♪ 2 1/2 years after a mob of his supporters attacked the u.s. capitol, donald j. trump has been charged in the effort to overturn the election he lost which culminated in such violence to people, property and democracy that day. if you are just joining us, i'm here in new york alongside jake tapper in washington and kaitlin collins outside the d.c. federal courthouse where the former president will be arraigned thursday afternoon. >> anderson, we just heard from the d.c. metro police, the department saying they are working with federal law enforcement in preparation for the arraignment on thursday. as for special counsel jack smith from whom we last heard after the first of now two federal indictments in the documents case, he spoke again briefly this evening. take a listen. >> the attack on our nation's capital on january 6th, 2021 was an unprecedented assault on the seat of american democracy. it's described in the indictment, it was fueled by lies. lies by the defendant, targeted at obstructing a bedrock function of the u.s. government, the nation's process of collecting, counting and certifying the results of the presidential election. since the attack on our capitol, the department of justice has remained committed to ensuring accountability for those criminally responsible for what happened that day. this case has brought consistent with that quitment and our investigation of others continues. >> now, special counsel smith singled out members of law enforcement who had been defending the capitol on january 6th. they are patriots, he said, and they're the very best of us.>> for the former president here, he is now facing multiple criminal charges here, four criminal counts in this, obviously they are conspiracy to defraud the united states, two counts relating to obstruction of an official proceeding, and a charge under a law against conspiring to deprive people of civil rights. provided under federal law or the constitution, all of this is what came down today. also mentioned but not named are six unindicted co-conspirators here. they're not named in the indictment but cnn has been able to identify the five that you see there on the screen, we're still working to confirm the sixth one here. four of president trump's attorneys, giuliani, eastman and sidney powell all in the white house at the time and jefffully clark and pro-stump lawyer kenneth chesebro all here. shortly after it was unsealed merrick garland spoke. he weighed in on this from philadelphia. >> jack smith, a special counsel to take on the ongoing investigation, in order to underline the department's commitment to accountability and independence, mr. smith and his team of experienced principled career agents and prosecutors have followed the facts and the law wherever they lead. any questions about this matter will have to be answered by the filings made in the courtroom. >> thank you. >> joining me now is the former president's newest attorney to his team, john lauro. you've read through this indictment. what is your defense going to look like? >> well, it's basically a regurgitation of the j-6 committee report but our focus is on the fact that this is an attack on free speech and political advocacy and there's nothing that's more protected under the first amendment than political speech, so at the end, our defense is going to be focussing on the fact that what we have now is an administration that has criminalized the free speech and advocacy of a prior administration during the time that there's a political election going on. that's unprecedented. we've never seen that in the united states in the history of the united states. so literally what we have is an attack and really an effort to not only criminalize but also censure free speech. donald trump had every right to advocate for his position while he was president. he saw irregularities. he saw deficiencies in the election process. he raised those. he was being told under oath by people around the country that there were problems with the election. he also saw in realtime that the rules were changing without the state legislatures weighing in, and ultimately he had every right, in fact, a responsibility as the united states president to raise those issues and now his advocacy is being criminalized. >> well, those are secretaries of state who were making those changes in those states because of the pandemic that was happening. you talk about free speech. jack smith noted trump's right to free speech and to contest the election results but what he says in this indictment is that when that did not work, the defendant, your client, pursued unlawful means of discounting legitimate votes and subverting the election results anna that is why he's being charged here, not because of anything related to free speech. >> yeah, but that's factually inaccurate because the ultimate request that mr. trump made to vice president pence was pause the vote counting, allow the states to weigh ultimately and audit or recertify and under article 2, section 1, clause 2, the actual responsibility for qualifying electors is in the state legislatures. mr. trump had the advice of counsel, mr. eastman, who was one of the most respected constitutional scholars in the united states giving him advice and guidance. that's pure politics. you may disagree with it and people have spirited arguments about the law all the time and that's why lawyers are in business, but we've never had a situation where a spirited debate about the constitution has become a criminal case. what's going to happen when there's a republican administration? is there going to be an effort to criminalize speech by democrats? is there going to be an effort to characterize something that a democrat politician says that's not -- that doesn't meet some kind of true standard at the department of justice? that that's going to be the subject of a criminal indictment? we've now entered a cons constitutional abyss as a result of this indictment. >> but, john, i should note that you're saying he was just asking him to send him -- i was just talking to the chief of staff who was with pence that day. he said he was being asked to do something illegal, that pence did not have the right to do to reject them and you mention the attorneys there that you cited, john eastman a co-conspirator in the indictment. i should note. and the indictment lists all of the people who control trump his claims about election fraud weren't true, including the vice president, senior justice department leaders, the director of national intelligence cisa which is in charge of making election in the united states are secure. senior white house attorneys, campaign staffers, state legislators. >> it's not true that there were states where ballots were sent out without people asking for them. where there were changes in verification, where there were instances where ballots were not being supervised at drop-off places. the president was told given advice that under these circumstances the state legislatures have the ultimate ability to qualify electors. he followed that advice. now, you may disagree as to whether or not those things actually occurred or not. that's why we have political debate. we don't have criminal trials over that. we have the discussion -- >> but it matters if those things actually occurred or not, john. >> not under the first -- >> it matters -- >> not at all -- fraud -- >> no, the first amendment -- >> let me stop you there. if he's saying that there were fraud, the first amendment doesn't allow the president of the united states to go and claim there was fraud when he was told there was no fraud and then try to subvert the election by overturning legitimate electors. i mean, it says it right here in the actual indictment -- >> absolutely, the first amendment protects all speech. if we're going to have i -- if we have a situation where they indict politicians for political speech and whether or not they're factually accurate then this country will shut down politically, because it's a never ending cycle of tit for tat and that's the risk of injecting politics into the criminal justice system. so right now people disagree with president trump. what's going to happen four years from now if somebody disagrees with president biden in terms of what he said during the election? that's why we don't criminalize political speech. political speech under the first amendment has an almost absolute protection. nobody gets to judge whether it's true or not except the american people and we do that in an election. we do that in an election and in the case of a president by impeachment but we don't indict people for speech. >> john, i got to stop you there. but trump is not being indicted for lying here. he is being indicted for using unlawful means of discounting legitimate votes and trying to subvert the election results. >> well, what's the unlawful means? there was an effort to get alternate electors. >> that he was trying to overturn -- yes, fake electors who were not legitimate. >> that was used in 1960 by john kennedy, and it was a protocol that constitutionally accepted, so there's nothing wrong about that, in fact, in the indictment itself it doesn't allege that there was anything wrong. and the final ask that mr. trump made to vice president pence was simply pause the voting. there's nothing inherently unconstitutional or illegal about that, in fact, he had an opinion from a very well-known constitutional scholar that said that's fine, that that's legal. mr. trump is not a lawyer. he's -- >> his own attorney said that was not fine, that that was certainly illegal that he was asking -- they weren't just asking for a pause. he was asking to overturn the legitimate results but, john, let me ask you -- is trump going to show up in person, john, let me ask you this, is trump going to show up in person for his arraignment on thursday? >> that's up to the court. the court makes those decisions so we're prepared to follow whatever the court rules are. the judge issued a summons and he will appear either virtually or in person. >> okay, so it's not clear if it's virtually or in person but one thing -- >> it's up to the judge. >> your client -- >> you have to look at his last -- >> john -- >> you have to look at what he said at the ellipse. >> you good to let me finish. your client, john, is on tape -- the secretary of state of the state of georgia, john, you got to let me finish my point. >> go ahead. >> i let you finish your point. >> absolutely. >> on tape with the former -- with the secretary of state from the state of georgia asking had him to find him one more vote than he would need to win the state. that's not asking for a pause. he's asking for votes he did not get. >> he was asking for the secretary of state to identify votes that were not counted properly and factor that in and, by the way, that discussion took place with dozens of people on a phone call with lawyers involved and no one was suggesting doing anything illegal and no one during that call said, mr. president, that's beyond the bounds. this is politics. this indictment is about pure politics. we engage in vigorous debate in this country about politics. what we don't do is criminalize political speech. this indictment is a game changer. it's the first time that we've taken political speech and said, we're going to criminalize it. by the party that's in control against the party that's contesting the next election where the two individuals involved are going to be running for office. that is an incredible set of circumstances. >> john, if you believe that you have a good defense here for your client do you believe this trial should happen before the 2024 election? >> it should not interfere with the election but really what the indictment has done is identify seven states -- >> should it happen before the election -- for. >> where there were irregularities. i need to look at what evidence will be presented. i can see it lasting nine months or a year but mr. trump is entitled to a defense. the government has had three years to investigate it and now they want to rush this to trial in the middle of a political season. what does that tell you? we deserve as much time as any american citizen to defend on these issues as anyone else and for the government to have three years to do it and then expect us to do it in three weeks or four weeks is just ridiculous. every single person in the united states is entitled to due process including the former president. >> okay, john. well, just note given what your client was saying they took too long to make the charges but john, good to see you. i know we'll see you many times going forward as you're representing the former president in this case. back to you. >> back with van jones, jessica roth, elie honig, david urban and geoff duncan. you heard a lot from the president's -- former president's new attorney, elie, what do you make of his case? >> interesting take. i'm unconvinced by that argument and here's why. even if you take it as a given that it is extremely broad in the realm of political speech it's not true that to quote the lawyer there as he said first amendment protects all speech of the that's not true. one of the lines even if you go all the way out to the margins is fraud. now, lying itself is usually protected by the first amendment but lying to steal something, that is criminal and that is fraud and the theory made in this indictment is that he lied in order to steal the election. there's also factual problems. one being a lot of these statements in the indictment were not made behind a podium or not made to the media. they were made by donald trump and others behind the scenes to try to influence people and so there's much less of a first amendment concern there but i think that's a really fascinating insight into the way they intend to defend the case. >> i think what we just heard is a preview of the defense that they're going to be making up until the trial if there is a trial and at trial and really try to relitigate also whether or not the election was stolen which i find remarkable. there are have been finding after finding after finding that there was no election fraud by courts and yet the defense will be that there was and an argument for delaying the trial is going to be we have to investigate whether there was election fraud. >> the argument he was making while the president is not a lawyer he was listening to great constitutional scholars, i'm not sure if that's rudy giuliani or mr. eastman. both of who are co-conspirators here unindicted at this point. is that a valid argument? >> well, there is such a defense called advice of counsel and defense but requires good faith reliance on your attorney. >> there were plenty of attorneys telling him, i mean, his actual attorneys not the -- >> tork of the united states. >> attorney general, top officials he pointed -- >> top white house attorneys. >> white house counsel's office and he had enough respect for to put in the highest offices at the department of justice telling him there's nothing to the theories these other people we're trying to hard to sideline and not let them speak to you, there's nothing to them, they are false. one way which the indictment is structured masterfully so that it is readable is it goes through all the schemes with respect to each of the contested states and talks about how trump floated a theory that he was given by the lawyers who should not have been participating in these discussions, how he has then told by the lawyers who know better that once he has appointed to government positions that these are false and this entrump goes on to repeat them as though they are truth and so you just see that as a reprise throughout the indictment. he says something, he is told by the lawyers that know better that it's false and goes out and repeats it. >> the reason it's politically effective for trump to do this, first of all, there's no excuse for what he did, and so the last refuge, the scoundrel, the first amendment. this idea that we're being silenced, the kind of grievance culture that trump has created, florida -- there's a group that is silenced and all i'm doing is talking. i'm just -- they won't even let me talk. and that is i think the great poison in the political culture that allows this to resonate with people. >> this is clearly going to be one of the pose watched trials in american history and i think he's playing very much into the pr of trying to convey to the public this argument around the first amendment. the reality is this, at least in the time that i was there and the days afterward is very sound serious respected attorneys across the board gave him the same advice, pat philbin, pat cipollone and decided to bring in actively sought out bad counsel from bad faith actors. >> who by the way had no skin in the game who were just free-floating organisms that showed up. >> correct. you do recall -- >> with the people employed by the white house, by the department of justice who had responsibilities -- >> right. these were being paid directly and maybe not even paid by him. you'll recall on election night rudy giuliani saying just go out and say you win -- you won. these are not good faith actors so i think that's going to be a hard thing to convey but i mean, listen, he will throw every one of those attorneys under the bus to protect himself and stay out of jamie. >> they're all active mes of the bar or at least they were at some point, right, when they're giving advice and, you know, he picked -- he picked his counsel there. he was given advice by lots of people. i know when i spoke to the president after the election and i said that he lost, he said, i'm not so sure i lost and that was only a few days afterwards so i don't know at what point he was convinced. i know alyssa has a different -- some different experiences with the former president, but, you know, if he believes -- like his lawyer just said, if he believes he really didn't lose and he was -- his right to fight, that's what you'll hear more and more of and will have this intersection between political activity, legal advocacy and criminal conspiracy and where do those meet? we'll find out. >> what were the words he spoke to you. >> can't believe i lost to this efing guy pointing to joe biden on fox news. i don't know if he convinced himself he did, in fact, win the election. i can't speak to that but the most compelling legal argument i believe he could make is i thought that i had won. i didn't. i was wrong. i was too fool oh to realize that but donald trump will knot do this. this from what i get from john lauro will turn into the show trial and go to seven states and relitigate the election was stolen and try to drag this on, drag the american bub through it past election day and who knows what happens. >> on the timing of this, you know, his point is, well, it took 2 1/2 years to bring charges, you you want us to -- we should have all the time in the world to defend our client. >> they're trying to have it both ways, obviously, by making that argument. i think that they don't need that much time, because these things have been thoroughly litigated. >> i mean these have been battled out -- >> rejected out of hand every single time which goes to why i didn't rely on the advice of counsel in good faith. he was getting feedback in realtime from the courts as well as from the responsible attorneys in the government that these claims were ludicrous. so -- and back to the reliance on counsel, right, the fact that these attorneys are named as co-conspirators. not by name, there's no defense that you can rely upon on advice of counsel when the attorneys are part of the conspiracy. and that is what is alleged. >> geoff, as somebody from lieutenant governor -- former lieutenant governor in georgia he is now relitigating what he was saying on that call that, well, he just wanted to find legitimate votes that were out there. >> i'm not a lawyer and y'all don't even let me play one on tv, so i see this as that indictment is 45 pages calling donald trump a liar and his early signs of defense was he was dumb. like both disqualify you politically from being president of the united states and the big winner in this process continues to be joe biden. right? nobody in the republican party talked about his failing record, his unpopular polling numbers, what he's dongen 0 the border, his lack of progress, we got downgraded today by fitch. our long-term debt got downgraded in the u.s. today. who is mentioned? we try to defend donald trump. his failed record, his embarrassing activities as president and afterwards. >> geoff, "the new york times" just had a poll that has him beating joe biden today. >> i don't think leaders run on polls. >> i understand. >> leaders in this day and age, this party needs leadership and if we want to follow mols we'll get more of what we got now and that's lack of leadership. >> i understand but if you're saying -- if you're going to be a principled candidate in this current debris you'll stand on the stage on august 23rd and milwaukee and you'll say your peace and say it and it's going to fall on deaf ears. >> the winning strategy has got to be twofold. you have to assume is this will carry too much weight and donald trump will fall. if he doesn't fall he's the nominee and then he gets beat by joe biden. if he falls and starts to weigh on him and we have a candidate that's willing to stand up and talk about the issues, that talking about looking forward. >> what if he doesn't fall? what -- >> then the trial goes on afterward. >> then he loses to joe biden. >> but what if he doesn't -- >> if he doesn't lose to -- >> second term as president than i did as first term. >> i think gutting the department of justice, i think that he's laid out pretty clearly what a second term would look like and it's incredibly damaging by the country. seven in ten americans don't want joe biden or donald trump. it's a sad day in america. >> back to jake in d.c. >> thanks so much. back now with the panel here, abby phillip, jamie gangel, dana bash and andrew mccabe. andy, let me start with you. because, one of the strengths to the case put forward by both the special counsel and also the january 6th committee is how much of the testimony is from not just republicans, but from trump supporting republicans, people who are with him at the very, very end. and one of them is the then acting attorney general, acting deputy attorney general rather, richard donoghue and i interviewed him and talked to him some months ago about the scheme put forward by jeffrey clark who is mentioned as co-conspirator number four. in which he was trying to get donoghue and the acting attorney general jeffrey rosen to write letters to state, specifically georgia, but also others, saying that -- lying that there were -- that the justice department had identified serious problems with the election and i asked donoghue go that. let's roll that clip if we can. >> that a letter claimed that the u.s. department of justice's investigations have, quote, identified significant concerns that may have impacted the outcome of the election in multiple states including the state of georgia, unquote. was that true? >> no. it would have created chaos in the states. i think that would have been disastrous for our country and constitution. >> wasn't that the point of that, to create that chaos? >> i think so, yes. >> so this isn't a first amendment issue despite the fact that trump's lawyer was talking about that. it's a scheme, it's a conspiracy to lie, to undo the election and perhaps even cause riots in the street >> that's absolutely right. so and i think elie honig put it well in the last segment. you cannot lie for the purpose of cheating and stealing, people of anything. right? there are multiple criminal astronauts in this country, wire fraud, mail fraud, all of these statutes criminalize people who use deceit to steal from others. what you see in this 45-page indictment is a sweeping effort by the former president of the united states to basically steal the franchise from over 81 million americans. that's what is happening. he is trying to steal the election. it is the heart of what's referred to in 18 usc 1512, the obstructing official proceeding, it is required that your obstruction be corrupt. this is the heart of corruption. he is doing it to bring himself back into the most sacred office in our country, and all of his co-conspirators, jeffrey clark, first among them, are going along with it, are perpetuating these lies like the letter you just referred to in an effort to secure power and position and esteem to themselves and jeffrey clark when confronted by i think it's the deputy white house counsel, having that conversation, the depsey white house counsel says to him that essentially what he is provoking will be riots in the streets, jeffrey clark says, well, that's what the insurrection act is for. like, acknowledging, i know that this scheme may result in massive social and political unrest and potentially rioting and violence, but he's okay with that because of what is in it for him. >> well, what you mean by that, the insurrection act, that's what it's for then donald trump will be able to use the military. >> flood the streets with military and suppress the rebellion. >> this idea, this argument that we heard that the first amendment protects all speech, it does not. >> it doesn't. >> that is a lie. i mean, they can't even tell the truth when they're outlining their defense. >> and here we go again, i mean, this proceeding is now going to become an extension of election denial and what donald trump did, you know, liz cheney has said many times, both during the hearing and since that donald trump remains a clear and present danger because he has perpetuated this. we just saw one of his counsel walking down the same road. >> and let me pick up on that because we've talked so much about what's in this indictment really being very reminiscent, even trump's lawyer said so of what the january 6th committee spelled out. when liz cheney, the republican, the vice chair of the committee, when she concluded her remarks, she outlined trump's campaign in so many ways, the conspiracy that's laid out here, to lie about the election, the pressure on the vice president to knock out the electric tort votes and efforts to corrupt the justice department, the push on election offices to change the result. the fake elect tore scheme, summoning the mob to the capitol and directing hem to the capitol and said this after outlining all of those different parts of the conspiracy on successive days. >> every one of these elements of the planning for january 6th is an independently serious matter. they were all ultimately focused on overturning the election, and they all have one other thing in common, donald trump participated in each substantially and personally. he oversaw or directed the activity of those involved. >> she sacrificed her political career to make that argument before the american people. one of the most conservative republicans in the house of representatives. >> and what she said is echoed in various ways in this indictment. even goes a little further. she's saying that he was involved, and what this indictment is saying is that he directed it >> that's what she said, he oversaw or directed. >> and this gives a little bit more meat on the bone to the directing it, because they had access to documents and witnesses that the january 6th committee didn't have, and just to sort of add to that, particularly what you were talking about, jamie, about donald trump, using this and will use this to once again try to relitigate the election lies, the fact that we have seen republican presidential candidate after candidate after candidate come out this evening, his opponents, people who want to beat him in the race to be the republican nominee totally sidestepping the core and the substance of what this is and just going on even somebody like tim scott, who like other members of congress, was there on january 6th, his response is, i'm concerned about the weaponization of biden's doj and its immense power and it's like cut and paste. >> yeah. >> whatever it is that they think that they need to say and the only person -- only a few people who have actually addressed the claims were mike pence because he didn't have any choice because of the fact that he was so involved this this and the two people, hutchinson who you had on and i haven't seen chris christie but i'm sure he will say the same thing, the people who are -- the rest of the people who are running against him are running towards him and helping to support these lies in doing so. >> what's important, abby phillip, we don't hear most of these republicans who are still afraid of offending trump's base of addressing any of the facts and findings this evidence that are laid out here. not at all. >> no, because i think on the one hand, a lot of it is not defensible. they all know just like we do that these were lies, but the republican base actually does believe a lot of this stuff. you even heard it from trump's lawyer tonight, john lauro, sort of sugar coating it and saying, well, you know, trump had doubts about whether the state legislatures had the authority to do that. it talks about trump making up things out of whole cloth talking about dead voters, you know, in georgia and then being explicitly told that that was not true. his own campaign staff saying that this was all made up stuff. the other things that is striking to me about this indictment and i think the other thing that republicans who are running for president don't want to acknowledge is that if any one of these things had succeeded, we would be having an entirely different conversation. i think the trump defense will hinge on this idea that it was just words and not the words are meaningless and don't hurt anybody because it's all politics, they can only do that because this stuff did not succeed. had any of these plots succeeded, the fake electors, the effort to use mike pence to roll back the election results, the effort to install, you know, officials into the doj to use the justice department to overturn election results, if any of those things had actually succeeded we would be having a totally different conversation that would -- it would have been, you would see in this document trump really being charged with trying to steal, i mean, trying to steal an election and i think that would be even harder for republicans to discount. >> unless he succeeded, of course. >> yeah. >> we're going to have to leave it there. coming up next, best-selling trump biographer maggie haberman will join us. >> announcer: "the source with kaitlan n collins" brought to y by jpmorgan chase,e, celebratin the people that uplift community, jpmorgan chase is here to make it happen. and now itpans the globe. you wanna take what was given you and you wanna build it. and you wanna pass it along. if i can do that, i would have done well. that's why we're here... to help make it happen. meet the team... behind the team. the coach. the manager. and the snack dad. all using chase to keep up with their finances. the coach helps save goals here, because she saved for soccer camp there. anddd check this out... the manager deposited a check. magic. and the snack dad? he's getting paid back. orange slicesss. because this team all has chase. smart bankers. convenient tools. one bank with the power of both. chase. make more of what's yours. i need it cool at night. you trying to ice me out of the bed? baby, only on game nights. you know you are retired right? am i? ya! save up to $500 on the new sleep number® smart bed. plus, free home delivery when you add an adjustable base. shop now only at sleep number®. what do we always say, son? liberty mutual customizes your car insurance... so you only pay for what you need. that's my boy. ♪ stay off the freeways! only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ we got our first inkling when the former president posted this began with an attack on the special counsel jack smith which doesn't bear repeating. i should note. it's something you see frequently from the former president. joining us now is someone who knows the former president backward and forward, cnn political analyst and "the new york times" senior washington correspondent and best-selling trump biographer maggie haberman. thanks for joining me. i wonder, as we had been bracing for this indictment waiting for it to come down, as you read through it, what stood out to you? >> a couple of things, kaitlin. number one, much of this was known. much of this was in the public domain or was uncovered by the house select committee run by liz cheney and some of her colleagues so look at this two years of investigative work that preceded there and it's all there. it's all very clear. there were a couple of threads they boil down, jack smith's team boiled down into a three conspiracies that he says took place and that trump was at the center of. what is striking is the therapy -- few new details they have are from, say, mike pence who talked about private conversations he had trump and had his notes subpoenaed. that's why they show up there. there is an effort by jack smith in this indictment to say that what trump did goes beyond free speech and goes beyond free political expression and was using the government to try to carry out these conspiracies, you're going to hear trump's team respond that this was free speech and he believed the election was stolen and you will continue hearing that. >> yeah, we just heard that from john lauro a few moments ago trying to make that argument about the fake elector scheme remarkably but we often know, you and i have covered trump for several years, you much longer, he tries to project a sense of bravado when something like this is coming and announced before the indictment came down that he believed it was coming. what is your sense of what he really feels about this indictment and the charges and the people that the special counsel has spoken to in this? >> it's a great question, kaitlin, and you are correct. he loves to project bravado and loves to be in control and have every moment exist on his terms. that's why he's tried to narrate his own indictments over the three that have happened but behind the scenes he's angry, much more rattled than he is projecting being, again, as you say, everything with him is about appearances and he wants to give off the appearance that everything is fine. he is very upset. folks around him are very upset. on the one hand they were relieved reading this indictment that there were no more details that they didn't know that were in it. on the other there was a reference to six co-conspirators and that raises questions about will anyone else face charges and will more details be revealed if that happens? >> and i think that's really critical here, because -- you're right about the new detays that came from pence's notes and pat cipollone, asking him to stand down on the election. you know, rejecting certifying the votes part but the fact that there are six unindicted co-supporters that could become indicted co-conspirators, the idea those indictments could shed a lot of light on what they were also doing behind the scenes. >> that's right, and, again, to be clear they have not named these people and we don't know that they will face charges but the way we've seen jack smith do these indictments, he starts out with a certain piece and then he expands. we saw him expand in the documents case last week with a superseding indictment and a new co-defendant for trump who works for him. you are seeing in this, this sprawl around trump's world. how many people this indictment touches on and i think that always creates a sense of anxiety for trump because as we said before he likes to project control and have control so much. >> and what about mark meadows? i mean, the idea he is not mentioned here by name in this indictment. obviously there's been suspicion in trump world that he was cooperating with the special counsel's team. what is your sense of his role in all of this and, of course, whether or not trump believes he's actually cooperating? >> well, trump is very suspicious about meadows and has been for some time but trump is suspicious about a wide range of people and often doesn't necessarily mean anything. i don't know that meadows is cooperating. i don't think anybody knows except for meadows and his lawyer and one or two other people but it's clear that mark meadows, we know he testified. we know he spoke with investigators. it's clear there are some scenes in there that he had knowledge of and i suspect they asked him about it and that they used what he said if it was confirming for what the bigger picture they were looking at but there's nothing in there so far that suggests either that mark meadows was providing extensive information that they didn't have access to already or that mark meadows might face charges, again, we don't know what we don't know. we don't know what else prosecutors have. but on the face of it that's what this looks like, there's shades of meadows in there. there's shades of mike pence in there. but beyond that it doesn't look like there's a lot to grab on to. >> maggie haberman, thank you, anderson, back to you. >> kaitlin, thanks. my next guest, michael luttig provided a stark warning and said our democracy can on a knife's edge. reacting he writes, the former president is neither a victim nor a martyr today. america is donald trump's victim. donald trump has martyred america for his own selfish personal and political ambitions. judge luttig joins me now. appreciate you being with us on this sad day. you also said in your statement tonight that, quote, these are as grave of offenses against the united states as a president could commit, save possibly treason. are you satisfied with the scope, the substance of the indictment? >> anderson, thank you for having me with you tonight. this is an historic day. it's also a tragic day and it is also a regrettable day for america. for the first time in american history, a president of the united states has been indicted. he will be prosecuted now. he will be tried for grave offenses against the united states. those grave offenses are the offenses that he committed on -- in and around january 6th in his efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election and for his role in the attack on the u.s. capitol on january 6th in order to obstruct and impede the joint session in its accounting of the electoral votes. i have not had an opportunity to study the indictment, anderson, but it's pretty straightforward and all that's -- that jack smith has done here is charge the president with the specific crimes under the specific provisions of the criminal code that relate to his effort to overturn the election and the attack on the u.s. capitol. these are grave offenses. as you said, they are as grave offenses as an incumbent president could commit against the united states with the possible exception of treason. donald trump, though, has decided to inflict this ordeal on the nation, on any day since january 6th, he could have avoided and prevented this indictment today. he chose not to, and so the nation's in for a spectacle, a spectacle that the former president wanted, that means for the next year and a half, the former president will be on trial for criminal offenses against the united states while he's campaigning for the presidency as the presumptive republican nominee for the american presidency. >> the former president's allies are making the argue. he was just exercising his right to question the integrity of the election. is that a valid argument? >> it is not, anderson. the president does not -- the former president does not have a first amendment defense of any sort to the specific charges that have now been lodged against him by the grand jury and jack smith. >> we should note you advised then vice president pence not to interfere with the electoral college sectorification. there are six co-conspirators alleged in the indictment. none of them has been charged as of yet. why do you think that might be? >> i don't know, and we don't know, anderson. one possibility and it's only a possibility is that jack smith wanted to indict the former president before indicting the co-conspirators so that he could circle back around to the co-conspirators and ask them if they had -- if they would like to cooperate with the investigation. in return either for a plea or their testimony against the former president at trial. >> the special counsel made a point of saying that he wants this to be a speedy trial. i'm wondering if you have an opinion of what you think a reasonable time line is for the trial and do you think the american public has a compelling interest to see this adjudicated before the 2024 election, before they cast a vote? >> let me answer that second question, first, anderson. i believe that the american public does have a compelling interest in having the president -- former president tried before the 2024 election, and i do believe that he will be tried before the election occurs. now the case is within the federal court system. the federal judiciary will determine the time line already in the classified documents case. the federal judge has set the trial for, i believe, april, long before the election. i expect the federal district judge in this case to set the trial for this set of offenses in or around the same date. in either event, it gives the federal judiciary and the defendant, the former president, more than ample opportunity under due process to have his case heard by a jury of his peers. >> just finally, one other thing you said in your statement i wanted to read to people, these events will forever scar and stain the united states and they will forever scar and stain the united states in the eyes of the world, never again will the world be inspired by america's democracy and the way it has been inspired since america's founding almost 250 years ago. that is a profoundly grave assessment. >> it is, anderson, but i believe it's correct, and i believe it's warranted. if you just think about what's happened here, you have a president of the united states of america who sought to overturn a presidential election that he had lost fair and square, and in order to accomplish that, you know, he gave rise to an attack on the united states capitol for the purpose and with the intent of disrupting, if not preventing altogether, the counting of the electoral votes for the presidency of the united states, which is in america a sacred proceeding, a sacred proceeding of our democracy, anderson. it just does not get much graver than that, if any at all. >> judge luttig, i appreciate you being with us tonight. thank you. >> you bet, thank you, anderson. >> just ahead we'll speak to a top elections official from michigan and we'll go back to the federal courthouse in washington, d.c. like a smart coffee grindeder, thatat orders fresh beans for you. oh, genius! for more breakthrhroughs like that- i need a breakthrough card. like ours! with 2.5% cash back on purchases of $5,000 or more. plus unlimited 2% cash back on all other purchases. and with greater spending potential, sam can keep making smart ideas- a brilliant reality! the ink business premier card from chase for business. make more of what's yours. ♪ when you have chronic kidney disease... there are places you'd like to be. like here. and here. not so much here. if you have chronic kidney disease, farxiga can help you keep living life. ♪ farxiga ♪ and farxiga reduces the risk of kidney failure, which can lead to dialysis. farxiga can cause serious side effects including dehydration, urinary tract or genital yeast infections in women and men, and low blood sugar. ketoacidosis is a serious side effect that may lead to death. a rare life-threatening bacterial infection in the skin of the perineum could occur. stop taking farxiga and call your doctor right away if you have symptoms of this bacterial infection, an allergic reaction, or ketoacidosis. farxiga can help you keep living life. ask your doctor for farxiga for chronic kidney disease. if you can't afford your medication, astrazeneca may be able to help. ♪ farxiga ♪ my cpa told me i wouldn't qualify for the erc tax refund, so i called innovation refunds. their team of independent tax attorneys will work with your cpa to determine if your company is eligible. [whip sound] take the first step to see if your small business qualifies. >> the state of michigan was mentioned at least 39 times in the indictment, in large part because of the state's role in the fake electors conspiracy. i'm joined by michigan secretary of state joscelyn benson. secretary benson, thanks so much for joining us. you were interviewed back in march by federal prosecutors. what is your reaction to the indictment today? >> i have two emotions. one, an enormous sense of gratitude for the hard work that the very meticulous work that went into these indictments these historic indictments, that are rooted in a really broad ranging investigation that will, i believe, support the indictments in a court of law. the second is kind of a reminder of what we lived through in 2020, and just how pretty unprecedented it was to clear the smoke, and really it was an attempt by the president of united states of the time to overturn a legitimate presidential election, leading to violence outside our state capital and u.s. capitol on january 6th. unprecedented extraordinary events that unfolded, coupled with my gratitude that we will see accountability, i hope, and consequences for those actions, i kind of combined color my response today in my reaction today, and then just hope that we can ultimately move forward from this and have a stronger morrow bust democracy as we head into 2024. >> federal prosecutors lay out in the indictment how michigan was one of the seven battleground states allegedly targeted by trump and his coconspirators, with these fake electors scheme. obviously just two weeks ago the michigan attorney general filed felony charges against 16 people in that scheme. there are other charges laid out today against two other individuals. how critical do you think what happened in michigan is to this federal case? >> when we were the eye of the storm, in michigan, as well as georgia and other states that were mentioned in the indictment, but what we went through in michigan, although we were the first day to go through the certification process really was an attempt to set the ball the tone for what would be attempted in the other states. there is a rich collection of facts in individuals behind those facts, attempts that were made and the levers that were pulled to try to block the will of the people. it was abundantly clear throughout the postelection process. so i'm not surprised that michigan continues to be a centerpiece of this investigation, because as we lived through it in the post election era of 2020, we certainly know that our work in michigan to protect the election results was going to, in many ways, set the tone for what happened in other states and the national level. >> and the indictment lays out the many instances in which trump publicly claimed there were suspicious vote dumps in detroit, which were not suspicious after all for anybody who had been paying attention. not to mention his repeated attempts to get key republicans in michigan to go along with his lies about fraud, and they refused, in the indictment, and they told trump repeatedly there was not fraud on any scale that would have changed the outcome of the election. the indictment alleges trump knew his claims of fraud were false. and you confident that that's true, that he knows it's false? >> he either knows they were false or is living in a state of denial despite an abundance of facts that would indicate they were false, but other which are troubling to me. both of which -- the reality is the fall slate of electors was submitted long after the legal process have been exhausted, long after a lot of the arguments have been made and rejected by individuals, lawmakers, on both sides of the aisle as well as in courts of law. so there's no reason for anyone to believe, in my view, after the certification process and the challenges have been dismissed, that the results of michigan's elections were anything but an accurate reflection of the will of the people. but notably, as more evidence built, showing that those results were accurate, the attempts to overturn those results escalated and became more vitriolic and more potentially violent, of course leading into the tragedy january 6th. so that was what was also compounding at the time. >> secretary benson, thank you for your time this evening. appreciate it. kaitlan? >> great to get her perspective on this. obviously she's been at the center of it. i'm joined by cnn legal affairs consultant paula reid. paulo, we've been tracking this all day in the question is what does thursday look like? trump's attorneys leaving open the possibility that it could be in person or virtual. what are the options here? >> they have the option to do this via zoom. he can appear via screen, inside the court, to handle his initial appearance and or arraignment. we know he has appeared in the previous two initial appearances and arraignments. you and i were there in manhattan. that was a circus. then we were also in miami when he did this. and he got a little fuller because there were some space between the motorcade and the entrance to the courthouse, but if he comes here, it would be unlikely that he would even get his photo op because he would likely come in the garage. this courthouse you see used to dealing with vips. so he wouldn't necessarily get the photo op. it's a huge hassle for him, so it seems like, while i understand the recovering lawyer in me showing up in person, showing respect for the process, showing you are taking it seriously, given all the logistics that come with the former president, he might want to explore the zoom option and make it easy for everyone. >> what about the judge. i know she's weighed in on january six rioters before. >> he's also known that d.c. would not be a friendly district for a lot of reasons. down in florida he has a different situation because the judge was going to hear that case, judge cannon, he appointed that judge, which is of course a very unusual unprecedented circumstance, but here he he will initially go before a magistrate judge and that will be assigned to a judge. the jury pool is arguably the bitter obstacle for him. his own lawyers have said they are concerned that he won't be able to get a fair jury he'll hearing here in d.c.. but that's a long way off. >> it's remarkable to hear john lauro say they could attend potentially take this in nine months to a year. which can surprise me because that would be before the election. >> it would. it would surprise me, as well. if they really wanted to put their client through a trial before the 2024 election, because it had been very clear down in florida they have argued that it would be unfair to do this while he is running for the white house. so yeah, maybe technically he can do it in 9 to 12 months, but i'm not sure they actually want to do that. but we'll see. we can also make the argument if you believe your client is innocent, why not clear his name before the election? >> yeah. we'll see what they'll decide to. do pollard, i'm sure we'll be here on thursday. thank you. >> kaitlan, it seems like we're always saying this data that has been historic, but perhaps we'll find the best way to describe this knowing the next one is just days away. >> and it is thursday, just two days from now, whether in person or by video link. a former american president will face charges for doing what no president has ever been accused of before. >> and of course we will be there when he does. right now the news is going to continue. thank you so much for joining us, we want to turn things over to cnn prime time with laura coats and erin burnett.

Related Keywords

Donald J Trump , The Push On Election , People , Effort , Violence , Democracy , Mob , U S Capitol , Property , Supporters , U S , New York , Jake Tapper , 2 1 , President , Anderson , Law , Corrupt The Justice Department , Courthouse , D C , Enforcement , Preparation , Kaitlin Collins Outside The D C , In Washington , Jack Smith , Case , Indictments , Documents , Evening , First , Listen , Arraignment , Two , Indictment , Attack , Nation S Capital On January 6th , Assault , Seat , American Democracy , January 6th 2021 , 6 , 2021 , Government , Process , Defendant , Lies , Capitol , Results , Counting , Collecting , Nation , Bedrock Function , Investigation , Department Of Justice , Accountability , Others , Quitment , Special Counsel Smith , Members , Capitol On January 6th , Law Enforcement , Patriots , January 6th , Charges , Conspiracy , Counts , Proceeding , Charge , Obstruction , Four , Co Conspirators , Wall , Constitution , Rights , Six , Attorneys , Rudy Giuliani , John Eastman , Five , Screen , Sixth , Cnn , One , Kenneth Chesebro , White House , Merrick Garland , Jefffully Clark , White House Counsel , Order , Commitment , Philadelphia , Facts , Mr , Team , Matter , Prosecutors , Questions , Independence , Career Agents , Defense , John Lauro , Attorney , Courtroom , Filings , Fact , Nothing , Speech , Advocacy , Focus , Amendment , Committee Report , Regurgitation , J 6 , Administration , Focussing , The End , History Of The United States , Country , Irregularities , Problems , Position , Free Speech , Election Process , Deficiencies , Oath , He Saw , State Legislatures , Issues , Realtime , Responsibility , Right , Saw , Rules , States , Estate , Election Results , Changes , Secretaries , Pandemic , Criminalized , Votes , Client , Anything , Discounting , Election Results Anna , Means , Mike Pence , Vote Counting , Trump Made To , Request , Advice , Electors , Audit , Section , Recertify , Clause , Article , 2 , 1 , Politics , Lawyers , Scholars , Arguments , Business , Guidance , Him , Situation , Debate , Republican , Democrats , Something , Kind , Result , Doesn T , Politician , Standard , Subject , Cons Constitutional Abyss , Pence , Chief Of Staff , Weren T True , Co Conspirator , Claims , Senior , Justice Department Leaders , State Legislators , Campaign Staffers , Director , Making , Cisa , Ballots , Instances , Places , Verification , Things , Circumstances , Trials , Ability , Isn T A First Amendment , Discussion , Fraud , It Matters , Mail Fraud , First Amendment Doesn T , Politicians , Somebody , Tit For Tat , Risk , Criminal Justice System , Cycle , Injecting , Nobody , Joe Biden , Terms , Protection , Impeachment , Protocol , Ask , John Kennedy , 1960 , Opinion , Fine , Scholar , Voting , Pause , Court , Person , Decisions , Judge , Thing , Summons , Court Rules , Point , Secretary Of State , State Of Georgia , Tape , Last , Ellipse , Vote , Former , Way , Place , No One , Phone Call , Dozens , Bounds , Election , Control , Individuals , Time , Game Changer , Trial , Office , Running , Set , 2024 , Evidence , Is , Nine , Seven , Season , Middle , Three , Anyone , Due Process , Citizen , Times , Argument , Lot , Geoff Duncan , Elie Honig , Elie , Van Jones , Jessica Roth , David Urban , Given , Realm , Lines , Theory , Margins , Scenes , Statements , Media , Concern , Podium , Preview , Insight , Relitigate , Courts , Finding , Both , Counsel , Attorney General , Faith , Tork , Respect , Officials , Offices , Theories , Talks , Schemes , Discussions , Positions , Entrump , Reason , Truth , Excuse , Reprise , Idea , The Scoundrel , Grievance Culture , Culture , Group , Poison , Florida , Reality , Public , Pose , Pr , Skin , Actors , Who By The Way , Board , Bad Faith , Pat Philbin , Pat Cipollone , Organisms , Responsibilities , Recall , Game , Correct , Bus , Election Night , Jamie , Mes , Bar , Lots , Experiences , Alyssa , More , Lawyer , Intersection , Activity , Fight , Words , Guy Pointing , Fox News , Show Trial , It , Election Day , Drag The American , Timing , Bub , World , Ways , Feedback , Name , Reliance , Part , Lieutenant Governor , Call , President Of The United States America , Pages , Signs , Liar , Tv , 45 , Black , Record , Polling Numbers , Winner , Progress , Debt , Fitch , The Border , Dongen 0 , 0 , Leaders , Poll , Activities , The New York Times , Polls , Candidate , Saying , Leadership , Stage , Debris , Mols , August 23rd , 23 , Peace , Ears , Strategy , Weight , Milwaukee , Nominee , Beat , Term , First Term , Thanks , Americans Don T , Panel , Abby Phillip , Jake , Jamie Gangel , Dana Bash , Andrew Mccabe , Ten , Special Counsel , Testimony , Strengths , Forward , January 6th Committee , Andy , Richard Donoghue , Acting Deputy Attorney General , Rather , Jeffrey Clark , Jeffrey Rosen , Scheme , Number , Justice , Letters , Outcome , Quote , Letter , Concerns , Investigations , Clip , Donoghue Go That , Chaos , Wasn T , Yes , Lie , Riots , Issue , The Street , Purpose , Segment , Stealing , Cheating , Astronauts , Statutes , Deceit , Franchise , 81 Million , Heart , Americans , Obstructing Official Proceeding , 1512 , 18 , Corruption , Power , Esteem , Insurrection Act , Conversation , Streets , Depsey , Unrest , It Doesn T , Military , Rebellion , Denial , Liz Cheney , Here We Go Again , Extension , Has , Hearing , Clear And Present Danger , Road , Pressure , Committee , Campaign , Remarks , Electric Tort , Efforts , Elect , Parts , Hem , Planning , Elements , Substantially , Common , Little , House Of Representatives , Career , Bone , Meat , Directed , Add , Witnesses , January 6th Committee Didn T Have , Opponents , Race , Response , Core , Tim Scott , Substance , Congress , Weaponization , Paste , Haven T , Hutchinson , Rest , Choice , Chris Christie , Most , Any , Hand , Base , Offending Trump , Findings , Stuff , Sugar , Doubts , Authority , Voters , Campaign Staff , Cloth , Anybody , Plots , Document Trump , Course , Maggie Haberman , Announcer , The Source With Kaitlan N Collins , Jpmorgan Chase , Uplift Community , Build It , Celebratin , Globe , Help , Coach , Chase For Business , Manager , Save Goals , Snack Dad , Finances , Soccer Camp , Anddd Check This Out , Check , Bankers , Bank , Tools , Magic , Orange Slicesss , Sleep Number , Bed , Smart Bed , Baby , Ya , Home Delivery , Game Nights , 00 , 500 , That S My Boy , Liberty Mutual , Son , Car Insurance , Freeways , Pay , Inkling , Someone , Correspondent , Trump Biographer , Washington , Some , Public Domain , Much , Couple , The House Select Committee Run By , Kaitlin , Number One , Work , Conspiracies , Colleagues , Threads , Center Of , Details , Notes , Conversations , Striking , Therapy , Expression , Elector , Sense , Bravado , Trump , Question , Being , Appearance , Appearances , Everything , Folks , Reference , Detays , Co Supporters , Flight , Behind The Scenes , Co Defendant , Piece , Superseding , Mark Meadows , Anxiety , Role , Suspicion , Meadows , Range , Investigators , Knowledge , Picture , Access , Face , Information , Shades , Michael Luttig , Back To You , Guest , Thank You , Victim , Martyr Today , Knife , Edge , Warning , Offenses , Statement , Grave , Ambitions , Treason , Scope , American History , 2020 , U S Capitol On January 6th , Session , Accounting , Opportunity , Provisions , Crimes , Criminal Code , Exception , Ordeal , Spectacle , Half , Presidency , Campaigning , Integrity , Allies , Sort , Grand Jury , None , Electoral College Sectorification , Possibility , I Don T Know , We Don T Know , Circle , Plea , Time Line , Interest , Adjudicated , Judiciary , Federal Court System , District Judge , Event , Jury , Peers , Events , Eyes , Assessment , 250 , Square , Rise , Intent , Disrupting , America A Sacred Proceeding , Graver , Elections , Michigan , Official , You Bet , Purchases , Cash , Breakthrhroughs , Beans , Genius , Breakthrough Card , Thatat , Coffee Grindeder , 000 , 2 5 , 5000 , Ideas , Ink Business Premier Card , Spending Potential , Sam , Chronic Kidney Disease , Stop Taking Farxiga , Life , Ketoacidosis , Side Effect , Yeast Infections , Kidney Failure , Blood Sugar , Side Effects , Dialysis , Women , Dehydration , Urinary Tract , Men , Reaction , Infection , Doctor , Death , Perineum , Symptoms , Farxiga , Astrazeneca , Tax Refund , Medication , Farxiga My Cpa , Erc , Tax Attorneys , Small Business , Innovation Refunds , Company , Step , Cpa , Sound , 39 , Secretary Benson , Joscelyn Benson , Gratitude , Emotions , Second , Reminder , Attempt , State Capital , Smoke , Consequences , Actions , Stronger Morrow Bust Democracy , 2024 Federal , Felony Charges , Battleground States , Coconspirators , 16 , The Eye Of Storm , Certification Process , Collection , Tone , Ball , Levers , Will , Postelection Process , Centerpiece , Set The Tone , Attention , Level , Detroit , Attempts , Scale , Which , Abundance , Slate , Sides , Aisle , View , Challenges , Reflection , Perspective , Kaitlan , Paula Reid , Center , Option , Paulo , Options , Cnn Legal Affairs , Zoom , Arraignments , Manhattan , Photo Op , Space , Circus , Entrance , Motorcade , Garage , Miami , Vips , Hassle , Logistics , Zoom Option , Everyone , Rioters , Reasons , District , Cannon , Magistrate Judge , Obstacle , Circumstance , Jury Pool , 9 , 12 , Do Pollard , Data , Historic , Video Link , News , Before , Doing , Prime Time , Erin Burnett ,