>> the news continues, the source with kaitlan collins starts now. >> tonight, straight from the, source made the woodworker and the plumber, exclusive new reporting on who saw what at mar-a-lago. the workers who could be called to testify against donald trump in the classified documents case. plus, four hours a day, israel has now agreed to humanitarian pauses and cause that to allow civilians move to safer ground and let aid in. the question is, could it also provide a breakthrough and getting hostages out. the cia director is having secret meetings in the middle east. and a political earthquake rocking washington post, as senator joe manchin has announced he is not going to seek reelection. leaving a blue seat open and a deeply red state. does it also open a door to run against president biden? i'm kaitlan collins and this is the source. ♪ ♪ ♪ we start with two exclusive stories for you tonight. we have the first cnn interview with former president's trump's former lawyer, who quit the classified documents case over the summer. and it comes on a night when cnn has learned who could be testified against donald trump in that very trail. the potential witness list, according to multiple sources and what they told cnn, could include some of the people who are working at mar-a-lago. a plumber, a show, for the, made a woodwork, or other mar-a-lago staffers, including some who still work here, plus contract workers, secret service agents, former intelligence officials, as well as people who were in the room with trump when he was caught on that audiotape referencing a secret military document that was about plans, potential plans, to bomb iran. these potential witnesses have already spoken to federal investigators, and some can provide firsthand accounts of what they saw at mar-a-lago, where we know hundreds of classified documents were found, including dozens that were marked as top secret. they were found and pleaeasant like trump's bathroom, his bedroom, a ballroom, and, yes, storage room. there is a woodworker who installed current motive in trump's bedroom in february 2022, according to three sources, the person noticed papers that may have been classified. there is also that made who cleaned trump's bedroom suite. one source telling cnn, the former president wind, quote, ballistic when he learned she had been asked to speak with investigators. there is also a chauffeur, who drove around visitors including foreigners and the epic ice at the club, and many, many others in this new reporting tonight. joining me now on this new reporting, and much more, for his first cnn interview since he left the trump legal team and the summer, in this classified documents case, -- thanks for being here,. jim good to have you back on the show. when you hear this reporting, and what cnn learned about the potential witnesses that jack smith's team could coal. do you have any concerns about the testimony they could potentially provide? >> my stuffing concern is that lakes. it's astounding how, when it comes to mar-a-lago, and i point towards doj for a lot of this, because it helps them, more than it would ever help president trump, all of the stuff gets great publicly main well up until, or it's writers islands. but in terms of the witnesses, i will say this. i got to make a lot of really nice folks. salt off the earth, good people, hardworking people down in the mar-a-lago scene. they or aggressively, really intimidated by the department of justice and the fbi. we have a decent idea, i had a decent idea in a lot of what they were going to say. not necessarily across the. but i tell, you it's the kind of thing, you can drop at mar-a-lago -- go to the page and get a subpoena. we had people, literally with new information, the intel to go to the fbi, threatened to go to washington -- >> have many people would you say to you believe investigators spoke with, as this investigation is going on, until of course you left the team over the summer? >> i'm not gonna join that leak former, but it's obvious it's at least dozens. and, look just the fact that in their zeal to find something, anything to justify this case, they were dragging in secret service agents, at least that's the report you just. head pitch generally, i know there's been exceptions -- that canister investigation, but generally speaking this kind of a no go. and that's just felt level of aggression that we saw across the board, while i was on the case. i think that continues the day. >> do you think the testimony from the secret service agents could be potential most damaging in this case? >> i'm not gonna wait into the substance of what people have to say. that touches not just in terms of my duty and loyalty to a former client, but to work product privilege, in terms of any internal investigation we did. look, i think it'll be fascinating when the cases tried. i'll certainly be one of the people that called in sick on my regular job so i can watch a lot of it, and see how it plays out. but, yeah, this is kind of unprecedented territory with not just what they're charging presidential records act, and all the issues that arise for criminalizing the stuff, but the level of aggressivity, tell it witnesses, for instance, this has been publicly reported -- gave me a passport to your computer or i'm gonna drag you up to d. c. in three days and you have to do it in front of a grand jury. those as heavy handed stuff. it's not like anything us in messick-buntyn ears with the department of justice. >> i understand, you don't say you like leaks. this is reporting cnn has done -- there are so many potential witnesses to told you about what could potentially happen here. but when you look at this, a lot of these people still work at mar-a-lago. trump employee number four, you still tavares just recently resigned, we're told, and trump was -- he was someone who had a trump paid attorney and then changed to a non-trump attorney. and he changed his testimony. do you think that the former president is trying to potentially influence any of the witnesses by paying for their attorneys? >> no, everything you just said goes to the fact that there is self serving elite coming out of one side of the aisle. it's really kind of amazing. no real respect for privacy and these individuals. it's not uncommon in a widespread investigation, and in any sort, criminal or administrative, further to be a group of attorneys that you're information under a joint defense agreement, have some sense of what's going on with the investigation, know there are things that can be litigated even pre indictment. paying for attorneys means nothing. that reality, the backstory, that's really horrific, in terms of what this reported conflict was, it revolves around that witness, is that the department of justice cannot stand stanley woodward, one of the attorneys in this case. because stanley blew the whistle on a doj official, essentially extortion him over upending judgeship to flip nauta. that's been publicly reported. that is a dark moment in doj history that they want to gloss over. anthony go after all the attorneys saying there is something wrong with attorneys representing multiple clients or sharing information. >> i know you, in our last interview, you brought it same instance up. i, said we had not seen any evidence of. that we haven't really satan brought up as an issue. stan woodward is still representing several clients. he turbulent a lot of them -- prosecutors have argued it would be a conflict of interest. but on yuscil taveras, you talk about, it's not unusual for attorneys to share information when they have multiple, potential witnesses or codefendants. that's true. he changed his testimony in a damning way for the former president that led to another codefendant being indicted because he went from a trump pay attorney to his own attorney. >> i think you're living together a whole bunch of things, that makes for a great story but i'm not hearing it. >> but you can see how there are questions about trump's influence when he pays for the attorneys, given the witness changed his testimony. >> i'm aware there are people who've -- i think that's a bigger backdrop, at the core context to what's going on when it comes to some of the lawyers being challenged by doj. and let me just also give a broader context about the idea of obstruction. we certainly, as lowers, we obviously look into questions of whether there's things that happened after the substantive offenses that could relate to obstruction or attempted obstruction. it's not something that any lower takes, likely i didn't want it to sound like i've glossed over. it but, me it's really clear the political decision was made but very politicized department, that the best thing they had going to try to distinguish president trump's possession of documents from then vice president biden's is to suggest that somehow, obstruction is the difference. that's been a narrative on this network and others that somehow, , well there are different because of the obstruction. we don't have to get any leaks out of delaware, but we get plenty of leaks down here that relate to the different witnesses, like the one you're talking about or walt nauta. 02 suggest there was somehow obstruction -- >> but it's not suggesting. trump for a subpoena to turn the documents over. even if they are as all of that was going on. >> actually, no. but let me just say this. we want executives. we want anyone who's in kind of the c suite of life, in business, to be able to really talk to their lawyers and figure out, hey, can we fight this subpoena. is there something over broad and overly burdensome about the subpoena? what happens if we respond? what happens if we ask for more time? those are things that we encourage as a society, it's exactly. right executives across this country have -- >> so he did try to file a subpoena, is that what you're saying? >> that's not what i'm saying. what i'm saying is we're in a position where we should all be encouraging fun ocean that anyone that runs of business has the opportunity to talk to their lawyers about whether or not there is some sort of privileges that apply, whether they can fight it, whether they should invite it -- >> okay, but jim, let me ask you this. the judge seems to be indicating in florida she's going to delay this case. do you think it's going to get delayed past the election? >> yeah, i mean, i don't have any inside knowledge from her chambers or really anyone else. but, i think what's driving the delays right now is not some sort of a political concern. it's the support process. this idea that when you have classified material, you have to go through a series scrubbing and review and litigation, long before you can enter the courtroom for the trial itself. that seems to be bogged down a little bit, perhaps on a clean hands from the government, i don't know for sure, but the bottom line is, that takes type normally. and so the timeframe, these kind of artificial timeframes -- >> but do you believe -- >> i think it will probably get pushed. i don't know if you get beyond the election or, not but generally speaking, sip cases, is classified information type cases don't go to trial quickly because of that review. no matter anything else, about how many witnesses how complex, whatever the defense is -- that alone usually puts them outside. >> okay, let me ask. you lost an rv was so it was when you are still on the trump legal team. you no longer our. can you just explain what you resigned from the trump legal team but they after he was indicted in the documents case? >> sure can't. and i certainly didn't suggest to see and i was willing to talk about. that the bottom line, is i have a responsibility -- >> i have to ask. >> i'm not for you for asking, it's fine. i'm just telling you, on what i kiss and tell a guy. i'm not gonna get into anything, it was the right time for myself to leave, john rather to, leave tim parlatore left a little bit before -- that >> did you resign or were you fired? >> it doesn't matter, it doesn't matter. i'm not here to try to elevate myself or disparagement from a client. the bottom line is, there was a logical break point, i took that break point and i don't kiss and tell. >> let me ask you about something that happened as. week the civil forecast that's been happening here in new york. you saw trump on the stand, it was a great catch exchange with the judge. i don't, but the judge asked chris kise, who is brought on to be on the documents case, but is now in that new york case as well, the current attorney, to get control of him. do you think you were better at controlling him as a client? >> no, look, here's what i say about. that a response that was reported, and i haven't been in the courtroom in new york, after other client to serve. but the response, as reported, chris basically said, ask better questions. that actually is the right response to the situation. the attorney general called him to the witness stand, and when you call anybody to the stand, it has some expertise in what they're talking about, they tend to be speech makers. i used to do with cross-examined and all sorts of experts in criminal cases as a prosecutor. everything from fingerprints to identification to go up as. what and the reality is, you get in and you get out. if you have to call this witness, and a civil case, you can call the other party, you don't will put or get in and out with very tight cushions and get what you want, and get out. they apparently didn't do a very good job of that, to the front of the judge. but the judge's ire -- >> i mean, he said trump wasn't answering questions with a yes or no answer. but i also think part of it would be, people say trump is a challenge inclined to have. he's had a lot of attorneys have come to work for him, and then with the case. there's a bit of chaos with the new york team right now as well. when you look at this, and you look at what he's been saying and the special counsel investigation, used to work at the justice department. you know jack smith was the special counsel. when trump calls him deranged and a psychopath, to use them close to or terms you would use to describe jack smith? >> what i would do is focus, again as a lawyer, as someone who's been a prosecutor, altogether 27 years, before i went private, i focus on the conduct. that to me is a different situation for a person running for president, being indicted in these unprecedented and creative, and i put quotes around, that types of indictments. but the bottom line, as i've seen things from the federal prosecutors in this case, including extorting a fellow lawyer. that are obstructionist, that are wrong, they're over aggressive. and that's what i cole -- >> would you call checks mr. ranged? >> that's a fun game to play, caitlin. >> it's not a game. i'm generally curious what you think, given you've worked with jack smith and used to represent donald trump. >> i don't think america is waiting with baited breath to see if jim will call jack deranged. it's not at my interest -- it's not really in the public interest, it's just fun, sensational stuff. >> it's not fun. >> the bottom line is, any client would have a right to be frustrated with the behavior he's facing on behalf of the department. alvin bragg, letitia james, and that wonderful georgia case as well. look, i don't have to sign off or sign on anything the president says. but i can tell you, the groans of frustration, the concerns about a two tiered system are genuine. >> okay, but you're not -- okay. i was gonna let you go after that, but you can't really call it a two-tiered system of justice. look at the number of democrats who are being investigated right now. i think senator bob menendez would argue it's a two tiered system of justice. hunter biden. i mean, tell us was. on >> hunter biden -- you are using hunter biden as an example of equal justice? >> i'm saying, you can call it a two-tiered system of justice because there are plenty of democrats also being investigated by the justice department, including the presidents -- sitting president's son. jim trusty. >> we'll come back and told about hundred case some not, that'll be fun. >> jim trusty, thank you for your time. appreciate you being back on cnn. appreciate your time. no cease-fire, but israel has now agreed to daily pauses in the fighting, allowing palestinian civilians to flee northern gaza. the question, is will that hold? plus, there has been a huge shake up on capitol hill. >> i will not be running for reelection to the united states senate. but what i will be doing -- >> big question. what will senator joe manchin be doing? that is next. >> after more than a month of nonstop war, a pause or rather or series of four-hour pauses. the white house confirming today that israel is going to notify civilians in northern gaza of four-hour breaks from bombardment in their neighborhoods so they can safely evacuate to the south. well these pauses are respites, really. prime minister netanyahu has been adamant there will be no cease-fire until all the hostages are released from gaza. but discussions are underway, we are, told to get those hostages out. cia director bill burns meeting with the israeli intelligence chief and also other officials from qatar, who have a direct line to hamas. while some members of the progressive caucus on capitol hill have joined in calls for a cease-fire, my next guest here tonight, a high-profile progressive himself, has called for humanitarian pauses instead. the question for some is does today's announcement go far enough? congressman ro khanna of california is here with me. what do you say, do the four hour pauses go far enough in your view? >> it's a good first step, but. no more needs to be done. you need to get 2 million gallons of water in there. we need to get fuel to the hospitals. and while hamas is using palestinian civilians as human shields, i have said that they should not be bombing civilian sites, civilian sites. hospitals. israel should not. i don't think there intentionally targeting civilians -- >> but are they doing enough to not hit civilians, in your view? >> in my view, they should have more operational patients. they have the right to self defense, it was a brutal attack on october 7th. any country has the right to get hamas perpetrators. but when you have a hospital, when you have a school, when you have a refugee camp with many children. even when hamas is there, intentionally, i think you try to get hamas out and get them into the tunnels instead. it took us ten years to get osama bin laden. but the loss of life there is heartbreaking. and so i would say, do not bomb civilian dense sites. >> they struck an ambulance recently. israel arguing hamas was using it to transport fighters. president biden said today he was frustrated that this is not happening soon enough. that he's pushing prime minister netanyahu for a three -day pause or more. he has a lot of influence on what the prime minister does. he's kind of -- one of his biggest supporters since this war broke out. do you think he could influence him to do more? >> he does and doesn't. certain things, there is not listening. my sense is that he has passed for the humanitarian pause, he wants the police to be longer. i think the united states government has had conversations about doing more to minimize civilian casualties. and the president is making progress. and i do think that the white house has really stepped up in talking about palestinian lives and making sure they're protected. >> your political director just resigned recently, because you are not calling for a cease-fire. is there -- would you ever call for a cease-fire? do you ever see yourself doing that? >> i wouldn't rule it out. at some point, the war has to end. but the reason i didn't call for a cea