Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Special Counsel Appointed In Hunter Biden Case; Soon: Judge Could Issue Order On Evidence Rules In Jan. 6 Case. Aired 2-2:30p ET

Aired August 11, 2023 - 14:00   ET

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

[14:00:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

ALEX MARQUARDT, CNN SENIOR NATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: Breaking news in the investigation into President Joe Biden's son, Hunter Biden. The U.S. Attorney General announcing a special counsel in the case. This, as the prosecutor leading the probe, signals that a trial is now likely. We're following the legal and the political implications.

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN ANCHOR: Plus, blunt words from a judge to Donald Trump's legal team in a hearing on the election interference case, reminding the former president that he can't intimidate witnesses and warning more inflammatory statements will require a quicker start to a trial. We're live outside court.

And in Hawaii, at least 55 killed, thousands displaced as fires devastated Maui. One official says the historic town of Lahaina is all gone. This hour, a look at some of what has been lost to the flames on Maui and what Hawaiians need most right now.

We're following these major developing stories and many more, all coming in right here to CNN NEWS CENTRAL.

MARQUARDT: It is happening again. Another high-profile special counsel has now been appointed. This time, it's in the Hunter Biden investigation.

Today, Attorney General Merrick Garland announcing that he elevated David Weiss to special counsel status. Weiss has been leading the years-long probe, almost five years of President Biden's son and he recently requested that he be given special counsel designation. The reaction in Washington is pouring in this afternoon.

But first, CNN's Paula Reid has been tracking all of this. So, Paula, how did this designation of David Weiss as special counsel happen?

PAULA REID, CNN SENIOR LEGAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: Alex, according to the Justice Department, on Tuesday, David Weiss, he's a Trump- appointed U.S. attorney who has overseen the Hunter Biden investigation for years requested this special counsel designation. Of course, this has been going on for years, so the first question is well, why now? And they're not providing an official explanation. But to our reporting, we can see in court filings that it appears that talks between Hunter Biden's lawyers and the U.S. Attorney's Office have broken down. They've been trying to broker a plea deal. They had one. They went to a hearing where they thought they would solidify that.

And the judge pushed back and asked for additional briefing. But at this point, according to court filings, it appears that this case, which we expect would be about tax charges and a possible gun charge is headed to trial. So, that may be the impetus here but we're still trying to figure this out because they're not giving us an official answer. But as special counsel, Weiss will be now required to file a final report. And the Justice Department tells us the attorney general is committed to making that report with all of his findings public.

But, Alex, another big question will likely come from Republicans, which is how does this designation of special counsel impact Weiss's ability to come and answer their questions? For a while now, they've wanted him to come and testify before Congress. At this point, it's unclear.

We know previous special counsels like Robert Mueller and John Durham have testified but they have only testified after they submitted their final report. Now, sources also telling me that the White House was not informed of this before the attorney general's announcement. And neither were Hunter Biden's attorneys.

MARQUARDT: And we are already hearing complaints from Republicans that Weiss has now been designated as special counsel. But, Paula, how unusual is it that in this case, Weiss would be -- would be designated given the fact that he was already the U.S. attorney and will remain the U.S. Attorney of Delaware? Is it -- is this unusual, or would the attorney general normally find an outside -- another person to be special counsel?

REID: Well, this is unique because the -- (INAUDIBLE) Trump-appointed U.S. attorney had been handling this. He's going to remain a U.S. attorney. And now, he's going to have this designation.

And that's how he has requested. There's not another conflict that would prompt you needed to go and find someone else. I'm not sure who's left. But they're not faced with that. Let's go take a listen to the attorney general lay out how he sees this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MERRICK GARLAND, U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL: I have concluded that it is in the public interest to appoint him as special counsel. This appointment confirms my commitment to provide Mr. Weiss all the resources he requests. It also reaffirms that Mr. Weiss has the authority he needs to conduct a thorough investigation. And to continue to take the steps he deems appropriate independently based only on the facts and the law.

(END VIDEO CLIP) REID: It's interesting. It's unclear that this is going to insulate the Justice Department from any more questions about the political aspects of this investigation. But I think the question going forward is whether this will insulate Weiss from having to testify before lawmakers if he will now be able to say look, just wait for my report. After that, I'll testify like previous special counsels.

[14:05:12]

MARQUARDT: It'll be very interesting to see where he takes his case not only because his plea deals falling apart, but now he has these expanded powers as special counsel. Paula Reid, thank you so much. Appreciate it. Brianna?

KEILAR: Let's go to the White House now, and CNN's Arlette Saenz. Arlette, the White House didn't, they say, get an up -- a heads-up about this move. They -- have they offered a response at this point?

ARLETTE SAENZ, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Well, Brianna, the White House is really sticking to this no-comment strategy. When I reached out to them after Merrick Garland announced the appointment of that special counsel, they simply referred me back to the Justice Department as well as Hunter Biden's personal representatives. And I'm told by a White House official that they did not receive any heads-up before this announcement came. Learning about this the very same way that we all did, as Merrick Garland stood at that podium to announce the appointment of the special counsel.

But this all follows -- really this approach from the White House is trying to maintain the independence of the Justice Department. As you have seen in past investigations, whether it's leading to the Biden's or those special counsel investigations regarding former President Trump, they really have tried to stay out and refrain from commenting in any -- in any manner. But this appointment of a special counsel serves as another complicated moment in the issues surrounding Hunter Biden.

From the White House, we have simply in the past heard that President Biden and First Lady Jill Biden love and support their son. Of course, they continue to have him here at the White House often for family gatherings, and other events, really showing no indications that they are distancing themselves from their son amid these investigations. This is a very personal matter for the Bidens.

But it's also becoming a more challenging legal and political issue for President Biden as well. He has faced the sustained pressure and criticism from Republicans relating to his son, Hunter's, business dealings. There have been threats of an impeachment inquiry by lawmakers up -- Republican lawmakers up in the House of Representatives. So, these are all issues that the president will have to navigate as this 2024 election proceeds and is now this investigation into his son enters a new phase with the appointment of a special counsel.

KEILAR: All right, Arlette Saenz, live for us at the White House, thank you so much for that. MARQUARDT: Let's now gauge the reaction on Capitol Hill. Joining us now is Democratic Congressman Raja Krishnamoorthi of Illinois. He sits on the House Intelligence Committee, as well as on the Oversight and Government Reform Committee. Congressman, thank you so much for joining us today. First off, I want to get your reaction. What do you make of this designation of David Weiss now as special counsel in the Hunter Biden case?

REP. RAJA KRISHNAMOORTHI (D-IL): Well, I think all along the Justice Department and Merrick Garland said to U.S. Attorney Weiss that if he requests that particular designation, he'd be granted it. So, I think it's only appropriate that they follow through when he did request it. But I think that it doesn't take away kind of the flaws in the Republicans' arguments with regard to Hunter Biden.

And you know, I had a chance to actually question the whistleblowers who came forward with allegations of wrongdoing in the investigation of Mr. Hunter Biden. And the problem with their fundamental allegations are that the alleged wrongdoing happened at a time when Donald Trump was president, Bill Barr was the attorney general, and of course, Mr. Weiss had been appointed by Donald Trump. And so, allegations of political bias don't seem to hold weight when you know Mr. Trump was ultimately in charge of the Justice Department and its handling of this investigation.

KEILAR: Do you have confidence that this designation is necessary?

KRISHNAMOORTHI: I don't know if it's necessary. I do know that Mr. Weiss has requested it in light of what happened at this hearing recently. But it appears that Mr. Weiss had quite a bit of latitude to pursue the investigation in the manner that he saw fit.

Again, my Republican colleagues somehow claimed that Hunter Biden's actions reflect poorly on President Biden, that somehow this involves wrongdoing by President Biden. But there isn't a scintilla of evidence to show that President Biden did anything wrong in connection with Hunter Biden. And I think that Mr. Weiss has not surfaced any such evidence because there is none.

KEILAR: Do you think that if this were not the president's son that this move would be made here?

KRISHNAMOORTHI: That's a good point. I'm not sure. But what I do know is that you know my constituents aren't asking about it. In fact, the other day, I heard that Richard Hudson, the head of the National Republican campaign committee said that nobody's talking about it back in his district because people just don't --

KEILAR: But we know many -- I do --

KRISHNAMOORTHI: This is not top of their mind.

KEILAR: I do want to say -- it is top of mind for a lot of constituents. I mean, we know that. I just want to put that out there. Maybe not yours, but there are many constituents out there who are paying attention to it for sure. [14:10:05]

MARQUARDT: Yes. And to that point, Congressman --

KRISHNAMOORTHI: I think that there are --

MARQUARDT: Sorry, go ahead.

KRISHNAMOORTHI: I think that there's definitely some on the other side who care very much about it. But as Mr. Hudson himself said, it's just not one of their top priorities the way that you know, jobs, education, health care, and other priorities are. I conduct a lot of town hall meetings. This does not come up. And this is really a big distraction right now.

MARQUARDT: But this was something that might have gone away a little bit quietly, perhaps only among Democrats, if the plea deal had been agreed to and carried out. That's no longer the case. So, this promise is that this is going to stay in the spotlight for quite some time as the presidential cycle is just ramping up. Politically speaking, Sir, you know, as a -- as a Democrat who's clearly going to be backing the incumbent Democratic president, are you worried about this dragging out and being what will -- you know, getting a lot of attention during the presidential election?

KRISHNAMOORTHI: No, I don't think so. Only because of this, which is that my Republican colleagues want to somehow connect Hunter Biden to somehow the president himself committing wrongdoing, again, not a scintilla of evidence has been brought forward, either in the House or otherwise. And so, this is going to be a big distraction.

KEILAR: You've seen House Democrats who were investigating Jared Kushner in the Trump children and investigating their business dealings, which obviously appear to be stalled very much right now after Republicans took over the House. Shouldn't Democrats abide by their own principles in the case of Hunter Biden even if Republicans are not?

KRISHNAMOORTHI: I think that the House has the ability, the authority, and they should be able to conduct oversight investigations with regard to the prosecution of anybody. And that's what they're doing. But the manner in which they're doing it is highly problematic.

And at the end of the day, remember, Jared Kushner was a member of the government. Hunter Biden is not. And so again, they're trying to attribute somehow wrongdoing to the president, and they can't produce even one piece of evidence to show that. And that's why this is a problematic investigation right now.

MARQUARDT: But, Congressman, we did hear from two Obama administration officials. They raised concerns to the White House about Hunter Biden's work. That was as far back as 2015, specifically his work in Ukraine. So, this has been an ethical issue for quite some time. Do you think that Democrats have not taken it seriously enough?

KRISHNAMOORTHI: No. They're taking it seriously. But remember, Mr. Weiss, has been investigating this for five years.

He's been investigated for five years. He's investigated, even those particular issues that you talked about. And I had a chance to look at some of this evidence in a skiff for classified settings as well. Unfortunately, for the Republicans, again, they cannot produce any kind of evidence of wrongdoing by President Biden, much as they have tried up to this point.

MARQUARDT: All right, Congressman Raja Krishnamoorthi, really appreciate your time today. Appreciate it.

KRISHNAMOORTHI: Thank you.

KEILAR: And coming up. A dramatic hearing in DC today in former President Trump's 2020 election interference case that could really set the tone for this upcoming trial. The judge's warning to the former president, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:17:34]

MARQUARDT: Now, to the other high-profile special counsel case that is barreling ahead today, the Trump election interference indictment. This morning, the presiding judge heard arguments from Trump's defense and federal prosecutors for the very first time. It was a hearing that Trump's team didn't even want to happen today. They tried to push it to next week. And as we learn how the judge responded to some of the Trump team's claims inside the courtroom, we can perhaps see why they wanted to put this off just a little bit longer.

CNN's Katelyn Polantz is outside of the courthouse. Katelyn, sometimes with these judges, you have to read between the lines to decipher the legalese. But today, it seemed that what the judge was saying was very clear.

KATELYN POLANTZ, CNN SENIOR CRIME & JUSTICE REPORTER: Very clear. Let me start with some of her words from exactly what was said today in court. Judge Tanya Chutkan. She said the fact that he, Donald Trump, is running a political campaign currently has to yield to the administration of justice. And if that means he can't say exactly what he wants to say in a political speech, that is just how it's going to have to be.

And so, Judge Chutkan, she had some legal issues she had to determine today. What she did about how evidence can be talked about or not talked about as Trump awaits trial is he and his team get to go through that evidence, especially witness statements. But what she's saying from a bigger position, a bigger perspective, is that this is the court of law. It's very important for American democracy, the government, all of the things that are set up here in this court that this takes precedence over whatever else you are doing in your day job.

She actually mentioned Donald Trump's day job with those words at one point. And so, though Donald Trump's lawyers are arguing to this judge that his speech should not be curtailed because he's running for president, Judge Tanya Chutkan is actually saying, no, I do have the legal right and the courts have a reason that there is a legal right to limit some of the First Amendment, some of the free speech that you get. And when you're a criminal defendant, you can't chill your trial. You need to make sure you have a fair trial. You can't intimidate witnesses, and you can't obstruct justice.

And then in this circumstance, what she was looking at today related to evidence is that she finds that there is quite a lot of law that allows her to place barriers around what Donald Trump is allowed to share, as he learns it as they're preparing for trial.

[14:20:02]

So, this was quite a serious hearing today from Judge Chutkan. She did infuse it with a little bit of humor. My colleagues in the courtroom have been -- have been reporting back that it was light-hearted at times.

She wasn't yelling at these parties. But she also was very clear that she will be scrutinizing what Donald Trump is saying very clearly between now and the trial and making sure he is abiding by the conditions that he is released upon, that he doesn't cross any of the lines that he is supposed to cross and that he's very careful not to talk to witnesses about the case, not to share what he's learning if it seems sensitive by the Justice Department. And that he doesn't do anything, the chills the ability of the justice system to do what it does best, which is take people to trial and determine whether they are guilty or not guilty. Alex.

MARQUARDT: And, of course, still waiting to see what the judge -- when the judge thinks maybe best for this trial to start. Katelyn Polantz, outside the federal courthouse here in Washington, thank you very much. Brianna.

KEILAR: Let's talk about this now, the legal and political implications of these developments. We have Elliot Williams with us. He is a former federal prosecutor and a CNN legal analyst. And David Axelrod is a CNN senior political analyst and a former senior adviser to President Obama.

I do think we should start with the legal element first here. What's your reaction to this latest development, Elliot?

ELLIOT WILLIAMS, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: A lot of -- so a lot of what the judge said in court today isn't that controversial. That -- and so for instance, noting that a defendant might have First Amendment rights. But those rights don't allow or empower that defendant to get in the way of the administration of justice is just not that controversial point.

Now, everything is a little bit controversial here when you're dealing with the former president of the United States. But she was basically stating the law. So there isn't -- there isn't a ton that's remarkable here. It'll be interesting to see how she rules in the end on the particulars of the protective order. KEILAR: And on the Hunter Biden development.

WILLIAMS: Yes.

KEILAR: -- special counsel. Your reaction to that.

WILLIAMS: Oh, the Hunter Biden development on the special counsel. Well, you know -- look. It's -- David Weiss asked. And I think there was a circumstance you're-- where we were in a circumstance here where if the attorney general had said no, the political fallout or even legal fallout to some extent, would have been far worse than anything here. It's hard to see what powers David Weiss has today that he didn't have yesterday because he's still empowered to conduct an investigation. This is a political issue, not as much of a legal one, as it's playing out now.

KEILAR: And that's your purview. David Axelrod, I want to ask you about this because, of course, you have all of this going on with former President Trump having been indicted multiple times now. But you also have this hanging over President Biden, which by the way, we have to remember that when he is -- his handling of classified materials as vice president, that is also subject to another special counsel. And now there's a special counsel being designated when it comes to Hunter Biden. What's the effect of this on the President in his run for reelection?

DAVID AXELROD, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well, look. I'm sure this didn't land all that well over at the White House because I think they'd love this Hunter Biden case to be behind them. The Republicans are sort of pointing to it for purposes of what about ism. They have a candidate who's a front-runner who's been indicted three times and may be on the verge of being indicted a fourth.

So, they need to have a countervailing argument. And their countervailing argument is hope to standards of justice. They're not in tightening Hunter Biden and so on. And they have -- they are beating that horse to death, even though they've failed to make the connection between Hunter Biden and Joe Biden in the way that they allege. So, I think that anything that extends the Hunter Biden case into the election year is not welcome news for Joe Biden.

On the other hand, Bri, you listened to what happened in court today, and I think the most important thing that happened in court today was that the judge implied that if Trump does not abide by the terms of her orders and decorum and goes out and tries to try this case in public or disclose information that that he learns through materials that are given to them by the prosecution, that she may go for an earlier date for this trial. And that may be the only way to discipline him.

One of the questions that's lingered is, what if he does? He seems unchastened by all these orders and rulings and admonitions from the court. Now, we know what one of the consequences may be if he insists on going out, and, you know, intimidating witnesses through his use of media, and disclosing things he shouldn't disclose. KEILAR: You wouldn't expect, Elliot, that to be an empty threat that she's saying, listen, if you are going to be out there doing these things, and obviously, we're going to have to move this along. What do you think about that warning?

[14:25:00]

WILLIAMS: No, it's a really interesting warning. And in the Justice Department's filing yesterday, what they said was that this whole idea of moving a trial along, it's for the defendant's protection. He has a speedy trial right. It is -- you know the Constitution says you ought to go to trial quickly.

But also, it's in the public's interest to have the trial move not because of the election, but for deterring conduct. Bad conduct from defendants such as speaking out and tampering with witnesses, and so on. So, they -- the judge is sort of piggybacking on that a little bit saying that the more the defendant is out there, he's just sort of making bad for himself. But impeding the Justice Department's ability to do its job, which is to deter this kind of thing from happening ever again, either from this defendant or a future one.

KEILAR: Let's talk, David, though, about these continuing proceedings that are going to be happening. We're still waiting to see, of course, Elliott, when is this -- when there --- when is this trial going to take place. Is this going to take place in 2024? Is he, the former president, going to be jumping around from trial to trial as he's trying to deal with -- deal with primaries and caucuses?

But you're also going to have all of this out in the ether when it comes to Hunter Biden, David. And I wonder in the mind of voters, and you know this so well, a lot of times they don't make distinctions. Can you talk a little bit about those voters who may be undecided and who really do have an issue with former President Trump if he is going to be found guilty, the fact that he may be indicted?

But now, they may be clouded by the fact that, hey, legally, is there a connection between the president and Hunter Biden? Maybe there isn't. But certainly, there's this cloud of dust that's kicked up.

AXELROD: Yes. Look. I think that is the hope that Republicans have that they can make that case. And that's certainly the case you see in conservative media, that somehow Hunter Biden is being treated differently and maybe treating differently because there are links to the president that somehow had -- that's so far have not been proven. And maybe with some voters, it will.

I mean, I think part of Trump's politics in general, is to suggest that the waters are murky, everyone swims in them, everybody behaves in the same way, and therefore these offenses are to be ignored. And we'll see if that happens. But I do think that, at this point, unlike the president who's ultimately -- who would love to run on his record, Trump has pretty much decided that this -- these indictments and prosecutions are going to be his campaign. That they are symbols of his potency in fighting the deep state and the corrupt you know Justice Department and so on. And he's using it to rally his base. And so, he's going to be campaigning in many ways from the courthouse steps during this primary season. And what we've seen so far is that Republican voters have responded you know strongly to it. He has gained with each indictment, which is a peculiar development. Something we've never seen before. But this is his campaign right now.

KEILAR: How do you think, David, that's going to play with people who are not completely in the column for Trump, that are not completely his base?

AXELROD: Yes. No, I think the problem for him is outside the base. It's helped him to rally the base. It's certainly not going to help him in a general election. And it may -- if the primary season goes on and he doesn't score in early knockout and starts having setbacks in the court, you can see where it could potentially affect him there. But he's taking this one step at a time, and he's using it to rally his base.

What we don't know, Bri, is when -- what will the aggregation of these things mean? So far, they've been assembled of people that they're piling on the president. But if he starts getting convicted, if the evidence is presented, and he's convicted by a jury of his peers, will that change? No one knows this. There's no template for this. We're in uncharted waters.

KEILAR: Yes, we certainly are. And I thank you, gentlemen, for joining us there. Elliot Williams, David Axelrod, so much to cover today and so many legal and political implications here. Thank you.

WILLIAMS: Yes.

AXELROD: Sure thing.

KEILAR: Alex.

MARQUARDT: A catastrophic loss of life in Hawaii and the humanitarian crisis may have only just begun. We have a look at the damage done by destructive wildfires. And information on you can help -- how you can help. That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)