i m yasmin vossoughian in for ana cabrera. today a man who felt direct heat from donald trump to overturn the 2020 election will speak to the department of justice. the special counsel s team meeting with georgia s secretary of state brad raffensperger. this happening as we learn that a close trump ally, rudy giuliani also had a sit-down with jack smith s team. what all of this means for that investigation and for the former president as well. plus, a double dose of wild, wild weather, storms snarling travel as canadian wildfire smoke prompts new air alerts here in the united states. also ahead, was there help from the inside? reporting from the new york times that a russian general knew about the recent rebellion before it even happened. and later on, malaria in the united states. dr. natalie azar joins us with more cases of the illness not seen here in two decades. we begin with the new legal developments surrounding the former president. at some point today georg
and, quote, lending work and life in the new year. kind of a bomba vibe there. travelers can expect to spend longer hours at the airports today as they head out for the holidays. a new report shows many of their fellow flyers are not on their best behavior. we are following these developing stories and many more, all coming in right here to cnn news central. welcome to cnn news central, i m brianna keilar, boris sanchez is off with jim acosta. what a treat. very nice. we are watching this donald trump tape, another one, that could have major legal ramifications. it has surfaced and this one is a recording of a call that he made two election workers in michigan. pressuring them to block joe biden s victory two weeks after election day in 2020. there was a meeting to certify michigan s result, you ve seen the footage here of that meeting, two-way and county election officials initially voting against certifying. then they flipped and voted to certify. that is when trump ste
we don t know exactly what raffensperger is going to say today in his testimony to the special counsel. but we have somewhat of an idea based upon his previous comments. that s very true. of course we have the phone call itself, which is really the best evidence you have, better than eyewitness account. you have that tape directly itself. investigators are going to want to get some of the context around the phone call, on how it came about, maybe some of the communications with the white house, how this all sort of laid out. i think it s important to listen back to what raffensperger said during his testimony before the january 6th committee. did 5,000 dead people in georgia vote? no, it s not accurate. we found two dead people, when i wrote my letter to congress that s dated january 6th, and subsequent to that we found two more. that s one, two, three, four people, not 4,000, but just a total of four, not 10,000, not 5,000. raffensperger is actually a really interesting figure
must have on the precipice of this to reach back into the satchel of the mueller report and say look at all this stuff we found, nobody voted it, it never came to the fore. this is at least one if not two more articles of impeachment. i oppose that, brian. i don t think this should be a kitchen sink impeachment. although i think you could justify one. i think for the purposes of this inquiry it should be constrained to the ukraine issue. it should be the president s conduct in the run-up to the july 25th phone call, the phone call itself, and the activities in the weeks that ensued until he got caught. because therein he asked and solicited and demanded a foreign country to interfere in the 2020 election and he conditioned military aid and the white house visit on those actions. and those actions in and of themselves are more than sufficient to justify the impeachment inquiry and probably the conclusion that it is a high
understandable temptation of mission creep. the temptation that democrats must have on the precipice of this to reach back into the satchel of the mueller report and say look at all this stuff we found, nobody voted it, it never came to the fore., this is at least one if not two more articles of impeachment. i oppose that, brian. i don t think this should be a kitchen sink impeachment. although i think you could justify one. i think for the purposes of this inquiry it should be constrained to the ukraine issue. it should be the president s conduct in the run-up to the july 25th phone call, the phone call itself, and the activities in the weeks that ensued until he got caught. because therein he asked and solicited and demanded a foreign country to interfere in the 2020 election and he conditioned military aid and the white house visit on those actions. and those actions in and of themselves are more than sufficient to justify the