Return to Transcripts main page
What We Know with Max Foster
King Charles Arrives In U.S. For State Visit; Suspect Charged With Attempt to Assassinate President Trump; U.S. Justice Department Gives Briefing On D.C. Gala Shooting; Trumps Want Kimmel Fired For "Expectant Widow" Remarks. Aired 3-4p ET
Aired April 27, 2026 - 15:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[15:00:32]
LYNDA KINKADE, CNN HOST: An update on Saturday's shooting at the White House correspondents dinner and the king of England arrives on U.S. soil.
I'm Lynda Kinkade, in for Max Foster and this is WHAT WE KNOW. A busy hour ahead.
Britain's King Charles has just landed at Joint Base Andrews in Maryland. This is for the start of a four-day state visit to the United States.
At the same time, we're waiting to hear from U.S. attorney general and the U.S. attorney for Washington, D.C. They're due to give a press conference
after the suspect in Saturday's shooting at the White House Correspondents' Dinner was charged with attempting to kill President Trump.
We'll bring you both of those as they happen.
But we begin with the king. Britain's King Charles and Queen Camilla, just arriving moments ago for a state visit to the United States.
I want to welcome to the program, Bidisha Mamata, a broadcaster and royal watcher, and Leslie Vinjamuri.
Good to have you both with us.
Bidisha, I want to start with you. This is King Charles's first state visit to the U.S. It's happening just days after that serious incident at the
White House Correspondents' Dinner. You've said you were actually surprised that this state visit is going ahead.
Why do you think it went ahead?
BIDISHA MAMATA, BROADCASTER & ROYAL WATCHER: I think that so many protocols were in place that it would have been harder to just cancel and
reschedule. I think that clearly the security services worked very, very closely on making sure this is absolutely safe. And I have complete and
total trust in them. And this is so symbolic that it would have been even more symbolic to cancel
KINKADE: You've described King Charles as quite politicized in and in fact, that, I'm wondering how this might shape his visit and the relations
between the U.S. and the U.K. right now.
MAMATA: Well, I think that he's been in meetings with his own advisors, and they've told him to dial back on his idiosyncrasy. He's very
opinionated in his own way.
But let's not forget his core values. And let's not forget that he is the son of Queen Elizabeth II, the great soft power jewel in the crown of
Britain. She was an extraordinary diplomat herself.
So I think Charles is going to talk very pointedly about peace, friendship, harmony, accord, permanence, and looking towards the future
KINKADE: I think, realistically, King Charles can stay above politics, especially when he makes that -- that address to Congress?
MAMATA: Realistically, you know what? I think he can't because despite being an extremely dutiful man, he is also such a character. And we know
that he is a man of passionate emotions in this regard. He and President Trump are not very, very dissimilar. I don't think he'll be able to hold
back from making a few barbs, but maybe that's exactly what's needed, because the criticism that there has been of Charles going over to the USA
is that this somehow seems to endorse anything that's happening politically.
I think the opposite might actually happen. He might be able to pull back to add a little bit of coolness, to take some heat out of the situation in,
in a way that is so charming and so very typical of him.
KINKADE: Yeah. I want to ask you more about that, because you have noted that President Trump and the British prime minister, Keir Starmer, have
very different styles. They have very limited chemistry. And given the president's recent criticism of allies, particularly when considering the
Iran war. Do you think the king can potentially bridge that -- that gap, that divide?
MAMATA: I love the phrase limited chemistry. That is extremely diplomatically put. I think that is completely true.
Starmer is a very interesting character. He's careful. He's a technocrat. He's a lawyer by profession and also by temperament. And so, I think that
the two of them find each other uncharming. He has been very firm in not being dragged into any wars or any kind of military action.
[15:05:00]
And for the first time, he's actually shown a little bit of backbone. So, at the same time as being part of this relationship with the U.S., that
clearly isn't working. He's getting back a little bit of good opinion amongst the British public. I think Charles is going to have to be the
connecting factor here.
KINKADE: And you've also mentioned, and we've discussed it many times on air about President Trump's love of pageantry and ceremony. How much does
that actually translate into diplomatic influence when it comes to this particular four-day trip between King Charles and the -- and President
Trump?
MAMATA: I think it's enormously significant. So, there are going to be different legs of the trip and the Washington leg is very, very ceremonial.
With his military base. There are addresses by the heads of state to Congress, to the cabinet, to assemble dignitaries. It's only when we get
out of the capital area, out of Washington, that we go to New York on the next day, and then it becomes a little bit looser, a bit more arts and
culture.
But I think that President Trump and King Charles both really enjoy the trappings of state. The long dinners, the formality, the fact that you do
have to talk a lot, but you don't really need to say that much. You're not supposed to reveal a lot about yourself.
You like to go down the line and look at all the shining lancets and uniforms, forms and what have you. They both like that they have that in
common with each other. Maybe that's what they'll begin to talk about.
KINKADE: And just on the Iran war, President Trump has heavily criticized allies for, you know, not getting involved, not coming to the aid of the
U.S. You've raised the question about whether this visit could be seen as legitimizing another country's foreign policy. Is that a real risk here?
MAMATA: That's what the criticism has been. And I do think that the British public are very 50/50 about this trip. I have to say, as a
political analyst, that I don't see King Charles going over to the U.S. for four days as somehow endorsing military action simply because king Charles
is a very known quantity amongst the British. We have grown up with his mother, and we've grown up with him in this long, long, dutiful
apprenticeship that he did.
I can't imagine him sort of elbowing president Trump and saying, it's okay, we're on your side. Really. I don't think he feels that he was born in the
immediate aftermath of the Second World War, a very, very devastating time. He knows the cost of war on ordinary people's lives. So, no, I think he'll
actually be very careful himself to not say or do anything that looks like an endorsement. He'll probably stay away from that altogether
KINKADE: Bidisha Mamata, great to get your analysis. Really appreciate your time today. Thank you.
MAMATA: Thank you.
KINKADE: We want to turn to another top story this hour. The man who burst through security lines and fired a gun at the White House Correspondents'
Dinner on Saturday, has been charged with attempting to assassinate Donald Trump.
Cole Thomas Allen had his first court appearance just a short time ago. Three charges were filed against him, including attempted assassination of
the president. Sources tell CNN that Allen had written a note expressing anger at the Trump administration, and the president.
Katelyn Polantz is standing by outside the court -- courthouse right now and joins us live.
Katelyn, good to have you with us.
So, we've now got these formal charges against the suspect at involved in the shooting at the White House Correspondents' Dinner. Take us through the
attempt to assassinate the president charge and, just today's court appearance by the suspect.
KATELYN POLANTZ, CNN CRIME AND JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: Yeah. Today is the first time that Cole Allen was in court facing these charges. And these are
only the initial charges at this time. They could change.
As of now, they are enough to keep him behind bars for the next couple of days until another hearing can take place, where both sides would argue
whether he should be able to stay behind bars or not until he awaits trial. But the major charge here, the one that really is the cornerstone of
whatever proceedings Cole Allen will be facing going forward, appears to be attempt to assassinate the president of the United States. That is a charge
that is quite significant. It is a charge of potential terrorism. It is a charge that also carries the possibility of a life sentence in prison. If
he were to be convicted.
And so far, we have just a few bullet points of what federal investigators have found so far. There is a seven page court document at this time that
prosecutors have put into court, are arguing about why he deserves to be charged with these three federal crimes at this time, that this document,
it has the basic facts that he transported two firearms allegedly from California on a train ride across the country to Washington, had checked in
to the Washington Hilton, the capital Hilton Hotel, which he had booked weeks in advance and then had scheduled that alleged manifesto, that letter
to his friends and family saying what he wanted to do assassinate members of the administration, that he had scheduled that to send at about 8:40
p.m. on Saturday night.
Now, in court today, they didn't go over all of that fine detail, and we are very likely to get much more detail about why the Justice Department
feels so strongly that this is a not just a general attempt to assassinate a federal official or federal officials charge. It is about attempting to
assassinate the president of the United States himself. In court, they named that specifically attempting to assassinate the president of the
United States, Donald J. Trump is what one of the prosecutors said.
But we're going to see very likely in the days upcoming, more about what prosecutors are finding and what Cole Allen may have said to lead to that
specific charge in court. He's a very tall man, and he's also a man who was very intent, following both the documents and looking at the people in the
courtroom, including the U.S. attorney herself, Jeanine Pirro.
Back to you.
KINKADE: All right. Katelyn, if you can stand by for us. I just want to bring in Kristen Holmes. Kristen Holmes is at the White House.
And, Kristen, this is now being described as the third major assassination attempt against President Donald Trump. We've heard the White House press
secretary blaming Democratic rhetoric for this situation, for the political violence we're seeing. What else is she saying?
KRISTEN HOLMES, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Yeah, she, of course, mentioned Democratic incendiary rhetoric, but did not mention any
of President Trump or his own administration officials' rhetoric, which we know at times has also been incredibly incendiary. She also called on
Democrats to fund the Department of Homeland Security. Just a note that the Secret Service falls under the Department of Homeland Security.
So those were the agents, the officers that were there on the ground. And there were a lot of questions about how the security went into this event,
the planning. And she stuck by this support that we've heard from President Trump when it comes to the Secret Service, saying that all of the levers
worked. She said that there was never any conversation about a potential designated survivor. However, they did talk about continuity of government
going into this and that there were many cabinet officials who weren't present at the dinner.
Of course, we know at least the top three most consequential Republican figures who would be in the line of succession were at that dinner --
President Trump, J.D. Vance, as well as Speaker Johnson. Then she also said that while they did stand by everything that the Secret Service had done,
that they were always going to leave the door open for potential change.
One thing to keep in mind here, Lynda, is that we're going into a year in which we expect to see President Trump at huge events across the country as
a celebration of America 250. These events have been in the works for the last year, and there is concern for the president's safety, for cabinet
officials, safety, but also for the safety of the American public. Just a reminder, when the Secret Service is at an event, they are there to protect
their protectees. They are not there to protect the public.
And of course, the public is going to feel wary if there are all these events that we see in which the president is put in harm's way, do they
want to also be put in harm's way? So that's an ongoing conversation that were hearing is happening at the White House, what this is going to look
like. But all in all, they stand by the Secret Service and what happened on Saturday night.
KINKADE: All right. Good to have you with us.
We're going to go straight to that press conference on this suspect charged with the attempt to kill the president. Let's listen in.
TODD BLANCHE, ACTING ATTORNEY GENERAL: That act, that horrible act was stopped because of the courage and professionalism of law enforcement. The
officers who responded without hesitation and did their jobs as they were trained to do. Secret Service agents promptly tackled and detained the
suspect, Cole Thomas Allen. The president and all the protectees and participants at the dinner were safe. One brave officer was injured and is
receiving care and has been released from the hospital.
I want to make this clear. This man was a floor above the ballroom with hundreds of federal agents between him and the president of the United
States. The Department of Justice approaches incidents like this with urgency and clarity of purpose. Violence has no place in civic life.
[15:15:01]
It cannot and will not be used to disrupt democratic institutions or intimidate those who serve them. And it certainly cannot continue to be
used against the president of the United States. We are investigating this matter fully. We will apply the law fairly, and we will ensure that
accountability is swift and certain.
But we also should recognize what did not happen. Law enforcement did not fail. They did exactly what they are trained to do.
This was not an accident. It was the result, as we know now, of preparation. But the men and women who protected us that night were
trained, professional and had an enduring commitment to the rule of law.
Today, the Department of Justice filed three federal charges in United States District Court against Cole Thomas Allen. The first count is
attempted assassination of the president of the United States. This count is punishable by up to life in prison.
The second count is interstate transportation of a firearm to commit a felony. This is punishable by up to 10 years in prison.
And the third count is discharge of a firearm during a crime of violence, which is punishable by a mandatory minimum term of imprisonment of 10
years, a maximum of life, and the ten years is consecutive to any other sentence imposed.
Just to go through very quickly. The timeline which many of you in this room already know, the defendant, Allen, made a hotel reservation at the
Washington Hilton for April 24th through April 26th. On April 21st of this year, he traveled by train from Los Angeles to Chicago, and then from
Chicago to Washington, D.C. On April 24th, he arrived in Washington, D.C. at approximately 1:00 in the afternoon and checked into the Washington
Hilton.
Approximately at 8:40 on the night of April 25th, Allen approached a security checkpoint on the terrace level of the hotel, which is again a
floor above where the dinner was taking place. He ran through the magnetometer, holding a long gun. As he did so, U.S. Secret Service
personnel assigned to the checkpoint heard a loud gunshot. One Secret Service officer was shot in the chest, but was wearing a ballistic vest
that worked.
This heroic officer, who was hit fired five times at Allen, who was not shot but fell to the ground and was promptly arrested.
I want to thank everybody who worked tirelessly on Saturday, Sunday and continuing today. This includes members of the FBI and Director Patel is
going to address that in a minute. It includes members of the Metropolitan Police department who were immediately on the scene. The chief, the mayor
to make sure that law enforcement was available to do their jobs and had had all the tools they needed to do so.
And lastly, the United States attorney's office here in D.C., our U.S. attorney, Jeanine Pirro, and her team prosecutors stayed up all night long,
didn't sleep all day yesterday, making sure that we got what we needed from all over the country. It included search warrants in California, search
warrants here in D.C., multiple interviews that have been conducted already of witnesses and of family members of the charged individual and continue
to work hard today.
This investigation is ongoing. It's not complete. A lot of the information that the media is hearing through leaks or sources. Some of it is true.
Some of it is not true, and at the right time you will hear information from us as appropriate.
I'd like to ask our U.S. attorney, Jeanine Pirro, to say a few words, and then followed by Director Patel. Thank you.
JEANINE PIRRO, U.S. ATTORNEY FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA: Thank you, Mr. Attorney General.
Cole Allen's journey of accountability in the criminal justice system starts today. Todd Blanche just indicated to you the charges. Those charges
are only three charges that are in the complaint that has been presented in federal district court. About an hour ago. There will be additional charges
as this investigation continues to unfold.
But make no mistake, this was an attempted assassination of the president of the United States with the defendant making clear what his intent was.
And that intent was to bring down as many of the high-ranking cabinet officials as he could. This is the kind of situation that we cannot
tolerate.
And as the attorney general has just indicated, it could have been so much worse. But for the reality that we had the Secret Service as well as the
Metropolitan Police Department and the FBI.
Now, the facts make it very clear what this intent was. You may recall that it was on March 2nd that the president indicated that he would be attending
this public event at the -- at the Hilton. And on April 6th, that's when Cole Allen first made a hotel reservation at the Washington Hilton for
three nights, the 24th, the 25th and the 26th.
It was on April 21st that he traveled all the way from the West Coast, from home, from his home near L.A. he gets to Chicago on April 23rd and has been
indicated. He arrives in D.C. on the 24th, and he checks into the hotel at about 3:00 p.m. He stays overnight.
He is very much aware that the president and the first lady entered the ballroom at 8:00 p.m., and it was at 8:40 that he made a decision to rush
the ballroom and thank goodness, law enforcement, the Secret Service was able to prevent him from getting into that ballroom. He was not injured
other than some kind of scrape on his knee.
Now, as indicated, these are the weapons that the defendant had on his person. You can see that's a 12-gauge pump action Mossberg shotgun, the .38
semiautomatic. He had at least three knives and all kinds of paraphernalia.
So, any -- any suggestion that he wasn't there to do harm is absurd. We will prove when he purchased these guns, they were purchased in California.
Why is that relevant? It is relevant because he crossed interstate lines with those firearms and those are the firearms that he used on the night of
the 25th or attempted to use, at the very least.
Now, the manifesto also makes clear about his expected rules of engagement. You know, you can look at it and read it and it may seem kind of la la la,
but at the end, make no mistake, he says, "I am targeting the administration officials. They are my targets, and I'm prioritizing from
the top down, the highest ranking from the lowest. And I will not hesitate to get involved in any kind of encounter with anyone who blocks me from the
president."
Now, finally, let me say one thing. Within days of the president nominating me to be the United States attorney for the District of Columbia, I was at
the scene of a double homicide where one, Elias Rodriguez, crossed state lines from Chicago with a firearm to commit a felony in the district. He's
now indicted for the murder of two individuals, Yaron Lichinsky and Sarah Milgrim, here in Washington.
Not long after that, another individual, Rahmanullah Lakanwal, crossed state lines again with a firearm with intent to commit a felony here in
Washington. He traveled from the state of Washington. He is now indicted with the murder of Sarah Beckstrom, a national guardsman, and the attempted
murder of national guard, Andrew Wolf.
Today, we have Cole Allen, another individual charged with crossing state lines coming from California with a firearm with the intent to commit a
felony here in the district. Let this be a message to anyone who thinks that Washington, D.C. is the place to act out political violence. And if
you are willing to do so with a firearm and cross state lines, we will find you. We will track your steps from the inception of your plan, and we will
prosecute you to the fullest extent of the law.
Washington, D.C. is not the place to travel to commit acts of violence. The Constitution and the laws of the United States permit us to register our
views through our voices and our votes. What they don't permit is making your views known through violence, especially violence directed at the
president of the United States. This is anti-democratic at its core.
KASH PATEL, FBI DIRECTOR: Thank you, Judge. Excuse me. Thank you, General.
This one hits a little differently. We were all there. Many of you were there. Many of you watching were there as well.
[15:25:00]
The president was there. The vice president was there. The cabinet was there. And what you saw described by the general and the U.S. attorney is
absolutely true.
The president spoke on late Saturday evening with a message of unity and a backing of law enforcement, and we have followed through on that message of
unity and the effectuation of law enforcement across this country.
This FBI is grateful to the United States Secret Service, the Department of Homeland security, and our interagency partners, including the Metropolitan
Police Department, for swiftly jumping into action. All of a sudden, there put us in a unique position. But all of us also acted uniquely.
The Washington field office jumped into action immediately, sending a mobile command center to the scene, along with our evidence response
technicians who showed up in speedy fashion to make sure we could collect the evidence that the prosecutors and the department needed to make this
announcement today. Also on scene, you were told about the brave heroics of the United States Secret Service and other members of law enforcement, and
that should be celebrated by every single American. They did exactly what they were trained to do. They stopped a massive attack from becoming even
worse. They stood in the way they safeguarded America, and they should be nothing but applauded for their bravery and their dedication to their
mission and their selfless sacrifice to this country.
The FBI, along with standing up mobile command units, evidence response team and Washington swat on scene, also established our NC3, our National
Crisis Coordination Center almost immediately. And almost immediately, in parallel, we stood up our command center at the Washington field office
under ADIC Darren Cox's leadership.
Throughout the evening, we immediately began working with our Department of Justice partners to find the evidence necessary to effectuate the legal
process necessary and enter into the suspects room at the Washington Hilton successfully and lawfully, and obtain the relevant evidence for
exploitation that was on scene. Back at the headquarters division and the Washington field office, we were coordinating a national scale
investigation that literally spanned from coast to coast. As you heard, FBI agents, along with the interagency, were immediately dispatched to the
suspects home in California, where we conducted interviews that provided critical information about this horrific attack.
We also dispatched investigators and agents to New London, Connecticut, where we conducted further interviews that provided necessary information
that you will find in this criminal complaint, as the United States attorney has just laid out. While officers were working diligently through
the night to conduct those interviews, we were also conducting interviews of witnesses on scene. Those interviews are ongoing. As you know, there was
almost 2,000 people there. We were sifting through and prioritizing who to talk to. And, and we will get to each and every one of you with any bit of
relevant information.
Again, we ask everybody who has any relevant information, like I did on Saturday night with the president, 1-800-CALL-FBI. Any piece of information
is information we want to have and must receive.
On top of the on-scene response by this FBI, the headquarters response and the Washington field office response, the FBI flipped on its enterprise
wide response to this critical incident. What does that mean? We dispatched fixed wing assets across the country so that we could immediately transport
evidence that was acquired in California and Connecticut and sent it to our laboratories in Quantico for analysis.
We collected the shell casings on scene, including the firearms and the weapons that the judge talked about. Those were also sent to Quantico
laboratories for immediate analysis. America should be proud that this FBI acted with the urgency that was needed for the moment that we had to
answer.
The president rightly said that we will act in a unified fashion, and it's because of President Trump's leadership and backing of the blue. Every
single person in law enforcement that I stood with into the late evening hours on Saturday, early evening hours on Sunday, and all day yesterday and
today are thrilled to wear the badge and defend this country. Each and every one of them deserves our thanks, and I encourage everyone listening
to go out there and shake the hand of a federal agent or police officer and say, thank you for doing their job. Thank you for training endlessly to
make sure they meet the mission requirements.
And for me, as the director of the FBI, I want to thank our headquarters components for working diligently with our prosecutors and make sure that
the American public knows it's not just federal agents that do this work. It's our intelligence analysts, our support staff, our laboratories, our
fixed wing assets, our critical incident response groups, our hostage rescue teams. Agents sprung into action, got out of bed and haven't slept
since.
These prosecutors haven't slept since. And I promise you, they're not going to be sleeping. They are going to give you every piece of evidence. As the
general said, we will make public, when appropriate, to protect the integrity of the investigation, to make sure that due process is served and
we will meet the highest standards of the Constitution, as we always do, and that is when we will continue to disclose information.
I know the public has a yearning for information, but just remind yourself of how much information you have already received, how transparent this
administration has been.
[15:30:01]
In less than 48 hours, you know almost every single thing we know and what we have not told you yet, we will tell you in short order.
So once again, from me, as director of the FBI, I want to thank the interagency.
I want to thank the United States Secret Service and their director, Markwayne Mullin, the Secretary of Homeland Security, the Attorney General,
the United States Attorney, Pirro, and ADA Cox, for springing into action on a night that should have been celebrating free speech. But we will be
doing it again shortly, as the President said. And we look forward to seeing you all there.
BLANCHE: Pierre?
REPORTER: Two questions, please. Beyond the evidence in what the judge described as the manifesto, what other evidence can you point to that tells
us that the President was the primary target of the suspect?
BLANCHE: So we're a day and a half into the investigation. As we talked about earlier, we were able to get multiple devices from various locations,
the hotel room, and also where he lived in California. We have started that process.
There's nothing more that would be appropriate to share at this time, until we have thoroughly gone through it -- which we're doing -- and we'll share
that information as appropriate in the future.
Second question. Go ahead.
REPORTER: Beyond the assassination attempts against President Trump, you had someone try to burn down the mansion where the governor lives in
Pennsylvania. You had those state lawmakers attacked in Minnesota. You had two Israeli embassy staff members murdered in the city here.
You had the Charlie Kirk assassination. You had the National Guardsman killed in the city. Can you, each of you, describe the current threat
environment and what DOJ's stance is about it?
BLANCHE: Well, you just described the current threat environment pretty accurately, which is that the political violence and rhetoric has got to
stop. And that's something President Trump said right after the incident on Saturday night. It's something that Karolyn Leavitt talked about a couple
hours ago.
It is something that is -- when you have a president who, and many people in this room, if we're going to be honest about it, has done as well.
They're just as guilty as a lot of people on X. When you have reporters, when you have media just being overly critical and calling the president
horrible names, for no reason, and without evidence, without proof, it shouldn't surprise us that this type of rhetoric takes place.
If you look at what it appears that this defendant had in his past, we're talking about somebody who was college educated, who has a job, who was
otherwise living his life. And we'll find out more about him, as I expect, in the coming days and weeks. But he chose to do what he did.
And so our threat environment is, we are ready. I mean, I'm not going to go through what Director Patel just talked about with the way we responded.
But this was something that we will always be prepared for.
And it's sad that it has to happen, but it's not a new thing, unfortunately.
REPORTER: Have you been able to determine whether the gunman fired shots? If so, how many shots he fired and who exactly -- whose bullet hit the
agent?
BLANCHE: We want to get that right. So we're still looking at that. It appears -- and I don't want to overstate because we are still looking at
this -- that there were five shots that law enforcement fired.
All the evidence is being examined very carefully and expeditiously, and we'll know more soon. We do believe that as the complaint lays out, that
the suspect, that the defendant fired it out of his shotgun, and we know that that happened. But as far as getting into exacting ballistics, I'm not
going to do that today because it's still being looked at and finalized.
REPORTER: Thank you for taking my question. You personally have called for a construction of this ballroom at the White House. The President has
called for this as well.
Today, the National Trust President put out a statement, says that they're grateful that everybody's OK, but, and I quote, we are not planning to
voluntary dismiss our lawsuit, which endangers no one, and which respectfully asked the administration to follow the law. Ballroom
construction is continuing unabated until June 5th at the earliest because the injunction is on hold. Where does the Justice Department go from here?
And then I have a follow-up on that.
BLANCHE: Well, we filed a motion today asking the court to do what the plaintiffs refused to do. We absolutely believe that there is no better
example of why this ballroom is necessary, aside from all the very positive things the ballroom will bring to this country and to Washington, D.C.,
than what happened on Saturday night. You guys, many of you all were there.
That's one of the only places in D.C. that you can hold an event like that due to its size and the structure of what we need.
So we're basically stuck at this point in the city with having an event like that at a hotel, so underneath a ton of hotel rooms. And so the fact
that we, aside, again, aside from the fact that the ballroom is spectacular, it's going to be beautiful, it's going to make this country
look great every time it's used, it's also a meaningful safety issue.
[15:35:03]
And so, I'm not -- I very much wish that the plaintiffs and their counsel would take a different view. But if they don't, we are going to continue to
fight in court like we have been.
And hopefully, the judges at the D.C. Circuit Court will do the right thing.
REPORTER: Are you aware of --
BLANCHE: Not you, the red.
REPORTER: Thank you. Are you investigating connections that Cole Allen allegedly had to left-wing groups? I think one is called the Wide Awakes,
reportedly.
BLANCHE: Yes, of course, we're investigating that. You.
REPORTER: Are you aware of his video game development past, including a potential shooter-style RPG game?
BLANCHE: I've seen the news reports that talk about that. I think that the positive and negatives of this type of case is that there's a lot of people
investigating this man right now, including the FBI. But the only investigations that truly matter in the court of law are the ones that
Director Patel and his men and women are doing.
So, we'll wait for them to do that and get an answer.
REPORTER: Just really quick. Do you know anything about his alleged Christian past, Christian faith past, because he said something about it in
the manifesto?
BLANCHE: I have read reports in the news. And I've read reports that say various things regarding his views of Christianity, his views in the past
of Christianity. And I'm certainly not going to speak to news reports.
I will wait, as I hope all of you would, for the investigation to continue until we actually have answers.
REPORTER: A little technical question. You mentioned that so far you think that Alan fired at least one shot. That doesn't say that in the affidavit
yet.
So, I'm just curious if you can explain the discharging of weapon charge at this point.
BLANCHE: Well, he's charged with violating 924(c), discharge of a firearm during a crime of violence. So, by definition, that charge means that it
was discharged. I can tell you from what I know, with the understanding that we're a day and a half in, that this is the gun that he discharged.
And as those of us that have ever shot one of these know, what happens when you shoot that, is the casing stays inside the firearm. And then if you
reload it, it pops it out. My understanding is that it was inside the firearm, but hadn't been ejected, which means that it hadn't been pulled
back again.
But again, I want folks to understand I'm the acting attorney general. I'm not on the ground doing the investigation. So, I'm telling you what I've
been told.
And if that information changes, I'm sure that we'll let you know. Yes.
REPORTER: I just want to ask you about this letter that you posted yesterday that's a dissent from Brett Schumacher, the plaintiff in that
lawsuit. It says that the Washington Hilton is, quote, demonstrably unsafe for the president of the United States. It said that with the ballroom,
that Trump will no longer need to venture beyond the safety of the White House perimeter.
Just engaging with those lines, was there an assessment in advance of the dinner that the Hilton was demonstrably unsafe? And if so, why was
President Trump allowed to attend it? And then separately, just the idea that by building the ballroom, that President Trump wouldn't need to go
outside of the confines of the White House.
I mean, is that something that the American people should find acceptable, that the president would have to be, for major events, confined to the
White House? It seems like a catastrophic situation.
BLANCHE: That is obviously not what he means by that. And the fact that that question comes with respect to President Trump is laughable in the
extreme. I mean, laughable in the extreme.
You have a president who willingly speaks with you guys multiple times a day, I would say seven days a week. He is active all over the country. I
think keeping it to the four corners of that statement, when he says demonstrably, it's demonstrated by what happened on Saturday night.
So that doesn't mean that the Secret Service would ever let the president go into an unsafe environment. I know that the director of the Secret
Service will be focused on making sure that we always keep him safe. And by the way, as we said before, and as anybody that was in that room knows, we
were safe.
We were safe. We heard a lot of loud noises that at the time, many of us thought could be guns going off. It was mostly plates falling because of
the staff, understandably, were running.
So my reaction to that is, I'll leave anything with respect to security up to the great men and women of the Secret Service. But when we talk about
having an environment like the ballroom, it's an environment like what you saw last night. So an environment where you have a unique blend of cabinet
members, leadership of this country, leadership of Congress, reporters, and members of the public coming together for an event like that, that's
different than other public- facing situations, which I have no doubt President Trump will continue to do as he said he would on Saturday night.
Ian?
REPORTER: Thank you. Is there, for FBI director, is there any other credible threats at this time related to events in the city, including King
Charles?
[15:40:02]
And then separately, the manifesto, I don't really want to give too much weight to this, did mention your name in it as someone that they maybe were
not targeting.
Do you want to elaborate on that? And then also the political motivations there.
PATEL: As to the latter, no. As to the former, the FBI and the interagency is constantly evaluating intelligence provided to us by interagency
collection methods. Our partners in the federal and state and local levels, we are constantly relaying that information to the White House, to the
Attorney General, to the United States Attorney specifically here in D.C.
And we will always assess each piece of intelligence and base it on the credibility that it was received and give it the due weight that it has.
But as the U.S. Attorney has stated and as President Trump's task force for Washington, D.C. has shown, we have reduced crime in this city by historic
levels and we will continue to do so. We will continue to safeguard the men and women that call Washington, D.C. their home.
BLANCHE: All right, just a couple more.
REPORTER: Acting Attorney General, in paragraph 14 of the complaint today, it says that the suspect fell and you said that he was tackled. I just want
to see if we can try to make sure we understand.
BLANCHE: Well, I think that both can be true. And I would rely on the complaint because that was sworn to by an agent and not by the words out of
the Acting Attorney General, who most certainly was not there. But I think both can be true.
REPORTER: The U.S. Attorney yesterday also mentioned that one of the charges possibly would be for assault on an officer. And I noticed today
it's a different charge. Is this because you've determined that what he shot didn't actually strike the officer?
BLANCHE: We're still looking at that. And I think that that's something that you'll hear about in the coming days as we know the answer to that. It
doesn't legally matter in that situation.
But when after an event like this happens, not surprisingly, there's initial charges that we consider. Then you have the U.S. Attorney's team
and the FBI looking through the evidence and figuring out what's the best thing to do. And that's what you have.
Just one more question.
REPORTER: I have two quick questions.
BLANCHE: All right, two questions.
REPORTER: I just wanted to clarify. You said the one officer fired their weapon five times. Was that the only officer who discharged a firearm?
BLANCHE: I want to be very careful in answering that question because this is when you do ballistics evidentiary collection and research, it is very
complicated. So when you fire a bullet, the bullet ends up somewhere. Sometimes you find it. Sometimes you don't.
And so from that, with that qualifier, we believe right now that there was five shots fired from the same firearm. But this is -- there's a team of
folks looking at this that are experts.
And the evidence collection team that were in that area of the hotel where the shots were fired will work all night. They have the evidence they
collected. But it's not an exact science from the standpoint that, for example, the buckshot, when that shots, it scatters everywhere.
Sometimes it just disappears, actually, depending on where it hits. So you don't have to -- hopefully with that qualifier, that's where we are right
now.
REPORTER: What's the timeline, sir?
REPORTER: I just wanted to ask what law enforcement has learned about why he was targeting President Trump. Do you guys believe he was upset about a
certain policy or decision by the president?
BLANCHE: The complaint lays out what I think is described as a manifesto, which is something that he's allegedly sent to many folks, his family.
That's what we have so far as far as his motivation. As the U.S. attorney said a few minutes ago, what is clear from the complaint and from what we
have so far is he was targeting President Trump. He described that in his manifesto. He was targeting administration officials. He described that.
But as far as us understanding additional motivation, that's for the FBI and law enforcement.
All right. Thanks a lot, guys. I appreciate it. Thank you.
REPORTER: The Amtrak security measures. Will there be any announcement about Amtrak security?
KINKADE: You've just been listening to the press conference from the attorney general of dc, the acting attorney general, and the FBI director,
and they have now formally framed the White House correspondents dinner shooting as an attempted assassination of the president, outlining various
charges, including interstate weapons transport and the use of a firearm in a violent crime.
Now, they know that the gunman was just one floor above the ballroom and rushed in just after the president and first lady had arrived, and they
added that law enforcement did not fail. They did what they were trained to do.
Well, for more on this, I want to welcome Alex Plitsas. He is a CNN national security analyst, and Jeff Swartz, a former judge in Miami-Dade
County.
Good to have you both with us.
ALEX PLITSAS, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: Thanks.
JEFF SWARTZ, FORMER MIAMI-DADE COUNTY COURT JUDGE: Nice to be with you.
KINKADE: I want to start with you first, Jeff.
So, we just heard the three charges outlined. The one we were waiting for was the assassination, attempted assassination of the U.S. president.
[15:45:04]
How high a legal bar is it for that charge?
SWARTZ: Well, it's more than just his acts. He would have to prove that the president of the United States was an intended victim. My reading of
the manifesto, he didn't actually use Donald Trump's name, but he alluded to administration officials, of which the president is one. That's why I
think that eventually they will charge him with attempted assassination of several of the officials that were at the dinner so that it all falls
together on an and/or and it will make it a tighter indictment when the time comes to issue the indictment.
KINKADE: Exactly.
And, Alex, I want to ask you about the fact that this is now being described as the third attempted assassination of U.S. President Trump. We
heard the director there being asked about the threat level, the attorney general being asked about the threat level when it comes to political
violence and rhetoric in the country.
Are we seeing a shift in the landscape?
PLITSAS: Well, I mean, I think the outcome is in the evidence, right? It's one thing to discuss. The discourse is very much another to see what's in
front of us. And we have seen an uptick in political violence across the spectrum over the last few years. And the rhetoric, quite frankly, in our
political environment in the United States has gotten out of control. And the narrative, you know, from folks on the political extremes has been
divisive. And it has been, you know, in some cases, calling for violence.
And there really is no place for that. You know, if you disagree with the president or his policies, that is not an acceptable response to any of
that. So it is, you know, disheartening. And obviously, since an attempt was made, this is not rhetoric. It was, in fact, another attempt on the
president's life.
KINKADE: And, Jeff, to you, the prosecutors are seeking to hold this suspect until trial in a case involving threats against top officials
within an administration, particularly if it does involve the U.S. president.
How heavily do judges weigh that danger?
SWARTZ: Well, they'll weigh that danger because they always weigh a danger to the community. That's a very important thing. Some people that are held
in detention show a threat towards the community, either whether they're drug dealers or they are people who robbed a bank or there are people that
use weapons. They weigh that as a very strong indicia that they should be held, because you don't want to let somebody out who's going to commit
another violent crime.
So, the bottom line is that that's really what they look at in this particular case, because it's the president, because it was a political
act. That's also something that will be weighed. I don't think there's any possibility he's going to get a bond. And even if he did get one, it would
one that the U.S. treasury probably couldn't post.
KINKADE: And, Alex, to you, we heard that the suspect allegedly brought these firearms and knives from California via train to Chicago and then
Chicago to D.C., and obviously brought it very close to this high. What should have been a very high security event. Does that point to a greater
failure when it comes to perimeter security, intelligence gathering, even the fact that he was able to transport these weapons in a state.
PLITSAS: So, I think it points to a lot of research ahead of time and purposeful exploitation of security vulnerabilities. And this was not
somebody who was having a short-term mental illness episode where this just sort of happened. You know, you can't fly on aircraft with weapons, but
you're not searched on trains. Your bags don't go through X-rays. So, it seems that the logical conclusion there was a purposeful attempt to take
trains to avoid detection through air travel, which took quite a bit of time. So this was something that was obviously thought through. And then
travel took place for a while, and then now that does become a question about perimeter security.
This was presented as a binary choice between hotels that are unsecure and a new secure ballroom being constructed. But at the end of the day, his
bags were not searched going into the hotel at a place where the president and vice president were known to be staying, along with multiple cabinet
officials.
You know, there was a stairwell that was empty that he ran down with no one posted on the corner there. And even when you go to the airport, you know,
you've got velvet ropes and things that sort of, you know, force you to stop and kind of move back and forth before you get the checkpoint. There
was nothing there. He flew straight through the X-ray machine.
It's easy to Monday morning quarterback, but it's clear that there could have been security improvements. Now, fortunately, he was stopped on the
first floor before he got anywhere near the ballroom, but there's always room for improvement here. And at the end of the day, it's always a balance
between security.
So if you talk to law enforcement, they'll tell you, look, if you have to search every single person that gets on a train, a subway, or tries to get
into a stadium, you know, you'll kind of shut things down and there's a balance that they have to strike. I do believe there's room for
improvement. I think there'll be an after-action review that will determine what else can be done. But to present this to binary choice between a new
secure ballroom and an unsecure hotel, I don't think is quite an accurate framing.
KINKADE: Yeah, exactly. And, Jeff, finally to you, uh, we heard from the attorney general of D.C.
[15:50:02]
That these three charges are just the beginning. We know so far that the FBI has conducted raids on a home in L.A. They're going through the
manifesto right now, and they're speaking to family members of the suspect. What are the charges are likely -- is domestic terrorism one of them?
SWARTZ: It's a possibility. They're going to have to show that it was meant to be a terroristic event as opposed to a straight-out assassination,
which in and of itself is not necessarily a terrorist event. However, if they can attach a political motive to it, that may be the reason why they
could try to charge him with terrorism.
I think that as much as they like to pile things on, I'm a former prosecutor. I used to like to keep things lean and mean. I don't like to
add a whole lot of stuff on just because I can. Um, it was easier that way. You're going to get the same result, whether its terrorism or whether its
attempted murder, you're going to get the same result. I think to a certain extent, they probably should lay off of that one.
KINKADE: Jeff Swartz, Alex Plitsas, appreciate both of you and your analysis. Thank you very much.
We're going to take a quick break. We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[15:53:56]
KINKADE: Welcome back.
President Trump is calling for the ABC to fire late night TV host Jimmy Kimmel. The president's social media post echoing his wife Melania's call
after comments Kimmel made last week while pretending to be the host of the White House Correspondents' Dinner.
I want to bring in Betsy Klein.
So, Betsy, what exactly did Jimmy Kimmel say that offended the first lady?
BETSY KLEIN, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE REPORTER: Right. Well, Jimmy Kimmel was participating in a mock White House Correspondents' Dinner speech. He
described the first lady as an expectant widow.
And what is notable here is that we didn't hear from the first lady or any of her aides pushing back on this. In the 48 hours after this aired on
Thursday to the lead up to the incident that took place at the Washington Hilton at the correspondents' dinner on Saturday evening.
Now, we saw that remarkable video of the first lady. She looks straight ahead. She crouches down and it marked the first time that the first lady
has been alongside her husband, when he has been aggressively evacuated by the Secret Service. She was not present during Butler or the West Palm
beach incidents, and we know that safety has been top of mind for her.
[15:55:04]
But otherwise, she has let the president do the talking. She made a rare appearance in the White House briefing room on Saturday evening, but this
was the first time that she spoke out. The president also calling for Jimmy Kimmel to be fired.
All of this setting up a major free speech pressure test for ABC and its parent company, Disney. Now, notably, reps for ABC and Jimmy Kimmel have
not responded to CNN's request for comment -- Lynda.
KINKADE: The key is this comment was made well before Saturday night's dinner. Has the ABC or Jimmy Kimmel responded?
KLEIN: They have not yet. And we are watching very closely for if and when they do. But I think its very notable that they have yet to respond to
this, and we'll have to see what they do say. But the first lady, obviously making very clear she's very unhappy with this.
KINKADE: Yeah, she did call Jimmy Kimmel a coward. We will continue to follow this story. Betsy Klein, great to have you with us. Thank you.
And we have much more news ahead. I'm Lynda Kinkade. That is what we know. Do stay with CNN. Much more to come.
END
TO ORDER VIDEOTAPES AND TRANSCRIPTS OF CNN INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMMING, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS
