Return to Transcripts main page

Inside Politics

New Details About Trump White House Plot To Seize Voting Machines. Aired 12-12:30p ET

Aired February 01, 2022 - 12:00   ET

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

[12:00:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

JOHN KING, CNN HOST: Hello and welcome to Inside Politics. I'm John King in Washington. Thank you for sharing this big news day with us. New details today on a brazen Trump White House effort to launch a coup. The former president had orders to seize voting machines, ready to go. We also now know a key White House insider cooperating with the Select Committee.

Plus, we follow the midterm money. George W. Bush writing checks to send an anti-Trump message. But a new scrub of the numbers also tells us, Trump is awash in campaign cash.

And parents of young children, this news is for you. Soon as today, Pfizer plans to ask the FDA to green light its COVID vaccine for children under five-years-old. We begin the hour though with stunning new details of Donald Trump's effort to ignore democracy and to keep power. Just a few the new headlines.

Trump advisors drafted more than one executive order to seize voting machines. Mike Pence is former Chief of Staff testifies in the House January 6th investigation and some Trump White House records handed over to that committee, we are now told had been ripped up. Two big takeaways from all this. One, is the alarming depth and the scope of the effort to find a way to ignore the election. To stage a coup. Yes, a coup, to hold power. Two, is the remarkable progress the committee is now making in building the historical record.

New testimony from key Trump insiders, and those new White House records including some the National Archives says, we're reassembled like puzzle pieces after being torn to shreds. Let's get straight to Capitol Hill, CNN's Ryan Nobles. Ryan, tell us more.

RYAN NOBLES, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes, so much that happened just in the last 24 hours, John, but let's talk about this new revelation that there was a second draft executive order that was attempting to empower federal agencies to seize voting machines to try and investigate these unfounded claims of fraud. We are now learning that there was a long cast of characters that were directly involved with White House officials are trying to come up with some sort of legal reasoning as to why either the Department of Homeland Security or the Department of Defense could go in and take these voting machines from these key swing states, where Trump was hoping to change the election results.

And this group is someone - this group continues to be the same group of people that we're talking about as this investigations unfolded. Rudy Giuliani, who was the president's personal lawyer at the time, who seems to have been kind of the ringleader of all of this effort. Sidney Powell, a conservative lawyer who was feeding Trump and his allies with questionable legal theories about the ability of the vice president to overturn the election, or these unfounded claims of fraud. And then Bernard Kerik, who's cooperating with the committee right now and is held an extensive interview with them, who is also a key player in all of this.

So, John, this is just an example of the information that the committee continues to uncover about this plot and all the many different ways that Trump and his associates were trying to find some sort of path to overturn the will of the American voters. And this wasn't just some sort of symbolic effort. They truly wanted to make this happen and there were people that stood in the way, including the former Attorney General Bill Barr, who the New York Times is reporting was presented with one of these options and turned it down immediately saying, it was just not something that was feasible. John?

KING: And Ryan, let's focus a bit here. Help me understand the importance of Marc Short, Chief of Staff to then former Vice President Mike Pence, but also the former Trump legislative director. So, somebody at the vice president side consistently from election day, up to January 6th, when Trump wanted Mike Pence to help him cheat, but also somebody who is wired throughout the West Wing. He knows what's happening in that building.

NOBLES: Yes, I don't think there's any doubt about that, John. And the way you have to view Marc Short, is that he is a first-hand witness. He was somebody that was in the room where it happened. He was there on January 4th, during a key meeting, where Trump and his allies were trying to pressure Mike Pence to take that unprecedented step of using this fictional power to overturn the election results on January 6th, he was by Pence's side during all the chaos on January 6th, when Pence was evacuated out of the Capitol.

And he's someone who maintains a close relationship with the former vice president. So, the fact that he willingly came forward, now he was subpoenaed, so he was compelled, but the fact that he didn't fight that subpoena shows that at least on some level, Pence has given tacit approval for him and others to talk to the committee.

Now, the committee still wants to talk to Mike Pence. But even if they don't get that opportunity, John, the fact that they have someone like Marc Short at their disposal, someone that gave them this much information is a key part of this investigation.

KING: Put together that critical timeline. Ryan Nobles, thanks for getting us started. With me now to share their reporting and their insights the former federal prosecutor Shan Wu, CNN's Dana Bash, CNN's Eva McKend, and CNN's Political Analyst Laura Barron-Lopez.

[12:05:00]

Dana, there'll be some people out there saying, let it go, let it go. It was more than a year ago Why do you keep talking about this, but if you look at the fabulous new CNN reporting today and I'm going to add this from The New York Times, Mr. Trump was more directly involved in previously known in exploring proposals to use his national security agencies to seize voting machines, as he grasped unsuccessfully for evidence of fraud that would help him reverse his defeat in the 2020 election.

According to people familiar with the episodes, it's the use, his national security agencies to seize voting machines, it is critical because he is planning a comeback. And this is a precedent to, by all accounts in this reporting was more involved than we previously knew, in trying to keep power to try to say democracy doesn't matter, I'm staying.

DANA BASH, CNN CHIEF POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: That's exactly right. This isn't just knowing what happened for history's sake, which is very important. But it's also knowing what happened, because he's still very much a player in the Republican Party right now. Gearing up for the midterms and potentially for his own future.

The fact that the committee is painting such a robust picture based on firsthand accounts, like Ryan was just talking about and documents they are seizing, is very telling. And I just want to underscore something that you talked about with Ryan about Marc Short. There is nobody who is closer to the former vice president than Marc Short, I know from my reporting at the time, and even now, today, he was in every meeting, on almost every phone call with Mike Pence, relating to everything but especially this push by the president to overturn the election and use Mike Pence to do that.

Now, whether or not, Marc Short gave any - what may be considered privileged information, executive privilege information about those conversations to the committee is unclear. I know that he is somebody who kind of abides by the notion that conversations with the president when you are working for the president should remain confidential. But there's no question that he had a lot of information to give.

KING: So, Shan as a former federal prosecutor, number one, you see the extensive meticulous work, the committee is doing. And we should all be grateful that they are building historical record. But when you see these new details, you try to press the Justice Department will seize voting machines. Now that didn't work, proposal, maybe we'll have the Pentagon seize the voting machines, that didn't go anywhere. What about the Department of Homeland Security? Can they go out and seize the voting machines, that is corrupt, is it criminal? SHAN WU, FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR: I think it is criminal, I mean, certainly deserving of a criminal investigation at this point. I mean, intent is always the key here. And that's what this evidence is about, intent. It's hard to record a person's thoughts. But the next best thing is written material. So, these drafts really show there was no mistake, and also the circumstances show, there is no good faith basis for this at all. I mean, it's really a naked attempt to seize and retain their power.

KING: And so, Laura Barron-Lopez, the details just in the last 24 hours, let alone what we've learned over the past several months, but just in the last 24 hours, Donald Trump at a rally saying, I might pardon. Actually, I'm inclined to pardon. People convicted of the January 6th insurrection, these new details about Donald Trump in the Oval Office trying to concoct any means necessary to hold power if I can't get a Secretary of State in Georgia to help me cheat, for example, maybe we'll have the Pentagon seize voting machines. And yet, and yet, John Thune, a leader, Republican Senate Leader just said, how will the system work, they shrug it off.

Well, the system worked and Trump wasn't able to keep power. Kevin Kramer, another member from North Dakota, telling CNN, if he feels like there were people unjustly detained, wrongfully detained. He has every right in the world to do that to pardon him if he wants to do that. You guys, we have a president in the White House. He's trying to change the subject to Joe Biden. Why is it that even after learning all of this that the leader of their party is anti-Democratic, that the leader of their party given power again will try to do it again, they all just say ho hum.

LAURA BARRON-LOPEZ, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: Yes, John, it shouldn't really be surprising at this point, I guess. But it still is, frankly, stunning. And really, it comes down to a political calculation for Republicans, which is that they think that their best bet to regain power and to hold power is alongside Trump is with Trump. And so that's why you see so many Republicans across the country, be it national ones like you just quoted, but also local state electors who are trying to out compete each other to be as Trumpy as they can be.

And by that I mean that, you see Republican state elected in Wisconsin saying encouraging their fellow Republicans to cheat in order to win elections. You're hearing that from the former president himself, who has said in recent rallies in Arizona, as well as before Pennsylvania Republicans, that Republicans should tinker with elections that they should just cheat brazenly. So, Trump isn't hiding the ball about what's to come in 2024.

KING: And you make a critical point there

[12:10:00]

because often if we can roll back the tape and there are people out there who have ideas that are out on the fringe and we ignore them. There are people out there who propose things and we ignore them, because they are on the fringe. Trump has brought these anti- Democratic fringe ideas into the mainstream, to wit, Eva McKend, Mike Detmer is running for the Michigan State Senate. He says if things don't go our way, people listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MIKE DETMER (R) MICHIGAN SENATE CANDIDATE: American people at some point in time, if we can't change the tide, we need to be prepared to lock and load. So, you ask, what do we do? Show up armed.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KING: Show up armed against to those who say why do you people keep looking at this? Why do you keep exploring the historical record? Why do you want to keep holding Trump accountable for all this? The seeds have been planted for a new generation of this and you see it right there. If the election is not going our way, show up armed?

EVA MCKEND, CNN NATIONAL POLITICS REPORTER: Yes, there it is. John, there is an increasing group within the Republican Party that is growing more radical. And the question is, are there going to be Republican members that get back to what the Republican Party is supposed to stand for? Right. Lower taxes, I think it's something that they once used to run on. But now it's Trumpism or nothing? I mean, what is - what are they going to be running on in 2022? Are they championing conservative policies? Or is it solely about the politics of personality? And this one man, where are the adults in the room? Who are the Republicans I think, is what we're all watching now, are they going to emerge to really stand up against this? Because it is, it is alarming.

KING: They would have to push him to the sidelines, which they refused to do, to have conversations about the many other important issues that would be great to have a campaign about, but he is back in the public sphere and I suspect he will try to dominate it. Everybody stand by, just when we come back. Just moments ago, the Russian President Vladimir Putin speaking on the record on the crisis in Ukraine. A breaking update, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[12:15:00]

KING: Some testy words about tensions with the West over Ukraine just moments ago from the Russian President Vladimir Putin.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

VLADIMIR PUTIN, RUSSIAN PRESIDENT: We have analyzed the written answer from the United States, which we have received on the 26th of January. But I have informed Mr. Prime Minister that our main proposals were ignored.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KING: This is the first time the Russian leader has spoken publicly about the situation in Ukraine, the standoff with NATO and the United States since late December. Let's get straight to the White House Chief Correspondent Kaitlan Collins. Caitlin, if you're looking for a diplomatic off ramp that does not leave you optimistic.

KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Yes, no indications there that the Russian President is ready to back down. And instead, he seemed to be making a forceful argument for why he has amassed those over 100,000 Russian forces on the Ukrainian border, something that, of course, has been the number one concern for the president's top aides here at the White House. And what you heard from the Russian leader there, which is A, just significant given this is really the first time we are hearing from him on this as you noted since late December.

We have not had him say anything publicly this year on this, of course there has been a lot of dialogue back and forth. Putin has stayed totally silent. And that has not helped people who are trying to read the tea leaves, trying to guess where his head is at on the invasion. And there he was saying that, yes, Russia did get this U.S. response last week on their security demands. We weren't expecting there to be a major breakthrough on that. But he said that all of their security concerns were basically ignored, or the words he used by the United States.

That is something that Russia has not responded to in writing yet. We thought they had responded yesterday, but a Russian spokesperson clarified today they have not sent their main response and yet they are still waiting on doing that and could come of course in the next few days, next few weeks potentially.

And one other thing that the Russian President said was making this argument saying that he believes NATO swindled the Russians, lied to the Russians about their eastward expansion, talking about what NATO itself looks like. And of course, reiterating his number one demand, which is that Ukraine never joined NATO. That is something the White House has said is off the table. So, when it comes to the idea of deescalating here and what that looks like, John, of course, that is the Russian President saying that is still something he wants. We know the U.S. has said that's not an option. We'll see if diplomacy is an option here because he did suggest maybe the French President would come to Russia.

KING: Stalemate at the moment, at least. Kaitlan Collins, appreciate the live update from the White House. Moving on to big COVID news. Now we are told that as soon as today, Pfizer could ask the FDA to greenlight its COVID vaccine for children under five, Pfizer will seek emergency authorization and quick FDA approval could mean shots in arms as soon as this month. The Washington Post was first report Pfizer's plans. Let's bring it in for some perspective as I go through the number,

Dr. Leana Wen, the former Baltimore City Health Commissioner, Dr. Wen, I just want to pop the data up here because I know this is of concern to you. Pfizer released a study, its research, it says among those six months to 24 months, this new vaccine, the dose for young children produced similar level of immunity as 16 year old to 25 year old, which is good news. But among those age two through just below five, it produced lower levels of immunity. And so, they're testing a third dose to possibly add to the regimen. Do you - is this good news to get this vaccine out there as soon as possible? Or would you say, let's wait a bit?

DR. LEANA WEN, FORMER BALTIMORE HEALTH COMMISSIONER: Well, I'm ambivalent right now, John, which is not something that I'd ever thought that I would say about vaccines for under five-year-olds. I'm the mom of two little kids under five. I can't wait until they are vaccinated. But I would wait until we find that the vaccines are safe and effective. And I'm not sure that we can say that at the moment because we just don't have the data.

Now, I definitely understand the urgency that many parents are feeling and I can also understand the point of view that hey, if three doses are being studied and two doses will give you some level of protection and the vaccine is safe. Then why not give it, maybe some parents will make that choice, but I also think that other parents would want to wait until we know that three doses will produce the intended effect.

KING: So, let's

[12:20:00]

walk through this conversation because I think it's critical for parents watching, especially those who have watched you knowing that you are one of these parents as well as a public health expert, and doctor to help guide them through the decision. Let's listen to Dr. Scott Gottlieb there who raises the point you just make. Essentially his point is, what are you looking for? Here's the data. It's not perfect, but it's good. What are you looking for?

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DR. SCOTT GOTTLIEB, FORMER FDA COMMISSIONER: If the goal of the vaccine is to get baseline immunity and the kids to prevent really bad outcomes, and you're really not using the vaccine as a tool to prevent infection in the first place, two doses could do that.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KING: So, the question is, does it help? So, I just will go through a couple of stats here. Number one is fully vaccinated. We already know, among those fully vaccinated, we have seen hesitancy among parents, with children aged five to 11, only 22 percent of those children are fully vaccinated, you see, teenager's 56 percent, adult's 74 percent. So, there's already Dr. Wen some hesitancy reluctance to race to get your shots in arms, for the kids aged five through 11. Then you look at the cases, right? If you look at the cases among children, still an alarming number, 800,000, dropping, but down 800,000.

And then if I look at cases by age, this is what is critical for me to the point you're just making. Right now, we know kids aged zero through four, three, only 3 percent of the cases the studies show. So, if you're a parent, and you have a kid in this age group, how are you balancing? Well, my children seem to be safer than these other age groups, so do I just keep them at home, I can control their movements, or should I just get the vaccine for now and hope it gets better down the road? WEN: We're going to see a lot of people making individualized decisions for their children. And by the way, the data when let's say that these vaccines end up getting authorized by late February, if that's the case, the numbers for Omicron, numbers for COVID are going to look very different. We're in the middle of an Omicron peak right now. But that's not going to be the case forever. And I think the decision making is also going to look different too.

Look at any point when vaccines are first authorized for any age group, there are people who are the early adopters who cannot wait and who would want any level of protection. But there are others who want to wait and see and maybe they want others to go first. And then there are others who also want to know what's in it for me, what's in it for my children. When you look at the five to 11 year olds, I think that it would have made a big difference in vaccine uptake, if the administration, if the CDC and others have said very clearly, once your child is vaccinated masks are optional.

I think time, vaccination to an off ramp to masking is going to be really critical for increasing vaccine uptake, especially in the younger age groups.

KING: Well, I think you make - a lot of people have said it's time for new markers from the government, if you will, new markers, especially as we do. I just want to put up the trend map. We are making substantial progress. 45 states now trending down. Now from a very high baseline, it's critical to know we still have an enormous number of Omicron cases, but 45 states reporting fewer new infections this week Dr. Wen than last week, only one state reporting more new infections. That's the state of Maine than last week.

So, is - are we at that inflection point where it's time for a reset from the government to help answer all of these questions, whether it's vaccines for the younger children, or when can my mask come off in other places as well?

WEN: Yes, it is. We cannot be in a perpetual state of public health emergency. That's not credible. It's also allowing many other problems to go by the wayside. And we have to give people some respite after this two year period of ongoing restrictions. I do think that we need to wait until hospitalizations are trending down. So, in places where hospitals are still overwhelmed, that's not the time to a lot of restrictions.

But if hospitalizations are consistently down, it is time for us to remove restrictions. Yes, we may have new variants arise in the future. But that's why it's even more important to give people a break now.

KING: Dr. Wen, as always grateful. Thank you. Up next, U.S. President Biden invites two key senators to the White House today for a Supreme Court chat. Plus, the Republican senator who says he's quote offended. The president is promising to pick a black woman.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[12:25:00]

KING: You might say an old school start today as President Biden seeks advice about his big Supreme Court pick. The president will meet this afternoon with two top senators on the Judiciary Committee. Democratic Chairman Dick Durbin, Republican Ranking Member Chuck Grassley, the president promises to name a black woman to the vacancy. And that promise is being ridiculed by some Republicans.

Our reporters back to discuss and let's listen to one of those Republicans right here. Senator Ted Cruz says I dare you, Mr. President.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. TED CRUZ (R-TX): The fact that he's willing to make a promise at the outset that it must be a black woman, I've got to say that's offensive. It's actually an insult to black women. If he came and said, I'm going to put the best jurist on the court and he looked at a number of people and he ended up nominating a black woman, he could credibly say, OK, I'm nominating the person who's most qualified. He's not even pretending to say that. He's saying, if you're a white guy, tough luck.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KING: Eva McKend, is it an insult to black women? Is it offensive to black women? Or is Ted Cruz qualified to decide for black woman?

MCKEND: No, he is not. And I would say what's important about this is that these comments aren't in isolation. If you speak to Republican members of Congress, for instance, which I have for years, and ask them about systemic racism, they don't believe it is real, right? Racism to them is an event that we have overcome. It isn't still part of reality in America today in terms of being ingrained within our institutions. So, this idea that a black woman should be elevated, I think you see this kind of.