last point you made about the Department of Justice. It's not the Department of Justice's job to be determining who serves us in public office. It's the Department of Justice's job to determine who committed a crime. And if there's probable cause to believe that someone committed an offense, and it's a grave offense, and it's capable of repetition, and we need to deter that kind of offense and the culpability of the offender is real, then the Department of Justice has to pursue such a prosecution regardless of the consequences.

So, I don't want a Department of Justice that's thinking about who should be our elected officials. That's up to the people. Except, again, in the very narrow case of people who have sworn an oath of office and violate that office by participating in the insurrection, the 14th Amendment's founders essentially determine that for us. Those people can't serve again.

BERMAN: To the legal question of Merrick Garland, to Jeffrey Toobin's question then, apart from the constitutional matters and whether or not they're determining who runs again, but to the question of, how can the Justice Department issue charges against all those people in the insurrection and not the person who the committee argues inspired them? What do you say?

RASKIN: Well, the - let me -- let me just abstract from the question to make it a general question. I think he's right. I mean nobody wants an organized crime prosecution where the DOJ lawyers or prosecutors go after foot soldiers and lieutenants but don't go after the people who are actually ordering the crimes, and putting all of the criminal events into motion.

So, I agree with that. You know, I think that, as a matter of justice, it's just wrong to punish the people who are seduced by a criminal mastermind, but not the criminal mastermind himself or herself.

BERMAN: Do you feel, or do you hope -- do you hope that the Justice Department is investigating Donald Trump right now?

RASKIN: Well, I can't believe that his actions in these events have not come to the attention of the Department of Justice. And, look, Attorney General Merrick Garland is a constituent of mine, and I don't, you know, harangue my constituents, I don't bug them. I believe that he is a professional, like the people at the Department of Justice, and I trust them to be doing their jobs. This is a matter, obviously, of grave importance as we're in this new century with authoritarianism rising all over the world. We cannot have presidents of the United States levying war against our people and our constitutional process. And it is dangerous to have politicians position themselves outside the constitutional order and then attack our elections.

BERMAN: I was not expecting constituent services to be the way to avoid a direct answer to the question there, so I applaud you for that.

What is -

RASKIN: But, honestly, I would hope -- I would hope I have never told a prosecutor, you must bring this case or you must not bring that case. I know America got used to that under Donald Trump as president, where he thought the attorney general was his personal lawyer. That is not the role of the attorney general and that's not the role of a member of Congress. I'm in the legislative branch, and I'm not individually prosecuting people.

In fact, part of the Constitution says that Congress cannot assign criminal guilt to someone. It's called the bill of attainder clause. So, that's really not our function.

We were composed under House Resolution 503 to get the facts about January 6th and get them out to all the people, including prosecutors, but get them out to the people and the Congress so we can fortify ourselves in the future against such attacks.

BERMAN: All right, lightning round, insofar as you have a window into what the committee is doing next, what more can we expect from you when you have a new round of hearings in September?

RASKIN: Well, you know, I think each member of the committee has his or her own questions. I mean one question on my mind is why exactly was Donald Trump so adamant to be at the Capitol? We know he wanted to go on the march so he could galvanize people further, incite them further, get them hyped up for what he knew would become an attack on the Capitol in which, you know, later on he defended and embraced as we saw in the conversations with Kevin McCarthy and others. But what exactly did he think was going to happen when he got up there? This is something that has bugged me ever since the impeachment trial. And I've got some theories about that. But I would like to nail down some hard facts about what sequence of events he thought was going to take place such that he would end up as president, at least for another four years, if not president for life at that point.

[08:55:11]

BERMAN: We -- the committee showed us video of Josh Hawley running last night after raising his fist there. We just showed it on the screen. We even slowed it down so people could see it fleeing different rooms in the Capitol.

Former impeachment advisor for Donald Trump's first impeachment, Daniel Goldman, attorney, called that clip gratuitous. Why did you show it?

RASKIN: Yes, it was not gratuitous at all. In fact, what we were showing is that there were people who were extorting the crowd and the mob, galvanizing them, inciting them on to further action, who later come to downplay the whole thing and say, oh, this was just a little rally that got out of control. And I thought it was very important to show that people who were cheerleaders for the insurrection themselves were terrified. And I would stand by forever our decision to include that. And he stood for a bunch of other people too.

BERMAN: Congressman Jamie Raskin of Maryland, thank you so much for being with us this morning. We appreciate it.

RASKIN: Delighted to be with you.

BERMAN: All right, just moments ago, former Trump adviser Steve Bannon - they actually played video -- an audio clip of Steve Bannon last night at the end of the hearing. But Steve Bannon arrived in court. His defense will give its closing arguments today in its contempt of Congress trial.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COLLINS: A paramedic and nurse from Alaska is doing her part in helping Ukrainians who have been forced out of their homes by Putin's brutal war. Since February, when the invasion started, her volunteers have traveled to the region three times to care for about a thousand Ukrainian refugees.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TERESA GRAY, CNN HERO: What we were expecting to see was large groups of people housed in tent cities. And, actually, they are housing these refugees in individual dorm rooms.

They've got food. They've got shelter. But the trauma is the same.

They've lost almost everything.

This is filled with women, children, and elderly. There is a flu outbreak currently that obviously affects the children. We also have pre-existing conditions. It isn't just about fixing the broken arm or giving you medicine. It's making that human connection. Sometimes you need to hold their hand and walk them down the hallway and listen to them.

We try to meet the needs of whatever presents to us. Human suffering has no borders. People are people. And love is love.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COLLINS: To see that full heartwarming story, you can go to cnnheroes.com.

[09:00:04]

You can vote for your hero. Unfortunately, you cannot vote for John Berman. I know so many of you want to.

BERMAN: Yes, it's - there's overwhelming support for that.

Listen, thank you for coming here all week, hanging out with me all week.

COLLINS: We have covered some serious ground this week, from Monday to Friday, the Middle East to the January 6th hearings.

BERMAN: And I'm doing "AC 360" tonight and Kaitlan will be joining me on "AC 360" tonight.

COLLINS: I will not.

BERMAN: CNN's coverage continues right now.

See you tonight.

COLLINS: Maybe.