tv New Day With John Berman and Brianna Keilar CNN June 28, 2022 4:00am-5:00am PDT
at least one surprise witness who has been central to their investigation. it is cassidy hutchinson, we have learned. a former top aide to trump white house chief of staff mark meadows. >> she has already delivered some of the most dramatic moments in videotaped testimony identifying the names of republican lawmakers she say asking for pardons, discussion the conversations surrounding the legality of the election scheme. and hutchinson reports to something reacting approvallely to chances of "hang mike pence." we have also learned that federal agents seized john eastman's cell phone last week. this is video of how it unfolded. eastman is the architect of fake electors to overturn the 2020 election. >> and kristen holmes is joining us from washington. kristen, this is going to be a
big day, unexpected and significant? >> absolutely. cassidy hutchinson has long been considered one of the most consequential witnesses for the january 6th committee due to her approximatety to trump many chief of staff mark meadows and therefore to critical events and conversations surrounding january 6. now, the committee has not released the topic of today's hearing, but the rush to get the hearing happening today shows just how important they believe this testimony could be. her testimony has rattled capitol hill. >> are you aware of any -- >> reporter: once a top aide to former white house chief of staff mark meadows, cassidy hutchinson is now a key witness in the house january 6 investigation. giving hours of testimony in multiple sessions. >> mr. gaetz and mr. brooks, and
a handful of members that weren't at the december 21st meeting asked for preemptive pardons. mr. gaetz did. >> reporter: at times surfing a. hutchinson's accuracy proving critical. >> you hear those at the white house saying the plan to have alternate electors meet and cast votes for donald trump in states he had lost was not legally sound? >> yes, sir. >> and who was present for that meeting, that you remember? >> it was in our offices, mr. meadows, mr. giuliani, and mr. giuliani's associates. >> well hello, deplorable! >> reporter: meadows who refuses
to be interviewed with the house select committee provides pages of testimony showing him at the lead of the 2020 and playing a lead role in attempting to stop biden's certification on january 6. events and conversations hutchinson had a front row seat to. >> who do you remember being involved in the early discussions around the thanksgiving time, regarding having alternate electors meet? >> mr. giuliani. several of mr. giuliani's associates. mr. meadows. members of congress, although it's difficult to distinguish if the members i'm thinking of were involved at thanksgiving or involved as it progressed through december. >> reporter: according to the committee, hutchinson also testified that it could turn violent.
hutchinson has a history of republican politics, now in her 20s, she previously worked for other high-profile conservatives including ted cruise and steve scalise. earlier this morning hutchinson dropping her trump attorney and viewing speculation that hutchinson would appear live before the committee. sources have told cnn at least some of the secrecy around her live testimony because there are real concerns for hutchenson's safety given what she's told the committee. again, highlighting the importance of what she believes the information holds. >> kristen holmes, thank you for that. joining us senior political correspondent for "the new york times" maggie haberman. maggie, this is intriguing today. "a," it wasn't on the schedule. and we only learned it was cassidy hutchinson last night. and i think, c, we expected she was going to testify at some point. so why this surprise, unscheduled, all of a sudden, it's happening today?
>> you're asking the $64 million question, john. we don't know the answer to that. why was this so important? why today, why the rush? on a week that members say they were happy to have this break because they needed to catch up because they amassed so much new evidence and spoken to witnesses and so forth. she was always expected to testify at one of the final hearings, if not the final hearing, about what donald trump was doing during this riot. why they're having her come forward now, especially after you heard testimony of hers played where she talked about requests for pardons from house members and some of those house members denied it, could it relate to that? we're going to find out. >> she switched lawyers moving away from trump world. could that perhaps play into this? >> i think it's certainly of note that she, you know, was working with somebody who had come recommended to her by former trump aides when clearly the committee was pressing for more, under this current setup with her new lawyer, they reached an agreement for public testimony.
and it seems they did it pretty quickly. >> again, we just don't know what makes it so interesting until now. let's remind people who exactly she is. mark meadows' chief of staff so she was around. >> i don't know that her title was actually chief of staff. but she was a top aide for mark meadows. she was present for a number of meets, both before and after the election. she has provided the committee with more than 20 hours of testimony. might have been much larger than that, over three subpoenaed sessions in which she describes hearing meadows -- she was asked anyway, meadows describing to colleagues, trump approvingly reacting to the "hang mike pence" chants. i understand she was asked about the alleged penchant for meadows burning documents in the fireplace. the office has a very large fireplace. and the conversations about the deputy with the potential to violence. all of those are things we know about thus far.
if you're talking about 20 hours of testimony you have to think there's more. >> you have to say, oh to be the fly on the wall. she is the ultimate fly on the wall? >> that's right. she literally was present. i don't think an active participant in a lot of these mee meetings, but certainly an observer. she's gavely testified in lieu of mark meadows because meadows refused to cooperate. but meadows did turn over hundreds and hundreds of texts. without the conversations and cassidy hutchinson's testimony, i think the committee would have a lot less of the sense of what is behind this. time lines. >> and mark meadows, he's playing a key role in absentia. mark short who was the former chief of staff to mike pence who testified on video, but not on person, talked about mark meadows. and how he would, i think, play both sides of this, mark short was interviewed over the weekend.
listen to this. >> mark would say to me he was working to try to get the president to concede and accept the results of the election. at the same time, he was bringing in lots of other people into the white house feeding conspiracy theories. i think mark was telling others sorts of different stories. >> marc short actually testified to something similar in video testimony that it remained a striking statement to hear him say this out loud. this is something i've heard a lot from former white house officials not only that marc short attests to that he said things they wants to hear. but singularly important in allowing trump to continue to what he was doing in relation to january 6 and prior to that. >> you have some really interesting reporting about trump being in kind of fence-mending mode. and reaching out to people that he's quite surprising he's fence-mending with. >> it's hard to know. there's a couple things, one is
he endorsed tom cole, a congressman critical of him, nancy mace who he savaged in south carolina won her primary where, you know, he backed her opponent. he then did some, you know, noted anonymity on her social media website saying congratulations. he is as one adviser said to me in friend-making mode. i don't think it's a coincidence. i think it's about the investigations. >> really? >> i do. i think a lot of what is driving him right now is about concern about the various investigations. and i think he is trying to make more friends than enemies at the moment. now, could it benefit for him if he ran for president and won? absolutely. but i think the investigations have a -- house and otherwise have a large mind share. >> is it bad pr? or do you think he thinks they're getting close to something? >> look, the line from trump's world he's not worried about the
doj investigations. he's just angry because the house investigations are quote-unquote very unfair in his words. donald trump is pretty good at seeing when there's heat turning up. again, can't read this mind, can't see into his heart, but i -- based on reporting, i don't believe it is only about the politics of the situation. >> i sometimes think she can read his mind, though, or see into his heart. >> magical powers. maggie, thank you very much. >> more than some, i will say. some great insights, maggie, thank you. overnight, a horrific -- this is just horrific what we're seeing here. a human tragedy in san antonio. that is what the mayor of san antonio is calling the scene in which 46 migrants were found dead inside a semi truck that you see there in the pictures. cnn's priscilla alvarez live with more. priscilla, this is horrific. >> reporter: brianna, officials say exactly that. they called it tragic last night in their briefing.
and they also said during that briefing that they received a call around 6:00 p.m. local yesterday. from someone who was in the area and had heard a cry for help and was alerted to the truck. that truck had deceased individuals in it. 46 people died. 16 were transported to local hospitals. like the one that's behind me. of these 16, 12 are adults, four were pediatric. and remember, this was a truck that was traveling in triple-digit heat in texas. and fire chief charles hood spoke to the conditions that he's people were under. take a listen. >> the patients that we saw were hot to the touch. they were suffering from heatstroke, heat exhaustion. no signs of water in the vehicle. it was a refrigerated tractor trailer. but there was no visible working ac unit on that rig. >> reporter: authorities also said yesterday that those people
who were found alive were too weak to even get out of the truck. three people were in custody. it's unclear what their connection is to this. but it is now a federal investigation. john and brianna. >> priscilla, i can't remember something as awful as this. but how common is it to try to move migrants in the backs of these trailers? >> reporter: human smugglers often use rigs to move and transport migrants. in fact, it has been happening more often along the u.s./mexico border. we've had border officials speak to the desperation that some migrants are in. where they put their lives in their hands. and recall, there is an increasing number of people crossing the msuu.s./mexico bor in the last months. and homeland security secretary
mayorkas, told me that the administration is doubling down to crack down on u.s. smuggling networks and there have been prosecutions and criminal investigations. but the greatest fear is exactly what happened yesterday. that dozens of people will die in tractor trailers making their way to their next destination. john and brianna. >> priscilla alvarez in san antonio, thank you for the report. ahead, we're go to be speaking to the mayor of san antonio, ron fle nuremberg. demand for the overturning of medication with the overturning of roe v. wade. we're going to have dr. sanjay gupta explaining next. >> it's one thing when you know something's going to happen. it's another thing when it actually happens. i just actually turned to cnn and i couldn't believe it. i couldn't believe it, because they actually did it. >> dana bash with an exclusive interview with vice president
kamala harris. the vice president's reaction to this ruling, dana joins us ahead. researchers believe the first person to live to 15 has already been born. it could be you! wow. really? of course, you'll have to eat your greens, watch your stress, wear sunscreen... but to live to 150, we're developing solutions that help doctors listen to your heartbeat while they're miles away, or ai that knows what your body will do before you do. cool.
demand for medication of abortion has more than doubled since friday's supreme court decision to overturn roe v. wade. that's according to hey jane, an organization that provides medication abortion in some states through virtual appointments. cnn's chief medical correspondent dr. sanjay gupta joining us now on this. we're starting to hear about this increase after this ruling. can you just tell us bit about how common this is to use the abortion pill for abortion? >> yeah, sure. i mean, this is the most common form of abortion now. the most common form of conducting an abortion is through these medications now. and if you take a look, sort of historically, about, you know, close to 30 years after roe v. wade, 27 years in the year 2000 is when they really came on the market in the united states. some version of these medication
abortion pills. you can see what has happened over the last 20, 22 years. now more than half of these abortions are performed using these medications. to give you more context, in 2019, according to the contraception journals about 629,000 abortions were performed in the united states, about 340,000 of those were performed using these types of medications. it's typically two medications they're talking about. the first medication is something that blocks progesterone so a woman's uterus, inner lining of the uterus starts to break down and that effectively ends the pregnancy. a couple days later, you take a second pill, both of these are by mouth, a second pill and that causes the uterus to contract, removing the contents of the uterus. that's how the medication works. and the numbers have gone up. you can also use it up until ten
weeks or so. 70 days after the last menstrual period. >> safety versus efficacy, sa sanjay? >> you find that safety in terms of major complications about 0.4%. there's a mortality rate that 000.1%. it's so really safe. effectiveness, in the first nine weeks of pregnancy it's going to be very effective in terms of ending the abortion, 99.6% within those first nine weeks. weeks 10 to 11 it goes down to 87%. still, pretty effective up until that point. >> so, who will still have access to this? >> well that is the sort of open question now. you know, we were trying to dig into this at the state-by-state level. this is differently, obviously,
if you're sending pills by the mail. during the pandemic in april 2021, this became something that could be sent by mail. not necessarily requiring an in-person visit. ahead of time, to get these types of medications. we'll see if that sort of policy still is upheld. and if these pills can cross state lines or not. i don't know. i don't know how that's going to sort of shake out. i think it's going to be different probably fapharmacy t pharmacy and state to state. and telehealth. right now, you can do telehealth visits. you have to do a visit before and after. but potentially from your own home. >> these are questions that really need to be answered in the coming weeks here. dr. gupta, great to see you. thank you. >> you, too. thank you. in an exclusive interview, cnn's dana bash sat down with the vice president kamala harris
to discuss the supreme court rule, the 2020 election and that and more. fascinating highlights of the interview. >> you were on a plane when the supreme court yo turned roe versus wade. >> yeah. >> and the highest ranking woman ever elected in u.s. history. what was going through your mind at that moment? >> well, i was on air force two, heading to aurora, illinois, to talk about maternal health. we were with lauren underwood, with the chair of the judiciary, dick durbin, senate judiciary, we were headed there working on a plan we'd been doing to ensure that women receive the kind of support they need during and post pregnancy. and, you know, we thought that the decision would come down sometime soon, but not at that moment. and i was shocked. and, you know, it's one thing when you know something's going to happen. it's another thing when it actually happens. and i just actually turned to
cnn. and i couldn't believe it. i couldn't believe it. because they actually did it. and here's what they did, the court actually took a constitutional right that has been recognized for half a century and took it from the women of america. that's shocking. when you think about it, in terms of what that means, in terms of democratic principles. in terms of the ideals upon which we were founded about liberty, about freedom. >> can the administration expand abortion access or abortion services on federal land? meaning provide the access on federal land that might be in and around states that ban abortion? >> i think that what is most important right now is that we ensure that the restrictions that the states are trying to
put up that would prohibit a woman from exercising what we still maintain is her right, that we do everything we can to empower women to not only seek, but to receive the care where it available. >> is federal land one of those options? >> i mean, it's not right now what we are discussing. but i will say that when i think about what is happening in terms of the states, we have to also recognize, dana, that we are 130 odd days away from an election. which is going to include senate races, right? part of the issue here is that the court is acting. now congress needs to act. but we -- if you count the votes don't appear to have the votes in the senate. >> you're saying now, the president said, that this fall roe is on the ballot. but what do you say to democratic voters who argue, wait a minute, we worked really hard to elect a democratic president. >> yeah. >> and vice president. >> yeah. >> democratic-led house, a
democratic-led senate. do it now? >> do what now? what now? i mean, we need -- listen, what we did, we extended the child tax credit -- >> i'm sorry, when i say do it now -- >> yeah. >> act legislatively to make abortion rights legal. >> we feel the same way. do it now, congress needs to do it now in terms of permanently putting in place a clear indication that it is the law of the land that women have the ability and the right to make decisions about their reproductive care. and the government does not have the right to make those decisions for a woman. >> would you support eliminating the filibuster in order to pass federal legislation for abortion rights? >> right now, given the current composition of the senate, the votes aren't there. >> a bully pulpit -- >> yes, i support it. here's the thing, i understand
why you're asking the questions but the reality of it is we don't really get to answer that -- >> as the vice president, as the president of the senate -- >> yeah -- >> -- to you have a position, i know you don't have a vote but do you have a position on whether the filibuster should be eliminated? >> i think the president has spoken on that issue. >> well, he kind of left the door open. is this where he was leaving the door open, too? >> i think that he has been clear on where we stand on this issue of reproductive health and what the administration have our in toolkit, that's what we're pursuing. >> really quick i want to ask you about january 6. >> okay. >> you are a prosecutor by training and lots of experience. based on the evidence presented so far in the january 6th hearings, would you bring criminal charges against the former president donald trump? >> as a former prosecutor, i would never comment on another prosecutor's case. >> the former vice president
mike pence, has your opinion of him changed? >> well, i think that he did his job that day. and i commend him for that, because, clearly, it was under extraordinary circumstances that he should not have had to face. and i commend him for having the courage to do his job. >> last question, i know we're out of time. >> sure. >> your friend, congressman jim clyburn said last week if president biden doesn't seek re-election, would you would be first on his list in 2024. you have talked to president biden about re-election? and what do you say to congressman clyburn? >> joe biden is running for re-election and i will be his ticket mate. >> full stop? >> fuel stop, yes. >> and dana is with us now. there's a lot to discuss here, dana. but i do want to go back to what she was talking about, the federal lands issue when it
comes to abortion. there's a lot of democrats, voters or progressives in congress like pramila jayapal who want to see president biden and congress do more. i don't know if they're looking at that and feeling that the biden administration is really to do a whole lot on abortion or really can do a whole lot? >> it's the "can" part of it. it's not as if the biden administration, the vice president herself was saying, no, i don't want to do all of the things that are being proposed. by a lot of groups. a lot of members of congress, obviously, and their own party. particularly, the federal lands issue, exactly. progressives, progressive women, are being very vocal about the federal government doing that. they're just not sure that's legally viable. it's not on the front -- or the top of their list that they're pushing. she said it's not something they're looking into. i think that they have and they will, in some ways, but they just don't think it's really
that viable. >> of the problem with progressives is they would like to see the white house behave as if this is a five alarm fire. and they don't feel as if they are seeing that in some cases. whereas, the vice president and president is saying we just can't, there's nothing we can do. >> yeah. the way she described it, effectively, is that this is going to be a very very, very long haul. that it was generational. she talked about her daughter and her stepdaughter. and her mother-in-law who are, you know, 50 years apart. and it is going to take -- likely take maybe that long to change things. it's very clear from talking to her, from talking to others in and around this issue, that they're going to do what they can on the federal level. but this is going to be and is already a state fight. and this is a fight at the ballot box.
the democrats -- the vice president said it multiple times in this interview. they want this to be a rallying cry for democratic voters. the question is, how much of a rallying cry. the people are angry. and they want to use their vote to register that anger. but the question is whether or not there's going to be enough of that to make a difference, in the numbers, the very real numbers that she talked about. and that is they don't -- they want to codify roe, which means make legislative -- make it a law through the congress. to make abortion legal nationwide. but they don't have the votes. she wouldn't go there on the filibuster which i thought was really interesting. >> yeah. it was very interesting to hear her answer on joe biden running for re-election. and she's going to be his ticket mate full stop. of course you had to ask that, especially what jim clyburn has
said about this. but i just wonder, do you get the sense that she and president biden are annoyed that they are fielding these questions? including questions that are kind of given some light by members of their own party? >> maybe. she didn't come across as annoyed. she came across as ready. >> uh-huh. >> you could tell. she was ready for that. she knew that was going to be a question. and it was because of people like jim clyburn, very well respected democrat who is basically why joe biden got the nomination because of his support for him and then the ticket. that is the reality that they are living in. and she wanted to say exactly, without any daytime, where she thinks things are right now. that's why she made it crisp and clear and clean. full stop. that's where we are right now in june of 2022. >> it was the most declarative statement from the ticket yet.
>> yeah. >> joe biden is running which is different linguistically to what he has said out loud, more or less. that was a declarative statement. >> dana bash, thank you. so an amtrak train collided with a dump truck in missouri. two siblings on that rain are going to join "new day" with more on the crash that killed three people and injured dozens of others. and new cnn reporting this morning on the white house losing some confidence in ukraine's chances against russia. like any family, the auburns all have... individual priorities. some like strategic diversification. some like a little comfort, to balalance out the risk. others want immediate gratification... and long-term gratification,too. they have their own interests, but at the end of the day there's nothing like being...
a gold-owner. visit invest.gold to see why gold is everyone's asset. bogey's on your six, limu. they need customized car insurance from liberty mutual so they only pay for what they need. we are not getting you a helicopter. only pay for what you need. ♪liberty, liberty, liberty. liberty. from prom esses to workouts and new adventures you hope the more you give the less they'll miss. but even if your teen was vaccinated against meningitis in the past they may be missing vaccination for meningitis b. although uncommon, up to 1 in 5 survivors of meningitis will have long term consequences. now as you're thinking about all the vaccines your teen might need make sure you ask your doctor if your teen is missing meningitis b vaccination.
hit that truck in an intersection that didn't have warning lights or gates. the driver of the dump truck and two people on board the train died in this accident. dax mcdonald and his sister samantha were on that train. they are joining us now. dax and samantha, thank you for being with us this morning. we're glad to see you doing well. samantha, i do know you had to go to the hospital. can you tell us how you're both doing? >> yeah. so, we all got checked out. we're just so grateful for everyone that's able to get us out. and for all of the nurses and all of the volunteers that were able to stop and come help. and it was -- it was amazing to see everyone come together. so -- >> dax, what did this feel like? describe to us what happened and how you experienced it. >> yeah. we heard a massive bang.
and either the train hit something. i honestly just thought it was going to be a delay. but then we started feeling the train tilting over to the right. that's when it kind of went into my mind, this is life or death. this is very serious. this is the first time for any of us on a train too. it was incredible. >> yeah. >> did you see the dump truck ahead of time? >> i was looking out to the right. i was on the right side of the train. i saw a cloud of dust. and i was -- you know, we were perpendicular to the train. there was one vehicle, you know, in that cloud of dust, which means there was another vehicle in front of it. i didn't see the vehicle in front, but they seemed to be moving pretty quickly. just seemed odd how quickly they were moving when i knew they had to cross the train tracks and when i had that thought, i heard the bang. >> i'm looking at the pictures.
you took still pictures or video. describe what it is that you were seeing with this? >> yeah. i woke up basically on the right side of the train. i looked through the glass and i could see the gravel on the other side. basically, i took a video, kind of stood up and looked around. immediately, everyone is asking is everyone okay. yeah, samantha, she -- you know, she hit her head pretty bad i think on that original throw. >> samantha, how did you guys get out of the train? >> so, when i was -- i was thrown to the other side of the train. and then we were laying on the side of the train on the windows. then we were looking up at the escape windows. and we had to climb ten feet straight above us to the escape windows. and i was able to lift myself up
and then there were other passengers that had gotten out before us from the other train cars that were able to help lift me up. and our family. and it was absolutely insane. >> look, it looks terrifying. we're so glad that you two are okay. that your family is okay. and we thank you so much for joining us to talk about your experience. >> yeah. thank you. >> thank you. >> dax and samantha mcdonald. >> first time on a train. >> i know. >> yeah, first time. there's new reporting that president biden is irritated with his own party, we'll have that ahead. blplus, wimbledon begins without some notable players -- players from russia. patrick mcenroe joins us on why he says that is a mistake.
with best western rewards you get rewarded when you stay on the road and on the go. find your rewards so you can reconnect, disconnect, hold on tight and let go! stay two nights and get a free night. book now at bestwestern.com. we've been streaming all day from every room. the power and speed of this super-sonic wifi from xfinity is incredible. mom! mass speeds was my idea, remember?
♪ happening today, cleveland browns quarterback deshaun watson is set to face an nfl disciplinary hearing. reports say the league is recommending an indefinite suspension, lasting at least a year for watson's alleged sexual misconduct. cnn's miguel marquez joins us now on this. miguel, what do we know about this hearing today? >> yeah, that it's not his only problem. those problems are mounting for the quarterback deshaun watson. he signed on with the cleveland browns for five years, 230 million bucks. previously, he was with the houston texans for five years, and that's where his problems began. today, he faces an independent disciplinary hearing and a new civil lawsuit has been filed against the houston texans, his old team. that suit was brought by one of the 24 women who earlier sues the 26-year-old quarterback for sexual misconduct. 20 of the 24 women have settled that suit.
the hearing was set up under the rules of the collective bargaining agreement. and the nfl association. interesting nfl.com is reporting that the league is seeking suspension of at least one year. it's pretty rare for something like that to leak prior to the hearing. whatever the outcome of the hearing it could be appealed to the nfl commissioner roger goodell who has final say on this. that civil suit was brought by a former massage student tori garner who alleges that watson sexually harassed her. and watson's behavior protected and shielded watson to protect the texans organization. "the new york times" earlier reported the team enabled his behavior by providing watson a nondisclosure agreement, to give therapists a nondisclosure agreement by supplying the venues of some of the appointments. and watson said he's innocent of the charges and the textens
insist they've complied with all and all investigations. but this is not going to end anytime soon. we'll watch for the youment come of that hearing today. >> miguel, thank you so much. over in england, wimbledon is under way, but without the world's top-ranked player, russian daniil medvedev. in a controversial move, the organization decided to ban all russian players in response to ukraine. joinings now espn commentator patrick mcenroe. patrick, i know how you feel about this because you wrote a cnn op-ed saying it's the wrong move, why? >> i think it's possible with this issue, john, and i think you can make an argument for either side by the decision made by the all-england club. i think about it hard as i have for the last couple of months, seeing what's going on like the nhl that just finished. the stanley cup playoffs. plenty of russian players involved there. and by the way, plenty of tennis
tournaments happening around the world that just ended in europe, the french open, italian open, tournaments in germany and holland that all allowed russian players to play. i certainly understand the all-england club which right behind me, the intent of the club which is to not allow the russian propaganda machine to take advantage of sporting stars that could play at wimbledon and could actually maybe even win the tournament. so i understand the intent of why they made the decision but in the long run i just don't think it's the right decision to make. it's penalizing these individual athletes in an individual sport. and i don't see any other tennis entities coming along for the ride. in other words, the all-england club made this decision unilaterally, without really discussing it with the other tennis power brokers around the world. and i think in retrospect, again, the intent, i believe what they're trying to do is isolate the russians and russian economy and the russian
propaganda machine. i think in the long run, it was not the right decision. the tennis community misses the full draw here at the championships. >> do you think that as long as russian athletes, not just tennis, right, any russian athlete, that they should be able to compete, as long as they are aren't wading into politics? we've seen examples where you've seen, you know in gymnastics where you've seen certain athletes making a statement as they're next to a ukrainian athlete. but as long as they're not going to do things like that, do you think it makes sense for them to be there? >> well, i think, obviously, they're in a very difficult situation. and there's some talk about having the russian players speak out against what their government is doing which we know is impossible. that's just not going to happen. but, brianna, i do think it makes sense to ban russian teams. and tennis has done that. they've banned the davis cup team from competing, the billie
jean king cup, the men's and women's team competition. that part, i understand. but when you're playing for yourself, you're playing as an individual, and you've earned the right to compete, based on the level that you're at as a professional tennis player, i think they've gone just a which will be the next major to take place, they're going to allow russian players to play and belarusian players to play. is that the right decision? again, i think you can make an argument in either direction on this, it is very complicated, but no other tournament in tennis around the world has done what the all england club has done. that's where i think the mistake has been made here. >> patrick mcenroe, great to see you every there, great to have you. we'll see you back here in queens when you cover the u.s. open. >> thank you. coming up for us, chris wallace will join us on today's surprise hearing by the january 6th committee. what we can expect when a key witness testifies. and full house star jodie
>> tech: when you have auto glass damage, trust safelite. this dad and daughter were driving when they got a crack in their windshield. [smash] >> dad: it's okay. pull over. >> tech: he wouldn't take his car just anywhere... ♪ pop rock music ♪ >> tech: ...so he brought it to safelite. we replaced the windshield and recalibrated their car's advanced safety system, so features like automatic emergency braking will work properly. >> tech: alright, all finished. >> dad: wow, that's great. thanks. >> tech: stay safe with safelite. schedule now.
>> singers: ♪ safelite repair, safelite replace. ♪ re-election and i will be his ticket mate. full stop. >> full stop? >> vice president kamala harris insisting president biden will run for a second term in an cnn interview. according to "the new york times," quote, facing intensifying skepticism about his capacity to run for re-election, the president and his top aides have been stunned by the questions by his plans, irritated by what they see as lack of respect from his party and the press and the suggestions that he's a lame duck a year and a half into his administration. join ing us is co-author of "ths will not pass, "trump, biden,
and the battle for the future," jonathan martin. you have this insightful article, the most declarative statement that i've heard yet from the ticket, kamala harris says the vice president says joe biden's running and i will be his ticket mate. >> and she had that statement at hand, didn't she, john? i was struck by that, because it was so declarative, and by the way, the reason that biden has not used that language is intentional. i was spoei speaking to the whi house folks about this, they don't want him using that kind of language. i'm not sure this won't trigger the ftc. this is their concern. they don't want him to say it like that because they worry as their lawyers have told them that if he does, they'll be forced to open up a committee and start having to raise money now for the re-election. which they do not want to do before the midterms. that's why you've not heard him
it say it so clearly as the vp did. he's deeply frustrated by this what he views as the lack of respect from the press and fellow democrats about his intent to run for re-election. he can't figure out why folks won't take yes for an answer. you and i know why that is. it is because he's going to be 81 years old in 2024. he's already the oldest american president and there is real doubts about his capacity to serve a second four-year term. >> there is another dynamic here, though, joe biden previously was sort of shuffled to the side, told not to run, and then look what happened in 2016. i mean, i wonder if you're joe biden if you're, like, guys, remember last time when you told me not to run and how that went. >> everybody out there who knows the history of joe biden recognizes that he's a proud guy. and he is very conscious of slights, real and perceived. has been his entire career.
and he really resents the fact he wasn't taken terribly seriously for much of his career, at least in his eyes, and, yes, when he was vp for eight years and a loyal one under barack obama his reward was to be sort of bumped to the side of the road for hillary clinton, by, yes, barack obama and his top advisers. he has not forgotten that, and i think he does crave the kind of deference he does not believe he's gotten. guys, one of the things i picked up more than once during the course of reporting this story was, you know, bill clinton and barack obama had tough midterms also, but they came back and won re-election, why can't we do it also? and so never far from the surface is that kind of sort of grievance about why aren't we being accorded the respect of bill clinton and barack obama. >> there is a lot in this story, a lot i haven't read before, including whether the bidens are pushing in the machinery to run
for re-election, et cetera. also, john, this floated notion of a joe manchin possible third party run. >> yeah. >> what about that? >> yeah, this has been a big topic in donor circles, john. a lot of wealthy centrists and even center right donors out there who don't want a biden or trump 2024 campaign, are looking for alternatives. and it may be fantasy on the part of the donor class, which can day dream about certain tickets, but, look, manchin did not rule it out, manchin likes the flattery, manchin has been courted by a lot of wealthy donors, he travels a lot, meets with donors all over the country, who like his style of centrist politics. i'm not sure he would ultimately go through with a third party campaign, given the challenges inherent to a third party candidacy. but that is something, john, we're going to hear more of if it is clear we're on course for
a biden/trump rematch. there is going to be a hunger, i think, for some kind of alternative to an 81-year-old running against a 78-year-old. >> manchin called you brother when you asked, his way of dodging the straightforward question. jonathan martin, thank you so much for joining us. appreciate it, my friend. >> thank you, john. see you. "new day" continues right now. good morning to our viewers in the united states and all around the world. it is tuesday, june 28th. i'm john berman with brianna keilar. we have morning intrigue surrounding the january 6th committee hearing today. a surprise hearing, not on the sch schedule. one surprise witness has been central to their investigation, that witness is cassid