Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Live Event/Special

Georgia Grand Jury Returns Ten Indictments, Awaiting Unsealing; CNN Covers Trump's Fourth Indictment. Aired 10-11p ET

Aired August 14, 2023 - 22:00   ET


ABBY PHILLIP, CNN HOST: You cannot disentangle that from Fani Willis' will, and her view that this is necessary and important to prosecute that in this particular state, part of the voting rights movement in this country, motivation matters and I think that's part of it for her as well.


JAKE TAPPER, CNN HOST: We are at just about 10:00 P.M. Eastern Time, seven seconds away, with Donald Trump seemingly on the cusp of indictment number four. Jake Tapper here in Washington along with Anderson Cooper and Kaitlan Collins.

ANDERSON COOPER, CNN HOST: And, Jake, a little more than an hour ago, a grand jury in Atlanta handed up ten indictments in Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis' investigation, the former president's attempt to overturn his 2020 Georgia defeat.

KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN HOST: And Anderson, those indictments are sealed. So, we don't yet know who it actually is that they name. But, certainly, the former president's team has spent the day bracing for bad news. They appear to believe that this could potentially reference him that his name could be one of those on those ten indictments that were returned.

They've issued a statement just a few moments ago lashing out at the district attorney, Fani Willis, here, something that we have seen the former president doing repeatedly on social media in recent days. There actually interference, which we should note is, of course, ironic given that is what is at the heart.

Let's go back to CNN's Sara Murray, who has been outside the courthouse in Atlanta all day. Sara, obviously, we're waiting to see when we are going to potentially hear from that Trump has been attacking here. What's the latest that you've heard?

SARA MURRAY, CNN POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: That's right. I mean, she is still expected to make remarks to the press this evening, but, obviously, they want to get these indictments fully processed, fully stamped. They want them to go through the clerk's office before she's making public remarks. We're told that it could take anywhere from one to three hours from when the clerk actually got these documents from the presiding judge, Robert McBurney, which was around 09:00 P.M. So, we're sort of waiting to see how long this takes before we see her comments. And as you guys pointed out, we know that there were ten indictments returned from this grand jury today. We know the grand jury has spent much of the day hearing the Trump election interference case. The one thing we don't know is if this grand jury heard any other (INAUDIBLE) started hearing the Trump election interference case today. So, that's the one caveat.

When we see this grand jury hand up ten indictments today, we are stated in those indictments, who is named in those indictments, if there in that stack that got handed to the clerk today that don't look the other regular sort of murder, assault and battery, the regular type stuff this grand jury has been hearing. We're waiting to see all of that and hear all of that from the clerk, and then at some point this evening, from the Fulton County.

COLLINS: And, Sara, I referenced that Trump campaign statement there, but I know you and I have both been asking we haven't heard anything. I mean, I haven't at least, and I'm asking if you have either on whether or not Trump himself has been notified of any potential indictment.

MURRAY: Yes, that's one thing we haven't heard. We haven't gotten any indication that Trump has officially received any kind of notification that he's been indicted. Obviously, he's the center of this investigation. He's the biggest target and who Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis was looking at. When we talk about the potential racketeering charges, that sort of rests on the notion that Donald Trump is at the head of this enterprise that's essentially trying to overturn the 2020 election.

But we've seen in some of these other indictments that Trump's team has been notified essentially as soon as the grand jury has handed up indictments. And we don't have, again, any indication from Trump's team at this point that the former president has been formally notified in this case.

COLLINS: All right. Sara Murray outside the courthouse in Atlanta, thank you. Anderson?

COOPER: Kaitlan, back with us, Alyssa Farah Griffin, Van Jones, Elie Honig, Michael Moore, and joining us this hour, CNN Political Commentator David Urban. He's a former Trump campaign adviser.

David, you're just joining us. Your thoughts as we wait for the indictments.

DAVID URBAN, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Yes, Anderson, obviously, very serious, right? We have ten different counts coming down. It'll be interesting to see who's listed in here and who's not listed in here, but I just caution everyone to exhale. Let's see what's in here.

And remember those images we just saw this weekend, over the weekend, from the Iowa State Fair. All those folks there who are with Trump and kind of campaigning with Trump and watching Trump and cheering him on, they all knew this was coming, and it had no impact on them. And I think that tomorrow, the folks in Iowa will have no impact on them as well.

So, I know there's probably a lot of glee on the other side of the aisle that this is going to be the demise of Trump, but I think lots of folks have seen this play before and know how it turns out. So, I think stand by to stand.

COOPER: Alyssa, I mean, if past is prologue, certainly, it won't have any impact, or it will just be used for more fundraising or maybe even produce a boost in the polls.


Do you believe that, over time, as this sort of -- I mean, there's a long time between now and the actual presidential race. Do you believe that this could change?

ALYSSA FARAH GRIFFIN, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well, listen, the reality is we're in August of 2023, and the lead candidates behind Donald Trump in the Republican field just have not taken advantage of the multiple indictments, the now fourth that we have in front of him.

So, I don't disagree with David Urban if those who are the Ron DeSantises, the Nikki Haleys, the Tim Scotts continue to actually defend him when indictments come down, I don't think you're going to see his approvals with the Republican base change.

At the end of day, voters are hardworking people who are focusing on putting food on their tables, paying their bills. When their elected leaders that they believe in say, hey, something wrong is happening to Donald Trump, they're going to believe it.

That's why we're seeing this. We've just seen such a level of either dishonesty or running cover by many elected Republicans and not calling Donald Trump out on what he's done. So, I would echo what Adam Kinzinger said. If at this point you're not going to criticize Donald Trump and you're running against him in a primary, then just get out and endorse him.

COOPER: And Congressman Kinzinger, though, I mean, many of the -- we don't have Adam anymore, all right. I'd like to -- go ahead, Van.

VAN JONES, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: I mean, to me, there's something deeper happening, which is that maybe some of these cowardly little candidates are going to say something. Maybe they won't say something. If they peep up, they might get smushed down. That's kind of small. There's something deeper going on, which is that you have half the country that is slowly coming to the conclusion that our justice system is just corrupt.

Well, that's not good. I mean, I think we need to be very clear. No matter who gets the nomination, the Republican Party or who doesn't, or who says something, or who scores something on the debate trail, or this indictment, that indictment, the idea that we now are living in a country where apparently half or a third of Americans are willing to just say, well, we just believe that all of those grand jurors and all of those prosecutors and all the people in the Department of Justice and all these people who we used to rely on, believe in, have confidence in, are just, for some reason, have all become zombies, and they all just hate Donald Trump. And they're willing to destroy the Constitution, whatever, to get one man. That is very, very dangerous.

And so I think it's incumbent on a bigger slice of America than even just these little cowardly candidates to start talking about the beauty of our institutions. This is a beautiful system that we have. People around the world don't have this, where even a Donald Trump, who's an obvious crook and conman, still gets his day in court, he still gets lawyers, he still gets a chance to participate, but regular, ordinary people can say this is the law and it has to be followed. If we can't defend our basic system, I think we're in trouble.

GRIFFIN: And, Anderson, if I could just --

COOPER: Go ahead, Alyssa.

GRIFFIN: I was just going to mention there is precedent in Georgia for having had cameras in courtrooms for trials similar to this, which I know we don't expect in the federal cases. So, I do think that could have a noticeable impact on the public's perception if they actually are able to see this case, assuming the indictment comes down, play out and see the facts and see exactly what this actual conspiracy looked like in this effort to steal the election looked like. I do think that could change some hearts.

COOPER: David?

URBAN: Yes. So, Anderson, I agree with Van. I think Van makes a very valid point. It is troubling, right, that half of America -- there are two sides of America. Half see this as just and righteous, and the other half sees it as unjust and unrighteous. And there's a big problem with our system of justice today and faith in our systems that American people don't have faith, whether you're on the Democratic side or Republican side, whether you're -- people don't believe that there's an equal application of the law, whether you're Republican or a Democrat now. And it's really eating away at the underpinnings of society, if we can have faith in that. And I think a lot that's the reason that when these indictments go out on the former President Trump, that so many Republicans, they just see it as white noise. And I agree with Van. It is troublesome.

And so, to Alyssa's point, maybe perhaps if there are cameras, not just in the Georgia case, but in the federal case, I think people need to be able to see and hear everything so that they understand that justice is being applied evenly and fairly. I think that's the only way it's going to be. You can move forward.

COOPER: I just want to talk to our legal folks for a bit. Elie, just in terms of for viewers who are just joining us basically at the top of the hour, the 10:00 hour on the East Coast, explain what we expect to happen over the next, say, hour or more.

ELIE HONIG, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: Right, Anderson. So, earlier tonight, we learned that the grand jury had voted yes on at least ten different indictments. We saw earlier as those indictments were walked by the grand jury, four-person into the judge who signed those documents. And now those indictments are back with the clerk.

And so as we sit here, we're waiting for the clerk to go through the processing, literally stamping the documents, and eventually they will be uploaded onto the electronic filing system.


I expect that around the same time that happens, the D.A. will come down and give a public statement. And I think the DA is going to try to time it so that the moment when she takes the podium is the moment when we all get to see that indictment.

Important to keep in mind a couple of things. One, the D.A. is typically going to be constrained in what she says to whatever is within the four corners of that indictment. A general rule of practice is you only say and reiterate what you've already put in your court documents. You don't just sort of go on a bender and say whatever occurs to you.

The other thing to keep in mind, and this is to Van and David and Alyssa's points, everyone needs to keep in mind an indictment is the start of this whole process. It is not the end. We used to say, as a prosecutor, you don't celebrate an indictment. You celebrate a conviction if you're a prosecutor, vice versa, of course, if you're the defendant. Our criminal justice process is about to play out in front of all of us on four different stages, to Van's point, and I think it's important that we keep up respect for that system.

And, look, Donald Trump has been trying to tear that down, undermine confidence in that through his social media posts every day. Let's let the system do its job. Our system is not perfect. It's capable of being criticized. But, by and large, it is our last bulwark of truth. So, let's all be patient. There's a long way to go in this case. And the other three, let's see how it plays out.

COOPER: So, Michael, in terms of logistics, I mean, if there are indeed multiple defendants, will they all have to be arraigned together?

MICHAEL MOORE, FORMER U.S. ATTORNEY, MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA: Well, most of the time they would be. But we just can't escape the fact that this is unique because you do have a former president and there's unique security concerns and that type of thing. So, typically, they would be brought in and have the chance to be arraigned at the same time.

The state court system is a little bit more of a gun slinging-type system than the federal court. And so they're not necessarily as rigid with the rules. And that's why you have cameras in the courtroom oftentimes, why it wouldn't surprise me at all.

I mean, but anybody that's waiting to watch this on tape before the election may be running a fool's errand, because I just think it's unlikely. I mean, we're talking about seven months, seven or eight months (INAUDIBLE) jury in another RICO case that's been going on here for this year. And so you can imagine the difficulty getting a jury in the Trump case. I just think that's a long time.

COOPER: Wait a minute. I'm sorry. Can you just repeat that? You said it took seven months to get a jury for a RICO case in Georgia?

MOORE: They're still picking the jury. It's been more than seven.

COOPER: Why does it take seven months?

MOORE: Well, I mean, you've got multiple defendants and you got lawyers jumping up and down and questioning jurors and all those things that go on when you have it. So, you can imagine sort of the circus that's going to happen when this comes out.

One thing I do want to add, though, about the sort of system that I've been hearing about, remember that Trump is presumed innocent at this point. And so that has to play in to some considerations about timing of the trial and whether or not it knocks him off the trail and all those other things.

And Elie is exactly right. This is not a case where the D.A. can come down and sort of slam him outside of what the indictment says. I mean, remember, this is not a case where that it's Fani Willis versus Donald Trump. This is not the prosecutor versus Donald Trump. This is the state of Georgia versus Donald Trump. And so she's got to wear that mantle in a way that causes and exudes impartiality and follows the rules that apply to prosecutors. And that is you don't try your case in media. You try your case in the courtroom. And so she'll be constrained tonight if she does come out and give some statements.

COOPER: And, Michael, obviously, the former president has always been released on his own recognizance. Obviously, no mug shot, no handcuffs. Would the other defendants, if there are, would they necessarily get the same treatment?

MOORE: Yes, I don't think they'll get the same treatment as the former president. I mean, again, I don't know that any defendants have ever been indicted when the courthouse is surrounded like a military base either. So, we are in uncharted waters. But I think the other defendants will likely have more of a routine-type appearance and will be processed in, and they're not going to be ushered in and out through a secret passage by Secret Service.

HONIG: Anderson, when we do see this indictment, to Michael's point, one thing that I expect to see is, are we going to learn new information about the allegations here? Because if you think back to Jack Smith's indictment for January 6th, the majority of that, I think the vast majority of that information had already come out through the January 6th committee hearings that Representative Kinzinger was part of.

But here, let's remember, Jack Smith had to paint with a very broad brush. He had to cover seven states. The Georgia part of his indictment is five pages long. Here, Fani Willis gets to drill down much more deeply. And I think we're going to get a lot more detail and a lot of new information that we hadn't seen before.

COOPER: Yes, I appreciate it, everybody. Let's go back to Jake in D.C. Jake?

TAPPER: Thanks, Anderson. I'm still here with the same CNN correspondents and analysts, Andrew McCabe, Gloria Borger, Abby Phillip, Jamie Gangel and Laura Coates.


And, you know, on the channel that is basically Donald Trump's defense network, Lindsey Graham, a senator from South Carolina, said earlier something along the lines of this should be decided at the ballot box and not in a bunch of liberal jurisdictions trying to put the man in jail, they're weaponizing the law, which is an interesting thing.

First of all, what's very interesting about that is one of the strongest pieces of evidence against Donald Trump, that tape from the secretary of state, Brad Rappensperger, who we should once again remind people is a very conservative Republican, that tape in which Donald Trump asks him to find 11,780 votes in Georgia, which is just one more than Joe Biden had as a margin of victory, that tape exists because Lindsey Graham had called Brad Raffensperger in a previous moment and had said something to him that Raffensperger took as a similar suggestion that he should corruptly find votes for Donald Trump, and Lindsey Graham denied it. And so it just disappeared from there. It was just he said he said. And so Brad Raffensperger presumably started tape recording this conversation.

PHILLIP: Yes. And, look, I think the retort to Lindsey Graham is pretty simple. Election interference in a democracy is not something that just gets decided at the ballot box. Like if it's a crime, it's a crime, and it needs to be handled in the courtroom.

If you open the door to people just doing any and everything to try to, quote/unquote, find votes that they did not actually win through lawful means, that's the end of it. That's the whole ballgame. That's why this is so important.

The jury will decide, but the allegations here in this case, in the January 6th case, they go to the heart of what a democracy is and what it means. And so the idea that it's just, oh, this is too tough, let's just let the voters decide on a political matter, it's not a political matter. It's a legal matter. And we'll find out what the jury ends up saying.

TAPPER: Let me just play that sound, if I can, just for one second, just to remind our viewers, we're well versed with this excerpt, but it is still stunning when you listen to it. This is Donald Trump calling the secretary of state of Georgia, again, a very conservative Republican in Brad Raffensperger, after the election, and this is what he suggests that Mr. Raffensperger do.


DONALD TRUMP, FORMER U.S. PRESIDENT: I just want to find 11,780 votes, which is one more than we have because we won the state.


TAPPER: I mean, that's just a reminder.

Another point -- oh, do you want to say something?

ANDREW MCCABE, CNN SENIOR LAW ENFORCEMENT ANALYST: Yes. You asked the question earlier, why Georgia? That phone call is clearly one of the big answers to that question. But another one, and also relevant to Lindsey Graham, is that Fani Willis, in 2001 opens this investigation, starts looking into these --

TAPPER: 2021.

MCCABE: That's right, 2021, starts looking into these rumors of meddling in Georgia. And she doesn't get cooperation principally from the federal officials who she reaches out to for interviews, people like Lindsey Graham. And that's what compels her to ask for the special grand jury.

The special grand jury, as we heard earlier, is the only grand jury that has investigative capability in the state of Georgia. And that grand jury really kind of turbo-charges her investigation into this malfeasance that, of course, results in a recommendation to her to pursue an indictment, and that's why we have the conclusion of the regular grand jury tonight.

But I think the answer to why Georgia is many different reasons fell into place, and not insignificantly, the recalcitrants she got from government officials who refuse to cooperate with this lawful investigation into unlawful activity.

GLORIA BORGER, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: Remember, Graham hired a lawyer to get him out of testifying.

MCCABE: That's right.

BORGER: If you'll recall. But I think both the voters and the juries are going to end up deciding this, because the jury, if Trump is indicted, the jury can say, okay, we think he's guilty, and then he can run for president and he can be elected president of the United States.

So, it's not just an either/or situation that Lindsey Graham is portraying it as. I mean, everybody gets their shot at this. And, again, it was Lindsey Graham who did not want to cooperate with this investigation.

MCCABE: That's right.

TAPPER: Also, we should note, Laura, one of the things that we heard before and during the second Trump impeachment for what happened on January 6th was, oh, we shouldn't handle this here. This will be left up to the courts and juries and criminal investigators. That's one of the reasons Republicans gave for why he should not be impeached, oh, because law enforcement will take care of this.


Now, law enforcement is involved and we're hearing, oh, no, but this shouldn't be up to the courts. It should be up to the voters, I guess it's like ring around the rosy here with just like the next group.

LAURA COATES, CNN CHIEF LEGAL ANALYST AND ANCHOR: It's political hot potato, right? No one wants to actually be the one to get burned by their own hypocrisy because it is an absurd notion to suggest that one could commit a crime, and because there is an election around the corner, which, by the way, it's America, there's always an election around the corner. I mean, that's what happens in a democracy. Voters are able to elect their candidate of choosing, hopefully, because an election is right around the corner. It does not serve as a way to immunize or inoculate you for life.

This idea that Fani Willis, though, should take a backseat to Jack Smith will come up again. Expect that to happen here, because many will look at this and say, hold on, we've got a special counsel who's already appointed. By the way, we've got three special counsel simultaneously right now for the first time in history, but why not just give it to him, defer to him, defer to him?

Well, the fact of the matter is every prosecutor is endowed in their individual jurisdiction with authority to actually bring a case if a crime has been committed in their jurisdiction. They need not wait for another one to accompany her to make a decision. She has every right to do so. But that will be a natural talking point to evolve from here and another way to pass that hot potato. But it really shouldn't have any legs for that very reason.

Finally, when you think about what is potentially at stake here, one of the main reasons we prosecute cases is in part for retribution, for punishment, but a large part is deterrence, when you bring a case on behalf of a jurisdiction. You don't get up and say Laura Coates versus or Jamie Gangel versus. It is the United States or the state of Georgia against this person. Why? Because you've offended the society with your actions, you've offended the people and what they expect in a civilized and social contract.

And so when you look at this notion of what to do next, the fact that she's able to bring a case, the fact that she's able to do this for deterrent reasons as well is because, why, there's election just around the corner.

BORGER: And Donald Trump looks at it as vengeance. He does not look at it as anything else. This is Fani Willis trying to get back at him. All these people in Georgia who didn't like him for one reason or another, didn't vote for him, et cetera, et cetera. But nowhere in his mind does what you just said come into play.

PHILLIP: And he made a statement to that effect just tonight on the verge of this indictment.

I do think, though, to Laura's point about who's going to take a backseat to Jack Smith, it feels to me like these indictments, the Michigan one against the fake electors, the Jack Smith case, this one, they have their lanes. I mean, when you listen to the Michigan officials, what they're talking about are very specific Michigan laws on the books in Michigan to protect against election fraud, tampering with voting machines, things of that nature.

And so we'll see what the Georgia case looks like. But there's a reason that our system, especially our federal election system, is actually very decentralized. That used to be something that Republicans were very proud of. And that decentralized system is going to create a lane here for Fani Willis to look specifically at the state of Georgia, the laws on those books, and charge more detailed crimes. Because reading the Jack Smith indictment, it's a pretty broad brush because they're dealing with federal crimes. In the state of Georgia, I think you're going to be getting at a much more granular level.

And that's why I don't think there's going to be as much conflict as people might think about these different cases, as Laura --

TAPPER: Laura, can they -- when Jack Smith sees what Fani Willis's grand jury has found, can he ask for that evidence for his case? Is that something that can be done? Do they share like that?

COATES: I mean, you get a no to 100 percent of questions you don't ask, Jake Tapper. And so perhaps he, in fact, will ask for that. He would be able to, if it extends and there is some basis to extend his own jurisdiction into Georgia. And, remember, he did name specifically Georgia as one of the different states in the indictment. I would foresee an opportunity for him to solicit it.

However, remember, there was already a conflict and attention between the January 6th committee, congressional committee. People can become very possessive of their information because they might fear that, well, obviously there's a federal indictment that's looming, people might want to clam up. If your trial might go before mine, I have an interest as a prosecutor to ensure that whatever you say in that trial, does not undermine my case fatally.

And so there might be a bit of attention there. But is he entitled to ask for it? Yes. Shall he receive it? Who knows?

TAPPER: Jamie, do you think this fourth indictment presumably will do any damage to the Trump brand within Republican circles, just from your take on having covered Republican politics for so long?


JAMIE GANGEL, CNN SPECIAL CORRESPONDENT: We have not seen it yet. Look, Jared Kushner once said about Donald Trump that he hijacked the Republican Party. I would say, from what we've seen, much of the Republican Party was waiting to be hijacked by Donald Trump, and they have not let go yet.

Elected officials, how many opportunities did they have, from Mitch McConnell, Kevin McCarthy, Lindsay Graham? They could have all stopped. They did for a moment after January 6th, and they said what they saw, but that's not where their power was. That wasn't where campaign fundraising was. That wasn't how they were going to get re- elected.

PHILLIP: Let's not let Mitch McConnell off the hook on this one, because he let Trump continue with these election lines well into December, because he didn't want it to interfere with the Georgia Senate races that were still unfolding, the runoff.

And people in Republican circles were basically like, well, he's just going to drop it. The Georgia runoff was basically a couple of days before January 6th. There were a lot of Republicans who let Trump go on this journey, doing the damage that he did to the country in the process for political reasons, and they were upfront about that.

Many of them thought, oh, he would just give it up and go home and take his ball and go down to Mar-a-Lago. That didn't happen. And I think that there is accountability that needs to be there to for that. That's in the public record. It's out there. We lived through it. They could have said something on a day after the election, and they didn't.

BORGER: The truth is they're not that different from Donald Trump. It's all about self-interests. Donald Trump cares not about the Republican Party but about self-interest and his political future. And the Republicans who made their choice, made the choice to care about their political self interest, which they think, and many continue to think to this day, is still tied to Donald Trump.

TAPPER: I should point out, according to Ben Cayman's (ph) on Twitter, Donald Trump is now under indictment in every National League East city other than Philadelphia, assuming that the home of the Braves is also delivering an indictment this evening. Anderson?

COOPER: Jake, thanks so much. I want to go back to CNN's Sara Murray, who is outside the courthouse in Atlanta. Sara, what are you hearing, if anything?

MURRAY: Well, Anderson, we're still sort of in this waiting game. We are waiting for the clerk's office to process and make public these indictments today. Again, we previously reported that this grand jury that was convening handed up ten indictments today.

We don't know who is named in those indictments. We don't know the substance of those indictments. And, again, we know that they heard a lot of evidence. They heard this election interference case regarding former President Donald Trump and his allies.

It's also possible, though, that they heard some of the regular grab bag of cases before they moved into this Trump case today, that they heard armed robberies, that they heard murders, that they heard that sort of thing.

So, we are still waiting to see what the substance of these indictments is. After that process plays out, which, again, we were told could take an hour, which has now passed, could take multiple hours. We are expecting to hear from Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis. She is expected to make remarks about this case.

But, again, I think that the D.A.'s office wants to be careful about making ensure that these indictments are fully processed before they put her in front of a camera to talk about what may have happened with this grand jury today, Anderson.

COOPER: But just to be clear, based on what you said that there were other cases that they heard, when you said that the grand jury had returned ten indictments, is it possible that some of those indictments are on other cases?

MURRAY: Yes. So, that's what we are waiting to find out is if it's possible that this grand jury -- again, this grand jury has been meeting Mondays and Tuesdays for weeks, and the normal cases, they hear murders, armed robbery, that kind of thing.

So, what we don't know is if they may have heard a couple of those kinds of cases before they turned their attention to the Trump election interference case. So, it is possible that when you get through that stack of indictments, that some of them are involved in totally unrelated cases to Donald Trump and his allies.

Again, we're waiting to get more information on that and we're waiting to see how many of these indictments could pertain to the former president, to his associates, to these efforts to try to overturn the 2020 election in Georgia.

COOPER: And we're still expecting Fani Willis to speak, if, in fact, these indictments are related to the former president in her case?

MURRAY: Yes, we are expecting her to speak this evening. And, look, we know that the judge stayed in the courtroom late, that they kept the courthouse open late because they were waiting for this grand jury to hand something back in the election interference case. But look, this is the District Attorney who has obviously come under sharp criticism from Trump supporters. She's come under sharp criticism from Trump's attorneys and part of that criticism has been about the comments she has made publicly throughout the course of this case.


So, I think when you're at a moment like this where the Grand Jury has handed up indictments, if you're in the District Attorney's shoes, you want to be careful about what you say and when you say it and you want to make sure that you have a document that's been processed, stamped through the clerk's office, that the press is able to, you know, see, read, hold in their hands before you stand up there in front of the cameras, Anderson.

COOPER: All right, thanks so much. Let's go back to Kaitlan.

COLLINS: Thanks, Anderson. Back with Alyssa Farah Griffin, David Urban, and Van Jones. Alyssa, I want to just ask you about a comment that Trump made on the tarmac when he was in Iowa at the state fair over the weekend. You know, every time we talk about these indictments, we say Trump and his allies, you know, the state party officials, White House officials that used to work for campaign officials that were all involved in this effort to try to overturn the election results in Georgia, and Trump was about his allies and if he's worried about their potential indictment.

And the quote he gave them was, "Many of the allies, I don't know because to be honest, we have so many allies, a lot of them, I don't know. So, I don't know exactly what you're talking about." I mean, when you see him say something like that, does that give you the sense that he's trying to distance himself from other people whose names could be in these indictments?

GRIFFIN: Absolutely. That's the sound of him, you know, backing the bus up over the potential Rudy Giuliani's, Mark Meadows's and others' who may come up in this indictment. And we shouldn't be surprised by that. I mean, this is the Donald Trump who instigated what we saw on January 6th.

And then, of course, has led a lot of those, you know, rioters and protesters serve jail time while he himself has skirted it. He is, he is, you know him well enough, Kaitlan, I do, too. It's about him and him only. I think in the other cases where he's also has co- conspirators, they should be prepared for him to throw them under the bus at any given moment if it means protecting himself.

COLLINS: And David Urban, I mean, he is running a campaign at this point. I mean, his campaign keeps accusing these prosecutors of election interference here, but he is very much still on the campaign trail. He's not doing as many rallies. A lot of that has to do, we're told, with the cost of those rallies. And we're seeing just the burn rate of the campaign cash and how that's intermingled with what he's using to pay for his legal fees, other people's legal fees. I mean, if you're running a reelection campaign, you're trying to be the Republican frontrunner, is that sustainable?

URBAN: Yeah, it's obviously a concern. That's been, you know, chatted about and talked about in a wide variety of circles. The last FEC reported somewhere around $40 million being spent on legal fees. And that's obviously money that's not going to grassroots organizing and, you know, get out to vote and knocking on doors registering Republicans. So, that is problem-some.

But I suspect that if pass is prologue that the former president will be able to keep raising money. He has lots of small dollar donors. The large money has eluded him in this race so far, but you know, it at some point those small dollar donors may get burned out. I think, you know, it's interesting though to, you know, what Sara Murray was talking about earlier in the segment about, you know, Fani Willis and being very meticulous and precise.

You know, we saw this potentially, this indictment posted on the court's website, you know, an hour beforehand and then they had go out and walk it back. And I tell, you if you go look at the, you know, on Twitter social media and other places right now, you kind of conserve and others are saying there's a conspiracy within the conspiracy. They'll use those kind of things to fundraise off moving forward and fill the coffers pretty quickly. COLLINS: So, what you're saying essentially is that even if this is

not something Trump wants to be indicted to have another legal issue, I mean, they're certainly, I mean, they're already putting out a statement they have not yet been notified about any indictment tonight.

URBAN: You're right, I mean, Kaitlan, you know, you see if you just take a quick gander through social media, what the posts are mostly about are not about the, you know, the -- no one's seen the indictment actually, but about this, the 10, you know, the 10 counts that were posted on the website hours before everything and court having to come out and the district attorney's office had to come out and say, well, that's not what it really looks like.

And let's see if it is what it really looks like. Maybe that's what's going on right now. They're trying to make sure that it doesn't exactly mimic the document that was earlier posted, right? But those are the kind of things that are going to help raise money from the base moving forward.

GRIFFIN: But I think, big picture, Kaitlan, I mean, and David Urban knows this as well, is listen, there is not a voter who was with Donald Trump in 2016 but then left him in 2020 for Joe Biden but after four indictments is like, you know what, I might go back to Donald Trump. That voter doesn't exist. So, it's stunning to me at this juncture in the Republican primary that so much money and so many polls are going in favor of Donald Trump when in reality, he's not strong head-to-head to Joe Biden.


I mean, we've seen the polling. Listen, Joe Biden's weak, as well. But if you're looking about how Republicans could put up the strongest candidate to beat Joe Biden, Donald Trump is not the answer to that. You cannot litigate four indictments in a general election and expect to win.

COLLINS: Well, Van Jones, I mean, when you hear what Jeff Duncan was saying earlier, calling on Republican senators, Republican governors to come out and call Trump out, you know, this call to action to his party. Really, I mean, we have not seen that has made a difference when there are Republicans who will speak out again.

I mean I talked to Brian Kemp who is one of the people that Trump personally called and targeted and tried to make sure he didn't get reelected here, and he still didn't rule out voting for Trump if he's a Republican nominee. And if he is someone who's saying that I mean you can imagine with other Republicans who have not been personally targeted and victimized by Donald Trump would say.

JONES: Yeah, well, it's a remarkable thing and I think that we're gonna have to get our heads in a different position here because this is the campaign. When you're running for president, what do you want? You want to be able to raise a ton of money. He's raising a ton of money. What you want to be able to do is dominate every news cycle. He's dominating every news cycle. What you want to be able to do is to shut off the oxygen for every other candidate so they can't get any attention.

Vivek's out here rapping like Eminem, just trying to get attention. This is the campaign. I think you got to understand, is this unusual? Is it weird? Yes, it's weird, but I don't think Donald Trump is going to bed at night, you know, crying Oh my God, my campaign's in trouble. This is the campaign, and it's going to be the campaign going forward because you're going to have indictment after indictment, arraignment after arraignment, hearing after hearing.

And so, I think the political class has to understand that's where we are. I think his opponents have to understand that that's where we are. But I don't think this is hurting him at all to get the nomination now. People can argue and debate about whether or not it's going to hurt him in the general election. It really depends. If the economy's good, it'll crush him. If the economy's terrible, he'll skate by. But this is the campaign, right now.

COLLINS: David Urban, I mean, Thomas Massie of Kentucky, he said all DeSantis needed was when everyone was exposing his issues and looking at them, was that maybe an indictment would help him. And he was kidding, but not really, maybe.

URBAN: No, not really and your point's well-taken earlier, Kaitlan, about, you know, Governor Kemp. Can you imagine somebody -- I mean, I know Jeff Duncan's not going to vote for Trump, but there are so many people in that boat. You interviewed last week or the week before. You had the former attorney general on who said, you know, he'll jump off that bridge when he comes to it, whether he has to vote for Donald Trump or Joe Biden.

And I think that's, you know, it is really -- people need to sit back and think, you know, remember what the current president says repeatedly, don't judge me against the Almighty, judge me against the alternative. And I think people are taking him seriously. I think Republicans are saying, look, we don't really like Donald Trump. We may not think he's the best candidate, but we sure don't like Biden and Kamala Harris. We sure don't want those two in the White House anymore.

And I think that's what you're seeing. That's what's playing out here. And just as Van, you know, and others in, you know, poll after poll reportedly say we don't want Donald Trump and Joe Biden against each other, I think if both candidates decide to go, if Trump went away, Biden would go away. If Biden went away, Trump would go away. You know, we'd be able to turn the page. I think until that happens, Jeff Duncan is not going to get, kind of, you know, mourning in America and bucolic Republican Party that he's hoping for.

COLLINS: I mean, Alyssa, what do you, I mean, you used to work inside the Trump White House. I mean, you saw this happen up close, Mark Meadows, Donald Trump, all of this. I mean, do you think that there's any chance any of that, that criticism from even people who did work for Trump, who certainly were loyal to his politics at least, would break through to any Republican, any Republican voters?

GRIFFIN: Listen, it's been, it's been two years and I've been shouting loudly and I'm not sure it has broken through in a real way. Listen, this is the reality. We live in a split screen in America. You know, if you're on another network right now, you would basically think Hunter Biden is actually the president and that his corruption and things he's done wrong are the greatest threat to American democracy. That's just simply a fact. I've got real issues with Hunter Biden. He should be investigated.

And then you've got not a lot of facts being shared about what Donald Trump actually did to try to destroy our democracy. I don't think the scary part is behind us. I don't think January 6th is, you know, the end of it with Donald Trump. I think if he's re-elected again, he would tear down our institutions. I think he would put deeply unserious and dangerous people in positions of power. I don't think that we take that deeply enough.

And the scariest part to me, by the way, is I think a lot of the people running for president against him know that. They just don't want to say it. And they're just hoping that something happens that keeps him from being the nominee and gives them a chance. But like, wake up, it's August, 2023. Nobody is going to beat Trump to the nominee short of some kind of a miracle or taking him on directly.

COLLINS: Alyssa Farah Griffin, David Urban, and Van Jones. Anderson, back to you.

COOPER: Thanks so much. Back with us tonight is Michael Moore, a former U.S. Attorney and a Senior Legal Analyst, Elie Honig, Former Assistant U.S. Attorney. So, Elie, first of all, I do think it's again important to point out, we know the Grand Jury has returned indictments and we had 10 indictments that were talked about.


That does not -- I think we need to reiterate this, that does not mean that they are all necessarily related to this case.

HONIG: Exactly, Anderson. So, there's really two possibilities here. It could be that there are 10 different charging documents, 10 different indictments, and each of them charges some different individual or group of individuals, all of whom relate to the effort to steal the election in Georgia. But it also could be that there's just one big indictment naming all the defendants in the election interference case and then nine other indictments that have nothing to do with the election.

And if you're wondering at home, well, how could they possibly have indicted 10 cases in one day, nine other ones? It's because a normal case, a normal drug case or assault case, you can present that as a prosecutor to a grand jury and get an indictment in 10, 15 minutes. So, if they had a couple hours this morning where they were hearing other cases, that's how this could play out.

And it's important to note, if there is a racketeering charge here, the whole point of a prosecutor bringing a racketeering charge, is you get to charge everybody all at once and explain to the jury, here's the whole deal. And so, it wouldn't really make much sense to split up a racketeering charge into different indictments. So, we're waiting to see, but those are the possibilities here.

COOPER: And, Michael, will you just talk a little bit about what happened earlier where a document was put online by the court? Because obviously it's now become part of this story and for those who are skeptical about this process here in Georgia, it certainly adds fuel to that fire.

MOORE: Sure. So, it's not uncommon for a prosecutor to have communications with the clerk's office. That's typically how things get scheduled and trials get scheduled and documents are sometimes filed. And so, there's nothing particularly unusual about that.

The question came down because there was a document that showed up on the clerk's website, apparently, that listed some charges for the former president. And it spelled out specific charges saying that he had been indicted for those offenses. We don't know if that was a draft that was erroneously sent from the DA's office. We don't know if it was a draft prepared by somebody in the clerk's office erroneously.

But what we do know is that you really can't overstate how big a screw up it was, really because of what we just heard. And that is that it provides fodder and gasoline for the fire of people who want to talk about that this is some type of conspiracy or look, the Grand Jury never even considered it. It was a done deal before this ever happened.

So, this document that appeared, this mysterious document, was up for a little bit and then taken down. The problem is that some folks were able to get screenshots of it. So, now there'll be a comparison between those sort of administrative journal type entries on the document and what actually shows up in the indictment if they match. You know, if it's a tit for tat and they match exactly, you know, it's going to, again, incite some folks.

COOPER: Michael, I've heard you say it's possible that one or more defendants could actually ask for this state case to be transferred to federal court. Can you explain that?

MOORE: There's a provision under the federal statutes that allows for a federal official to have their case transferred. If they're charged in a state case, have that criminal case transferred and heard in the federal court. What's unique here is that the -- by all accounts, and again, we have not seen the indictment, but that this indictment will envelope and charge conduct against Trump for conduct he committed while he was President of the United States. So, you've got a sitting state district attorney bringing state charges against a former president for conduct while they were a sitting president, actually serving as President of the United States.

That may very well under the federal statute give a basis to move the case. They tried this in the New York case. That was different because remember at that time we were talking about, did he hide this information in his campaign report so that it didn't get out in the 2016 campaign as it related to certain payments? This conduct though, he actually was serving as President. So, there may be a move to do that. The benefit of that is that it

expands the jury pool that expands, you know, some efforts that the former president may have as it relates to move in appeals expeditions through their federal appeals system. But the biggest advantage, as I mentioned, is that it takes the jury selection outside of Fulton County, which is, you know, is a majority Democratic County and spreads a little bit around into other parts of the states. So, I wouldn't be surprised to see that motion is certainly a good motion to file, what the court does with it, I don't know but it gives a grand appeal, as well.

COOPER: And Elie, when this -- what -- I don't know if it's a screw up snafu whatever this document was put online -- what -- how serious do you think it is?

HONIG: Yeah, it's obviously a screw up. It's a substantial screw up. I promise you somebody at the clerk's office tonight feels absolutely horrible about it. I should say though some of these conspiracy theories that are starting to emerge, there's really nothing to them.


Because as a prosecutor, if you have a big indictment, a long indictment, there would be nothing at all abnormal about sending an advance copy to the clerk saying, hey, this may be coming your way. It's pending. The grand jury's actual vote. Don't post it, please, until we tell you that the grand jury has voted.

But you would do that as a convenience to move things along. There's nothing illicit or irregular about that. But again, the fact that it was posted online is a true error by the clerk's office and a regrettable one because, as we can see, this is giving birth to really some far-fetched conspiracy theories.

COLLINS: All right, Michael, Ellie, thanks so much. Jake.

TAPPER: Yeah, Anderson, thanks so much. Let's go to CNN's Paula Reid at the courthouse who has some new information about the indictments. Paula, we know the ten indictments were returned this evening by this Grand Jury. Can you give us any more information?

PAULA REID, CNN SENIOR LEGAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: Yeah, Jake, our colleagues Sara Murray and Zach Cohen reporting from inside the courthouse right now that at least one of these 10 indictments is related to the election probe. We're also alerting that we expect that this indictment will be unsealed shortly and then, of course, we will have that press conference with the District Attorney Fani Willis much later than we expected but let me tell you, the Fulton County courthouse in downtown Atlanta here, it is up and running.

They are doing the best they can to accommodate all of the interest that is generated in this. I think one of the best things about this case right now about this investigation, the cameras that were in the courtroom, allowing people to see this process. Something that happens every day, many times a day, even just in this courthouse alone, seeing the judge sign the indictment, seeing the clerk take it. She gave a brief interview with reporters earlier and she said, look,

I've been doing this a long time. I'm very experienced. I'm qualified. This is interesting to all of us, but she said this is what I do every single day. So, democracy, criminal justice, all on display down here in Fulton County, and hopefully we'll be able to will be getting this indictment unsealed anytime now.

TAPPER: All right, Paula, down there in Fulton County. Thank you so much. Joining us now to talk more about this, Former Trump Attorney Tim Parlatore. He now represents former NYPD Commissioner Bernard Kerik, who was pardoned by Donald Trump when he was president. Mr. Parlatore, good to see you. As always, you represent Bernie Kerik. Can you bring us up to speed about what role he might be playing when it comes to any of these indictments or cases?

TIM PARLATORE, FORMER TRUMP ATTORNEY: As far as the Georgia case is concerned, he doesn't really have any role. I mean, he was kind of tangential to the whole efforts in Georgia. He has not been given any notice of anything from the district attorney's office, so he's pretty much uninvolved. He and I did meet with the special counsel's office last week, though, and, yeah, he was debriefed on all of the efforts that he and the Giuliani team took in D.C. as part of the election investigation.

TAPPER: Did he testify before this grand jury in Georgia?

PARLATORE: No, he did not.

TAPPER: When you say he was interviewed, Mr. Kerik, by Jack Smith, was that in front of a grand jury or that was just with prosecutors? It was just with prosecutors and a couple of FBI agents. What is your response to the news this evening that your former client Donald Trump, it looks as though he, I mean we haven't confirmed it yet, but by all intents and purposes it seems that within minutes we'll be reporting that he has been indicted.

PARLATORE: Well, I mean, obviously, I like to read it first to be able to fully understand what they're talking about. It is something that, you know, just based on the information that we do know, I have a lot of questions about. Yeah, I certainly have questions about whether this is something that's going to get removed to federal court. You know, I have read the decision from Judge Hellerstein denying the removal of the Manhattan case, and when you read that and you then apply that exact same reasoning to Georgia, seems like a pretty rock- solid case to remove so that's one thing to consider.

The other thing to consider is that a lot of what's been reported that Fani Willis was looking at seems to be outside of her jurisdiction. Yeah, she is a county district attorney, she does not have jurisdiction in the state house, she does not have jurisdiction in other counties.

So, ultimately if the allegations here are things that happened within the state house, you know calls to the Secretary of State, things like that, that's something that the attorney general of the state of Georgia is the one who has the sole jurisdiction over and if he didn't specifically delegate that down to her, she may run into a problem, you know, jurisdictionally right from the beginning of whether she exceeded her authority as a county district attorney. So, there's a lot of interesting issues here.

TAPPER: Yeah and obviously we all await the actual indictment to respond to.


A lot of the issues about Georgia, we saw a play out in real time and we saw because Brad Raffensperger in the Secretary of State's office, somebody in that office recorded the phone call of Donald Trump calling him and asking him to find, quote, unquote, find 11,780 votes, one more than Joe Biden's margin of victory over him. We know from reporting of the fraudulent electors, we know that from a judge's ruling last fall that after John Eastman's emails were obtained, that Donald Trump was told that information in an affidavit, in a sworn statement, was false.

John Eastman told him the information in the lawsuit was false, that in the sworn statement, he was about to sign was false, and yet he signed it anyway and turned it and sent it to Georgia. There's so many things we saw play out in real time. And I'm wondering, what you think about a criminal case that might be built on some of these -- some of the evidence that the public's already aware of?

PARLATORE: Sure and yeah, as you know, I'm a criminal lawyer, I'm not part of any campaign, and so, I don't really look at things from the perspective of, you know, was this a good idea, but rather is this something that somebody should go to jail for? And I think a lot of that's going to come down to criminal intent and, you know, the difference between doing something that may have been ill-advised, doing something that may have, you know, may have been, you know, careless or an error or something that was an intent to deceive, you know, a real corrupt intent. And I think that, you know, from the Jack Smith case to this case is really going to come down to that element of intent.

TAPPER: Well, I mean I'd -- one of the instances I just told you about is John Eastman who certainly is one of the last people in the ride or die vehicle with Donald Trump, telling Donald Trump according to this judge, Judge Walton, this information is not true. You can't sign this document and Donald Trump signs it anyway. And that is in so many ways emblematic of the entire series of lies that Donald Trump told so many people, so many Republicans, so many Trump-supporting Republicans, whether Bill Barr or top officials, top Republicans in Michigan, top officials, Republican officials in Georgia, and on and on, telling him, no, all of this is incorrect.

His deputy attorney general going line by line by line with every false conspiracy theory that Donald Trump would tell him, saying, no, we looked into that and this is the truth. At one point, is there just a refusal to acknowledge the truth indicative of something beyond just well, he believed it?

PARLATORE: Sure, I mean there is the concept of conscious avoidance and if everything as you just said --

COOPER: I'm sorry to interrupt you for one second. I just want to bring the news. The indictment has been unsealed and CNN can report that Donald Trump has been indicted by this Grand Jury in Fulton County. The news this evening, a Grand Jury in Fulton County, which is the Atlanta, Georgia area, has indicted former President Donald Trump. This is the fourth indictment of Donald Trump since he left the presidency.

I'm sorry, go ahead and answer the question just to bring viewers up to speed. When is an ignorance so willful that it becomes not defendable?

PARLATORE: Ultimately, that's going to be a question for the jury to decide. And, you know, I would be interested to see what evidence they have of the things you just mentioned. You know, I mean, one of the things that came out when Mr. Kerik and I met with the investigators, you know, a few days ago was that Bill Barr had had U.S. Attorney McSwain in Philadelphia double check some of these numbers and had found some errors. But the problem is, as Kerik then looked at him and said, you know, that's nice. Why didn't anybody tell us? Why was that never communicated if that was true?

And so, you know, it's going to be an interesting situation of what evidence do they have to show that people did go through those things, what did they communicate that was, you know, potentially ignored, who did they communicate it to. All of those things are really things that are going to have to go before the jury so the jury can make a decision as to whether there was criminal intent and whether there was, you know, that conscious avoidance that we mentioned a moment ago.

TAPPER: All right, Mr. Parlatore, thank you so much. Appreciate your time this evening. And if you're just joining us, I want to bring you up to speed.


An Atlanta-based grand jury indicted former President Donald Trump on state charges, stemming from his efforts to overturn Joe Biden's victory over him in the November 2020 election in Georgia. This is a historic. This is the fourth time Donald Trump has been indicted. Let me bring in Kaitlan Collins right now. Kaitlan. I'm not sure if you have the indictment unsealed.


TAPPER: Is Caitlin there? And tell us what is in this indictment. Is it just of Donald Trump or are there other individuals?

COLLINS: It's of other individuals. Obviously, it's a 98-page indictment. It's going to take us a minute to read through. But Jake, one of those important parts, of course, is not just Trump's name is on this, but it's the others that are on this. And so, we've got Donald John Trump, Rudy Giuliani, John Eastman. Mark Meadows is on here, Jake. Ken Chesebro, that's another unindicted co-conspirator in the previous indictment. Jeffrey Clark, that's the former Justice Department official that wanted to be named the Acting Attorney General, nearly did. Jenna Ellis, the Trump attorney. Ray Smith, another attorney. Robert Cheeley, Mike Roman, that's the Trump campaign official who was handling fake electors in that time period, Jake, from the election to -- through December. He's someone who's also been part of the -- he had met with investigators in Jack Smith's investigation. His name is on here. And David James Shafer, that, I believe, is the top former Republican official. He was in a campaign fundraising role that is also part of this and was someone who was part of that fake-elector scheme involved in that.

And so, those are the names that I'm reading off this sheet right now that we see. Several different charges. We're waiting to see which ones, of course, apply to which people. But I mean, the first name that stood out to me, a lot of them are obvious, but Mark Meadows being on there.

TAPPER: That's fascinating.

COLLINS: Obviously, he was Trump's -- yeah, Trump's Chief of Staff at the time.

TAPPER: Because what, if it's the White House Chief of Staff, and one of the things that's interesting about that is that there was no suggestion in the federal indictment of Donald Trump and six unnamed co-conspirators, four of whom at least are in this indictment as well and named. That's Giuliani, Eastman, Chesebro and Clark. But Mark Short, Vice President Pence's Chief of Staff told me that Mark Meadows, Trump's Chief of Staff of the White House, was the ringleader of the whole conspiracy. And he suspected that because Meadows was not a co-conspirator in the federal indictment, that he was cooperating. So, it is interesting, indeed, that Mark Meadows is indicted --


TAPPER: -- in this state indictment.

COLLINS: Yeah, and he was the one who, with Georgia in particular, Jake, he was the one who went down, he was making phone calls to Georgia officials. He was the one who went down to Georgia to visit an audit, an election audit site. He was the one who was on the phone when Trump called Brad Raffensperger in that infamous call just a few days before January 6th. He wasn't actually in the room with Trump, but he was listening in another room when the White House switchboard called him in.

He is someone that Georgia officials, when you talk to them, they echo what Mark Short told you they say that he is someone who was arranging a lot of the calls, a big part of this. He is someone who fought testifying in this as did others when they were initially investigating this over the last, you know, two and a half years.

So, it's just really notable to see -- to see his name in here to see other Trump campaign officials. People like Mike Roman who's not a household name, but he is someone who was working on day-to-day parts of this -- he was emailing out about the fake electors. TAPPER: So, one other thing about this. This is a breaking news story. And I think you saw the first page of the 98- page. There are actually nine other individuals, or eight other individuals, 19 total, I believe, including Donald Trump. So, just the full list.

COLLINS: That's not even the full list.

TAPPER: Yeah, what you gave us was not the fullest. There's another page. But so, I'm just going to go through the whole page again. President Trump, obviously, Rudy Giuliani, John Eastman, the attorney, Mark Meadows, the former White House Chief of Staff, Kenneth Chesebro, the Wisconsin campaign lawyer of the Wisconsin political operative, yes that's right, a Wisconsin political operative named Chesebro. Jeff Clark, the former Justice Department official. Jenna Ellis, former Republican National Committee lawyer. Ray Smith, Robert Cheeley, Mike Roman, and David Shafer, all of whom you mentioned before.

Next page, Shawn Micah Tresher Still, Stephen Cliffgard Lee, Harisson William Prescott Floyd, Trevian Kutti, or Kutti, I apologize, Sidney Powell -- Sidney Powell, who Donald Trump himself referred to behind closed doors as crazy with her conspiracy theories. Cathleen Latham, Scott Hall, and Misty Hampton, AKA Emily Misty Hayes. Do you know who that is?

COLLINS: She was the -- she's actually a very interesting one.