Summary
Former Trump White House counsel Pat Cipollone to testify through transcribed interview to the January 6th hearing after former White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson`s bombshell testimony in the leadup and during January 6th Capitol insurrection. January 6th panel to lay out links between extremist groups like Proud Boys and Oath Keepers to Trump allies relating to the Capitol attack. Fulton County, Georgia`s district attorney Fani Willis said no one is immune from prosecution including former President Trump. CNN reporting today that Jayland Walker was handcuffed when his body arrived at the Medical Examiner`s Office according to documents they reviewed. DeKalb County, Georgia D.A. Sherry Boston vowing she won`t prosecute abortion cases.
Transcript
NICOLLE WALLACE, MSNBC HOST: Kevin died while shielding, while protecting. A GoFundMe in their honor has already raised $2.5 million for that little boy, who is expected to be cared for and raised by other members of their family.
Seven victims known and mourned by hundreds of friends and families and neighbors who are now forced to live with this, to cope with lifelong holes in their hearts. Our thoughts are with each and every one of them today and the days and weeks and years to come.
Our thanks to you for letting us into your homes today. THE BEAT with Jason Johnson in for Ari starts right now.
Hi, Jason.
JASON JOHNSON, MSNBC HOST: Thank you so much for that, Nicolle.
Welcome to THE BEAT. I`m Jason Johnson in for Ari Melber. And we start with a break in the January 6th investigation.
A major witness is going to testify. Trump White House counsel Pat Cipollone will go under oath. His lawyer indicated a transcribed interview but his testimony will be on camera this Friday.
Cipollone knows it all and this news is huge for the probe. He was witness to talks on seizing voting machines, sending fake electors to Congress, and was in the West Wing on January 6th. He has spoken to the committee before in an informal setting. But this testimony is under oath stemming from a subpoena coming just after the bombshell testimony on Trump`s violent coup from Cassidy Hutchinson.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CASSIDY HUTCHINSON, FORMER AIDE TO WHITE HOUSE CHIEF OF STAFF MARK MEADOWS: On January 3rd, Mr. Cipollone had approached me. Mr. Cipollone and I had a brief private conversation where he said to me, we need to make sure that this doesn`t happen. This would be legally a terrible idea for us.
Pat Cipollone barreling down the hallway towards our office.
I saw Mr. Cipollone right before I walked out on to West Exec that morning, and Mr. Cipollone has 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.
Pat was concerned it would look like we were obstructing justice or obstructing the Electoral College Count.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
JOHNSON: He warned Trump`s team of, quote, "every crime imaginable," and specifically mentioned too he was in that Oval Office meeting when Trump floated the idea of decapitating the DOJ to install loyalist Jeffrey Clark. And (INAUDIBLE) testimony Jared Kushner talked about Cipollone`s threats to resign.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. LIZ CHENEY (R-WY): Jared, are you aware of instances where Pat Cipollone threatened to resign?
JARED KUSHNER, FORMER TRUMP WHITE HOUSE SENIOR ADVISER: I kind of -- like I said, my interest at that time was on trying to get as many pardons done, and I know that, you know, he was always -- him and the team were always saying oh, we`re going to resign, we`re not going to be here if this happens, if that happens. So I kind of took it up to just be whining, to be honest with you.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
JOHNSON: Remember what Jared said. I was working on the other conspiracy so I couldn`t work on that conspiracy. Look, there are so many key questions that Cipollone will be asked and they will go public.
Also breaking today, another new witness will testify live at the hearing on Tuesday. Sarah Matthews, a former deputy press secretary for Trump, will go under oath and will be in the spotlight. Matthews resigned from the administration after the insurrection saying she was, quote, "deeply disturbed." The hearing will focus on Trump world`s links to extremist groups. Here`s what a committee investigator said about Matthews.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JOHN WOOD, FORMER SENIOR INVESTIGATOR, HOUSE JANUARY 6TH COMMITTEE: I actually lead the staff part of the interview of Sarah Matthews. I can tell you that she is an extremely credible witness. She`ll be able to help fill in some of those gaps about what happened on the buildup to January 6th and January 6th itself.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
JOHNSON: So what exactly does Matthews know about these groups? We know Roger Stone was with the Proud Boys on the morning of January 6th outside of the Willard Hotel in the insurrection headquarters. New evidence revealed a meeting between Proud Boys and Oath Keeper leaders on January 5th and the evidence of coordination.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The Proud Boys established a command structure in anticipation of coming back to D.C. on January 6th. The Oath Keepers began planning to block the peaceful transfer of power shortly after November 3rd election.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The night of January 5th, Enrique Tario and Stewart Rhodes met in a parking garage in Washington, D.C.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Be advised, there`s probably about 300 Proud Boys. They`re marching eastbound.
REP. BENNIE THOMPSON (D-MS): The Proud Boys instigated the first breach of the Capitol just before 1:00 p.m.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The Oath Keepers went into the Capitol through the east doors in two staff formations.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
JOHNSON: And now Giuliani is doing another Giuliani. Under criminal investigation, he`s back on camera saying this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
RUDY GIULIANI, FORMER PERSONAL ATTORNEY FOR PRESIDENT TRUMP: They`re going to try to charge him with that which is why he probably should have pardoned himself.
[18:05:01]
Not because he committed a crime. Don`t you understand me? Because these people are criminals. They frame people.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
JOHNSON: As Ari Melber says, pardons are for criminals. And as the former SDNY chief, Giuliani knows that.
Joining me now is my fellow Wahoo, Melissa Murray, NYU law professor, and Barbara McQuade, former federal prosecutor.
Thank you all so much for joining us to staff off today.
Barbara, I`m going to begin with you because I just -- there is so much of this that I think is just sort of pouring out every single week, which makes me scream and makes regular people scream. We now have people backing up Sarah Matthews saying, look, everything that Cassidy Hutchinson said is true, what she talked about in the car, what she talked about as far as the attack, what she talked about in the room.
How important is it for the overall sort of legal case that may be left at the DOJ`s door that we now have more people coming forward and backing up the testimony that we heard in the last January 6th hearing?
BARBARA MCQUADE, FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR: It`s very important. Number one, corroboration is very valuable. Sometimes people might think that a witness either misheard something or didn`t remember it correctly or is even lying about something. But if you have another witness who can independently verify the same facts, that tends to enhance the believability about it.
I also think Sarah Matthews could be an interesting witness just as Cassidy Hutchinson was, in what I would refer to as a bridge witness. That is, even if she didn`t see things directly, she may be able to lead investigators to additional witnesses or describe bits of conversations or things that she heard that can open new lines of investigation, so she seems like a very interesting and promising witness.
JOHNSON: Professor Murray, the next hearing -- it`s going to be about sort of Proud Boys and white nationalist connections and everything else like that. What is the kind of thing that is sort of a definite link, right? You know, look, just because I have a meeting with a member of the Klan doesn`t necessarily mean that I`m a member. Just because I have a meeting with the Proud Boys doesn`t necessarily mean that I am directing their behavior even if I might be coordinating.
What has to be shown or what should be explained at next week`s meeting to say, look, these people were in the room. You know, it`s true. In the room, with the ranch, you know, with the made in order to make sure that we can draw this connection here legally and politically?
MELISSA MURRAY, NEW YORK UNIVERSITY LAW PROFESSOR: Well, to be clear, Jason, this is congressional testimony, it`s not a criminal prosecution, this is not a criminal trial.
JOHNSON: Right.
MURRAY: So the standard of proof is very different. This is just testimony given under oath and I imagine what the select committee is looking for is, as Barbara said, more corroboration that there are actually very established links here. If this were to go forward and be subject to a DOJ prosecution for conspiracy or to link anyone in the White House to the charges of seditious conspiracy that have already been leveled against individuals like Stewart Rhodes, then I think you actually need to have some kind of connection whether it`s in the form of messages or communications, and it doesn`t have to be a lot in order to establish that there was some kind of conspiracy afoot.
Conspiracy is known as the darling of the prosecutor nursery because it takes so little to establish it and to link up a number of different people in this theory of group liability. So, again, just links between these individuals who have already been identified with these extremist groups and those in the White House I think would be quite profitable.
JOHNSON: Barbara, we`ve got some sound talking about people being concerned about being prosecuted. We have some sound from Roger Stone, his thoughts about someone who`s going to try and avoid future investigations. Want your thoughts on the other side.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ROGER STONE, TRUMP ASSOCIATE: I think he announces sooner rather than later. I think he announces as early as July.
ALEX JONES, INFOWARS: As early this July? Meaning like a week, he could be announcing the 2024 run? Wow.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
JOHNSON: Barbara, look, I understand that Trump may have an interest in announcing early so that people are obligated to pay attention to him so he can use, you know, campaign and PAC money for whatever sort of conspiratorial things he wants to engage in, but from a legal standpoint, how does announcing that you`re running for president possibly insulate you from prosecution? I don`t -- explain to me and the audience why it would make a difference if he`s announced or not announced when it comes to being investigated?
MCQUADE: I don`t think it would matter in this instance, but here`s why it`s relevant. The Justice Department does have a policy that says it should never take action for the purpose of influencing political outcomes. In some ways, they shouldn`t even take action that might have the effect of influencing political outcomes. So for that reason, the Justice Department usually stands down in what they call a cooling-off period for roughly 60 days or so around an election.
So I would say, as we face primary season in the spring of 2024 or the November of 2024 season, I think you would see the Justice Department cool off any investigation or any charges, but we`re a long ways away from that. And so I think whatever he announces in July or 2023, I don`t think it`s going to make a difference in the investigations being done by DOJ, or Georgia, or this committee.
[18:10:08]
JOHNSON: And cool off any more I think we`ll be frozen. I haven`t seen much heat yet.
Melissa, I got to ask you this. One other thing that`s of interest is, Republicans have already said, look, if we retake the House this fall, we`re going to start investigating members of the January 6th Committee. They`re basically already planning their own counter investigation of the initial investigation. The DOJ is not necessarily going to be anymore obligated to listen to those results than they are what`s happening with the actual January 6th Committee.
What could be the consequences, though, as far as information being shared? If Republicans take over the House, they shut down January 6th. Could they hold information from the DOJ? Could they snatch documentation back? What could be the real consequences to a Republican House takeover this fall as far as this investigation goes?
MURRAY: Well, Jason, the question assumes that the individuals who would be taking back the House would be institutionalist who would follow established protocols like we know that that`s already not the case, so it could be that they do things that are perhaps unorthodox things that we haven`t seen before in terms of withholding information, asking for evidence back, asking for information to be sent back to Congress.
It`s all very unclear, but we do know that the fact that they are already contemplating the prospect of a retaliatory investigation of an investigation shows how serious they are and how close this select committee has come and how unnerving the findings have been for those who are outside of it. So who knows what will happen? But, you know, having that kind of power will certainly lead to some interesting shifts in how business is done at the Capitol.
JOHNSON: And I have to follow up and say this. You know, the idea that they`re planning extended testimony says to me all the more reason why the January 6th Committee should continue. I don`t understand why we only have two more episodes left of this most important investigation into this conspiracy when you know that the other side is planning bad-faith investigations all the way until 2024. Doesn`t make any sense to me.
But anyway, Melissa Murray, Barbara McQuade, thank you so much for starting us off on THE BEAT tonight.
Coming up, the prosecutor in that Trump criminal probe now saying she might subpoena Trump himself. That exclusive interview coming up.
Also, a shocking new detail about a police shooting in Ohio and we`ll hear from district attorney who is refusing to prosecute abortion cases despite a ban.
All that, plus a report on how losers in GOP primaries are now blaming other Republicans for so- called election fraud. Stay with us on THE BEAT.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[18:17:05]
JOHNSON: Donald Trump can get subpoenaed and he is not immune from criminal charges. That is the bracing new message today from the Fulton County prosecutor Fani Willis leading the criminal investigation into Trump and his allies` attempt to overturn the 2020 election in Georgia. Willis making those comments in an exclusive interview with NBC`s own Blayne Alexander.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BLAYNE ALEXANDER, NBC NEWS CORRESPONDENT: Could we expect to possibly see additional subpoenas from people in former President Trump`s inner circle, former Trump associates?
FANI WILLIS, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, FULTON COUNTY, GEORGIA: Yes.
ALEXANDER: Are we talking about family members? Are we talking about former White House officials?
WILLIS: I mean, we`ll just have to see where the investigation leads us.
ALEXANDER: Might we see a subpoena of the former president himself?
WILLIS: Anything is possible.
ALEXANDER: So we`re not ruling it out. It is possible.
WILLIS: Absolutely.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
JOHNSON: Willis saying more subpoenas could be hitting Trump`s inner circle and Trump himself just a day after she subpoenaed Rudy Giuliani, coup mastermind John Eastman, Trump lawyer Jenna Ellis, and GOP Senator Lindsey Graham amongst others. Graham responding he`ll challenge the subpoena, calling the probe, quote, "all politics." Willis saying today if anyone committee a crime including the former president, she will bring charges. Shocker.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
WILLIS: People also seem to think that in society, that there are certain people that are immune from prosecution if you are a celebrity, if you are a high-ranking public official. Lady Justice is actually blind. This is the reality. If you come into my community and you commit a crime, you deserve to be held responsible. I don`t care what your race is, I don`t care what your gender is, I don`t care the status you reach, I don`t care who you care to love. And so Lady Justice here is blind.
ALEXANDER: That includes the former president.
WILLIS: If he committed a crime in my jurisdiction then it includes him.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
JOHNSON: Joining me now is justice correspondent and Lewis Black of politics, Elie Mystal from "The Nation."
Elie, I have to start with this. For a year now, we`ve basically heard Merrick Garland of DOJ say we`ve got to be careful, we`ve got to be sure, we`re not political. And then we have this local prosecutor basically doing the Usher, watch this, we`re going. Watch this, we`re going straight after this guy. We don`t care.
Why is a local prosecutor so much more aggressive and open about holding the former president of the United States accountable than the Department of Justice? Like I heard more fire and bravery and commitment to the Democratic project in this short interview with our reporter Blayne Alexander than I`ve ever heard from the DOJ in the last 18 months.
ELIE MYSTAL, THE NATION JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: Yes, that was brazen. That was refreshing. She said the words. If you commit a crime in my jurisdiction, Lady Justice is blind. She doesn`t care about your race, she doesn`t care about your gender, she`s going to prosecute crime. What an idea. Wouldn`t it be amazing if we appointed an attorney general who believed the same thing? Because clearly, we haven`t.
Look, and just to be clear, it`s not that Fani Willis is saying that she`s blind to all of the stuff going around.
[18:20:06]
She said in that same interview that she might well suspend her investigation after voting starts in the midterm and pick it back up after the midterm elections to create a zone of, you know, to avoid even the mere appearance of impropriety. But look at how she is defining the appearance of impropriety. When voting starts.
JOHNSON: Right.
MYSTAL: As opposed to Merrick Garland who apparently defines it as, you know, his entire term in office at this point. So I think Willis is doing exactly the right thing. And I don`t know where that investigation goes. Look, I do know this. I`m going to date myself a little bit, Jason. I`m a little bit older than you. I remember the old television show "Colombo." And if you remember "Colombo" --
JOHNSON: I barely. Just barely.
MYSTAL: Right. If you remember "Colombo," that show starts with the crime being shown to the viewers. Everybody sees what happened. Everybody sees who did it and then the whole rest of the show is Peter Fault trying to figure it out and then trying to convince everybody else of what we already know what happened.
Donald Trump called Raffensperger and committed election fraud. And we`ve all heard the tape. We`ve all seen the crime. It happened right in front of our eyes. And so what Fani Willis is doing is that "Colombo" Peter Fault`s slow walk. You know, she`s coming. She saw what we saw but not everybody has seen it and so she`s going to do what it takes to prove what we all saw actually happen.
JOHNSON: That`s the amazing part. And I have to say because I think this is key. You know, when you see that the president or the former president has already sort of committed these crimes, and it seems to take forever for people to get to this point, you`re now in this discussion of like, you know, the political elites are all, OK, well, how is he going to get out of this? Can he do anything one way or another?
We have these stories coming out now that former President Trump also probably because he`s afraid of DeSantis who`s a slightly better fascist- in-training than him, is saying, hey, I`m going to announce that I`m running for president and that will somehow inoculate me from prosecution. We talked about this briefly in the last second. Does that even make a difference? I mean, does announcing that you`re running for president really have any impact one way or another?
Will that lead to Merrick Garland saying, OK, I`m sorry, he basically has an immunity token, so I can`t do anything to him until 2024? Or does it have any actual material legal defense once you say I`m running for president? Because if that`s the case, every time I want to rob a bank, I`ll just say I`m running for mayor.
MYSTAL: Yes. No, it has no material legal effect. It`s not a law. It`s not a rule. It`s not a statute. But what we`re fighting over is the same thing we`ve been fighting over since January 20th, 2021 and that is the one foot of square space in Merrick Garland`s head. And if Merrick Garland decides that Trump running for president -- you said it exactly right, gives him an immunity token. Oh, he`s too powerful now. Oh, no. Then that`s why he might do it.
This is why having a weak AG is such a problem. Donald Trump is playing a game counting on Merrick Garland to be a weak person who does not have what it takes to go get him, and he thinks that making it even a little bit mentally harder, not legally harder, not jurisdictionally harder, but mentally harder for Merrick Garland can do it, will break him. Because that`s how weak Trump thinks of Merrick Garland. That`s not how weak I think Merrick Garland is. That`s how weak Trump thinks Merrick Garland is.
JOHNSON: I want to play you some very, very quick sound from someone who is not going to be weak. We have a candidate running for attorney general in Georgia. Quick sound from her last night. I want your thoughts on the other side of this sound.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
STATE SEN. JEN JORDAN (D-GA): It was surreal. You know, you walk in and there`s Rudy Giuliani. I think what it was really about was providing what they believe to be some kind of legitimate basis for the legislature to go into special session and basically throw out, you know, the slate of electors that have been chosen by the voters of Georgia.
I`m literally Googling who is John Eastman when he pops up. He purported to be giving expert testimony, you know, on the Georgia constitution, on Georgia law, and the man isn`t even a Georgia lawyer.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
JOHNSON: We have State Senator Jordan, we have a local prosecutor. Do you think Georgia might be the best place right now to see any justice brought against this previous administration for attempting to overturn the election?
MYSTAL: I mean, look, I`m a New Yorker. So I`m going to ride or drive my state. Tish James, yo. But, look, both of these states I think are the best chances. Both of these states have state jurisdiction over various aspects of Trump`s criminal empire. Georgia has I think the most easiest case to make because, again, Trump is already on tape committing any election fraud. But remember that so much of this goes to Trump`s state of mind.
We have to be able to prove that Trump not only committed the election fraud that we heard him do on the phone, but that he knew he was committing election fraud when he was doing it and his defense has always been I had the John Eastmans, the Jenna Ellis, the farting man, whoever, to tell me.
[18:25:06]
But I`ve said on this program in the past like going and finding a wino on the street who says yes, you the president now, does not mean you`re taking reasonable legal advice. And that`s basically the role that Giuliani is in, the wino off the street. And so as long as you can show that Giuliani and Ellis and Eastman were completely out to lunch, that does not protect Trump from criminal liability.
And again, I think that when you look at those subpoenas, that`s what Fani Willis is looking for. Look, Lindsey Graham for instance is all like, I`m going to fight the subpoena. It`s his right to fight it. It`s not his right to ignore it but it`s his right to fight it. But remember, people are trying to give Lindsey Graham a chance to explain himself because he`s also wrapped up in this mess. He also called Raffensperger.
JOHNSON: Right.
MYSTAL: Raffensperger also said that Lindsey Graham told him to throw out some votes. So Lindsey Graham can come in and explain himself or maybe he catches an indictment, too.
JOHNSON: Elie Mystal, as per the usual, the Lewis Black of politics, politics writer of "The Nation." Thank you so much for joining us on THE BEAT tonight.
MYSTAL: Thanks for having me.
JOHNSON: Coming up in just 60 seconds, the sister of Jayland Walker speaks out on the deadly police shooting that struck him with over 60 rounds.
But first, exposing MAGA media`s plans for the next coup attempt. Back in just 60 seconds on THE BEAT.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
JOHNSON: A year and a half after the Capitol riot, the big lie that brought rioters to the Capitol is now dominating far-right radio. This time it`s focused on the midterm elections. Radio hosts telling their listeners that Democrats will try to cheat in order to win. Listen to this sound.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We know the Democrats are going to cheat.
CAROL ROSS, HOST OF "THE ROSS REPORT": There`ll be rampant cheating.
LARS LARSON, HOST OF "THE LARS LARSON SHOW": Democrats nearly always win. Or at least they cheat to a win.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: They`re going to get smoked so bad it`s going to be embarrassing if they can`t cheat.
MICHAEL KNOWLES, HOST OF "THE MICHAEL KNOWLES SHOW": They`re just going to try to cheat and steal the election.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
JOHNSON: The "New York Times" reporting that the phrase Democrats cheating was brought up more than 5,000 times on conservative radio shows across America this year, and it`s just July. Piling up conspiracy theories can have unintended consequences. Some footage from January 6th shows rioters thought that even the Trump video telling them to go home in peace was a deep fake.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, FORMER PRESIDENT: But go home and go home in peace.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: That looks prerecorded. When did he record that?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Stop. Stop it.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Where are the people?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
JOHNSON: Joining me now is Kurt Bardella, the brightest voice in country music in Washington, D.C. and an adviser to the DNC and DCCC.
Kurt, thanks so much for joining me tonight. Look, you know, we`ve talked plenty of times about the sort of cultlike nature of the Republican Party. That`s not new. That`s not rocket science. But what I do think is interesting is this. What I have seen polling wise is that since the overturning of Roe, the congressional ballot has actually improved for Democrats even as Biden`s numbers have gone down.
Do you think this new push in the right-wing ecosphere, oh, my gosh, we`re about to be cheated, is because Republicans are thinking maybe this fall was not completely in the bag? Because this seems to be new rhetoric that they`re pushing even stronger since the overturning of Roe.
KURT BARDELLA, ADVISER, DNC AND DCCC: Yes, Jason, here we go. It`s the greatest hits on replay. This is what they do. When Republicans are in trouble, when Republicans sense danger, when Republicans sense political fallout, they go back to the greatest hits. They go out to these egregious, ridiculous, debunked lies about the election.
It`s really absurdity bathed in hypocrisy because, as we know, they are the ones who cheat. They are the ones who have used the instruments of power to try to suppress people from participating in the democratic process. They are the ones who know that when all things are equal and the playing field is level, that they lose elections. That`s why they`ve tried to change all the voting laws in America.
[18:30:00]
2020 was the most free and fair and accurate election that we`ve ever had. When you look at how it`s been litigated, how it`s been recounted, how certain states have this recount over and over and over again, it is the most verified election we`ve ever had. And yet Republicans saw fit to try to rewrite all the voting laws in America. Why? Because they know that they`re going to lose if they keep going down this path.
JOHNSON: Right.
BARDELLA: And if they don`t suppress the vote, they have no chance.
JOHNSON: So if they`re in the middle of this sort of suppression idea, you`ve got a new poll coming out, 65 percent of Republicans think there was widespread voter fraud. They`re convinced that like, you get a there`s a scam, the feeling way Joe Biden got in. I`ve always kind of wondered if part of your messaging to your own base is the whole process is rigged, how the heck do you then translate that into people bothering to vote?
Because, you know, overall, if you keep telling me, hey, man, no matter how much you go to the gym -- how much you go to the gym you`re still going to be fat. I`m not going to the gym. I`m not going to crunch fitness anymore. When do you think Republicans -- I mean it`s just not worthy for me. When do you think Republicans will get it in their head that debunking the system could have an impact on the margins for people actually turning out to vote for them.
BARDELLA: I mean, you would think that after what happened in the Georgia special election, were rallying against the fairness and the election integrity, wasn`t really a winner for them and cost them potentially those two seats that they would learn the lesson. But again, this is the gospel of idiocy with the apostles of stupid following him and keep repeating the same mistakes over and over and over again. And you`re right. At the end of the day, when we come to Election Day in November 2022, if turnout in the Republican areas isn`t what their pollsters think it should be, looked back at this as the reason.
JOHNSON: Last word to you, Kurt. I got to ask you this. As you`ve seen some of these primaries come out and sometimes far-right, Maga Republicans are losing to just mainstream terrorists supporting Republicans, they`re saying, hey, look, I don`t trust the election process. Do you think we could see splits down the line in the -- in the midterms that could lead to lower Republican turnout? Do you think hard-right Maga people may say, hey, if my election-denying person isn`t the candidate, I`m not going to vote? Do you think that`s a possibility?
BARDELLA: I think it absolutely is. Again, we`ve seen some of this happen already in previous elections. And this has been the great concern that Republican leaders like Kevin McCarthy and Mitch McConnell privately have that they`re going to basically talk themselves out of a win by running these extremists, these out of touch with the mainstream Americans who want to do things that are just so far outside where most voters are. And we`re common sense is that there`s just no way they`re going to be able to cobble together the votes to win, it`s going to cost them and they`re going to be people who may not want to vote for a Democrat, but they`re not going to vote for these people either, and they`re just going to not vote.
JOHNSON: Yes, Dr. Oz and Herschel Walker. Kurt Bardella, thanks so much for joining us tonight on THE BEAT.
Ahead, the Akron police shooting, the victim`s body reportedly handcuffed on arrival at the medical examiner. I take on that. And the double standard in police response to suspects next on THE BEAT.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[18:35:00]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JOE BIDEN, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: The Justice Department and Civil Rights Division of the FBI field office in Akron, Ohio, and the local U.S. Attorney`s Office are closely monitoring and reviewing what happened. If the evidence reveals potential violations of federal criminal statutes, the Justice Department will take the appropriate action.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
JOHNSON: Turning now to that fatal police shooting out of Akron, Ohio. 25- year-old Jayland Walker was shot more than 60 times -- 60 times by police while fleeing a traffic stop. If you`re not clear with the law, that`s not a death penalty crime. His sister is speaking out this morning for the first time since that fatal incident.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JADA WALKER, SISTER OF JAYLAND WALKER: I haven`t really haven`t been watching a lot of television or publications on things because I just -- I don`t want to see him in that light. I`m just really sad because I said many black men who have been killed and many families who experiences even as a sister, you know, it`s just -- excuse me, it`s just -- it`s really hard.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
JOHNSON: CNN reporting today that Walker was handcuffed when his body arrived at the Medical Examiner`s Office according to documents they reviewed. That, along with the 13 body cam videos released this weekend only leads to more questions. And this is only the latest in a string of problematic police incidents out of Ohio.
Remember in 2012 when 13 officers unleashed 137 shots onto two unarmed suspects killing them. Only one officer was charged with manslaughter and he was acquitted two years after that. 12-year-old Tamir Rice was fatally shot by a Cleveland officer who faced no criminal charges and drove up to the kid and gave him 0.03 seconds to respond. A DOJ probe later finding the Cleveland police use a pattern of excessive force.
Now, for all the talk about the danger facing police or the facts of a given incident, the data shows race drives different outcomes. Police used more force on black people who are three times as likely to be killed by police and data shows police frequently escalate interactions with black people over non-violent and fractions. Compare this to police peacefully apprehending Dylann Roof after he murdered nine people including a dear friend of mine in a hate crime in South Carolina. Now you see officers calmly handcuffing him, leading him into the back of a car, and there were reports that they bought him some Burger King.
[18:40:00]
JOHNSON: And we showed you yesterday the stark contrast on how police treated the 22-year-old suspect in the Highland Park mass shooting over the weekend that killed seven. That suspect was arrested without incident. Well, Jayland Walker was fatally shot more than 60 times, more times in the Parkland shooter`s shot.
Joining me now, is a social justice activist and MSNBC analyst, Brittany Packnett Cunningham. Brittany, I hate that usually, we`re talking on the air because some other black person has been murdered by the state. And so I don`t want to just talk about that. What I want to address today is the fecklessness and the refusal on the part of local and national public officials to implement any sort of policies that hold cops accountable. Just off the top with your organization, your work, what are two things right now that the state government or the federal government could do right now to lessen the likelihood of the next state-sponsored murder of a black person in America?
BRITTANY PACKNETT CUNNINGHAM, MSNBC ANALYST" I`ll give you two things right now. One, most certainly, is to change qualified immunity in this country. The fact that having a badge and a gun in my community gives you carte blanche to kill is a problem in a so-called democracy. The other thing, the bigger thing, the more important thing, in my opinion, is to divert all of these millions of dollars that continue to go to police departments that do not prove themselves responsible, fair, kind, or just, and divert that to the things that actually keep us safe.
But as you said, Jason, I am often on TV because something bad has happened. Often something bad has happened to black people. I have a little godson who gets excited when he sees me on TV and I hate to tell him that it`s because somebody was probably shot by police.
We had a chant in Ferguson. We said who do you protect? Who do you serve? And the truth is nobody, especially not us. And this is a point I think people don`t get. The police officers -- police unions for a long time have been litigating a simple fact, the point that they actually don`t have to jump in harm`s way to protect the citizenry, that`s actually not their responsibility.
JOHNSON: Right.
CUNNINGHAM: So this idea of serve and protect is a myth. So if they`re not here to serve and protect us, as Uvalde showed us, then what are they here to do? That the reason is right in the name, it`s law enforcement. When the law of the land was that enslaved people couldn`t run from their enslavers, then police officers happily enforce that law. When the law of the land is that people can be arrested and charged for exercising our bodily autonomy and getting an abortion, then they will perform that very task. And when the law of the land is supported -- when the folks in power are supported by the continual terrorizing of black and brown people, then they will perform that task. The truth of the matter is we have to get through our heads. This is a fully systemic problem.
JOHNSON: Right.
CUNNINGHAM: What is rotten fundamentally cannot be reformed. The only way to handle that is to take the money away and put it in the things that really save us.
JOHNSON: And as I`ve said, consistently, we have to abolish policing as we know it. You cannot reform something that is rotten to its core. And Brittany, one of the things I want to add to this. I think you`re making a good point about how systematic this is. We have this story out of Kentucky where a white guy who was being -- you know, the police were going to his house for domestic violence where he shoots three cops, he kills three cops, they managed to bring him in, right?
Parkland shooter kills multiple people, they`re white, managed to be brought in safely. And yet, we see now in a place like Uvalde where witnesses and people who save their own children from that school are being harassed and terrorized by the police who are frightened that they might actually come forward and talk a little bit about police incompetence.
What do we also have to identify in our public discourse about how police operate? Because I think some of the issues that we`re having here is we trust police too much. We`ve got too many instances of them lying. We don`t even know until we have body cameras what actually happened in Akron because we know that even with body cameras we got nothing but lies out of Uvalde.
CUNNINGHAM: You know what I find really interesting today after the Highland Park shooting, we`ve got a child who went to a fourth of July parade and as I saw someone tweet, left an orphan. And the person who killed his parents, as you`ve already said, Jason, was taken alive and without incident. And so today, people are tripping over themselves to find a reason, to find the motivation why this person could take a gun in this country and go into a crowd and shoot people. But when we, as black folks, indigenous folks, brown folks, disabled folks, poor folks, when we give you hundreds of years of evidence as to the motivation and the reasons why police continue to kill us, we`re called anarchists and we`re told that we are actually the hate groups.
JOHNSON: Right.
[18:45:00]
CUNNINGHAM: The police are on track this year to kill more people than in recent years past. And even though there is no correlation between crime and police killings, that is the myth that you will continue to hear. So to your question, Jason, we have to actually start by questioning the police. We have to stop media outlets that tape police report in carte blanche and offer it up as a report and as an article without criticism and without question.
We have to make sure that we use the words that are actually truthful that this is not about police incompetence that this is actually about the system of policing. It`s not broken. It`s operating precisely as it was designed. Jason, this is not the country I was promised. It is most certainly not the country that I was owed or that Jayland was owed, and most certainly not the country that we deserve moving forward.
JOHNSON: And it isn`t the country that I should be paying my taxes to if this is the results I`m going to get. Brittany Packnett Cunningham, thank you so very much for your time and for joining us on THE BEAT tonight.
Still ahead. A defiant prosecutor vows she will enforce abortion bans. She`s my special guest next on THE BEAT.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[18:50:00]
JOHNSON: Now to a special interview with a defiant law enforcement official vowing she won`t prosecute abortion cases. With federal protections gone, a patchwork of laws are settling in essentially wiping out access across much of the South. Georgia`s restrictive new law is expected to take effect in the coming weeks. It bans abortions once a fetal heartbeat is detected, generally, around six weeks before many women even know they`re pregnant. It`s been held up in the courts since Republican Governor Brian Kemp signed it in 2019.
The fall of Roe now likely giving it the green light and that`s setting up a big fight because, in this battleground state, several district attorneys said they`re taking a stand and they won`t enforce the law. That includes a district attorney in DeKalb County, who says she won`t go after women or doctors. That prosecutor joins me now.
DeKalb County, Georgia DA Sherry Boston, thanks so much for being here. Sherry, I`ll start with this. I always think that the numbers about this are important. Fulton County is ranked number one, I think, just what, 139 or 156 something counties in the state of Georgia. Fulton County is number one for abortions. Where does DeKalb County rank in the state for the number of abortions every year, is it a top three or top five?
SHERRY BOSTON, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, DEKALB COUNTY, GEORGIA: Well, considering that we`re the third populous county in Georgia, I would say we`re definitely in the top three for the number of abortions happening in the state of Georgia.
JOHNSON: OK. And overall -- and I need the audience to understand this, the state of Georgia has seen a slight uptick in abortions over the last several years. Even throughout the pandemic, you have at least reported about 31,000 procedures. And so I want people to understand if you are responsible -- being the prosecutor for DeKalb County, which is the third- most-popular county in the state, if you were responsible for prosecuting three or 4000 people a year, doctors, and friends, and family members, and women who sought this medical procedure, how much time would that take up from your office`s ability to, I don`t know, prosecute actual criminals?
BOSTON: A tremendous amount. I can tell you that right now we handle -- we`re a felony-only office, so we handle roughly five to 6000 felony cases a year. So you do the math. That`s about 50 percent. That would be a 50 percent increase in our office`s caseload of non-violent offenses. And I know that my community is most concerned with gun violence, gang violence, murder, armed robbery, rape, all those offenses where people are at significant risk to their safety.
JOHNSON: So the Attorney General of Georgia right now has said hey, he`s upset, he thinks that this is sort of dereliction of duty, everybody should be responsible for this. What kinds of phone calls are you getting from the attorney -- the current Republican attorney general from Georgia? Are you getting phone calls from Brian Kemp`s office? What kind of pressure are you receiving after releasing the statement that you`re not going to pursue any prosecutions once this law takes effect?
BOSTON: Well, I have not heard from our governor or Attorney General directly. I have seen some of the statements that our Attorney General has made to the media, but he has not called me personally to address those concerns. But the calls that I have received from my constituents, from people that live in DeKalb, and that work in DeKalb, are really thankful and grateful to have a district attorney that`s willing to look at the law, look at public safety, and more importantly, consider how these actions can be extremely detrimental to our community.
JOHNSON: So I have to go back to this year, this is really important. So you`re telling me that you said hey, look, I`m not pursuing this stuff because I think these things are ridiculous. I think people should still have a right to access to abortion as health care. And the governor and the Attorney General are talking all this smack to the media but they haven`t been about that like they haven`t actually called you about this. What do you think that says about their actual commitment to this? Is it -- is it about the laws or is it just politics for them?
BOSTON: I can`t tell you. I would never deign to speculate what is in the minds of our governor or our attorney general. The only thing I can say is I`ve made my position very clear dating back to 2019, that this is not a political issue.
[18:55:00]
JOHNSON: Right.
BOSTON: This is a constitutional issue. And although the Supreme Court has ruled in Dobbs on the federal constitution, there are still a lot of questions locally through the Georgia Constitution, about whether this law is legally enforceable and legally constitutional under Georgia Constitution. And as a district attorney, I have some grave concerns and I look forward to the 11th Circuit and Judge Jones in the Northern District to examining these very issues that we`ve been challenging since 2019.
JOHNSON: I`m glad to see that this is something that you`re taking not just seriously, but also legally because quite frankly, it seems very obvious that the behavior on the part of the leaders that have passed these laws in the state are not in alignment with what the voters actually want and you actually are. Thank you so very much, DeKalb County District Attorney Sherry Boston. Thank you so much for joining us tonight. Thank you for fighting the good fight. We`ll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)