second season of my podcast has started. all there is is what it's called, it's about grief and loss, something all of us will experience at some point. if you point your phones camera at the qr code you see there on the screen right now, a link will appear for you to click on it and listen. grief is something that most of us have a hard time -- it has been the case for. me but in the podcast, i talk to all sorts of people who are facing grief, and trying to learn from that. learn from grief, and i'm trying to learn from them how all of us can as well. episode two, which is available starting tomorrow morning, is a deeply personal conversation with the white house about grief with president biden. in 1972, his first wife amelia and their 13 month old daughter naomi were killed in a car crash. and then in 2015, the oldest son beau, died of brain cancer. season one upset one of the new season are available right now. if you can't access that qr code, you can also find ups at apple podcast or spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts. the president biden episode starts tomorrow morning, that's when it becomes available. the news continues right now, the source with kaitlan collins starts now. tonight, straight from the source, breaking news. the candid admission from president biden about his reelection, saying it quote, if donald trump wasn't running, i'm not sure i would be. >> plus the, case against trump revealed. how the special counsel plans to directly tie him to the violence on january 6th, a trial. also tonight, hundreds of military nominees who have been held up over abortion, for months have finally been confirmed. after one senator ended his nearly ten month blockade, mostly with no apologies and no regrets. i am kaitlan collins, and this is the source. >> this tonight behind closed doors, president biden offering a candid assessment about why he is seeking a second term. something that he says he may not be doing if donald trump wasn't running again. but of course, trump's, and as of this moment, he is the front runner for his party's nomination. tonight, one of his most outspoken republican critics is also saying out loud that some republicans will only say about trump in private. >> when he's gone to war with the rule of law, and a president who won't enforce the law creates a situation where things just unravel. >> liz cheney is the former vice chair of the january 6th committee, also addressing the rumors that she herself may step into the 2024 republican race, to challenge trump in this new interview with anderson cooper. >> what i am going to look at this over the next couple of months, through the lens of, how do we stop donald trump. and on some level, it's not about me, it's not about what i'm going to do or not to do. i look at it very much from the perspective of right now, absolutely we have to keep our eye on the goal of stopping him. >> the congressional committee that cheney chaired's would help lay out a roadmap for the criminal prosecution of trump over the riot at the capitol on january 6th, and his efforts to overturn the 2020 election. the special counsel, who is handling that case jacks mitt, is now revealing how they plan to try to prosecute trump in court. jack smith, we are learning, plans to go back, way back, to tell the jury at that trial of donald trump's history of encouraging violence. also, his longtime refusal to commit to the peaceful transfer of power. the course documents that were just unveiled are striking, we're going to dig into them with a team of attorneys in the moment. but tonight, we start with two veterans of the trump administration, who joined the growing chorus against the republican presidential front runner, former national security adviser john bolton, former deputy white house press secretary sarah matthews. ambassador bolton, let me start with you. because i just wonder what you make of what liz cheney had to say in these blunt mornings that you know, it's no surprise that she's saying this. but the fact that she is -- coming out months before this election is going to get underway, potentially when trump is the republican nominee. >> well, i think the criticism that she makes of trump, are exactly correct. i don't think there's any doubt that if he were the nominee, and elected president, he would cause serious damage to the country. but i don't think it's existential. and i think it's important for voters to understand what the nature of the problem is, and what the remedy needs to be. i think if you overstate the problem, you are inviting the wrong kind of response from the other side. and under stating the problem is just as serious. i think trump's election to a second term would mean constitutional crisis on a daily basis. but i have faith in our constitutional structures. they are strong, and trump tried to steal the election as president in 2020, and failed. so it would be a tremendous battle, and not one that anyone should look forward to. but i'm confident in the end, trump and his acolytes will be defeated. >> that's really interesting there, saying that you don't believe people should understated, but you also don't think people should overstated. liz cheney, in this interview, seemed to address people who think that she is being alarmist with these warnings. i want viewers who missed that part of the interview to listen to what she told anderson. >> i think it's naive, and a real misreading of what we've lived through, to think that we can count on the guardrails that we have in place. donald trump tried to seize power in 2020, he has learned the lessons of 2020 and 2021, and so i think anybody who says well don't worry, you can count on the balance of power in the institutions, that's really wishful thinking that we can't afford. >> ambassador, she is basically saying that the guardrails that you are saying that are there on there. >> look, they were there in 2020, and a lot of people did exactly the right thing. time and time again, and trump's efforts to steal the election were defeated. i'm always happy to be called naive, it brings back memories of days gone by. i'm not naive about this at all. but i'm also not alarmist. you know, bob kagan, who might have a great deal of respect for, an old friend, wrote a lane the piece a couple of days ago, comparing trump to julius caesar, and the threat to the roman republic. and i have to say, cesar must be turning in his grave to be compared to donald trump. but donald trump is not seize, or in the roman republic fell not because of caesar alone, but because of repeated body blows from the likes of salt lake, -- -- -- >>. and its own structures were not even comparable to ours, so you just got to get a grip on this historically, and be ready for the fight of trump's elected. but, not put it in terms that confuse people or actually make it harder to mobilize a position to trump, when the need arises. >> so what are the guardrails that you think would be there, if trump did try to repeat his actions? is it the supreme court, is a congress? because i mean, the supreme court you know, he picked several, three of the justices that are on that court, they now leaning strongly conservative favor. we've seen republican lawmakers. i mean, liz cheney got booted from her position as a republican leader on capitol hill, basically because of the same comments that she is making tonight. >> well, i don't think anybody who knows the six republican justices nominated by republican presidents on the supreme court really believes that any of them are going to do trump's bidding. i am worried about some lower court judges. but by and large, i think the judiciary will hold. i think congress, it depends, it depends on who gets elected in some key races. i think too many republicans in the house in particular have been -- and facing trump. i hope that changes. but even within the executive branch, people have to understand trump can't just snap his fingers and expect things to happen. and i think one of the constitutional crises we are going to see is when he tells appointees even his own appointees, to do things that are illegal, unconstitutional. how many of them resign, and then how many of the career people in the justice department and the military start resigning below him? e nd of thing that i think will cause enormous turmoil in the country. but it's part of the process of keeping trump under control. >> oh yeah. and you mentioned those lower courts. we know a lot of the lower and -- they have a lot of trump appointees that have been confirmed. but you know, you mentioned a second term. if trump gets a second term, he has been very blunt about what he would do with one, do if that. he has talked about using the justice department to go after his political opponents. but do you think when he says those which would typically be the quiet part out loud, do you think that people are listening to that, that is breaking through to republican voters what he plans to do with a second term? >> well, i don't think it's breaking through enough. but we will see in the third debate tomorrow. i mean, i think the opponents to trump, by and large, have committed the same mistakes other candidates did in 2016. they are attacking each other instead of attacking trump. chris christie, ace hutchinson, they have attacked trump, and more need to do to show he is not fit. look, i am perfectly well aware of what trump can try and do with the justice department, he tried to do it to me, with respect to my book in 2020. and his political appointees at the top of the justice department did the bidding of the white house. in trying to suppress publication of the book. the real question is because of, because others have learned as well, certainly trump has learned from his experience, but others have learned as well how he will try to manipulate the justice department. and we will see how it goes, we will see how many of his nominees get confirmed, we will see how he deals not just with a few people being in acting positions in a place like the justice, or the defense department, with everybody being inactive positions. i think he could be tripping over his own shoelaces in fairly short order, if people keep their eye on the ball. >> yeah, it's a big we will see, ambassador john bolton as always, thank you for your time tonight. >> thank you. >> more now from another trump white house insider, sarah matthews, former presidents debt press secretary, and testified in the -- also resigned in the wake of that attack on the capitol. and sarah, thank you for being here tonight. what do you make of what ambassador bolton was saying there? do you think some of liz cheney's claims about what a threat trump's are overblown? >> no, i understand what he is trying to convey when he says he doesn't want to sound like an alarmist. but i think we have to look at what trump is saying, and pay attention closely. his call for doing our parts of -- he said that he wants to rig this country of people he deems vermin. he says that he wants to weaponize the doj to attack revenge on his political enemies. and so, i would encourage people who think that we sound like alarmist when we are saying that democracy is at stake, if trump were to be elected again for a second term. that you have to pay attention to his own words, because he is saying these things. and unfortunately, it doesn't seem to be penetrating through to the public. and i think that's in large part because his campaign is actually kind of adopted, a basement campaign strategy circa joe biden's 2020 campaign. and they actually kind of have shielded him from public view, and have been a lot more strategic with his appearances. and so, i think that as we get closer and more into the 2024 race, it looks obviously inevitable that trump will be the republican nominee. and then i think the american public will be a little bit more tuned in, but at this point, it doesn't seem like they. our >> yeah and i'm glad, you brought that up. you know trump is not going to the eu -- he hasn't been to any of the debates. he knows he would get attacked by some of the people, people like chris christie on that stage. liz cheney was ak asked about how republicans view what frump is saying, framing this as biden is the actual on democratic, undemocratic candidate in this race. one obviously, that is what he is accused of. this is what she told anderson. >> i think that the overwhelming majority of republicans understand that that's disinformation, that's a lie. that has been sort of trump's method of operating. he knows that it is a real threat to his political success if people recognize that he himself is trying to unravel democracy. and, so i think he is projecting, he is trying to turn that threat around, but i don't think it will work. >> sarah, do you think that the overwhelming majority of republicans see it that way? >> i think if you look back at the 2020 race, obviously a lot of people voted for joe biden because they thought that democracy was at stake. that was a large focal point of his campaign. and d so there werere some reluctanant republicicans, and n some relucuctant demococrats and indepependents whoho went alonog wiwith his canandidacy, bebecaue they belelieved in t that messa. anand so obvioiously, now w joen is g going to rurun on that t se message inin 2024. and, i k know that f from viewss thatat as a potetential weakaknf his. and hehe is tryingng to, as lilz chcheney said,d, project a and t backck to biden.n. now,w, i do worrrry, i don't't w if repubublicans, ththe vast majorityty don't belelieve that. i dodo actually y think thatat e is a sigignificant n number of republicicans, espececially when you u look at ththe base, whwhoo view a bididen presidedency as detrimenental to ourur country.. theyey are unhapappy with ththe cucurrent statate of thingngs. bubut i don't t know if ththat memessage willll necessaririly s effefective on i independentntso are the e voters thahat trump wd need to wiwin over mosost, in or toto win in a a general elelectn against t joe biden.n. >> s sarah matththews, thanknk u for your t time. also ambasassador boltlton as w. upup next, we e will talk k abot more on n the new fifiling thate mementioned a a moment agogo. itit reveals h how specialal col jack s sm tit's a f falso, , it- oaoabriotersprprot >> the special counsel's office offering a taste of what evidence prosecutors plan to present at donald trump's upcoming trial, in washington. stemming from his attempts to overturn the election. jack smith's roadmap, far more expensive than we had expected, but what we've learned is they plan to establish a pattern, basically, of trump's claims of voter fraud going as far back as 2012, and mitt romney's campaign against brock obama. prosecutors point to this scene in detroit in 2020 as evidence that the trump campaign wanted riots to happen to stop the vote counting. they also said on everything that trump has said about the january 6th rioters to be used against him. pointing specifically to moments like this one. >> -- stand back and stand by. >> if i run and if i win, we will treat those people from january 6th fairly. we will treat them fairly. and if it requires pardons, we will give them pardons. >> with me now, cnn's senior legal analyst and former federal prosecutor elie honig, and also former senior investigative counsel for the january 6th select committee -- the trouble in detroit, comments about mitt romney's campaign, what he's saying now, how does that tie back to this indictment? >> prosecutors are trying to establish a pattern here. and what this document is is where prosecutors lay out their evidence that sometimes outside the indictment, but ti 2012, 2016, every time he presidential, or otherwise, he exactly what prosecudeto >> that's the question. because they are basically tying him closer to the violence on january 6th than they did in the indictment. so how does the judge make that call of whe likelihood that >> so you t? >> i think she do i think jack narrative. i don't think she cuts him off. >> i should note, smit is trying to interfe i indictme. we'll see if that argument breaks through at all. the other thing, ali, twthey led make their case? >> that may be a little bhere technically a person, dofo acts committed by relevant is this evidence. inflammatory judges time to time too much evidence. the time tohen getsvidence. the thorough by so i ab >> is that a real concern? >> it's always a concern. every prosecutor wants to -- have >> that would be donald trump's dream, if he was convicted and then it was overturned. it would basically fulfill all of his arguments that he makes about this. >> yes. but judge chutkan is an experienced judge here. she's not gonna let that happen. this is common here, right? prosecutors are constantly going to want to get in as much as possible that they can, to paint the worst picture of the defendant. the defendants counter that. the judge is going to find the balance here. but i think what's very important here is that there is evidence that connects the presidents former intent with the violence here. right? in the document, jack smith talks about and references those under the 87 minutes, wheattack and folks were pleading with him to do some i think th -- of his intent to obstruct the congressional proceedings. now, does it mean that it's evi get individual members? not necessarily, no. but it does look. thank you both for comingi in tonight. and as we're looking at this docu t it's thef the onestocharges. the new speae ohnabout januar at least maybe blur them. the speaker, who ordered thousands video, the ones who illegall >od against. and to be charged by the doj. >> many of them have been charged by thdoj. speaker johnson's oclintention.a statement saying thatfa from ann i have a feeling former deputys- director of the fbi andisagree.s me now. i do wonder, andrew, what you make of what speaker johnson is saying here. we do aneed to be protected from law enforcement? >> well, caitlin, before i get to that, let me just touch on the security issue very uickly. you know, the idea of releasing tens of thousands of hours of private i get it, inside the halls ahar they're not democraciesth ano wn you do that, you exto pspace. ay ctothis. i can tell you that there are notes.of foreign intellige putting that aside, trerema inactive transparency, the speaker hcovideo. i don't really understand that. but what he's doin and so i spent a lot of tim f the fbi. it's videos. >> a lot of them postedg the capitol, on facebook. but as we are looking at fedpicked as trump's next cica i know you'rey cia. can get rolling onyes. the one e got them for offensive operation>> wh >> i mean, where do you begin? it's a stunning lalecertainly nf people so, i would say he is probably not aht that aside, caitlin, i think we really need to look very seriously at things likwho are o donald trump, and we need to take them at their word. thiis a eanit to function. and that'sthdo. all of those plans involvand the normse all expect govern i t time. >> it's not farfetched. i was covering the trump white house -- as a cia director, and have this loya it came very close to nearly being carried out. but it is a sign that these are real possibilities, if he wins a second term. andrew mccabe, thank you as always for your time. >> thanks caitlin. >> of course, we're talking about what would happen if trump won the republican nomination. if he did, he would almost certainly face president biden in the 2024 race. behind closed doors tonight, presidentbiloabod druagain. what he told donors about why he's running again what he told donors about why what he told donors about why he's runninwhat he told donors y he's running again. hat he told donors y he's running again. what he told donors about why he's runninagain. what he told donor