Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Former Marine Trevor Reed Expected To Make A Full Recovery After Being Wounded In Ukraine; Hunter Biden Plea Deal Appears To Fall Apart At Hearing. Aired 11:30a-12p ET

Aired July 26, 2023 - 11:30   ET

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

[11:30:00]

OREN LIEBERMANN, CNN PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT: So he was held there from about 2019 to April 2022, when he was released in a prisoner exchange for a Russian cocaine smuggler. The source close to -- close to Reed says one of the reasons he went to fight in Ukraine was because of how he was treated there and the oppression he saw while he was in detention, John.

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: All right. Again, new developments with a new look at Trevor Reed as he was in Ukraine fighting. Again, not on behalf of the United States, they're on his own, but a complicated matter to say the least. Oren Liebermann, keep us posted. Thank you very much. Rahel?

RAHEL SOLOMON, CNN BUSINESS ANCHOR: All right, John, thank you. And joining me now to discuss more is retired Air Force Colonel, and CNN Military Analyst Cedric Leighton. Colonel Leighton, always good to have you. Thank you.

So, let's start. There are now learning. These are new details that Trevor Reed is expected to make a full recovery. But help us understand initially when we learned that he had been sent to this military hospital in Germany, what does that suggest to you in terms of the type of injuries he may have sustained?

CEDRIC LEIGHTON, CNN MILITARY ANALYST: Yes, Rahel. Let's say, you know when I heard that he was going to Landstuhl, I thought the injuries might be very serious because that's the Regional Hospital. And in fact, it's the only U.S. military hospital in Europe that handles major cases.

And that's where all the troops from Iraq and Afghanistan went when they were seriously wounded. So, this was one of the big places that medical treatment takes place. And of course, they're used to cases of trauma. But the worst was -- you know, I feared the worst in this particular situation but it sounds like that's not the case in Trevor Reed's situation here.

SOLOMON: Colonel, it's a delicate situation, I think for a lot of reasons. But help me understand. We know Trevor was there fighting on his own, not necessarily on behalf of the U.S., but we do see the patch there. Does this if at all complicate diplomatic efforts to try to get home other Americans who are wrongfully detained in Russia, you think Paul Whelan, you think Evan Gershkovich? Does this complicate that at all?

LEIGHTON: I think it might, Rahel. And the possibility, of course, exists that the Russians are going to say, look, we release these people as part of a prisoner exchange. And then all of a sudden, they're back fighting against us. And that's you know, of course, something that the State Department is very concerned about, and the Defense Department is as well.

It's very clear that Trevor Reid did this on his own. The United States does not have troops in Ukraine. And of course, they want to keep it that way for as long as they possibly can.

But the other part of this story is that when Russia and Ukraine exchanged prisoners, of course, those -- some of those prisoners -- former prisoners come back to fight on the front lines almost immediately after they've been released. So, there are certain nuances to this in any way you look at it.

SOLOMON: Yes, that's a fair point. Colonel, I want to switch gears a bit. Bowe Bergdahl, I mean, as someone who has fought on the front lines -- I mean, yourself. What is your reaction to this news, the judge vacating his conviction and dishonorable discharge?

LEIGHTON: Well, from you know my perspective, of course, say, you know, I think all the parties involved in the Bergdahl situation agree that he deserted his post when he was serving in Afghanistan. And, of course, he walked into the Taliban frontlines and basically was captured by them and held prisoner for about five years.

That, you know, is the situation where he did this. But because of the situation where the judge -- the presiding military judge was actually applying for a job as an immigration judge in the Trump executive branch, that created a problem where the perception was pretty clear that it's possible that that military judge was currying favor with the Trump administration.

And if we remember back in those days, President Trump when he was running for president, he very much called Bergdahl a traitor. Called him you know somebody that does not deserve fair treatment under the U.S. military justice system. And that situation could be considered undue command influence. And that's the kind of thing that this judge was looking at when he -- the latest judge when he vacated the charges against Bergdahl.

SOLOMON: Yes, it's been a fine point at -- point on questions about perhaps the judge's neutrality in all of this. Colonel Leighton, great to see you. Thank you. John?

BERMAN: All right. Rahel, we have some breaking news out of Wilmington, Delaware from the Hunter Biden plea deal hearing. Our Kara Scannell just ran out from inside the courtroom. Kara, bring us up to speed. KARA SCANNELL, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Hey, John. So, as we -- as I went back into the courtroom, the hearing had just begun again. The judge was back on the bench. And she was pressing the prosecution on this investigation and the four corners of the plea agreement. One of the prosecutors said that the investigation was very much ongoing and that she asked him what is not covered in the sleep agreement if you are leaving the possibility for there being other future charges.

[11:35:01]

So, then the judge said, would this include a possible FARA charge? That's not registering as a foreign agent. The prosecutor said no. The deal would not include that.

It was at that point that she had said to the prosecution, you know, if you were not good -- if you can charge that, then what does this mean? And the prosecutors -- actually she asked Hunter Biden's attorneys about that. And he said, well, then there's no deal. And the prosecutor said, then there is no deal.

So, Biden's team said that the plea agreement, as far as they understood, it was now null and void. They were moving ahead to talk about what the next steps would be in this case. So, as of right now, the deal appears to be dead and off the table and it remains to be seen how they're going to move forward.

But he has been charged with those two misdemeanor tax evasion charges. But one thing we learned is that this investigation is very much still ongoing, John.

BERMAN: All right, Kara. I'm just going to ask a follow here. So, we're crystal clear on where we are right now. Well, as we sit here, the plea deal between Hunter Biden and federal prosecutors is off.

SCANNELL: That's right, John. So, the judge was pressing the prosecution on the four corners of this plea agreement and what is there -- she's saying you've reached this plateau, what is left for there to charge? You're telling me that this investigation is still ongoing.

The prosecution said that's right. It is ongoing. And he was saying they couldn't bring, for instance, a tax evasion federal charge. But he said that they were still investigating.

It's then that the judge said. Well, what about a FARA charge? That's not registering as a foreign agent?

Remember, part of this investigation was very expansive. It looked into Hunter Biden's overseas business deals. She asked the prosecutor would that be covered. He said, no, it wouldn't.

And it was at that point that then they went back and forth between Biden's team and the prosecution. And both side's saying that at this point, there was no meeting of the minds about what was covered by the plea agreement and so the deal was off the table. BERMAN: All right. Kara Scannell, in Wilmington, Delaware, thank you for bringing us up to speed. Again, keep us posted. If they're -- well, actually, let me assess finally, Kara.

Has ever one left? I mean, are they done? Is court closed for the day, or is it possible they walk back into that room and meet with the judge again? Is this it for today?

SCANNELL: I mean, when I left the courtroom, they were still in there. They were still talking about the next steps. Now, it's possible that both sides could side -- have a sidebar. They could confer.

The judge was still on the bench, so the gavel had not closed. The hearing was not adjourned. So, it technically, as far as I know, is still ongoing.

And I haven't seen any of the parties to the case walk out of the courthouse just yet. So, we'll have to go back inside and see if there have been any additional developments. But both sides had said quite firmly that the deal was off. As Hunter Biden's lawyer said, they considered it null and void if it did not include immunity from all other prosecutions.

SOLOMON: Kara Scannell, we're going to let you go back inside. We do really appreciate you running out to bring us what has become a major development in this hearing.

So, Elie, Kara did a great job there. But help us make sense. Before we talk about what's next, let's just talk about what just happened.

ELIE HONIG, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: This is exactly what we were speculating about five minutes ago that it sounded like was happening. This is what's happening. When a defendant pleads guilty, in this case to tax charges, that's it for those tax charges. He can't be charged with those charges.

Again, he's covered, immunized, wherever you want to call it. He's not in jeopardy of being prosecuted again for those tax charges. But what the judge said is, how about anything else? And Kara mentioned FARA, the Foreign Agents Registration Act, which is one of the potential crimes that we've had reporting in the past that Hunter Biden's been under investigation for, has nothing to do with taxes. Is he covered for that?

Sometimes, a plea agreement will say the defendant's covered for anything we know about as DOJ right now. And sometimes the plea agreement will say he's only covered for the narrow charges that he's pleading guilty to. Now, I'm actually surprised they didn't already have that worked out.

So, the judge said. If you don't have an agreement about whether Hunter Biden is covered for anything outside the scope of this paper, then you don't have a deal. And the judge is right. I am astonished that the parties didn't have a clear understanding of that heading into today.

SOLOMON: And did we hear -- I mean, Hunter Biden's team say, well, if we don't have a deal, then we don't have a deal.

HONIG: Kara's reporting just now is that, yes. Hunter Biden's team said we can't walk him in here. Have him plead when he might get charged with something else. We have to have an understanding about that.

And I do want to make this clear. There's two ways this goes now. One is the judge says I'm not accepting this plea. You don't have an agreement. It's a contract.

BERMAN: BERMAN: Yes.

HONIG: You don't have a meeting of the minds here on the relevant issues. The other thing that sometimes happens is the lawyers huddled. They go in the jury room maybe. Let's work this out. I felt we had an understanding, is there some miscommunication, and then they might have a chance to go back on the record?

Maybe they won't have time to reduce it to writing. But the judge will say, tell us your deal on the record. The court reporter will take it down on both sides. Is that your deal?

So, the judge is trying to make sure they have an actual agreement. And now, if they don't, she won't take the plea.

[11:40:02]

BERMAN: And that's why we have Kara Scannell running back into the court right now --

HONIG: Yes.

BERMAN: -- to figure out if there are still meetings taking place and whether or not this is it for today. Ellie, two points. Number one, this gets to one of the things we were asking the minute this deal or non-deal was announced, which is again, the Hunter Biden team said, this concludes --

HONIG: Yes.

BERMAN: -- you know, the investigation business. The prosecutors were saying no, there's still an investigation going on.

HONIG: Right.

BERMAN: This seems to indicate that they both had very different views from the very beginning. And they were just saying what they thought.

HONIG: Exactly. And the question at the time was well, as DOJ just saying this is ongoing in the sense that DOJ always says everything is ongoing. But it's now clear that DOJ has other things that they're looking at that are not as of this moment contemplated or covered in the understanding between the parties.

SOLOMON: And remind us-- I mean because this is an investigation that dates back years. Remind us of some of the other universes -- other worlds this investigation touch.

HONIG: Well, this does go back to 2018. It's worth noting, this is a five-year-old investigation. We've had reporting from Evan, Kara, Paula Reid, and others that this investigation has looked at, for example, Foreign Agents Registration Act.

Was Hunter Biden lobbying the U.S. government on behalf of some foreign government without registering as a foreign agent? We don't know the universe here. And I think that's what is got Hunter Biden's lawyers concerned.

BERMAN: And I think it's -- we're going to bring in Evan Perez, who's got some reporting on this also. But, Elie, someone made a bad mistake here. Am I wrong looking at this saying that these someone, whether it be Hunter Biden's defense or prosecutors here? How did this fall apart?

SOLOMON: How could there be such a big miscommunication?

HONIG: I cannot even begin to explain how the Justice Department walks into that courtroom without knowing exactly what the scope of immunity or coverage for Hunter Biden is. And equally, I cannot even begin to understand how Hunter Biden's lawyers walk him into that courthouse without knowing exactly what the constraints -- what the limitations of that deal are.

BERMAN: Evan Perez, a good time for you to enter this conversation here. This took a turn today that we were not expecting.

EVAN PEREZ, CNN SENIOR JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: You know, that is the understatement of the year. I mean, look. We know a lot about this investigation. We certainly have been covering it since 2020. And we know that a lot of things that appear to now be part of the disagreement have been at the center of this.

We know that the investigators looked into money laundering charges. They looked into whether they charged Hunter Biden with violating the FARA law, which is, you know, the Foreign Agents Registration Act. All of those things were covered in depth as part of this investigation. And certainly, as part of our reporting, we understood that you know, sometime last year, the investigators and the prosecution, everybody on the Justice Department side had decided that the strongest part of this case was the tax charges, the part that is at the center of this agreement that at least we thought was going to be stamped by this judge.

So, the idea that according to prosecutors, there is still some aspect of those other possible charges that are still under investigation. You know, that's certainly huge news to emerge at this court hearing. It's an -- it's an amazing thing for Hunter Biden's lawyers to have entered into this agreement without getting the Justice Department to say whether the FARA charges, whether the money laundering charges, whether anything else that they had covered as part of this five-year- old investigation, whether any of that was still possible to charge against Hunter Biden. And the idea that at this late hour at the -- at the final hour here right before this judge is where they are now saying, well, we don't really agree on this is just astonishing. Again, this is something that we know was a big part of this. And, guys, you know, going back to the politics of this, you heard from those IRS whistleblowers that is part of what they believe certainly was strong enough to bring charges on.

But the prosecutors decided it wasn't strong enough. That they didn't think was quite there, and why they decided to narrow this case just to the tax charges for 2017, 2018 misdemeanor. So, again, it's a very surprising turn of events. This is a history-making case, by all accounts, and certainly something like this never -- doesn't happen every day in federal court.

SOLOMON: Evan, standby for us. I want to bring back Elie. Elie, role play for me -- role to play with me for a moment, you and John do this very well. But -- I mean, you've been a federal prosecutor.

Let's say, though, that you are on Hunter Biden's team at this point. Are you trying to get this kind of squared away today or do you feel like you're going back to the drawing board because there are so many questions about what your legal exposure is?

HONIG: So, the concern that Hunter Biden's lawyers have right now is yes, he's going into court. The plan was for him to plead to these tax charges and to have the gun charge diverted.

[11:45:05]

But he needs to be covered for everything else out there. Evan just laid out the universe that we know of. There's probably more in DOJ.

Now, that doesn't necessarily mean he's going to be charged for those. But you cannot, as a defense lawyer, walk your client in, take a plea and then find that two months or now he's being charged with something more. From the prosecutors' point of view, it's really just the converse of that. We're giving him this plea. But does this sort of cover him for all time for all things or is it only limited to the tax and the gun charge?

And again, I keep saying this. But this is a contract. This is a deal between two parties. And that provision, how broad is the coverage, is one of the most important provisions. And the fact that it's not specifically written out and the fact that the parties it was just revealed, do not actually have an understanding and meeting of the minds is a failure on both sides.

Now, again, sometimes these things do get rectified pretty quickly in court. It may be there was one point of contention or misunderstanding. It sounds like the judge has given them a chance to confer quickly, see if they can work it out. But if not, that, we're back to square zero.

BERMAN: As a -- if you're trying to figure out how they navigate through this. HONIG: Yes.

BERMAN: If there were to be a possible solution here. Is there an agreement to be made where you say, OK, on the things that you've investigated so far, right, at this point, you're not being charged for that? However, if new information comes to light, we're not saying you can't be charged for information that we're not aware of yet.

HONIG: That is exactly how these deals are structured in this type of case. Usually, in a plea agreement, the understanding and it would be written is the defendant will be pleading to charges one, two, and three, and also will not be further prosecuted for anything within the knowledge of the Justice Department, which includes the FBI, as of this date. You're not going to give someone immunity moving forward because who knows what they might do in the future.

BERMAN: Right.

HONIG: That's all still fair game. So, yes, John, that's exactly how these deals are usually structured. But here, they don't seem to be quite literally on the same page.

BERMAN: But how could they now have that conversation? It's hard for -- it's hard to believe that this conversation didn't take place. It's not a conversation. It's the conversation in the plea agreement.

SOLOMON: Because in essence, what's happening is I'm agreeing to play to this, and in exchange, you give me immunity for that.

HONIG: It's the central issue here. It's not a peripheral matter. This is not window dressing. This is a primary concern, especially from the defense side, from Hunter Biden's side.

It could be they have an understanding that it's not reduced to writing or again, there could be some nuance maybe that they haven't agreed to. But yes, this is -- this is not some side issue. This is really the core of what a plea agreement's about.

BERMAN: Stand by.

HONIG: OK.

BERMAN: Again, we have Kara Scannell back in the federal courthouse as discussions seem to be going on still, we'll figure out if there's any new development there today. In the meantime, let's bring in Sara Murray, who has been covering this from all kinds of different angles for months and months now. Was there any sign that there was trouble heading into the last few minutes, Sara?

SARA MURRAY, CNN POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, look. I don't know that anyone was expecting things to fall apart in this sort of spectacular fashion, at least for now. You know, as others have pointed out, they're in recess, again, trying to see if they can work through some of these disagreements.

But there were signals from David Weiss, the U.S. attorney that this investigation was ongoing. And everyone was sort of trying to read the tea leaves about what this meant. Did this just mean the investigation was ongoing in the sense that, you know, you have to wait for Hunter Biden to formally enter his plea, for the judge to approve it for the judge to sign off on the sentencing, or could there be another piece of it?

And in Weiss's letters to Capitol Hill, he did kind of signal that there may be another piece of this ongoing. You know, when he was agreeing to show up for testimony in front of the House Judiciary Committee led by Republicans in September and October, his letter about that, notes that there could be investigative steps, prosecutorial decisions, and judicial proceedings that are ongoing that he was not able to talk about.

And again, I think a lot of people looked at that line and thought, you know, that just means let's get through the plea deal. Let's get through the sentencing. But what we are hearing in court today is that there may be more of this going on and points of this where, frankly, Hunter Biden's defense team and prosecutors were not on the same page about where this investigation stood. And if it is in fact, over, John.

BERMAN: Yes. I'm not sure they were in the same book, let alone the same page.

MURRAY: Yes.

BERMAN: Based on the reporting we have over the last few minutes whether that changes or not, I guess we will have to see. Sara Murray, thank you very much.

SOLOMON: Elie, not to belabor the point, but how rare is it that a -- as a prosecutor that you are walking in for this type of hearing, and you are walking out, perhaps with the deal falling apart?

HONIG: It's very, very rare. Sometimes you do have a miscommunication about what the scope of as we'll call it, the coverages, how much is this person covered moving forwards. But that is, in some sense, the most important issue in a case.

[11:50:06]

Look at this case. If Hunter Biden pleads to one or two or three tax misdemeanors, it's two in this case, that's fine. But the agreement here is no prison time.

The bigger concern is, is he covered for anything else? Is he going to get a pass from DOJ for anything else? And you would absolutely have that hammered out from both sides. To have it fall apart in this fashion is really surprising, and doesn't reflect well on either of the two parties.

BERMAN: If they walk out of here anytime soon.

HONIG: Yes.

BERMAN: We have these live cameras here to try to figure out if they're walking out with no deal.

HONIG: Right.

BERMAN: What happens then from a prosecutorial and investigatory standpoint? Does the DOJ then file charges tomorrow?

HONIG: So, they're back to the drawing board. DOJ could say, OK, we don't have a deal. We're going back to our investigative work. You might get indicted straight up, or we might conclude that we don't have enough to charge here.

BERMAN: Right.

HONIG: Now, they're already on record saying that they believe he committed a tax, at least a misdemeanor.

BERMAN: Well, that's -- (INAUDIBLE) I mean he was -- he was agreeing to plead guilty to tax charges.

HONIG: Yes.

BERMAN: You would think they would say OK we're going to charge you.

HONIG: If this falls apart, there is next to no chance that DOJ says OK, our deal fell apart, no charges for him at all. Because again, they're already on record saying they believe he committed both the tax charge and the gun charge. So, there's a very high risk to Hunter Biden if this deal falls apart.

SOLOMON: Talk to us a little bit about -- I mean, let's say Hunter Biden out of this.

HONIG: Yes.

SOLOMON: As a -- as a person who is facing charges, if you walk into a courtroom with a deal in your head that you thought you were getting, it is very important that you get it sort of ironed out what exactly that deal means because of potential legal exposure.

HONIG: Yes. This is the most important deal you'll ever make if you're ever you know God forbid a defendant. I mean, forget about buying a house or buying a car.

This is a hundred times more important. This is your liberty at stake. And especially, by the way, if you believe you've worked at a deal that will likely spare you prison time, as in this case, it's ultimately up to the judge.

And so, the number one question I would have if I was the defense lawyer here is he's going to -- the deal is he's going to plead guilty to these two tax misdemeanors, we're going to divert the gun charge assuming he behaves himself, but what happens with all that other stuff that's been swirling for five years? And if you don't have a straight answer on that, you don't have a deal and the judge is right to not accept it. BERMAN: Right. Stand by, Ellie, for one more minute here. Let's bring back our Senior Justice Correspondent Evan Perez. And, Evan, if you will just take a step back and look at all of this now, where does this leave things in your mind? Where are we now if this deal falls apart in the Hunter Biden investigation?

PEREZ: Well, I think there's a couple of very, very big questions for prosecutors. I think they are looking at the statute of limitations that they are going to be bumping up against.

It is the case. You heard this from one of the whistleblowers already, that as a result of how long this case has gone on how much foot- dragging they say was going on behind the scenes, they already lost one year of the statute of limitations on one possible year of a possible tax crime that could have been charged. At least again, according to the testimony from the -- from these whistleblowers.

The question for prosecutors is, you know, if, if you don't have a deal, then you have to decide whether you're going to go to trial on this. And you know that you don't have a lot more time to work with. Certainly, you know, the 2017 tax here could be in jeopardy here.

So, one of the things that I think for prosecutors, one of the reasons why they want to make this deal was they wanted to salvage at least some part of this Hunter Biden to agree. And you know, already in court, he's already said that he's planning or he was planning to plead guilty to not paying his taxes on time for 2017 and 2018. And so, if right, and if there is no deal, then prosecutors have to decide whether they're ready to bring charges on these -- on these cases, on this charge -- on this -- on those tax years, whether there's any other possible crimes that they can bring.

And again, the time-sensitive nature of this is that this is -- this is stuff that is so old, already. We've -- we're talking about an investigation that's been going on for five years. And so, you know, for them, you know, there's going to be an incentive to try to come to terms with whether they can do this whether they have to do more investigation, how much longer can they do that. And that's part of what is also probably working behind the scenes in the minds of the prosecution here, guys.

SOLOMON: And we should say that both sides, as far as we know, are still in recess, presumably trying to figure out if they can reach some sort of agreement today or if perhaps this goes back to the drawing board. I mean, we still just still don't know.

BERMAN: I mean, who doesn't want to walk out of that courthouse without a deal more, Elie?

HONIG: Right.

BERMAN: I mean who is -- has the biggest incentive to settle things over the next, you know, several hours here? We got about a minute left.

HONIG: Hunter Biden, by far. Hunter Biden is the one with all the risk and all the exposure here. For DOJ, it's a question of do we get this play on the books or do we carry on with our investigation. There may be political ramifications that follow.

[11:55:04]

But Hunter Biden is the one who's really at risk here because he was -- he and his lawyers apparently believed they had a deal in place that would almost certainly have spared him from prison. If this deal, in fact, collapses -- and it should be noted, I've seen lawyers get together under the gun and put things together very quickly so this could still sort of come back to life. But if it does not, he's going to walk out of that courtroom and have no agreement with DOJ, no assurance, no protection against any of those other potential crimes that Evan just laid out, and anything's in play at that point.

BERMAN: All right. Elie Honig, thank you very much. We'll let you run to the next camera that you're going to be talking to because the major breaking news is that at least for now, the Hunter Biden plea agreement appears to have fallen apart. No deal in place just yet. Lawyers still working behind the scenes.

We have a lot of major developments coming in much more ahead. I am sure, man. "INSIDE POLITICS," that's going to be interesting. Don't go far.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)