Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Biden's Campaign Ad for Reelection Emphasizes on Economy; Interview with Assistant Democratic Leader Rep. James Clyburn (D-SC); Proud Boys' Seditious Conspiracy Trial Reached a Verdict. Aired 10:30- 11a ET

Aired May 04, 2023 - 10:30   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

[10:30:00]

SARA SIDNER, CNN ANCHOR: But when it comes to something like police reform, that has not happened in the way some folks in the country thought it should. What is your take? What will the people of South Carolina do in your opinion?

REP. JAMES CLYBURN (D-SC), ASSISTANT DEMOCRATIC LEADER: Well, the people of South Carolina are very, very pleased with Joe Biden, the African American community as well as those non-African Americans. Last night, I was at a commencement exercise here in Columbia and I heard nothing but positive things about Joe Biden. Now, we know that we have three branches of government.

We don't blame Joe Biden for the decisions being handed down by the Supreme Court, and we cannot blame Joe Biden for what the majority in the House of Representatives may be doing with the debt limit. We can look at his record, and when you look at Joe Biden's record, it is a stellar one. Let's go back to the rescue plan. Go back to his infrastructure bill, his CHIPS and Science Act. In Columbia, South Carolina, VW just announced that he's going to put their new SUV will be built in Columbia. Why? Because of the CHIPS and Science Act, expecting 4,000 new jobs. That's Joe Biden.

Inflation Reduction Act. When I'm talking -- my late wife was diabetic, and so I know what the cost of insulin has been. They give Joe Biden credit for that, that's his record. And veterans, that's the big thing when it comes to this debt ceiling, because Joe Biden with the PACT Act went back and picked up all those Vietnam veterans that got left out because they were not treated fairly when they came back from Vietnam. We picked them up, and we have taken care of them with the PACT Act. Yes, we did OK for those in Afghanistan and Iraq with the burn pits, but we did much more than that.

So, that's what people are going to be looking at. Not just whether or not we could not get 60 votes in the Senate to do what we wanted to do with voting or to do what we wanted to do with the police reform. But he has a record that he can run on and I've been very proud of that record.

SIDNER: Congressman, he had a great deal of criticism though when it came to the withdrawal in Afghanistan. And despite all the things you mentioned there, he's got a challenger. Robert Kennedy, Jr., is going up against him. He's a conspiracy theorist. He is an anti-vaxxer. But he's polling at 19 percent. Are you concerned, as a person who has backed Joe Biden, who is behind him and his re-election, are you concerned and do you think Mr. Biden is concerned with this polling?

CLYBURN: I'm always concerned when there's somebody on the other side and breathing (ph). I treat every opponent seriously, no matter who they may be, what their names might be. I guarantee you, of that 19 percent, 15 percent is Bobby Kennedy. And when you get exposed to the fact this is Bobby Kennedy Jr. And not Bobby Kennedy Sr., those numbers are going to reflect that reality.

So, this 19 percent doesn't bother me at all. I am bothered by anybody who's an anti-vaxxer, who is a conspiracy theorist. This is all about a democracy moving forward, leaving a country for our children and our grandchildren. And you cannot do that if you are against vaccines.

I grew up at a time when polio was running rampant. Why did we get rid of polio? Because of vaccines, Jonas Salk, and Albert Sabin. And now we've got a vaccine for this pandemic, and you're trying to get it behind us, and anybody that's against vaccinations, I just have a problem with them, and most people I know would have a problem with that.

SIDNER: Congressman Clyburn, can I quickly ask you a yes or no question, and that is when it comes to the debt ceiling, do you think President Biden should agree to some cuts, some of the cuts, maybe not all of them but something when it comes to the negotiation between him and the Republican speaker?

CLYBURN: Well, if I were advising Joe Biden I would say, let's go back and look at that $2 trillion tax break that we give to all these multi-millionaires and then pay for it, that's where we ought to go.

[10:35:00]

If the Republicans are serious about this, why would they want to cut veterans' benefits, cut Medicare, Medicaid, the Affordable Care Act? Why do you cut there and still leave 2$2 trillion of tax cuts I place for multi-millionaires? So, when they sit down, my advice to the president and to say, when they put veterans benefits on the table, put this big tax break on the table and let's see where it (INAUDIBLE).

SIDNER: All right. Congressman Clyburn, thank you so much for joining us. And that's a nice purple shirt there, too.

John.

JOHN BERMAN, CNN NEWS CENTRAL CO-ANCHOR: All right, Sara. There is a breaking news, a partial verdict has been reached in the Proud Boys seditious conspiracy trial. That verdict will be read any minute in court. We will go there live as it happens.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:40:00] BERMAN: All right, the breaking news is this, a verdict has been reached in the seditious conspiracy trial against five members of the Proud Boys for their actions leading up to and on January 6th. There are no cameras in the courtroom. We have people inside. We are also listening, people are our reporters, to an audio feed. We will bring you this verdict the second it comes in.

In the meantime, Sara Snider, before you got this gig you were actually monitoring this trial in the courtroom for a large part of it.

SIDNER: Right.

BERMAN: Remind us exactly what this is for.

SIDNER: All right. So, the big charge that they face is seditious conspiracy. We have all heard that charges. This is, of course, in relation to January 6th, and basically, it's that they tried to stop the peaceful transfer of presidential power. That's the large charge. There's a lot of other charges that are sprinkled in and each person faces a different number of charges in this particular case.

Dominic Pezzola, which is one of the five who are on trial, you will remember him and I know the country remembers him because he was like the first person to break through a window, and you saw him with the shield of a police officer. This is on video, the jury saw this, smashing into the window of the Capitol. And then you saw people flooding in through that window. So, I know that was shown to the jury, that was part of the evidence.

And what the argument that is being made here by the prosecutors is not only did they actually do this, this wasn't spontaneous. The Proud Boys are arguing that this was spontaneous. They had no plan. They just ended up getting caught up in the crowd. But the prosecutors are saying, look, they had been plotting this for a long time. And they did show the jury that in their estimation with evidence of text messages and different types of communication between all of these members of the Proud Boys.

Trying to show that they brought things with them that they shouldn't have had that could be weapons. That they were the first to help push past police. That they were the ones breaking in and each of them are members of the Proud Boys. It's something similar that they did in the first seditious conspiracy trial that -- with the Oath Keepers. And so, this is the second one of its kind.

Now, just a warning, the verdicts could be some people get guilty, some get not guilty, or they all get not -- it could be a hodgepodge, which is what happened with the Oath Keepers.

KATE BOLDUAN, CNN NEWS CENTRAL CO-ANCHOR: And there is a partial verdict.

SIDNER: That's right.

BOLDUAN: So, it is -- it's going to be something in between. Let's get to the courthouse right now. Katelyn Polantz is standing by.

Katelyn, you have some news. What are you picking up?

KATELYN POLANTZ, CNN SENIOR CRIME AND JUSTICE REPORTER: Well, Kate, it looks like this moment right now, the judges on the bench. There is a partial verdict that the jury has reached some unanimity on some of these charges, potentially even that major seditious conspiracy trial. But like much of this trial, the defense team is arguing vigorously. They have tried to derail this case dozens of times, trying to get mistrials.

And right now, our reporters in the courtroom, Hannah Rabinowitz and Holmes Lybrand, they're sending information that there is a dispute going on about whether the defense team even wants that partial verdict to be read right now or if the jury should continue deliberating. So, that's what's going on.

But this is a case that we really need to watch on so many fronts because this is not just about the people on the ground on January 6th. It is also about someone, Enrique Tarrio, the founder of the Proud Boys, the head of the Proud Boys who was not on the ground and the possibility that he could be convicted for engaging in this agreement.

And this is not just any conspiracy case either. It is a seditious conspiracy case meaning not only would these men need to be convicted, be proven that they came to some sort of agreement, but that agreement was to overthrow the government or somehow hinder the government by force.

So, a lot is on the line here and there is a lot that is at stake for the Justice Department in their January 6th prosecutions. We don't have a verdict yet. As far as I can tell the jury is not back in the room, but we're eagerly awaiting to see what happens next.

BOLDUAN: Katelyn, real quick for those who haven't been following jury deliberations. As you say, the defense is now disputing if they even want it read right now. They jury has, kind of, come back with some questions. They have -- with the appearance of -- they have struggled here to find unanimity. Bring people up to speed on, kind of, what that back and forth has been in the past several days?

POLANTZ: Yes, the jury has really asked for a lot. Often there are notes from juries when they're out deliberating. They ask the court for advice, for readings of the law.

[10:45:00]

But in this case, they've asked for specific things. They asked to see a riot shield, they asked to see a bull horn, pieces of evidence that were used that day. But then in recent days, they've asked very technical legal questions and also asked, can you give us advice on what to do if we can't you -- reach some sort of agreement among all of us, at least on one type of count. Suggesting that there is the possibility that the jury hasn't come to an agreement on at least one of the charges. But even with that, it does seem like they have worked diligently through the evidence. They even caught a typographical error on the verdict sheet yesterday. That raised a lot of more arguments from the defense. But this just keeps going on where the defense is trying to dig into all of these questions. There's a lot of tea leaves reading. But at this point we do have a partial verdict from this jury. They have been able to come to an agreement, at least on some of the counts.

BERMAN: You know, Katelyn, I'm curious because we often hear a judge when the jury comes back and says, it's partial or there's some things we can't agree on, send the jury back to deliberate more. How common is it for one of the legal teams, either the defense or the prosecution in this case to say, we want the jury to go back. I'm not sure I've heard this nearly as much. This feels a bit unusual this morning.

POLANTZ: Well, I have heard from some of the defense lawyers around town that sometimes defense teams want juries to keep deliberating, right, to take as long as they can because maybe that will signal, they can't come to an agreement and there can be a mistrial. This has been such a difficult case to get through. There have been so many different motions trying to get things tossed, questions about jurors that have arisen.

And so, the defense has really taken every opportunity they can to make this difficult. The judge has been losing his patience many times. But as much as the defense is arguing right now, it's quite clear that the judge has already told the jury, you can bring back a partial verdict, we will take that. That's OK. He could tell them to go back and keep deliberating on the other counts but that seems to be what they're still deciding upon right now.

SIDNER: Wow. Really interesting, Katelyn Polantz. We have seen this before. So -- but it -- it is unusual. I mean, it's hard -- you hardly ever see cases where the attorneys are the ones that are saying, go back in the room and finish doing whatever you can do.

We will see what that means, what the partial verdict means that one or two of them, they cannot decide then, or if it means that there are just some counts that they can't decide on. This is very interesting and we're going to have way more on this. Of course, we'll go back to Katelyn who's at the court and talk to the two folks that are in court all the time. When we will come back, we'll have much more.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:50:00]

BOLDUAN: We are following breaking news out of Washington. A verdict has been reached in the seditious conspiracy trial against those five men, five members of the Proud Boys for their actions leading up to and on January 6th. We've been following this and heard it is a partial verdict is what we know. The judge is on the bench right now. There's some discussion going on in court of how this is going to proceed. But it is an important day because it's really been seen as the center piece case, the center piece trial, the center piece of all of the prosecutions that the Justice Department has brought as it relates to January 6th.

And you've covered this so closely, Sara. Enrique Tarrio is an interesting character. You were talking before about how four of these men were at -- in the riots, amongst the group on January 6th. Enrique Tarrio was not.

SIDNER: Yes, he was not there and that was because of another case. He was convicted of a case where he had burned a Black Lives Matter flag that was hanging on a church. And then he also had some gun cartridges that were not legal in D.C. And so, the judge, after he was caught with that, said you were not allowed to come back into the District of Columbia while this is being hashed out.

So, he was not there when all of this was going down. So, you wonder, well, how did the prosecution then pull him into this case with the four others? I will tell you how, because they had -- say they had evidence that showed he was helping plan this. And there are lots of quotes from him on social media -- yes, on social media --

BOLDUAN: Yes, on social media.

SIDNER: -- and on private chats between him and some of the others. And the prosecution is trying to argue that because he helped plan this, even though he wasn't there taking part in it, that he is also -- because remember, it's a conspiracy charge. It's not that you actually --

BOLDUAN: Not just the day of.

SIDNER: That's right. It's not that you actually went forth with this, but you planned this, that you plotted this. So, that is why he is a part of this case, he was also the head of the Proud Boys at the time.

BERMAN: All right. What's happening right now, just to bring people up to speed is the judge is on the bench, and there has been a verdict in this case. We're waiting for the verdict to be read. We have people inside the courtroom. It's a federal court. There are no cameras inside the courtroom. So, the way we're going to find out is our people inside are going to text or call our people outside. We will tell you that verdict the second it comes in.

This has come after, Sara, long trial. Why has it been so drawn out?

SIDNER: There are two things. One, I want to speak to the two people inside the court, that's Hannah Rabinowitz and Holmes Lybrand, they are incredible reporters who have watched every single moment of this 18-week trial.

[10:55:00]

It's the longest trial that we've seen when it comes to January 6th.

BOLDUAN: Yes. SIDNER: Part of that is because of the seditious conspiracy charge, but it's also because there are five defendants.

BOLDUAN: Yes.

SIDNER: But there were the same number of defendants in the Oath Keeper trial, and that one was much shorter, much more come back and the jury came back with mostly guilty verdicts. But there were some that they found -- some of the counts that they found not guilty.

And so, this case has been a little bit more, if I can say, raucous. The attorneys are -- speak more. They go after decisions made by the judge more. I have seen these attorneys in action, and they are extremely aggressive trying to protect their client, of course, which is what they're supposed to do. But there is a lot more contention, if you will, in this court.

And the judge in this court is different from the judge in the Oath Keeper case, the judge in the Oath Keeper case. He kept a really tight ship. He didn't let people go on and on. So, it's a little bit of that that's caused this difference, Kate.

BOLDUAN: All right. So, we have had -- it's been a four-month long trial, seven days of deliberations from this jury, and now we have a verdict that is coming in today. A partial verdict is the word from the courtroom. We're going to stick very close to this. This is happening before our eyes, before our ears in the courtroom in Washington, D.C. We have much more of this at the top of the hour. We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[11:00:00]