Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Sources: Trump Lawyers, DA Negotiating On Surrender; Federal Appeals Court Says Abortion Pill Should Remain On Market, But Rules In Favor of Limiting Access. Aired 3-3:30p ET

Aired August 16, 2023 - 15:00   ET

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

[15:00:00]

JIM SCIUTTO, CNN HOST: The sheriff there says the 45th President will be treated like everyone else, mug shots and fingerprints included.

So how soon could Trump turn himself in, we're going to take a closer look coming up.

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN HOST: Plus growing evidence. A fault in Maui's electric system led to the fires that have decimated the town of Lahaina and left more than a hundred people dead. Now, Maui residents are providing DNA samples to help identify their loved ones' remains.

And, we've learned charges against Alec Baldwin could be refilled, based on a new forensic report in the deadly movie set shooting.

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

SCIUTTO: The clock is ticking, talks are happening behind the scenes to work out the logistics of Donald Trump's surrender to authorities at the Fulton County jail by next Friday. He has until August 25th to turn himself in on racketeering and conspiracy charges. His lawyers are negotiating with the District Attorney's team on that front.

The sprawling RICO case as it's known, accuses Trump and 18 others of criminally plotting to alter Georgia's 2020 Election results to overturn them. So far, no defendants have yet been booked at the jail.

CNN's Nick Valencia he's outside the courthouse where the grand jury voted earlier this week. Nick, the turning in won't happen there. It's going to happen around the corner, I suppose. But tell us what we're learning about the details and how they're being worked out.

NICK VALENCIA, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, according to the Fulton County sheriff, former president, Trump, will be treated like everyone else's who has been indicted in Fulton County, and that means being processed through the infamous Fulton County jail where the former president along with his 18 co-defendants will be fingerprinted. They'll be given a mug shot and process through that facility.

You mentioned there are two sources familiar with those negotiations that say Trump and his team are still negotiating with the Fulton County District Attorney's office. Early indications are that, the former president will turn himself in sometime next week.

And here's what the jail is having to say about the - those defendants turning themselves in: "It is expected that all 19 defendants named in the indictment will be booked at the Rice Street Jail," that's the Fulton County Jail, "Keep in mind, defendants can turn themselves in at any time. The jail is open 24/7."

I did reach out to the Fulton County Sheriff's Office they told me that no one has turned themselves in yet. And just really quickly here, Jim. We know that Trump's team is negotiating with the Fulton County DA, Fulton County authorities won't just have to negotiate with Trump's team. They also have to negotiate with the Secret Service, the details of his surrender. Jim?

SCIUTTO: Former president turning himself in at the county jail, remarkable.

Nick Valencia outside of court.

We're also going to be joined now by CNN's Paula Reid.

So, a new strategy here, and boy, we've seen a lot of them through all the various trials underway and charges and court motions, but this one to move on Mark Meadows, one of his co-defendants, Trump's co- defendants, attempting to move this to federal court. Why and how would that come about?

PAULA REID, CNN SENIOR LEGAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: Well, this strategy we saw coming, we very much expected that former president, Trump, and some of his closest advisors would try to move any criminal charges in the state of Georgia to the federal level.

Now, Mark Meadows' attorneys argue that this should be moved to federal court and then they want it dismissed. They are arguing that everything he was doing was done in his capacity as the White House Chief of Staff. And there is a federal statute that seeks to protect federal officials from state prosecutions.

Now look, Jim, it's unclear if he's going to be successful in getting this removed or dismissed. But he's not the only one who's going to try.

Rudy Giuliani has also said this week that he too, is going to try to get his case removed to federal court. We also expect former president, Trump, will try this as well.

Now it's possible they could get their cases removed to federal court but not dismissed. So that would mean that this becomes sort of a quasi federal case. Because on the one hand, it would be in federal court, but the District Attorney, Fani Willis, her prosecutors, technically they could be sworn in as U.S. attorneys are still dealing with state law.

And look, Jim, one of the big advantages, though, for the former president and his associates, if they can get this moved to federal court, would be the jury pool, because Fulton County is a heavily Democratic jury pool. And at the federal level, the federal jury pool there would expand to include a more diverse array of jurors.

Now the big downside, though, I would argue for the country and for journalists is that there are no cameras in federal court. So the American people would not be able to see this process play out.

SCIUTTO: Good point and it might drag the process out as well.

Paula Reid, thanks so much. Boris?

SANCHEZ: Trump's Georgia co-defendant, Rudy Giuliani says, he will surrender next week.

[15:05:02]

This comes as we're learning new information about the former New York mayor's spiraling financial problems.

CNN's Katelyn Polantz has been covering this story for us.

And Katelyn, Giuliani's attorneys say that he is facing hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal bills and outrageous sum of money.

KATELYN POLANTZ, CNN SENIOR CRIME AND JUSTICE REPORTER: Yes. So he has to fight this criminal case. He says he is anxious to fight the criminal case from the Fulton County prosecutors. But that is essentially aside and apart from the major legal battle he's fighting right now, which is just keeping his head above water to respond to what he needs to respond to in court in these lawsuits around the 2020 Election.

He's being accused by multiple different parties, two companies, Smartmatic and Dominion, as well as two Georgia election workers, that he defamed them when he made false statements about the election - about election fraud in 2020.

And so, those places they're suing him, they will ultimately seek damages if they were to win, which can be huge, enormous bills, the sorts of bills that can bankrupt a person very easily.

SANCHEZ: Right.

POLANTZ: But just to respond to those lawsuits, because those lawsuits are moving forward. He has bills to get access to his records, so he can turn them over under subpoenas to these organizations or to these plaintiffs. And he also is getting court orders for sanctions because he's not able to pay those amounts, amounts of $15,000, $20,000. And so, he's been sanctioned almost $90,000 in the case from Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss.

He also lost a totally separate case recently where a judge looked at his phone bill ...

SANCHEZ: Right.

POLANTZ: ... from a couple years ago and said ...

SANCHEZ: Tens of thousands of dollars.

POLANTZ: Yes.

SANCHEZ: Phone bill.

POLANTZ: Yes, 50,000 - $57,000, has to pay a phone bill, and he just got a court order last month saying it's time to pay your phone bill.

And so all of this put together are the bills that we know about the Giuliani has at this time. And it just is mind boggling how expensive - being opposite a court case like this, let alone three major defamation cases can be and so he has to figure that out, maybe sell his co-op in New York.

SANCHEZ: Right. We should point out at least one judge has expressed some doubt as to how serious these financial hardships are.

We also have an update on the Special Counsel Jack Smith's federal investigation into Trump's efforts to overturn the 2020 Election. He's collected what could be a vital piece of evidence.

POLANTZ: Yes, the major development here is that we now know that Twitter has told a judge in open court, the Donald Trump Twitter account that everyone watched so closely for its public tweets, there are private messages in that account as well, DMs, direct messages.

So, @realDonaldTrump was shut down after the January 6 attacks and the Justice Department went to court to get a warrant to get access to all of the data in that Twitter account. They wanted a lot of things. Some of the things they prioritized were messages between government officials and Twitter itself.

But in the course of a series of sealed proceedings in the federal court in D.C., as Twitter was fighting with the Special Counsel's office over whether they could tell Trump about this warrant and about turning over his data, that's when this came up and Twitter said, yes, there is a volume of information in this account that would be direct messages. There are confidential communications there.

We don't know what that means ...

SANCHEZ: Right.

POLANTZ: ... or the Special Counsel investigation, what they found when they got all of that data from Twitter. But it's quite possible that we see the public tweets as part of the allegations against Donald Trump in his criminal charges in federal court. We could see more about what messages were being sent privately in writing, perhaps, even by the former president himself when he's sitting in the White House on January 6 or after.

We could see that at trial. We could see that in further parts of the investigation.

SANCHEZ: Yes.

POLANTZ: We just don't know what they found there.

SANCHEZ: Yes, it's still early. It's not just the direct messages, it's also drafted tweets, deleted tweets ...

POLANTZ: Deleted tweets, yes.

SANCHEZ: ... a throve potentially of evidence.

Katelyn Polantz, thank you so much.

We have some breaking news right now we want to get to Paula Reid who has an update for us. Paula?

REID: That's right, Boris. Just in a court filing, the Fulton County district attorney, Fani Willis, has asked for a March 4th trial date.

Now, that comes right in the middle of not only some important key dates in the 2024 presidential election, but also falls very close to another schedule of falsified records trial in New York that is already on the former president's calendar.

Now look, Boris, this is a RICO prosecution with 19 defendants. These cases are notorious for taking a long time. The District Attorney has said she wants to try all 19 defendants together so it will now be a process for others to weigh in with their request for a possible trial date.

But again, just in the District Attorney, Fani Willis, she is seeking to take the former president and 18 have his allies to trial on March 4th.

[15:10:04]

Now, it is unlikely that date will be granted. This is going to be a negotiation. But that's a pretty aggressive timeline. And also, Boris, as we've reported extensively, the calendar is really crowded for former president, Trump, next year not only with obligations as a candidate for the presidency, but also with all of these trials and court dates.

SANCHEZ: Yes. A significant development there, Paula. Fani Willis aiming for March 4th as the start date for her prosecution of not only former president, Trump, but a number of other co-defendants. And she is, apparently, still aiming on having all of those co-defendants and the former president on trial at the same time, right?

REID: Yes. Our colleague, Sara Murray, asked her about this at her press conference earlier this week, do you want to try them all at the same time. She said, yes.

Now, there is a world in which that is possible. But logistically, Boris, it's almost impossible to comprehend having that many defense attorneys that many just sort of considerations for all those people being tried at once. Now, I'm sure that she would hope that these charges I would encourage some people to cooperate, maybe strike some plea deals. But that was what she told her Sara Murray at her press conference a

few days ago. And she also said that she wanted to seek a trial date in about six months, which is just about what she's asking for here.

SANCHEZ: Yes. And we're talking about an arrays - an array, I should say, of motions to dismiss from all these different co-defendants are likely and the potential for some of them to, perhaps, flip because obviously this is a RICO investigation. The strength of a RICO case is that for folks that are less prominent in the investigation, it's a lot of pressure. There are very serious charges and it could incentivize them cooperating with prosecutors, no?

REID: Absolutely. I mean, the RICO statute racketeering was designed to dismantle organized crime. And, of course, for any prosecutor anytime you charge more than one person in a case, you do hope that at least one of those defendants will cooperate, strike some sort of deal. But it's unclear if that's going to happen at this time.

We expect there to be many challenges to these charges that she filed earlier this week. We were just talking about how Mark Meadows is trying to get this removed to federal court. We expect other people will try similar challenges.

And look, it is unclear if she's going to be able to try this case as soon as next March. That seems like quite an aggressive timeline of work case of this size and complexity. But ultimately, it will be up to the judge.

SANCHEZ: All right. And Paula, please stand by. We still have Katelyn Polantz here with us. Thank you for standing around after the Rudy Giuliani thing.

The Breaking News happen as you were standing here.

POLANTZ: I was interested.

SANCHEZ: Yes. March 4th, that is a very aggressive timeline, as Paula described it.

POLANTZ: It would be and it is the timelines that we're going to - we're not just looking at that timeline, we're looking at all of the timelines here. And that would fall right in the middle of the two other criminal trials that are on the calendar right now. The hush money case and then in New York and then the case related to the documents in Florida that's scheduled for May.

All of this said, there's also this other case out there that doesn't have a trial date yet. And we haven't heard what Trump's team wants to say about that. They're going to be telling the court tomorrow, this is the January 6 federal case ...

SANCHEZ: Right.

POLANTZ: ... in Washington, D.C., so separate from Georgia. But sometimes there are some things that are ...

SANCHEZ: That sort of overlap?

POLANTZ: ... they overlap on some of the facts. That case, that one might be the one to watch on how all of this is going to have to shake out in the calendar year of 2024. And that's because, Donald Trump is the sole defendant. He's before a judge who has already indicated that she wants things to move very aggressively and he's before a Justice Department that is tacitly arguing that one of the reasons to have things settled so quickly in this case for to go to a jury so quickly, is because the public should have a result of this, a case about an election before the next election.

And so, what happens with Fani Willis, there's a lot of different possibilities as Paula was just laying out. There are possibilities that not all 19 defendants might go to trial, many people in the system do often choose to plead guilty at some point in their cases.

But with this, we need to watch to see what the federal case does related to January 6, and see how the rest of those cases fall in line if they hold the dates that they're having. But without a doubt it's going to be a very busy year for Donald Trump, whether he's sitting at trial or just having to respond to these cases as a candidate.

SANCHEZ: Yes. He's going to be on the campaign trail. And we should pause for a moment because Paula Reid, we want to get back to you have some new reporting.

Paula, what's the latest?

REID: That's right. Among the things that the District Attorney is seeking to have a judge agree with her on, is having the arraignment for various defendants take place the week of September 5th.

Now we know after she filed charges earlier this week, she set a deadline of next Friday at noon for these defendants to surrender.

[15:15:05]

The way this takes place at the state level, that surrender will happen through the Fulton County Sheriff's Office, a mug shot, finger prints. But then a judge schedules a date for an initial appearance. So here she is seeking to have those scheduled for the week of September 5th.

Again, this is her request. This is what she is asking for - from the judge as a timeline that she set out to be ready for trial in early March.

It's unclear if the judge will agree with this. If this will hold. Obviously, the defendants will have a chance to weigh in. But that's what she's asking for right now. Because, of course, a lot of people have been asking when might we see former president, Trump, or Mark Meadows or Rudy Giuliani going to court to be arraigned for their initial appearance, but it's going to take a while to process at the state level.

It's not exactly what we saw at the federal level with the past two indictments former president, Trump, where he did his processing his initial appearance and his arraignment pretty quickly after being charged and all in one fell swoop.

It's just a slightly different process down here in Georgia. She's asking this judge to bring these defendants in the week of September 5th.

SANCHEZ: So again, an arraignment on September 5th. Backing up ...

REID: The week of, yes.

SANCHEZ: ... she wants them to surrender, correct, the week of - she wants them to surrender by next Friday and she wants a trial start date of March 4th. This is a very busy calendar, Paula, not only because of all the legal cases that President Trump is handling, but also what Katelyn mentioned, he's campaigning for president and his legal team most of their strategy relies on the idea of delay, delay, delay. They're trying to push this back.

What counter-argument are you anticipating will come from them about a March 4th start date?

REID: Of course, Boris. And that's been the tension not only in Fulton County, but also in the Special Counsels' investigation. The Special Counsel Jack Smith, one of the few things he's ever said publicly is that he wants a "speedy trial." He believes that it is in the public's interest, as Katelyn was noting, for these cases to be resolved before the 2024 presidential election.

Now just looking at the calendar, it's unclear if it's going to be possible for him to conduct two federal trials before the presidential election. The former president's attorneys - they have made many arguments.

The first one is that they believe if he is a candidate for the presidency, that he should not be put on trial. He should not face criminal trial before the presidential election. They've argued that that would be unfair. In the Mar-A-Lago documents case, they have tried to delay. And look, little delays here, little delays there, that adds up.

But some of these are not just delay tactics. Look, Boris, some of this is just the due process that is due in a defendant. And in that case, they've also argued, it takes time to go through the classified information. They have, as they've pointed out, a lot of legal cases they're working on, and they want to be given a reasonable amount of time to be able to serve their client.

So, I think, we're going to see a lot of the same arguments here in Fulton County. They're going to argue that they're going to make challenges to these cases. They're going to also argue that they have a lot of cases right now. They've argued this when we were down in front of Judge Aileen Cannon in the Mar-A-Lago documents case.

They just told her, they said, look, look at all the cases that we're working on. Look at how small our team is. We can't do this on such a tight timeline. Their strategy, their goal is to delay. But they also have some legitimate arguments that might be a really tight timeline, given the nature of this case, but also, all the other cases that are floating out there.

And Boris, because the former president is once again running for the White House, his status as a candidate, it is a consideration. Though, I will say the judge in the January 6 case, Judge Tanya Chutkan, I was in court with her last Friday. Boris, she made it clear, his status as a candidate does not impact that case for her and it will not impact any of her decisions.

So, look, they have a lot going on here. I can - I think we can expect to see a lot of similar arguments against this timeline that Fani Willis is requesting. But again, we'll give them a chance to speak for themselves as they respond in the coming days.

SANCHEZ: They have a lot going on here. It's a bit of an understatement for Trump's legal team.

Again, Paula Reid with the breaking news, Fani Willis aiming for an arraignment the week of September 5th, and a trial start date of March 4th 2024.

Paula Reid, Katelyn Polantz, thank you both so much.

Over to you, Jim.

SCIUTTO: We also have this just into CNN, a major court ruling on the availability - accessibility of the abortion pill mifepristone.

CNN's Joan Biskupic on the story.

Joan, as we watch this case, I remember when the first ruling came through on this a number of weeks ago, you and I spoke about it, a judge in Texas that ruling considered an outlier but now you have an appeals court upholding part of that decision?

JOAN BISKUPIC, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Yes, it's just part, Jim, but you're right.

This is the most important case involving abortion to hit the federal courts since the Supreme Court back in June of 2022 struck down abortion rights by rolling back Roe v Wade.

[15:20:06]

And what was at issue here was, as you said, a Texas judge, Matthew Kacsmaryk, last April had essentially suspended the food and drug approval of the abortion pill, mifepristone, that's been used by millions of American women since it was first approved by the FDA in 2000.

Just now, Jim, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, reviewing Judge Kacsmaryk's order has reversed a significant part of it. It reversed his suspension of the FDA approval that dates all the way back to the year 2000. But it did say that the judge was right in saying that some guidelines had gone into effect in 2016, that had made the drug more accessible to women, those would have to be rolled back.

But the one thing I want to caution viewers about right now is that nothing changes, because the US Supreme Court itself had in an earlier chapter of this new litigation over mifepristone had put on hold the lower court's ruling fully as the litigation plays out, so nothing will change.

But the important thing here is that we now have an appellate court judge ruling that, as you said, in some ways, impinges women's availability to the drug, if it were to take effect. But now this will go to the Supreme Court, if indeed, the group's appeal, which I anticipate they would, this has just come in, I haven't had a chance to talk to them.

But a group of anti-abortion physicians and medical groups were the group that brought the challenge to the FDA approval of mifepristone. And I anticipate that they would have tried to go all the way to the Supreme Court again.

And one of the things that I want to underscore here about the importance of this case, ever since the Supreme Court reversed Roe v. Wade, states have done - taken many steps to make it harder to get abortion, surgical abortion and many more women are using abortion medication ...

SCIUTTO: Yup.

BISKUPIC: ... and abortion medication, even without the option of surgical abortion had been the - had become ...

SCIUTTO: Yes.

BISKUPIC: ... a major way to end the pregnancy for women across America.

SCIUTTO: So let's slow down a little bit here because it's a lot for folks watching at home to absorb here.

BISKUPIC: Yes.

SCIUTTO: As you say nothing changes today, but this will likely be ...

BISKUPIC: Correct.

SCIUTTO: ... appealed to the Supreme Court, which by the way, just a year ago, reverse Roe v. Wade.

As I understand it, in this case, this gets to - to some degree, the FDA's ability to approve and the extent of its ability. And do I have it right that this ruling accepts that the FDA went too far in terms of who can prescribe this drug, is that right? Not just doctors, but also other medical professionals?

BISKUPIC: Okay. So, Jim, you're exactly right that it gets to the FDA authority to deem a drug safe and effective ...

SCIUTTO: Right.

BISKUPIC: ... and to also set various regulations for access to that drug who can prescribe whether telehealth can be used just exactly when it can be prescribed. And what the lower court said here is that, the original 2000 approval, it's not changing that, it's actually reversing ...

SCIUTTO: Okay.

BISKUPIC: ... what Judge Kacsmaryk, the lower court judge had said against that.

But you're right, what it's saying is the 2016 rules that had taken effect that would make the drug more available, would alter exactly who can prescribe it. Those, according, to at least this ruling, right now today by the Fifth Circuit based in New Orleans, those would be thrown into doubt, Jim.

SCIUTTO: Understood.

BISKUPIC: But again, this is not the last word on this litigation.

SCIUTTO: No question. Then there's a bigger issue is there not about agency's power more broadly, which is a highly - quite a lightning rod of an issue with conservative groups, is it not? Because that relates to that as well. Does the FDA or other agencies have such a great power on a whole host of decisions?

BISKUPIC: Jim, that's exactly right. We're not just talking about abortion medication, although obviously, that's so compelling at this moment, but it's the FDA's power to regulate a whole range of drugs ...

SCIUTTO: Right.

BISKUPIC: ... over diabetes, you just name - think of all the - falls right now under the FDA authority. And this would go to whether a federal judge or federal appeals court right now is able to curtail that FDA authority or whether the FDA authority will be read more broadly down the road when this actually ...

SCIUTTO: Understood.

BISKUPIC: ... reaches the U.S. Supreme Court, Jim.

[15:25:06]

SCIUTTO: A lot of impact and a lot of still open questions, but boy, it makes the Supreme Court certainly something to watch.

Joan Biskupic, thanks so much for breaking it down as you always do.

BISKUPIC: Thank you,

SCIUTTO: Boris?

SANCHEZ: Still ahead this hour on CNN NEWS CENTRAL, more than a hundred killed and hundreds still missing after the Maui wildfires. Loved ones now being asked to provide DNA samples as crews search for remains. We have a live report from the island just moments away.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[15:29:38]

SANCHEZ: President Biden is set to visit Maui on Monday to see for himself a wildlife catastrophe that has killed at least a hundred and six people. And CNN has obtained new footage that may shed light on how it started showing the possible first signs of trouble with power lines. A lawsuit claims that electric lines down by hurricane-forced winds ignited the flames in Lahaina ground zero for the devastation.

The video you are about to see was taken on another part of the island, in a town further inland the day before the catastrophe. It was shot at a bird sanctuary and after a few seconds you see this bright flash of white light. The video is actually paused. The camera then starts panning around and a few minutes later, you can see flames spotted in the distance and are highlighted here.