Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Today: House To Vote On Biden Impeachment Inquiry; Today: House To Vote On Biden Impeachment Inquiry; Rep. Jared Moskowitz (R-FL) Discusses About House Impeachment Inquiry On Joe Biden; Supreme Court To Decide Fate Of Key Abortion Pill "Mifepristone"; U.S. Natl Security Adviser To Hold "Extremely Serious" Talks With Israel About How Gaza is Being Conducted. Aired 3-3:30p ET

Aired December 13, 2023 - 15:00   ET

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

[15:00:04]

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN HOST: We're going to break down the wide-ranging impact that decision will have.

PAMELA BROWN, CNN HOST: And could drunk driving soon be a thing of the past? Federal Transportation officials are working on technology that would check if drivers have been drinking and then disable their car. How they plan to make the tech as standard as seatbelts?

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

Well, we are following the day-long clash on Capitol Hill over House Republicans' escalating probe into President Biden. A couple hours from now, the full House will vote on formalizing a Biden impeachment inquiry. The GOP's probe so far has failed to show any clear links between Biden and his son Hunter's questionable business dealings. Republicans think this resolution will give them more investigative leverage.

This morning, Hunter Biden showed up at the Capitol right outside, as you see right here, offering to testify publicly in the probe. But Republicans want a closed-door interview first. So now they say that they're going to pursue a contempt of Congress referral against Hunter Biden.

CNN's Manu Raju is following all of this.

Manu, you have been a busy man up there on Capitol Hill today. What do we expect to see in the coming hours?

MANU RAJU, CNN CHIEF CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: We do expect that the Republicans will get the votes to authorize this impeachment inquiry. In fact, the inquiry has been going on since September when then-Speaker of the House Kevin McCarthy unilaterally announced that this investigation would go forward.

They actually don't need a vote to authorize an inquiry, but Republicans are trying to show some forward momentum. They argue that they can have more power if this gets dragged out into court, as they're trying to get documents and try to enforce their subpoenas and the like. But the reality is that they want to show momentum. They want to show Republican unity behind the idea of an impeachment inquiry.

But what's clear in talking to so many Republican members is that there is not unity about whether Joe Biden should, in fact, be impeached because of the fact that they plainly acknowledge they do not have proof yet to show that Joe Biden acted corruptly on behalf of his son, to benefit his son Hunter Biden's business dealings. They say that that needs to be gathered during this impeachment probe.

Now, the Speaker of the House, Mike Johnson, believes that they do have the votes today to go ahead, and he made clear that this is an issue that he believes his party will get behind.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Speaker, do you think that you'll have all Republicans to vote for the impeachment inquiry today?

REP. MIKE JOHNSON (R-LA): I think it's going to pass. We're going over here.

RAJU: Are you worried about position of votes (inaudible) members?

JOHNSON: That's all I'm going to say about it right now.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Do you think Hunter Biden should have shown up today?

JOHNSON: I certainly do.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Do you think he should be deposed again?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Thank you.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

RAJU: And I asked him in there, do you have any concerns about the impacts that this vote may have on vulnerable members of Congress? He didn't address that specific questions and said it's all he had to say at the moment. But in talking to those same vulnerable members, they are saying that this is much different than impeachment. They're saying this is simply just an investigation in the days ahead.

But it's still a very significant move by the House to go down this road, because a lot of members say once you open the door to an impeachment inquiry, ultimately, you may charge the president with high crimes or misdemeanors, which has only happened to three other presidents in American history.

BROWN: That's right. So where do things stand with Hunter Biden? Contempt is on the table, but could there be more negotiations for testimony? What are you hearing?

RAJU: Yes, that is the threat right now by the House Oversight Chairman, Jim - James Comer along with Jim Jordan, the House Judiciary Committee chairman. They are indicating they plan to move ahead with contempt proceedings, but that is going to take some time to play out, Pamela, likely to stretch into the New Year. And then they would have to vote in the committee, vote in the full House, and then refer him to - for criminal - federal criminal charges.

And then, at that point, there had to be a decision being made by the U.S. Attorney about whether or not to charge Hunter Biden with contempt of the House. So - well, it's been happened before, it happened with other people who have defied subpoenas in the past. Will it happen again with Hunter Biden? That's a process that will take months and months to play out. Pamela?

BROWN: Yes, as we saw with Steve Bannon and Peter Navarro, the referral to them, charge, the trial and now that's still being appealed.

Manu Raju, thank you so much. Boris?

RAJU: Thanks.

SANCHEZ: So in just a few hours, House Republicans are expected to vote on their resolution to formalize this impeachment inquiry. Remember, House Speaker Kevin McCarthy unilaterally launched the inquiry back in September. So far, the probe has struggled to produce conclusive evidence of wrongdoing by the vice president. There's only been one hearing related to the inquiry since it launched.

And here's what one expert witnessed called by Republicans said there.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PROF. JONATHAN TURLEY, GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY LAW SCHOOL: I do not believe that the current evidence would support articles of impeachment. That is something that an inquiry has to establish.

BRUCE DUBINSKY, FORENSIC ACCOUNTANT: I'm not here today to even suggest that there was corruption, fraud or any wrongdoing. In my opinion more information needs to be gathered.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

[15:05:06]

BROWN: Nevertheless, last week's tax indictment of Hunter Biden emboldened Republicans, three felony charges there out of six total. They argue that today's vote is going to strengthen their legal standing against the White House and fortify their subpoenas of key witnesses.

Now, we want to dig into one of the central claims against Biden, that in 2016, as Vice President, he abused his powers to pressure Ukraine to fire this top prosecutor, Viktor Shokin. He was allegedly investigating the Ukrainian energy company Burisma and Hunter Biden, of course, served on the firm's board at the time. Republicans are arguing that Vice President Biden forced him out to protect his son. Now, the fact is, Biden did push for the prosecutor to be fired, but that was consistent with bipartisan U.S. policy at the time. Multiple Republican senators called for Shokin to be fired, including Senator Ron Johnson of Wisconsin.

Shokin's firing was also applauded by European Union allies, who saw it as a way to root out corruption in Ukraine. Even back in 2019, Donald Trump's own special envoy to Ukraine, Kurt Volker, testified that Shokin's firing was widely understood internationally to be the right policy. And this, David Holmes, a former diplomat in Ukraine testified that in his understanding, Shokin was not at that time pursuing investigations of Burisma or the Bidens.

This is just one example of why several Republican lawmakers have emphasized caution over the impeachment inquiry, believing that it could potentially backfire, while others are ready to go full steam ahead. Pam?

BROWN: All right. Thanks so much, Boris.

So for more on this, we're joined by Democratic congresswoman of the Oversight Committee, Jared Moskowitz of Florida.

Congressman, the impeachment inquiry resolution is expected to pass. What are you hearing from some of your moderate Republican colleagues on this vote?

REP. JARED MOSKOWITZ (R-FL): Well, listen, I think they're making a grave mistake. I've talked to some of them, but they're afraid of Donald Trump. This is what Donald Trump has demanded of the Republican Party. He has 50 percent of the nation's impeachments in American history, and he's got a hundred percent of the indictments. All hundred percent of the indictments in American history are against Donald Trump and Joe Biden has none of those.

And so they're trying to run up the score. And so, look, this is going to rally Democrats and I think Independents around the president to see them do an impeachment with no evidence. Chuck Grassley, who's leading the investigation, Sen. Chuck Grassley is leading the investigation in Senate, came out today and said there is no evidence, based on everything they've seen.

All of the tens of thousands of documents that have been turned over by the Biden administration, something the Trump administration did not do in their investigations. Their - the Chairman Comer's own witness, the Republicans' own constitutional witness in committee said of everything we know, there's no evidence to impeach Joe Biden. It doesn't rise to the level of high crimes and misdemeanors.

BROWN: And, of course, Republicans argue that they're not getting what they're asking for from the White House. That's why they need to formalize this to give them more tools as part of their legitimate oversight.

MOSKOWITZ: Yes. BROWN: That's what they argue.

MOSKOWITZ: But that's - yes, but that's nonsense. Why do you think Chairman Comer brought reporters into the room to see the boxes, and boxes, and boxes and boxes of documents that they've assembled? Where do you think they got those documents from?

You can't claim that you're not getting compliance when you have 50,000 pages of documents that have been turned over to you. You've done a half a dozen depositions. You've taken all of this other testimony. You've held hearings. You've brought government witnesses in during those hearings.

And so they have gotten tremendous compliance from the White House. The problem is the evidence doesn't show that Joe Biden did anything wrong. And so, look, the chairman has worked very hard at trying to convince the American people that Joe Biden did anything wrong. And quite frankly, I think the only thing the chairman has discovered after all of this evidence that has been produced is that Hunter Biden is the son of Joe Biden.

BROWN: So do you think that articles of impeachment here are just a foregone conclusion, no matter what this probe turns up?

Well, that's where my moderate Republican friends are thinking a mistake. I mean, what do they think is going to happen? They think Marjorie Taylor Greene is going to be satisfied with just an inquiry, right? Does she - do they think that the Freedom Caucus is going to be satisfied?

No. As soon as they take this vote, they're going to be beating the drum every single solitary day to bring those articles of impeachment. And so, look, the 118th Congress isn't a historic Congress, right? This is what they're going to be known for. They're going to be known for expelling a member. They're going to be known for removing their own speaker. And they're going to be known for doing this impeachment. That's what they're going to be known for, not a single real accomplishment.

[15:10:00]

When Israel needs aid, when Ukraine needs our help, when our allies are looking to see if the United States can deliver on their promises, when we got issues to try to solve around this country for the American family, to try to find middle ground on the border, my Republican colleagues are too busy doing this fake impeachment inquiry.

And by the way, to show you how serious they are about this impeachment inquiry, as soon as they take the vote, they're going to run out of town for three weeks. They're going to leave. They're literally going to go away.

So this is so serious, it's so important for the country. The evidence is so overwhelming that they're going to vote and run. BROWN: I want to ask you about Hunter Biden, because, as you know, he was subpoenaed to come today and sit for a closed-door deposition. He came to the Hill, he made some remarks outside of the Capitol building and said that he wouldn't sit for a closed-door deposition, that he wanted to do a public hearing.

Now, Republicans are saying that they're going to pursue contempt of Congress and refer it potentially to the Department of Justice. Do you think he should have complied with the subpoena?

MOSKOWITZ: Well, listen, Chairman Comer on national television several times said Hunter Biden needs to testify, and he can either come sit for a deposition or come to a hearing of his choosing. Those are the chairman's own words. So, Hunter Biden called his bluff and said, no problem, Mr. Chairman. I will come to a public hearing. I know that caught the chairman off guard. I'm sure the chairman regrets his invitation.

But this is the first instance in which we have a witness taking the chairman up on his invitation to testify publicly. Transparency, right, for it to be transparent in front of the cameras, for Hunter to tell his side of the story and answer all of the questions.

Remember, Republicans control the committees. They control the rules in committees. They can keep Hunter there for 10 hours in front of the cameras. And now, the chairman is scared of Hunter Biden. He's running away. And what he's going to do, he's going to try to hold someone in contempt who's trying to come and testify publicly.

Look, Hunter, obviously has been indicted. There are some things he's got to deal with. And if the - if he's found guilty, he'll have to deal with those penalties, right? Democrats believe in justice. We believe in the rule of law for Donald Trump. We believe in the rule of law for Hunter Biden.

But the idea that they're going to try to hold someone in contempt who wants to testify in front of the American people, just shows you the chaos Congress that we currently serve in.

BROWN: All right. Congressman Jared Moskowitz, thanks for coming on.

MOSKOWITZ: Thank you.

BROWN: And coming up, the Supreme Court is waiting back into the abortion rights debate. We're going to break down the case that involves one of the most common abortion methods.

Plus, the families of American hostages believed to be held by Hamas just met with President Biden. What are we learning about that meeting and the push to get hostage negotiations back on track? We're going to tell you about that after this break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[15:16:56]

BROWN: The Supreme Court is set to take on the first major abortion case since the landmark ruling that overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022.

SANCHEZ: Now, the conservative-leaning court will decide whether to impose nationwide restrictions on the commonly used abortion pill Mifepristone. The FDA-approved medication has been used by millions of women over the last two decades.

BROWN: CNN's Paula Reid is here to explain. I mean, this is huge. This is probably one of the biggest cases of the term, right?

PAULA REID, CNN CHIEF LEGAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: Absolutely, and could have consequences for the presidential election. Because here, once again, you have the conservative-leaning court jumping into the abortion issue less than a year after they overturned Roe v. Wade, which completely changed the abortion access landscape in this country.

Now, a decision would likely come by July, which is right in the middle of the presidential election cycle. And we know, since Roe was overturned, abortion has been a really hot issue on the campaign trail.

Now, here specifically, we're talking about access to the most commonly used abortion medication, Mifepristone, that when used with another drug, it accounts for a significant number of abortions in the United States.

Now, some lower courts have tried to restrict access to Mifepristone. Right now, those decisions are on hold, while the Supreme Court looks at this issue of the nationwide access. Now, this drug has been approved by the FDA for 23 years. They approved it back in 2000, and in the past few years, they've actually made it more accessible. You can now get it through telemedicine appointments. You can even get it delivered by mail.

But opponents, abortion rights opponents, have argued that the FDA did not sufficiently vet its safety here and didn't adequately account for risks when they made it more accessible. Now, some people have said that that's just a Trojan horse to further restrict abortion nationwide, but this, as you said, Pamela, this is going to be one of the biggest cases of the term, so definitely one to watch. And repercussions potentially for people across the country, but a couple of people in particular, those presidential candidates, because this is going to bring abortion right back to the forefront, no matter what they decide.

BROWN: Yes, we saw how it galvanized voters after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade. So how could this impact people living in states where abortion is still legal?

REID: It's so fascinating, because right now it's accessible nationwide, but we have to see what they decide, because they're looking at this as a nationwide issue. Now, it's possible they could couch it, sort of like they have with the states' rights argument, but it'll be one to watch. But, I mean, the idea that they would restrict this nationwide, that would certainly be a significant ruling. And, again, this has consequences not just for U.S. citizens, but for this election. I mean, this is something that could really impact the outcome of the 2024 election.

BROWN: Yes, it certainly could. And, as you know, Justice Alito, in his opinion of returning Roe v. Wade, so much of it was about states' rights.

REID: Yes.

BROWN: And so, I think that's something we'll be looking at, too, if this, however they rule on this, aligns with kind of what the argument was there.

REID: Absolutely. It's shaping up to be a huge term at the Supreme Court.

[15:20:02]

They're taking up this, right? It deals with regulation. It deals with abortion. They have the big - the special counsel. I mean, for, again, for the legal nerds over here on this ...

BROWN: Yes.

REID: ... are you a legal nerd, too, Boris? I don't know.

SANCHEZ: I dabble.

REID: A dabble - you dabble.

SANCHEZ: From time to time, yes.

REID: Join us. It's (inaudible) to join us.

BROWN: (Inaudible) a legal nerd is like (inaudible) ...

REID: All right. This is going to be a huge term.

BROWN: Mm-hm. Yes.

REID: In this case, the fact that they granted this, I mean, this is definitely going to be one of the marquee cases this year.

BROWN: Definitely. You're going to be a very - one busy lady, Paula. Thanks.

SANCHEZ: Thanks so much, Paula.

So this just in to CNN, the White House says that U.S. National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan will conduct extremely serious conversations with Israeli officials during his visit to the country this week. This as the United States is looking to press Israel to conduct a more surgical campaign against Hamas.

The Hamas-controlled health ministry in Gaza says more than 18,600 people have been killed there since October 7th. More than 50,000 have been injured and that there have been more than 327,000 cases of infectious diseases documented. Joining us now is Avril Benoit, Executive Director of Doctors Without Borders-USA.

Avril, thank you so much for being with us this afternoon. Talk to us about the latest conditions that your staff is seeing in Gaza, especially with mounting reports of infectious disease.

AVRIL BENOIT, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, DOCTORS WITHOUT BORDERS-USA: Yes, the infectious disease situation is galling because, of course, in a context of a total siege where people lack medicine, they lack drinking water, clean water. We are seeing an increase in skin rashes, skin diseases, lice, things that are exacerbated by the unhygienic conditions. We're seeing a lot of diarrhea. We are seeing fevers. It's all related to the kinds of inhumane living conditions that people find themselves in.

SANCHEZ: The World Health Organization is reporting that less than a third of hospitals in Gaza are functional right now. How are your doctors prioritizing the care that they provide?

BENOIT: It's a horrific situation because the few hospitals that are functioning are sometimes surrounded by tanks. Sometimes there's sniper fire all around them. Just on Monday at Al-Awda Hospital, one of our doctors was shot and injured from the outside. So, a bullet piercing the hospital and here is somebody who's at the bedside of patients. We've had colleagues killed. We've had colleagues unable to move because of all the violence and the fighting.

And so what happens in the hospitals also is that people who are there are unable to receive care because even the medical staff cannot always reach the hospital in due time when they're coming and going between, checking in on their families and so forth.

In the hospitals themselves, it's a continuing catastrophic situation. Too many patients, insufficiency of medicine, not enough space. A lot of people sheltering in hospitals, still no water, no food, and a lot of things are going on outside of the hospitals as well.

In the last month, we estimate that there are 5,500 newborns, babies born in these kinds of horrible conditions, often in the rubble or in the camps. And the pregnant and lactating mothers lack enough nutrition. So they are famished, they're thirsty, they are getting sick and unable to look after these newborns through breastfeeding. And of course, there aren't any other options because of the total siege.

So all in all, a completely catastrophic situation, which is all the more reason for the entire humanitarian community to be calling, as we have, strong and loud for a ceasefire.

SANCHEZ: Avril, you mentioned one of the surgeons being hit. Your organization says they believe it was by sniper fire. I'm wondering what your response is to the IDF who argue that they only operate in and around hospitals that are being used by Hamas and other armed groups. What's your response?

BENOIT: Well, time and again, they make these allegations without offering substantial proof or any evidence to convince those who are observing, collective punishment of civilians in Gaza, indiscriminate attacks on medical facilities that are full of patients, full of medical staff, and, of course, should be protected because attacking a hospital is a violation of humanitarian law. It's a war crime.

And so if there is evidence, let us see it. We do not see it. So consistently, our staff are just trying to do the work of saving lives, relieving the suffering without anesthesia, without painkillers, without medicines, doing the best they can. And all these allegations, frankly, are a diversion.

[15:25:00]

And it's not something that we can corroborate at all. We don't see it. What we see are hospitals that are full of sick and injured people and a lot of people who require reconstructive surgery, follow-up care, long-term post-operative care, management of infections.

Right now, we have so many people that are coming in and declared dead upon arrival because there's just so little health care. And, of course, this is one of the great objections that we've been screaming about is that people have a right to receive health care in a conflict.

We're used to working in conflict zones. And for the life of us, we cannot understand why such cruelty, such outrageous cruelty towards civilians who have the right to be able to seek health care and receive it. So for us, the ceasefire and then the consistent votes by the United States, votes against humanity at the United Nations on a couple of occasions over the last few days is so disappointing, because what - we need that ceasefire to be able to deliver aid, reduce the suffering, reduce the killing.

SANCHEZ: Avril Benoit, we have to leave the conversation there. Appreciate you sharing your perspective.

BENOIT: Thank you.

SANCHEZ: More news just in to CNN. The White House has indicated that President Joe Biden received a heads-up before Hunter Biden's statement to the press outside the U.S. Capitol earlier today. Here is White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre being asked about this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KARINE JEAN-PIERRE, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: Look, the President was certainly familiar with what his son was going to say. And I think what you saw was from the heart from his son. And you've heard me say this, you've heard the President say this, when it comes to the President and First Lady, they are proud of him continuing to rebuild his life. They are proud of their son.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)