Return to Transcripts main page

New Day

Search Documents Show Trump as Possible Subject of Criminal Probe; Russia, Ukraine Accuses Each Other of Attack Plot at Nuke Plant; Judge Blocks Florida Governor's Stop Woke Act on Businesses. Aired 7-7:30a ET

Aired August 19, 2022 - 07:00   ET

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


BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN ANCHOR: Answering my phone.

[07:00:00]

It works great, Gabe.

GABE COHEN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yes. I think most people are like that now.

KEILAR: Yes. Gabe, thank you so much, such an important report.

And New Day continues right now.

So, just to be clear here, this is not the same surveillance video that was subpoenaed by investigators. That surveillance video reportedly showed activity around boxes of classified documents that so alarmed law enforcement, they moved forward with securing that search warrant.

We begin with six words that could spell legal jeopardy for Donald Trump, willful retention of national defense information. I'm Brianna Keilar with John Berman this morning.

And those words appear in one of several documents that were unsealed yesterday by Judge Bruce Reinhart. These are documents that were used to justify the search of Mar-a-Lago. And they put a sharper focus on the former president himself as a potential subject of the criminal probe.

The document contains specific language about willful retention, in other words, they say Trump knew he had them and he knew what these documents were. This was all part of the argument over whether to release the affidavit justifying the search of Mar-a-Lago.

Prosecutors made the case for secrecy because evidence might be destroyed, they said, but the judge set in motion the possibility of releasing a redacted version of the affidavit as soon as next week.

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: So, ludicrous, ridiculous, B.S., those words coming from former Trump senior officials who dispute the former president's claim that he had, quote, a standing order to declassify documents that he took from the White House. CNN reached out to 18 former top Trump administration officials, and all of them told us they never heard any such order issued during their time working for Donald Trump. We're going to have much more on that in just a moment.

Joining us now is former Senior Counsel to Ken Starr, former Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy at the Department of Homeland Security, Paul Rosenzweig. Counselor, thank you so much for being with us.

I want to talk about the document that was released yesterday by Judge Bruce Reinhart, which outlines some of the reasons why the FBI wanted to search Donald Trump's home. And one of the reasons listed out here, it says the search is related to a violation of 18 USC 793, quote, willful retention of national defense information, as Brianna put it, he knew what he had and he knew what it was and he knew he was supposed to give it back. Why is that important?

PAUL ROSENZWEIG, FORMER SENIOR COUNSEL TO KEN STARR: Well, it's critical because it suggests that the government is investigating crimes for which it will have to prove a relatively substantial degree of knowledge on Donald Trump's part, that he knew it was national defense information, that he knew he wasn't entitled to keep it and that he knew it had been requested back.

If they're going to undertake that burden, that's a pretty significant one. And what it means is that the warrant, affidavit, at least the portions of it that we haven't seen yet, suggest that there's probable cause to believe that that's actually the case, in other words, that they already have in hand some form of evidence that establishes that to the satisfaction of the magistrate judge.

BERMAN: One of the things we've been trying to point out to people this whole time is it's never been clear necessarily that this search and investigation was into Donald Trump specifically, that he is the one who personally retained these documents. But do those words, when you're talking about the willful retention of national security documents, does that put the focus in your mind more squarely on him?

ROSENZWEIG: It does. I mean, to be fair, it is possible that this is evidence that Mark Meadows willfully took all those documents, stuffed them away in Mar-a-Lago and left them there and that Mark Meadows refused to return them. But given the co-location of these documents in Donald Trump's home, the scope of the number of people who might have willfully put them there is pretty slim. I suppose you might also include Jared or Ivanka, but it's narrowing it down pretty closely to Mr. Trump himself.

BERMAN: So, Paul, I know you're specifically interested in the why here, why Donald Trump or these documents were at Mar-a-Lago and why he or someone did not want to return them. What's intriguing about that to you?

ROSENZWEIG: Well, the why is the motive question. I mean, you don't have to prove motive to win the case. But every prosecutor will tell you that establishing the motive of a bad actor goes a long way to convincing the jury of what it is you're trying to prove. And we don't know the why yet, we don't know if it's because he is a packrat or of it's because he treats these documents as if they were his personal property, he took them for mementos or he took them to sell to the Russians. And each of those would be a very different case and would matter a great deal more, of course, if it was some nefarious purpose than if it was for, you know, personal aggrandizement maybe to make himself look good with the Saudis, who knows.

BERMAN: Leave selling them to the Russians aside for the moment, leave the most nefarious scenario there.

[07:05:00]

Personal aggrandizement, how much trouble would one be in for that?

ROSENZWEIG: Well, like I said, motive is not a necessary the proof point of the case of for willful retention of the document, you just have to prove that he retained them and that knew he shouldn't have done so.

But you could imagine scenarios in which it might matter to some jurors to understand why, and self-aggrandizement to make himself rich, would be a lot worse than, say, by accident and then kind of stubbornness and not returning them just because the government asked, which is another scenario that people painted, the petulant child idea. Each of them would make a difference, I think.

BERMAN: So, by the way, petulant child doesn't cover the he knew he had them and knew it was wrong to have them there. That defense wouldn't seem to hold up.

I do want to ask you about the affidavit at this point, because Judge Bruce Reinhart opened the door to the possibility that some of it would be released, but how much? He wants the DOJ to come back with a redacted version. So, what's likely to happen here?

ROSENZWEIG: I think the DOJ is going to redact everything except the name -- the words Mar-a-Lago and Department of Justice. I exaggerate, of course, but some things I know for sure, we're not going to find out if there is an internal human source, we're not going to find out what it was that might have been on the surveillance video that's been alleged to have been part of the case. We're not going to find out exactly what the classified nature of the documents is. The DOJ is going to redact them.

So, in the end, I'm guessing that the Department of Justice will fight to keep the amount of disclosure as narrow as possible because, as you said in the opening, they are worried about ruining the ongoing investigation, the destruction of evidence, witnesses unwilling to testify, that is sort of thing.

BERMAN: Paul Rosenzweig, great to talk to you this morning, thanks so much.

ROSENZWEIG: Thanks for having me. KEILAR: This morning, less than two hours left for prosecutors in Atlanta to respond to Republican Senator Lindsey Graham's challenge against appearing before the special purpose grand jury that's investigating the 2020 election interference in Georgia. Graham argues he should not be forced to testify because, as a senator, he is immune from being questioned over legislative acts.

CNN's Nick Valencia is live for us in Atlanta with the latest. Nick?

NICK VALENCIA, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yes, good morning, Brianna. There's been a flurry of legal activity surrounding this investigation including a lot of legal wrangling to try to get Republican South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham here to testify before the special purpose grand jury.

It was on Monday that a federal judge here in Atlanta denied his motion to quash his order to appear here, saying that there was considerable areas of inquiry that were not legislative in nature when he called Georgia secretary of state's office twice in the wake of the 2020 election. On Wednesday, Graham's attorneys responded asking a separate federal judge for a stay on his order to appear. And now, today, the district attorney's office has until 9:00 A.M. to respond to that filing.

There's a lot of moving parts here. So, just to remind everybody how we got here, it was Graham, when he was the then-chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, that called Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger in the wake of the 2020 election. Graham said it was a fact-finding phone call. But just take a listen to how Brad Raffensperger characterized that had phone call in an interview with CNN from that year.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SECRETARY OF STATE BRAD RAFFENSPERGER (R-GA): He asked if the ballots could be matched back to the voters, and then I got the sense it implied that then you could throw those out. I mean, really, would look at the counties with the highest frequent error of signatures. So, that's the impression that I got.

Just an implication that look hard and see how many ballots you could throw out.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

VALENCIA: If a federal judge ultimately denies Graham's stay to appear here in Fulton County, he will have to appear next Tuesday here. It will be, you know, the sight to see here, Brianna. It's been very, very interesting to follow this case. Brianna?

KEILAR: It certainly has been, Nick, and you've been very much in the middle of these developments. Nick Valencia live for us from Atlanta, thank you.

As indictments, investigations and subpoenas continue to stack up against former President Trump and his allies, two former Trump officials are speaking out and warning the GOP that it is time to truly put America first before it's too late.

Joining me now is former Trump White House Official Gavin Smith, he co-wrote this CNN op-ed that's titled, to our former Trump world colleagues, this is your moment to finally put America first. Gavin, thank you for being with us this morning to talk about this op-ed. Tell us why you're writing it now.

GAVIN SMITH, FORMER TRUMP WHITE HOUSE OFFICIAL: Look, I think that, you know, when I joined the Trump campaign in 2016, I joined the campaign because I bought into the policies that Donald Trump was promoting, and that was to so-called Make America Great Again, the so- called put America first and to be the party of law and order.

And I think what have we seen since 2016 is the Republican Party has become anything but that.

[07:10:01]

In fact, I felt like we've been, you know, dissolved into anything but just another Trump property. And that's just not the Republican Party that I joined over 12 years ago when I got into politics as a young college student.

So, I think, you know, for me it's time for the Republican Party, we are at a crossroads, we have to decide, are we going to be the party, you know, of policies that we've championed for so many years, tax returns -- or tax policy, securing the border, et cetera, or are we going to be the party that continues to double down on conspiracy theories, such as Donald Trump's stolen election theory.

KEILAR: Why do you think that they're going to listen now, Gavin? The people you're targeting are the folks who haven't. Why would they listen now if they haven't been inclined to up until now?

SMITH: Yes, I get this question a lot and thanks for asking that. You know, my answer to this is always it's really hard to step up and speak out in Trump world. I had the opportunity to work for the president on his campaign for two years and then I served in the administration for just two years as well, and it's a very hard thing to do.

So, I think as more and more of us stand up and speak out for what's right, for what's honest, this isn't about speaking out against Donald Trump or trying to oust him from the party, this is about speaking up for what is right, for what's going to save the Republican Party and for what we truly joined this campaign to do and that's put America first.

So, I think as more of us speak out, maybe more of us -- maybe more of our former colleagues will finally do the same thing and we can accomplish those things.

KEILAR: It's interesting to hear you say, I got into this because I wanted to -- you know, you were buying into something, but now you say the so-called America first. What was the moment where you went from believing to thinking, no, this isn't real, this is just so-called? SMITH: Yes. Well, for me, there were a number of red flags throughout the administration. But from where I truly broke with the Trump campaign and the administration was with the stolen election theories. I mean, that's something that I can't get on board with.

And I think that there is a number of us and my former colleagues who feel that same way. I mean, look what happened with Representative Liz Cheney the other night. She's someone that voted with Donald Trump, I believe it was 90 percent of the time, her record in Congress. And the sole reason that Donald Trump went after her is because she didn't support his election theories.

So, I think in stark contrast to the Democrats, who continue to get legislative and policy wins, the only thing stacking up for the Republican Party are indictments, subpoenas and investigations, and that's a really important thing to note as midterm elections are coming up and as we prepare for the 2024 presidential elections.

KEILAR: To that point, there is this new filing and it has to do with the Mar-a-Lago search, and it says that there was, quote, willful retention of national defense information. As you look at that, as you're following these developments, what is your worry about why Trump would have knowingly kept those classified documents in Mar-a- Lago?

SMITH: Well, again, I think to my point, what we've seen with Donald Trump, George Conway said it best on this network last night. The Republican Party always talks about they don't support pronouns but Donald Trump is the king of pronouns, I, me, my, mine. That is Donald Trump. Everything is about him. It has become less about America first and more about Donald Trump first. So, that's why I think he kept these documents, is because, to Donald Trump it's like a five-year-old with a toy. That's my toy and these are his documents.

KEILAR: I want you to look ahead to 2024. Would you vote for Joe Biden if it's again a Biden/Trump matchup and do you think Biden could beat Trump?

SMITH: Look, I think, you know, for me, the Republican Party's bench is stacked, we have leaders like Ron DeSantis, be it if you agree with all of their policies or not, this is something that the Republican Party has to recognize and they have to recognize it now is we can still enact many Trump era policies and we don't need the baggage of Donald Trump.

You know, I'm from the great state of South Carolina and we have a fabulous governor, Nikki Haley, she's someone that's ready to step up. So, I think, there are a number of candidates that could take on Joe Biden or whoever the Democrats nominate and that's a really important decision for Republicans to make as we eye the 2024 elections.

KEILAR: But, Gavin, if it came down to Trump having cleared the field here, if it is Trump versus Biden, would you vote Biden?

SMITH: I don't know that I would vote for Joe Biden. I'd have to see who else is running in the field, whether there's an independent. But I can tell you one thing that I wouldn't do and that's vote for Donald Trump.

KEILAR: Gavin, it's a really interesting op-ed and we appreciate you speaking with us about it. Gavin Smith, thanks.

SMITH: Thanks for having me.

KEILAR: So, this morning, demands for a demilitarized area around the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant in Ukraine as one leader is warning about a, quote, new Chernobyl.

[07:15:01]

BERMAN: And CNN speaks with Actor Alex Baldwin following the FBI report on the Rust shooting. Why he thought former President Trump would get him killed.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ALEC BALDWIN, ACTOR: 1,000 percent I'm nervous that a bunch of people who were instructed by the former president to go to the Capitol and they killed a law enforcement officer, they killed somebody, and you don't think that I think to myself are some of those people going to come and kill me?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BERMAN: Concerns of a, quote, new Chernobyl this morning as officials fear a catastrophic accident at the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant. Recent shelling near Europe's largest nuclear power plant is heightening fears over its safety.

Ukraine accuses Russia of using the site to shield its military equipment. CNN has verified video showing Russian military trucks inside near a reactor. It's not clear when exactly this video was taken.

At a trilateral meeting between Ukraine's president, Turkey's leader and the U.N. chief, they called for a, quote, demilitarization area there.

[07:20:03]

Russia claims Ukrainian forces are planning a false flag operation at the plant today. Ukraine's state-run nuclear power operator claims that Russians plan to soon disconnect units from the lines that supply power to Ukraine.

KEILAR: So, let's bring in Reena Ninan. She is the founder of Good Trouble Productions and a former Anchor at ABC News and CBS News to talk about this with us.

I mean, what is Putin's calculus here as you see it? Why is he doing this?

REENA NINA, FORMER ANCHOR, ABC NEWS AND CBS NEWS: That's a great question. I think the biggest worry is some sort of a miscalculation. Putin is doing this because there really aren't many options at this point. One of Zelenskyy's advisers said recently there is a strategic deadlock in the south where the fighting is taking place right now. There is no big military wins for him.

And what we've seen over and over again, Brianna, is the summer with the grain crisis, for instance, he's masterful at creating these situations that don't need to happen, the grain crisis. They finally get Turkey to roll in and mediate it between Russia and Ukraine.

Okay. People get food now. That's averted. Now, we're here on the brink of this situation and, again, it's another crisis that doesn't need to happen that he's manufacturing so that he can, again, be asked to come and mediate this and maybe come down off the brink of this situation.

BERMAN: I think that's an important thing to point out. It's by choice. (INAUDIBLE), a nuclear weapons expert, was here before and he says Vladimir Putin understands the risks of playing with Zaporizhzhia. It's not just that he understands them, he's exploiting the risks.

NINAN: He's exploiting the risks, he gets it and he knows how worked up the international community is. For folks who don't remember, back when Chernobyl happened, it was devastating for every someone in the region. When something like this happens, it's not contained to one area. The Russians today have come out and said on state T.V. the Ukrainians and the U.S. are shelling this plant. We have got to protect it. We have got to do something to help the situation. They're flipping the narrative here on this.

But the real situation here on the ground, what's different from Chernobyl is there is this concrete barrier that's around this nuclear reactor. They've learned from Chernobyl that does protect it. A nuclear scientist in Ukraine recently said it can withstand a terrorist attack, it can withstand a jet coming through. It's not really built to withstand a bombing or shelling that's continuous. So, that's an issue that if there's nuclear material floating around, the impact of it, it affects everything, agriculture, dairy, livestock, the food people eat.

And while the Russian right side pointing at the U.S. and Ukraine, air isn't contained. It travels to Russia. It travels to all the neighboring areas and it's a big threat.

KEILAR: He's got to factor in that there is a nonzero chance something very bad could happen here, which means he would have to live with the potential consequences of what is unfolding here. But he knows that. So, how does that play? How is that going to fly if something happens? How are Russians going to respond and also even countries who might, you know, be willing to see from Russia's perspective here or not be on the U.S.'s side?

NINAN: You know, Putin -- the one thing that I am optimistic about, and maybe it's false optimism, is Putin is somebody who studies history. And if you look at Chernobyl and what happened, that pushed forward the collapse of the Soviet Union. I think he does understand what the threat is and how grave it is, but I think he is walking right up to that red line and he knows how far he can go. But it's miscalculation, you never know, does somebody shell the power -- the system that powers everything? You know, little things can go wrong that are not meant.

I was remembering there were probably three times where nuclear reactor in history has been involved involving the Israelis. There were two in the '80s and one in 2005 with Syria. In 1981, you look at Ronald Reagan's diaries. He really believed we were on the brink of Armageddon there. And I'm hoping that maybe Putin, who everyone says studies history, knows there are real significant consequences. This is something that can really explode in his face literally in this situation and it couldn't be good. It's a very dangerous -- by the way, did you see that HBO series Chernobyl?

BERMAN: Sure.

NINAN: Oh, man, that's good. It's powerful.

KEILAR: It tells you what's at stake and it also tells you what it did to the whole Soviet apparatus, and that is what he's facing.

NINAN: Powerful.

BERMAN: Reena Ninan, thank you very much.

So, why Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell is not so sure Republicans will take control of the Senate.

KEILAR: And a federal judge partially blocking Governor DeSantis's so-called anti-woke law. How he's reacting this morning.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[07:25:00]

KEILAR: This morning, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis announcing the arrest of 20 people on charges of voter fraud across the state. This comes after a two-month investigation led by DeSantis' newly created state agency tasked with investigating election crimes.

Meanwhile, a Florida federal judge has now temporarily blocked the enforcement of DeSantis' anti-woke law commonly known as the Stop Woke Act. It restricts conversation about race in schools and workplaces.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GOV. RON DESANTIS (R-FL): What I've said in the state of Florida because we've taken on woke corporations, we've taken on ESG, obviously, in the classroom, we've battled a lot of ideologies, but what I've said is that the state of Florida is the state -- is the place where woke goes to die. We are not going to let this state -- we are not going to let this state descend into some type of woke dumpster fire.

(END VIDEO CLIP) KEILAR: It's worth noting DeSantis is currently on a MAGA tour in swing states across the U.S. in what could be a test for a potential 2024 run.

BERMAN: So, some less lousy economic numbers lately and some recent polls have Democrats a bit more hopeful heading into the midterms.

Here now, CNN Senior Data Reporter Harry Enten.

[07:30:00]

And, Harry, where Democrats are looking most specifically is at the Senate map right now. How have their chances improved?

HARRY ENTEN, CNN SENIOR DATA REPORTER: Yes. So, you know, let's just take a look.