>>> AND AS REPUBLICANS POSITION MORE ELECTION DENIERS FOR
OFFICE, CNN HAS LEARNED THE FORMER PRESIDENT'S ATTORNEYS
HAVE WARNED HIM HIS EFFORT TO OVERTURN THE 2020 ELECTION COULD
BRING INDICTMENTS. ERIC HOLDER BELIEVES THAT IT
WILL HAPPEN AND WILL PROBABLY INCLUDE TRUMP.
>> MY GUESS IS THAT BY THE END OF THIS PROCESS, YOU ARE GOING
TO SEE INDICTMENTS INVOLVING HIGH LEVEL PEOPLE IN THE WHITE
HOUSE, YOU WILL SEE INDICTMENTS AGAINST PEOPLE OUTSIDE THE WHITE
HOUSE WHO WERE ADVISING THEM WITH REGARD TO THE ATTEMPT TO
STEAL THE ELECTION, AND I THINK THAT ULTIMATELY YOU WILL
PROBABLY SEE THE PRESIDENT, FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED
STATES, INDICTED AS WELL. >> THAT PREDICTION COMES AS CNN HAS LEARNED
TRUMP'S LEGAL TEAM IS IN TALKS WITH THE DOJ OVER EXECUTIVE
PRIVILEGE. >>> MORE SIGNS INVESTIGATORS ARE FOCUSING
ON TRUMP'S ACTIONS ON JANUARY 6 WITH ME TO SHARE THE REPORTING
AND INSIGHTS, MANU RAJU, JACKIE KUCINICH.
IF THE FORMER PRESIDENT'S LAWYERS ARE IN DIRECT
COMMUNICATION WITH SENIOR ATTORNEYS AT THE JUSTICE
DEPARTMENT THAT TELLS YOU WHAT? >> IT TELLS ME THAT THEY ARE
LOOKING FOR INFORMATION BY ENGAINS WITH A DIALOGUE WITH THE
JUSTICE DEPARTMENT, I THINK THAT THEY ARE THERE IN PART TO BE
ABLE TO BY ASKING QUESTIONS FIND OUT AS MUCH AS THEY POSSIBLY CAN
ABOUT THE SCOPE OF THE INVESTIGATION.
ABOUT WHETHER MARK MEADOWS IS GOING TO BE CHARGED.
ABOUT HOW CLOSE THE INVESTIGATION IS COMING TO THE
FORMER PRESIDENT. SO WHILE THEY CAN ENGAGE IN
CONVERSATION ABOUT EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE AND ATTORNEY/CLIENT
PRIVILEGE, I THINK THE MOST THAT THEY HAVE TO GAIN THROUGH THESE
MEETINGS IS WHAT THEY CAN GLEAN FROM THEM.
>> A FASCINATING MOMENT THE TIMING.
WE KNOW THE FEDERAL GRAND JURY IS LOOKING INTO THIS, THE FAKE
ELECTORS PLOT, SHOULD WE SEIZE VOTING MACHINE, NOT JUST ABOUT
THE VIOLENCE ON JANUARY 6, IT INCLUDES THE WHO'S WHO OF THE
TRUMP ADMINISTRATION, PEOPLE INVOLVED IN THE PLAN.
TWO TOP AIDES TO MIKE PENCE. WHITE HOUSE COUNSEL AND HIS
DEPUTY. AND ALSO PEOPLE TRYING TO HELP
TRUMP INSIDE THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT AND HIS ATTORNEY JOHN
EASTMAN. YOU LOOK AT THAT GROUP, IF YOU
WERE DONALD TRUMP'S LAWYERS, YOU'D WANT TO KNOW WHAT ARE THEY
SAYING? >> WELL, RIGHT.
THEY ARE TRYING TO DETERMINE WHAT FALLS UNDER EXECUTIVE
PRIVILEGE. BUT I THINK THAT ONE OF THE
THINGS IN THE REPORT THAT REALLY GOT ME WAS THE FACT THAT TRUMP
STILL HAS SKEPTICISM, THAT HE IS GOING TO BE INDICTED.
HE IS NOT CONVINCED. AND THERE ISN'T ANY INDICATION
ONE WAY OR THE OTHER, BUT I THINK THAT SPEAKS TO HOW HE
REALLY HASN'T BEEN HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR MANY THINGS IN
THIS HIS LIFE BOTH INSIDE AND OUT OF
OFFICE. SO WHY TSHOULD THIS BE ANY
DIFFERENT. >> AND THIS STATEMENT FROM A
SPOKESMAN OF THE FORMER PRESIDENT, BUT HOW CAN ANY
FUTURE PRESIDENT EVER HAVE PRIVATE CONVERSATIONS WITH HIS
ATTORNEYS, COUNSELORS OR OTHER SENIOR ADVISERS IF ANY ADVISER
IS FORCED EITHER DURING OR AFTER THE PRESIDENCY IN FRONT OF AN
UNELECT COMMITTEE OR OTHER ENTITY.
IT IS A SELECT COMMITTEE, NOT UNCOLLECT.
IT UNSELECT.
>> AND ALSO WHAT THE DOJ IS TRYING TO DETERMINE IS WHETHER
OR NOT THE PRESIDENT COMMITTED ANY CRIMES.
WHETHER IT WAS DEFRAUDING THE U.S. AND THE ELECTORAL SYSTEM,
WHETHER IT WAS OBJECTING TO, YOU KNOW, OBSTRUCTING -- EXCUSE
ME -- A CONGRESSIONAL PROCEEDING.
SO ULTIMATELY, YES, THE PRESIDENT HAS EXECUTIVE
PRIVILEGE AND CAN HAVE PRIVATE CONVERSATIONS WITH HIS LAWYERS.
BUT IF A LAW WAS BROKEN, THEN THAT IS A DIFFERENT STORY.
>> THE CONVERSATION IS ON DIFFERENT THAN IT WAS A COUPLE
WEEKS AGO WHERE WE DIDN'T KNOW AS MUCH ABOUT WHAT THE GRAND
JURY WAS DOING. WE DIDN'T KNOW THAT MIKE PENCE'S
ATTORNEY AND CHIEF OF STAFF HAD BEEN IN, THAT THEY WERE TRYING
TO GET CIPOLLONE AND PHILBIN INTO THE GRAND JURY.
SO NOW PEOPLE ARE SAYING THAT THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT IS
ACTUALLY DOING SOME SERIOUS BUSINESS.
AMONG THOSE IS LIZ CHENEY, THE TOP REPUBLICAN ON THE COMMITTEE
IN CONGRESS. AND THERE HAVE BEEN SOME
CRITICISM ON CAPITOL HILL AND NOW SHE SAYS MAYBE TRUST THIS.
>> WE'LL CONTINUE TO FOLLOW THE FACTS.
THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE WILL DO THAT.
BUT THEY HAVE TO MAKE DECISIONS ABOUT PROSECUTION UNDERSTANDING
WHAT IT MEANS IF THE FACTS AND THE EVIDENCE ARE THERE AND THEY
DECIDE NOT TO PROSECUTE, HOW DO WE THEN CALL OURSELVES A NATION
OF LAWS. >> THE LAST PART THERE, TRYING
TO ESSENTIALLY TELL THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT MAN UP, BE BRAVE,
DON'T BACK OFF BECAUSE HE IS A FORMER PRESIDENT.
>> AND THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT HAS BEEN MORE PUBLIC ABOUT WHAT
IS HAPPENING. OF COURSE WE DON'T KNOW
EVERYTHING THAT IS GOING ON AND THEY WON'T CONFIRM THE NATURE OF
THE INVESTIGATION. MERRICK GARLAND GIVING THAT
INTERVIEW A COUPLE WEEKS AGO TALKING ABOUT HOW NO ONE IS
ABOVE THE LAW SIGNALS THAT THINGS ARE MOVING HERE IN A
DIFFERENT PACE THAN A LOT OF PEOPLE HAD EXPECTED.
AND THE PLAYERS WHO HAVE TESTIFIED BEFORE THE GRAND JURY
ARE ALSO SIGNIFICANT. SOME OF THOSE FOLKS INCLUDING
THE PEOPLE CLOSE TO THE FORMER VICE PRESIDENT MIKE PENCE
TESTIFIED OF COURSE AND SELECT COMMITTEE SHOWING DONALD TRUMP'S
CONCERTED EFFORT TO OVERTURN THE ELECTION, HOW MUCH OF THAT IS A
FOCUS OF THE INVESTIGATION TOO. THAT IS A QUESTION HERE.
AND ALSO THE COMMITTEE IS PROVIDING THIS INFORMATION TO
THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT. SO WHETHER THEY ARE PURSUING
SIMILAR LINES HERE, DONALD TRUMP'S ROLE, IT APPEARS THAT
THEY MIGHT BE. >> IS THERE A CLEAR LINE ON THIS
PRIVILEGE QUESTION AND DOES IT IMPACT PRIVILEGE ISSUES AT ALL
IF YOU BRING TO A JUDGE THAT MANY OF THE SAME PEOPLE DID
TESTIFY TO THE JANUARY 6 COMMITTEE, IS THAT COMPLICATED,
CLEAN IT UP? >> I THINK THE PRIVILEGE ISSUES,
FIRST OF ALL, EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE REALLY BELONGS TO THE
CURRENT PRESIDENT. THERE IS ARGUMENTS THAT FORMER
PRESIDENT CAN ASSERT IT, BUT PRESIDENT BIDEN HAS REALLY MADE
CLEAR THAT AS TO JANUARY 6 MATTERS, HE IS NOT CLAIMING
EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE AND HE IS THE SITTING EXECUTIVE.
THE SECOND THING IS THAT CRIMES AS WAS SAID EARLIER, CRIMES ARE
NOT OF A -- ALLOWED TO BE OVERCOME BY THE EXECUTIVE
PRIVILEGE. SO IF THERE IS EVIDENCE OF A
CRIME, THEN THAT IS GOING TO TRUMP CLAIMS OF EXECUTIVE
PRIVILEGE OR ATTORNEY CLIENT PRIVILEGE.
>> WELL PLAYED. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.