A spokesperson for
Georgia Governor Brian Kemp confirms
that Jack Smith's office
has contacted Kemp,
but declined to release
any further details.
You'll recall
Trump push
Kemp to overturn Georgia's 2020
presidential election results
after he narrowly
lost the state to Joe Biden.
CNN's Marshall Cohen joins us now.
Marshall,
the Target letter has already gone out
to the former president.
That means an indictment
could come at any time.
We thought there was a possibility
could happen
late this past week,
like yesterday, for example.
So maybe in the coming days
here very shortly.
Is it a surprise?
Should it be a surprise
that the special counsel
is still talking
to people like the governor of Georgia
as part of this case?
You know, I'm
not too surprised
because there were so many people, Jim,
that were the target
of Donald Trump's efforts in 2020
to overturn this election.
So there's a lot of people to talk to
who they want to interview first,
who they want to interview last.
That's up to the prosecutors.
But Brian Kemp is a big name.
Don't forget
that during that critical period in 2020
after Trump lost the state of Georgia.
But before
the inauguration in January 21,
Donald Trump spoke
repeatedly with Brian Kemp in public
and in private.
Trump
tried to twist
Kemp's arm to get him to basically
violate
his oath of office
and step in to overturn
the results in Georgia.
So those conversations
between Kemp and Trump,
I can imagine that's
what the prosecutors
are going to be asking
Once they eventually get him
maybe in front of the grand jury,
perhaps an FBI interview,
we're not quite sure at this time.
But as you mentioned,
with that target letter
going out to former
President Trump, an indictment
really could come at any minute.
That's typically the next step.
And in the classified
documents case, the judge in this case,
Judge Aileen Cannon,
set the trial date for May 20th.
20, 24.
Assuming that it happens on on that date
and of course, it could slip
beyond that that will be in the thick
or actually it will be sort of
after the presidential
Republican primary elections
have kind of wrapped up.
Trump could have
this thing wrapped up the primary process
before this trial even starts.
He could
he may be the presumptive
nominee by the time this trial kicks off.
If the trial schedule means
it's not going to get earlier.
It might go later.
Yeah.
But yeah, if it holds,
he might be the presumptive nominee
at that point in time in 2016.
He already was
everyone else had dropped out.
But this decision from Judge Cannon,
who is a Trump appointee,
you know,
she did not give Trump
everything he wanted here.
He asked for a frankly,
he asked her
not even to put a date
on the calendar yet.
And if you really, really had to
make it in 2025.
She did not go there.
She put it in May 24
but that's a lot later than what
special counsel Jack Smith wanted.
He wanted this trial to take place
in December of this year.
Presumably
there would have been a verdict
before the end of the year
before anyone cast a ballot
because of course Jim,
the Iowa caucuses are in January.
Yeah, coming very soon.
All right.
Marshall Cohen, thank you very much.
Joining me now
is the Michigan secretary of state,
Jocelyn Benson.
Secretary, thanks so much for joining us.
We appreciate.
Great to talk to you again
on this program.
You were also interviewed
by Justice Department prosecutors
as part of the special counsel probe.
It seems, though,
there is a focus on what took place
at the state level
in places like Michigan and in Georgia
and so on.
We were just talking
with our Marshall Cohen a few moments ago
that there has been some interest
at the special counsel's office
in Georgia, Governor Brian Kemp.
Can you talk about the importance
of what took place
at the state level
between the 2020 election and January six
and why that might be
critically important
to the special counsel?
Yeah, and thanks for having me.
I think what this really reveals
is the again, the multifaceted,
nationally coordinated effort
we were facing in the states
like Georgia
and Michigan and Arizona in 20, 20
that really did take place on the ground.
I mean, people
who are
claiming falsely
to be electors of the state
showed up at our state capitol.
People showed up outside my home.
And I think a lot of the investigation
at the federal level
should focus
not just and needs to focus
not just on the effort
to undo the election results,
but on the violence that followed
and the threats that came
towards our election officials,
because that was the precursor
for the tragedy that unfolded at
our Capitol on January six.
And let's talk about the
case in Michigan
of the new charging
documents are revealing
the attorney general's
case against 16
Republicans accused of trying
to subvert the 2020 election
process by falsely claiming
that Donald Trump won the presidency.
The fake electors are charged
with forgery and conspiracy
to commit election forgery.
If convicted,
they face up to 14 years in prison
Your reaction
to these charges being filed
and what I guess some of them are saying
which is they
don't think
they did anything wrong in this case.
Well, first, I'm gratified
that the felony charges were filed.
I think it reflects
the gravity
of what was attempted
in 2020 in Michigan.
And frankly in other states as well.
And it wasn't just a you know
wish in a ceremonial attempt
to sign some things
and say symbolically
these are our electors.
This was an actionable attempt
to physically disrupt
the Electoral College
and the transmission
of the Electoral College votes
from Michigan
to the United States government.
And, you know,
it's important
that we see consequences
for what happened in Michigan
in 20, 20 at the state and federal level,
because right now, as we prepare
for another presidential election
next year,
we need to assure voters
and be assured ourselves
that this isn't going to happen again.
And so seeking consequences
now for what happened in the past
will help us prevent
a recurrence of these instances in
the future.
And let me ask you this
one argument that we've heard
from defenders of the
these bogus electors,
no matter what state they were
in, is that they were just preparing
to serve as legitimate electors
in the event
that Trump's
legal efforts in the 2020 election
were successful.
I'm sure you've heard
that argument made before.
They've been made from people inside
Trump World and so on.
What's your response to that?
Yeah, I think we have to look at that
in the context
in which everything was unfolding.
I mean, first
at the time
when these so-called
fake electors allegedly met
in the basement of the state party
Republican Party building,
all of the court cases
had by and large, been resolved.
There had been
the election results had been certified.
We had begun
the process of transmitting
the Electoral College votes,
and we had asked
and answered all the questions.
There were none
there was zero evidence
of any widespread fraud.
All of the evidence suggested
and indicated
the results of the election were
and indeed
are an accurate reflection
of the will of the people.
So there was really no ground
to stand on to
somehow say
that you thought something
was going to happen to somehow
change the results at a later date.
The election was done
and the will of the voters
was unequivocally clear.
And, you know, a lot of Republicans,
including Republican leadership
in the state
legislature, recognized this
and affirmed the results as well.
And so when you look at mayors
and the former co-chair of that party
who chose
instead of
accepting the results
to sign these electors
papers, you have to see
and I think the evidence
shows a willful, intentional effort
to lie about the results
simply because they
didn't agree with them.
And based on what you know,
do you think that this is
a part
of the special counsel's
indictment
that they may be preparing
for the former president
Well, we know that Michigan
was not the only state where the
these shenanigans were attempted.
We know in Wisconsin
and Pennsylvania and Arizona and Georgia
it was a similar effort afoot.
And so when you have
a nationally coordinated effort
like that,
you do need to
have a national consequence.
And so I'm hopeful
that the federal investigation
will continue down that route.
But what it's also uniquely poised to do
is recognize the connection
of those attempts
to overturn the election
and the lies
surrounding them
to the threats and the violence
that so many of us experienced.
And that, again,
we saw unfold at our Capitol
on January six. It's all connected.
And as atrocious
as it was, as unprecedented as it was,
we have to see consequences
or else we have to prepare
for it to unfold again.
And I was just about to ask you this.
Do you worry
something like this could happen again
in 20, 24?
Is there anything
really stopping party officials
getting together
in basements
and saying, well,
we're going to be the alternate electors,
you know, in case our efforts
to overturn the election work out,
they pan out, hey, here we are.
We're ready to go.
There are signatures on the page
Could this happen all over again
if they wanted to?
Yes, because the only thing
that ensured
democracy prevailed in 20, 20
at this point
where people of integrity on both sides
of the aisle,
secretaries of state, elected
officials of both parties
who said, no, that's not who we are,
we're going to follow the law.
That's what ensured democracy prevailed.
And when we look
at some of the personnel changes
that have happened since 20, 20,
we see not just more people stepping up
who are pro-democracy,
but, you know, for example,
someone who was my former
opponent in 22
is now the head of the Republican Party
in Michigan in 20, 24.
And that person still has not accepted
the results of past elections
and try to intervene with them
in 20, 20 and in 22.
So we have to be wide eyed
and clear eyed
about the opportunities
that may exist for bad actors
to try to overturn election results
they don't like again in the future.
And that's why
legal consequences
and political consequences, frankly,
for the actions
that occurred in past cycles
are so important to see play out now.