tv Don Lemon Tonight CNN July 8, 2022 11:00pm-12:00am PDT
hundreds of pages of transcript? so what exactly went on behind closed doors for all of that seven hours? what did the committee learn from the trump white house counsel? >> mr. cipollone did appear voluntarily and answer a whole variety of questions. he did not contradict the testimony of other witnesses. and i think we did learn a few things which we will be rolling out in hearings to come. >> my ears perked up on the idea answering questions. so now congresswoman lofgren went on to say that not contradicting is not the same as confirming. more on that. and two people familiar with pat cipollone's testimony telling cnn the committee didn't ask him if he told cassidy hutchinson on january 6th that they would, quote, get charged with every
crime imaginable, unquote, if they went to the capitol. i mean, would not have confirmed that, apparently, confirmed that statement if they had asked the question. and you also heard the congresswoman say that some of what they learned from pat cipollone today will be rolling out in the future hearings to come. so will we be hearing and my be seeing -- remember, it was videotaped as well. some of his testimony as soon as next week. and will the former president be watching? you've got to figure this is one witness that he really, really hoped would not cooperate with this committee. >> our committee is certain that donald trump does not want mr. cipollone to testify here. >> well, i want to bring in cnn congressional correspondent ryan nobles here tonight. ryan, good to see you. seven hours, first of all, is a long time, and we're told he answered some questions. so you've got some new information on pat cipollone's critical interview with the
committee today. what can you tell us, ryan? >> yeah, laura, in fact in the last hour we've learned quite a bit about what went on in this interview with pat cipollone. as you mentioned, that went on for more than seven hours. i'm told from committee sources that cipollone was asked very specific questions about his view about donald trump's conduct on january 6th and whether or not it was responsible for him to go to the capitol on that day. and also the committee believes that cipollone was able to help them put together a picture of just the dereliction of duty that the committee believes that donald trump was a part of on january 6th, not springing into action when trouble was happening at the capitol on that day. now, sources close to pat cipollone say that they do take issue with this idea that he didn't contradict any of the hearing -- or the testimony i should say from other witnesses, cassidy hutchinson in particular. they say there were specific questions that the committee didn't even ask him. as you point out, that they didn't ask him about that
specific conversation that he had with cassidy hutchinson about the potential legal ramifications about going to the capitol on that day. but the committee says this interview was really focused more on cipollone's perspective of that day. the conduct that he witnessed and the advice that he gave. so there's a little bit of back and forth and interpretation as to how this interview was conducted. but in the grand scheme of things, laura, the committee believes they learned a lot and they also previewed that we should expect to see much of this testimony in clips in the hearings that are to come. >> a really important point about the idea of -- we always falk about as lawyers don't want to ask a question you don't know the answer to. but you might not want to ask the question that may not get the answer you want. even though transparency is the goal. and the idea of perspective so important here. his whole job here in testifying is not just to buttress someone else's testimony but to actually learn about how he felt, his perspective. it's a really important point.
ryan, cassidy hutchinson testified about pat cipollone's conversations with people like mark meadows while rioters were storming the capitol. listen to this. >> and i remember pat saying to him something to the effect of the rioters have gotten to the capitol, mark, we need to go down and see the president now. and mark looked up at him and said, he doesn't want to do anything, pat. and pat said something to the effect of, and very clearly, had said this to mark, something to the effect of "mark, something needs to be done or people are going to die in the sxt and the blood's going to be on your f-ing hands." >> now, let's remember that mark meadows was also getting dozens of text messages around this same time pleading for the president to do something. donald trump jr. writing "he's got to condemn this shit asap. the capitol police tweet is not enough." and then "this is one you go to the mattresses on.
they will try to f his entire legacy on this if it it gets worse." and former chief of staff reince priebus writing in all caps, "tell them to go home." now, these are their words, of course, not mine. but ryan, pat cipollone, he had a front row seat to critical events. we're talking about seven hours today. the question has been around those 187 minutes while the attack unfolded. and despite all these calls trump did nothing? this is the heart of the testimonial matter, right? >> i don't think there's any doubt about that, laura. and that's what the committee's focused on tonight. that's what i was told by sources tonight that they truly believe that cipollone helps to piece together what they view as a dereliction of duty by the former president on that day. and we've known from our previous reporting that cipollone was among a very small group of people that were in and out of that presidential dining room where donald up from was holding court on january 6th, where he was watching television
and watching the whole riot play out and seemingly not taking action to try to quell the violence taking place on january 6th. and v so that could be a big part of what we see in the testimony in the days to come, these clips of cipollone talking about that experience. and it's important to keep in mind that if through sources he's attempting to at some level refute cassidy hutchinson's testimony, she said this under oath on national television. millions of people saw what she had to say. but also pat cipollone as the white house counsel has a more important role than an aide to the chief of staff. so his perspective, you know, what he saw as a firsthand witness, which is what the committee believes he is, that ultimately could become the most important testimony that we've seen up until this point in this investigation by the january 6th select committee. >> ryan, well stated. thank you so much. i want to turn to the nixon white house counsel, john dean, and of course special watergate prosecutor nick ackerman.
glad to have both of you here tonight. really important to think about just the gravity assigned to the testimony from white house counsel like pat cipollone. more than seven hours? john, of course i know compared to the way you testified in watergate over several days eight hours a day this might seem like small potatoes. but the fact that it was seven hours, do you think his interview with the committee would have lasted that long if he was just to be sable privilege or the fifth, kind of like flynn did at that moment in time. this actually means there may have been some meat on the bone, right? >> i think there probably was given the time span involved. i can tell you from personal experience decades later, check ing i gave about 60,000 words in about seven hours of testimony. so you can cover a lot of ground, and it's very difficult for us at this stage to tease
out what was or was not really confirmed or what new information. the committee i think smartly is holding it very close to its vest. congresswoman lofgren, she did hint that he was cooperative, that there were no serious conflicts it appeared to her. but i think that's generally what we'd want to hear. so i think it's a good day for everybody. the investigation is going forward. it appears they have solid new evidence and we'll have to stay tuned, laura. >> we certainly will. nick, i want to turn to you. here's a key moment from cassidy hutchinson's testimony. listen to this. >> and mr. cipollone said something to the effect of please make sure we don't go up to the capitol, cassidy, keep in touch with me, we're going to get charged with every crime imaginable if we make that movement happen. >> and do you remember which
crimes mr. cipollone was concerned with? >> in the days leading up to the 6th we had conversations about potentially obstructing justice or defrauding the electoral count. >> well, now, nick, of course, sources telling cnn that the select committee didn't specifically ask cipollone about that particular comment from hutchinson and many people are wondering, well, why would you ask him that question? isn't that what we'll want to know, the very thing what were you afraid of being charged? >> i think they may have asked the question. we don't know for sure that that question in substance wasn't asked. i mean, certainly they could have asked it even going another way around it by just bringing out the fact that donald trump wanted to go up there, that cipollone was concerned about various violations and where it would put trump in terms of being at the capitol.
but i think a lot of this can be brought out by other things that cipollone said, did, and knew. the general overall point being one, he wanted to go to the capitol. two, that was a bad idea. three, he was not doing anything about the violence, which is totally consistent with the idea that donald trump knew that his supporters had weapons with them, he nao you that they could perpetrate violence at the capitol, and he also knew that his vice president was not going to throw out the electoral vote, so that the only way he could stop it was through the violence. so not doing anything is consistent with the idea of letting the violence go ahead and letting the violence attempt to stop the count of the electoral vote. >> i mean, the more circuitous route you talk about is not one
that just plainly all who wander are not lost, the idea of going around that notion to try to get to the same point to be able to present the testimony overall. the way we've seen, john, in many respects of sort of splicing in testimony here and there to confirm, to buttress credibility as well. i mean, zoe lofgren says they learned some new information tonight from pat cipollone. what would be the most damning thing that he could have said that might implicate donald trump? this is somebody as we've all been talking about, the front row seat. i mean, he's in the room where it happens. so much so that he would be the person who might have the ear of the president of the united st states. >> well, the most damaging thing in your question that you raise would probably be that trump was ready to lead an armed attack on the congress. i think in essence that's what he had in mind, some sort of militia that would join him and
he would go in and take control of the government. i mean, it's just crazy. but donald trump is not known for his sound thinking about how government operates and how indeed he should operate. so it could be anything. and i think that probably the person who did the most good today was cipollone for himself. by coming up there and having a full exchange with the committee, the committee satisfied with what they got. that's good for pat cipollone. now, we all hope he has revealed information that tells us what happened that day and it will be a good day for the country too. >> well, of course, he's the white house counsel at the time. by nature of his position he's supposed to think about the institution, about the integrity of it in the language run as well. one would hope honesty was there. nick, to you finally.
sip cipollone, we talk a lot about january 6th. understandably so. but he was also in that key oval office meeting on january 3rd when trump was considering making jeffrey clark the acting a.g. and the top official richard donoghue testified cipollone called the draft letter false lei claiming they found evidence of election fraud, he called it a murder-suicide pact. what do you think the committee may have asked about from that meeting today? that's a pretty important moment. >> he ya, i think it is. and i think they went through it in good detail, my guess. they had very detailed testimony already from jeff rosen, who was the acting attorney general. they had it from his deputy. they knew all of the details. and i get the sense also that cipollone in his informal discussions with the committee back a month or two ago basically told them what happened on that occasion. there's no executive privilege there. everything was already revealed.
so i think that cipollone probably did give a very detailed account of what happened at that moment, all of which related to all other aspects of what donald trump was doing with the phony electors, his effort to try to get the states to send new electors that would be pro trump as opposed to the biden electors that were rightfully elected by the states. i think once you get into that meeting it sort of relates to everything else that we know was going on leading up to the meeting and what happened after the meeting. so i wouldn't be surprised if they actually started to and moved out from that particular meeting. >> i think you're right. one thing that occurs to people or should occur to people is just as you and i and really the world's able to watch these hearings and know what people like donoghue or jeffrey rosen or cassidy hutchinson have said on the record, he too could be watching. the it not like a regular trial where you don't know what the
other person is saying. he's also virtually now in a room where these hearings are happening. he'd have a vested interest. thank you, gentlemen. nice to talk to both of you. we'll stay long with you. thank you. >> thank you. >> the question now really is just how damaging and impactful or persuasive could pat cipollone's testimony be? how much is he telling? plus the director of the fbi tells cnn that their investigation of january 6th is going to follow the facts, whatever they lead. >> we're going to have to act. that's the rule of law. that's what the rule of law's all about. >> does that mean anybody who was involved at all levels? le mons, lemons. look how nice they are. the moment you become an expedia member, you can instantly start saving on your travels. so you can go and see all those, lovely, lemony, lemons.
♪ and never wonder if you got a good deal. because you did. ♪ this is john. he hasn't worked this hard to only get this far with his cholesterol. taken with a statin, leqvio can lower bad cholesterol and keep it low with two doses a year. side effects were injection site reaction, joint pain, urinary tract infection, diarrhea, chest cold, pain in legs or arms, and shortness of breath.
with leqvio, lowering cholesterol becomes just one more thing life throws your way. ask your doctor about leqvio. lower. longer. leqvio. if you wake up thinking about the market and want to make the right moves fast... get decision tech from fidelity. [ cellphone vibrates ] you'll get proactive alerts for market events before they happen... and insights on every buy and sell decision.
. former trump white house counsel pat cipollone giving more than seven hours of videotaped transcribed testimony to the january 6th committee. of course it happened behind closed doors, but it happened. and sources say that he was one of a handful of the people in the dining room where the then president actually watched the capitol riot unfold on tv. so what could it mean for the committee to get this kind of glimpse into the trump inner circle on a day like that? joining me now to discuss, chris whipple. he's the author of the upcoming book "the fight of his life: inside joe biden's white house." chris, nice to have you here today.
look, people are wondering whether his testimony might be a john dean moment. obviously, john dean and cipollone, both white house counsel in very different eras for very different presidents. but he was in fact a reluctant witness. what do you think about the fact that only know are we really hearing this moment and what could it possibly mean for his inner circle, the fact that he even presented himself to give testimony? >> well, it could be devastating. we're going to find out pretty soon. but i think it's important that we shouldn't run out and lionize pat cipollone. i was interested to hear myfriend friend john dean giving him brownie points for coming forward. but he came forward reluctantly. he's a long-time trump loyalist. he was all in on trump's shakedown of volodymyr zelenskyy, denying weapons unless he got dirt on joe biden. we shouldn't forget all of that.
so it's hard to say. but having said all of that, you have to sympathize with a guy in his position. i used to think that the worst job imaginable was being donald trump's white house chief of staff. reince priebus told me take everything you know and multiply it by 50. but imagine being donald trump's white house counsel. who in his right mind would sign up for that job? so a little sympathy is in order here. and obviously he knows a lot and it could be devastating for trump, meadows and the rest of the inner circle. >> i mean, you wrote the book really on presidential chiefs of staff. the idea of knowing how important their role would be if you were a mark meadows in a case like this. but you're right about the importance of course of in this context of the person whose job it would be to legally advise the president, particularly about things like, i don't know, handing over the keys to the castle because the electorate says it's time to could do so.
committee member zoe lofgren says cipollone did not contradict hutchinson's testimony, said that. and that he revealed new information. now, you know what these discussions can be like between white house officials. can you explain a little bit about the kind of access that a cipollone may have had compared to maybe even a mark meadows would have had? would it have been more of an intimate one on one moment in terms of the advice and counsel and conversations for, say, a cipollone and meadows may have been outside the room at times? what's that like? >> i would say that next to mark meadows cipollone probably knows more than anybody about what went on in the oval office. maybe you could put jared kushner and ivanka in that category as well. but he would know an awful lot. and he obviously is being very careful about what he shares with the committee. and so we'll just have to see how that turns out. but you know, what's fascinating
to me about cipollone, and i write about this in my upcoming book about the biden white house, is that during the final days of the trump white house there were a number of staffers in the west wing who were trying to make the peaceful transfer of power take place. they were doing it sometimes secretly, under trump's nose. cipollone was clearly one of those people. but of course you have to ask yourself given the horrors of january 6th whether maybe he should have pushed back sooner and harder. >> well, that's the question that everyone's asking and wondering. you talk about not wanting to give either brownie points or participation awards for simply showing up at a time like this. there will be questions about that throughout the hearings. nice talking to you, chris. thank you so much. >> great to be with you. >> the fbi director is speaking to cnn. and the fbi director is warning about the rise in political
violence. stay with us to find out more. >> there are way, way too many people in today's world who are taking their very passionately held views and manifesting them through violence. ♪ limu emu ♪ and doug. [power-drill noises] alright, limu, give me a socket wrench, pliers, and a phone open to libertymutual.com they customize your car insurance, so you only pay for what you need... and you could even save $652 when you switch. ok, i need a crowbar. and a blowtorch. [teddy bear squeaks] [doug sighs] limu, call a mechanic. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪
fbi director christopher wray issuing a disturbing warning tonight about political violence in the united states. he's also weighing in on the justice department's investigation of january 6th. saying they're going to follow the facts wherever they lead. here's part of wray's interview with cnn's evan perez. >> the question that has arisen from the recent hearings makes it clear that the former president was very involved in at least trying to help make
sure that the election results were overturned. what's your thinking about, you know, the fbi's process of looking at everyone who may have had a role in what happened on january 6th? >> january 6th was a reflection of a broader phenomenon that we see in our country today, which is that there are way, way too many people who are willing to take their ideological, social, or political grievances, perhaps very earnestly felt, and manifest them through violence. and in our system there is a right way and a wrong way to express when you're angry or upset about something. and it doesn't matter whether you're upset about an election, upset about a trial, upset about the criminal justice system, upset about any issue. in the case of january 6th, those things plus interference with a sacred part of our
consti constitutional, then we're going to have to act. that's the rule of law. that's what the rule of law's all about. >> does that mean anybody who was involved at all levels? >> so we're going to follow the facts wherever they lead, no matter who likes it. we're going to follow the law. i'm not going to comment on any specific individual who may or may not be under investigation. i want to let the facts speak for themselves as the investigations develop and if there are charges against individuals the public will see that through the charges at the justice department. >> and evan perez joins me now. evan, i mean, you asked wray about people at all levels there. and we know the next public hearing from the committee is focusing on extremists, right? and connections that might be there to the white house. i'm wondering, is the doj prepared to really act? i mean, criminally prosecute. if evidence is shown during these hearings and there is evidence of that connection, are they going to go there?
>> look, i think what he is opening the door, certainly leaving the door open for, is to follow exactly that path if that evidence is there. and you've heard this from lisa monaco, the deputy attorney general who told us earlier this year that they're going to look at this effort to put up fake electors. and of course we saw in recent weeks, we've seen some of the subpoenas being delivered. we saw federal agents raiding the home of jeffrey clark who was very much involved in all of this effort. so you see you're familiar with how the swrus department works and how these guys do their work, which is they go from the bottom up. and you know, they've got plenty of time to investigate. i know there's a lot of people who are very impaint with the pace of this. but you can tell that chris wray and some of the other officials who are oversewing all this, they have a lot of patience because they want to make sure they get it right. it's not obviously -- if you get to that level, you have to make
sure you have everything right. >> i did notice he made the statement of follow the facts essentially no matter who likes it, kind of akin -- just a close cousin to the idea of without favor or political favor, just following the facts. you heard from a.g. merrick garland time and time again. evan, he also commented on the july 4th parade shooting in highland park, illinois. what did he tell you about that tragedy? >> you know, one of the interesting things about this conversation, laura, is that he brought it back to, you know, the fight that the fbi and the justice department had on their hands with radicalization from foreign terrorist groups, usis and some of those groups. and he compared it to the same -- to the phenomenon that we're living with these mass shootings by people, some of them who are inspired by racism, anti-semitism, anti-black bias.
this is what they're dealing with because as you heard in the july 4th shooting repeatedly this person was able to get guns despite the fact that there were clear signs that he should not have been able to. what ray told me today was they are trying to apply some of the same tactics that they used then to this current problem. obviously, it's a different issue. right? there is no material support law that could get you to cut off some of these people before they strike. but he says, you know, we want people to -- if they see something wrong with a family member, they need to say something because that's the only way the fbi and prosecutors are going to be able to stop the next uvalde, the next highland park. >> there's that see something say something. and what's incumbent of course on the government is to do something about what's been told. only you can look this sharp at 3:00 in the morning in london.
evan perez. >> thank you. >> nice seeing you. >> you too. >> president biden is signing an executive order on abortion. but can it actually protect women and girls and their access to the medical care that they need? pain hits fast. so get relief fast. only tylenol rapid release gels have laser drilled holes. they release medicine fast for fast pain relief. and now get relief without a pill with tylenol dissolve packs. relief without the water.
there's a reason comcast business powers more businesses than any other provider. actually, there's a few... comcast business offers the fastest, reliable network... the protection of securityedge™ and the most reliable 5g network. want me to keep going? i can... whether your small business is starting or growing, you need comcast business. technology solutions that put you ahead. get a great offer on internet and security, now with more speed and more bandwidth. plus find out how to get up to a $650 prepaid card with a qualifying bundle.
president biden signing an executive order today aimed at protecting abortion rights. it attempts to safeguard access to emergency contraception as well as protect patient privacy and bolster the legal opinions and options available to both patients and doctors. the executive order comes amid mounting pressure on the administration to take action after of course the supreme court overturned roe v. wade in the dobbs decision just last month. president biden said the court's decision was a call for women to head to the polls.
>> when you read the decision, the court has made clear it will not protect the rights of women, period. period. after having made the decision based on a reading of a document that was frozen in time in the 1860s, when women didn't even have the right to vote, the court now, now practically dares the women ofmark to go to the ballot box and restore the very rights they've just taken away. >> for more i want to bring in former texas state senator wendy davis. i'm so glad you're here. a lot of people were focusing on this issue out of texas long before we even knew about the dobbs decision or of course overturning roe v. wade. and as you know, wendy, biden's order lists a few goals. you can see them on the screen. the question many people have is how are they intending to be able to accomplish this? i mean, much of it's being left of course to the health and
human services department. how far is this going to go in actually protecting abortion rights, do you think? >> you know, laura, i think what the executive order did today was try to create some clarification and protection around people who are able to leave states where abortion is illegal and travel to other states to receive that care. protecting the confidentiality of their google searches, for example, protecting the confidentiality of a doctor who may treat a patient from another state. but it falls far short of protecting people who need care in states like mine who cannot afford the privilege and luxury of being able to travel. we know that most women who access abortion care are low income, are in their 20s, and most of them already have children. and the hurdles that they face in traveling hundreds of miles to receive care are
overwhelming. i understand that president biden is encouraging us all to vote, and i know people are feeling incredibly motivated to vote as a consequence of this decision and our anger and our upset about it are one thing. but i do also believe that we need to see democrats fighting with every tool possible to motivate us to step up and get behind democrats who are running because we believe that they're going to bring solutions to the table. >> so what are those change tactics you're talking about? the idea of fight. what does the fight look like? obviously, the white house has some constraints in terms of what it can put forth because of obviously separation of powers. but what do you think at the state level particularly? one of the things abortion rights advocates have suggested is that in states, for example, where abortion is banned the white house should allow abortion services then on federal land. now, boyd biden has dismissed t
idea. but is that one vehicle and one area to do that in? >> you know, i think that it is. and i think it's something that should be tested. what i find so interesting, laura, and frustrating as a person who's been involved in partisan politics for a long time is that republicans don't worry about the rules before they proceed headlong into whatever it is they're hoping to achieve. and democrats, we tend to be rule followers and we think of all the hurdles in front of us before we decide we're going to take action rather than boldly moving forward and dealing with the hurdles as they come. and yes, there may be some significant hurdles when it comes to using federal properties for providing abortion care or telemedicine abortion care to women. there also has been the suggestion that a public health emergency could be declared so that doctors out of state could provide telemedicine support to
women who live in anti-abortion states like mine. and i think these have to be explored and we should be testing every boundary possible and taking them wherever they may lead us. but at the very least demonstrating that we're willing to fight and go to the mat for people who so desperately will need this care and will not be able to receive it. >> wendy, if we've learned anything from what's happened in at least last summer related to abortion laws in texas or even what we've seen from the supreme court as of late it seems it's an advantageous tactic to ask for forgiveness rather than permission, to you are why point entirely. and sadly, i want to remind our viewers of course, and you know this as well, as we're talking about the rights of women we must include the fact that there are girls, minors, who are also impacted by these decisions. criticism committed against them. where they find themselves having to find resources that are not there and means to travel as minors to try to
whether it's a new or chronic problem. and apoquel's treated over 11 million dogs. nice. and...the talking dog thing? is it bothering you? no... itching like a dog is bothering me. until dogs can speak for themselves, you have to. when allergic itch is a problem, ask for apoquel. apoquel is for the control of itch associated with allergic dermatitis and the control of atopic dermatitis in dogs. do not use apoquel in dogs less than 12 months old or those with serious infections. apoquel may increase the chances of developing serious infections and may cause existing parasitic skin infestations or pre-existing cancers to worsen. new neoplasias were observed in clinical studies and post-approval. most common side effects are vomiting and diarrhea. feeling better? i'm speechless. thanks for the apoquel. ahh, that's what friends are for. ask your veterinarian for apoquel. next to you, apoquel is a dog's best friend.
former japanese prime minister shinzo abe, who was shot and killed while giving a campaign speech in central japan. the president ordering flags to half staff and referring to abe as his friend in a speech today. >> service to his country and his people was in his bones. even after he stepped down from public office to focus on his health he stayed engaged. he cared deeply. and i hold him in great respect. >> abe's death sending shockwaves across japan, a country with some of the world's strictest gun laws. here's cnn's will ripley. >> reporter: a campaign speech in central japan. one of many in the long career of former japanese leader shinzo abe. but this would be his last. the country's longest-serving prime minister and one of japan's most high-profile figures laying on the ground, shot twice.
bleeding profusely from wounds in the neck and chest. he would later die after being rushed to the hospital, a team of 20 doctors unable to save him. his alleged attacker, 41-year-old yamagami tetsuya, also lay nearby, tackled by security. police say he had a machined made gun and similar pistol-like items in his home. they're investigating his motive. >> translator: the suspect confessed that he had committed the act as he had a grudge against a specific organization and believed former prime minister abe was part of it. >> reporter: a shooting like this is almost unthinkable in japan. guns are strictly controlled here. it's a long and complicated process to buy one. involving classes, background checks, mental health evaluations and drug screening. it's resulted in one of the lowest crime rates in the world. in japan there were only ten shootings last year with only one death. in the united states that figure exponentially higher.
according to the gun violence archive firearms were responsible for more than 45,000 deaths last year in the united states. keep in mind japan has about 40% of the u.s. population. the u.s. is also eclipsing japan in the number of guns in the country. in japan there are 0.3 guns for every 100 people. in the u.s. 120 guns. that is, more guns than people. disbelief on the streets of tokyo. a crime most people here only hear about in other countries, not their own. >> translator: it's unbelievable to see an attack like this in japan, which is very safe. it's unbelievable that somebody was walking around with a gun like that. >> translator: there are many gun crimes, happening abroad. but i never imagined it would happen in japan. >> reporter: at the scene of the shooting mourners lay flowers for the former leader. some shedding tears.
one whose death weighs heavily on a country with the grief of gun violence. for decades, japanese politicians, even high-profile ones, have been able to get up close and personal with their constituents. that's how elections work here. there are a lot of questions now about what will be changing in japan, a nation that is so safe when i lived there i never once felt nervous, whether it's walking around in the middle of the night, big city, small town, you see young kids going to school by themselves, some as young as 5 years old taking the subway because it's just that safe. and that is why this crime, laura, is just really shocking and unsettling for people who live in japan and those who know that country, and love that country. >> even in a country where we have a far more pervasive problem with guns, it's still stunning for us to see this. will, abe was the longest-serving prime minister in japan and he was still very much a leading political figure. he was giving a stump speech when he was assassinated. do we know if this is a factor
in the suspect's motive for the shooting? >> it's a good question. there are more than 90 police officers on this case, and they've been interrogating this suspect, this 41-year-old unemployed man, and he said that his motivation was not shinzo abe's politics. he specifically said that's not why he held a grudge against him. he says he held a grudge against abe because he thought that abe was part of some unspecified organization, that his mother may have donateped a lot of money to and he thought that shinzo abe was somehow connected with that and therefore he felt that he needed to assemble these homemade weapons, shoot him and assassinate him, the first political assassination that japan has seen in many, many decades, laura. >> unbelievable. thank you, will, for your reporting. we'll all be captivated by this. an assassination of the former japanese prime minister. shocking. thank you. more than seven hours of
testimony here in the united states of america. and from who? the former trump white house counsel, pat cipollone. so what is he telling the january 6th committee? he hast worked this hard to only get this far with his cholesterol. taken with a statin, leqvio can lower bad cholesterol and keep it low with two doses a year. side effects were injection site reaction, joint pain, urinary tract infection, diarrhea, chest cold, pain in legs or arms, and shortness of breath. with leqvio, lowering cholesterol becomes just one more thing life throws your way. ask your doctor about leqvio. lower. longer. leqvio.
i called the barnes firm. it was the best call i could've made. your case is often worth more than insuran call the barnes firm to find out i could've made. what your case could be worth. we will help get you the best result possible. ♪ the barnes firm, injury attorneys ♪ call one eight hundred,est resul eight million ♪ ♪ twhen a truck hit my car, injury attorneys ♪ cthe insurance company est rewasn't fair.illion ♪ i didn't know what my case was worth. so i called the barnes firm. i was hit by a car and needed help. i called the barnes firm, that was the best call i could've made. i'm rich barnes. it's hard for people to know how much their accident case is worth. let our injury attorneys help you get the best result possible. ♪ the barnes firm injury attorneys ♪ ♪ call one eight hundred, eight million ♪
former trump white house counsel, pat cipollone testifying for more than seven hours behind closed doors today. i want to bring in harry litman. we were talking on your podcast, nice to see you again here tonight, harry, new reporting tonight, right? cnn learning from two sources that the committee did not directly, did not directly ask pat cipollone if he told hutchinson on the day of the attack they would get quote charged with every crime imagine fastball they went down to the capitol. any idea as to why they would
not ask that? maybe they were asking around it? tiptoeing, not knowing what he might say and what is the logic of not coming out and saying, did you say it? >> i agree it was perplexing. they tacted around it. not just that one. she said he did not contradict anyone but that is not the same. you don't want to get that bad sound bite even if they do not display it can be used down the line. they lacked confidence that he would give them what they wanted. still in all, this is their chance and why not take it and given the upside. they must of had an advanced sense that he could of gotten squirrely, so squirrely it would not have been worth the risk. >> perhaps, also, maybe their thought was, look, you are not here as white
house counsel to be tape recording device. you are here to tell us about your perspective, not just the credibility of other testimony, that might be the focus and the source telling cnn that the committee was focused on the perspective, not just the system saying, and i quote, mr. cipollone provided a great deal of new information relevant to the investigation that further underscores president trump's supreme dereliction of duty. a lot of focus on credibility, that is a huge component, right? >> is that for me? >> yes. >> yes. it is. i don't mean to step on you. it is a huge component. it is interesting. a couple little things, they are playing it kind of cute because they will have the hearing next week. i expect that, in fact, they have real combustible stuff that is going to break big when they do it and she is being kind of coy
Uploaded by TV Archive on