Return to Transcripts main page
CNN News Central
Hunter Biden Shocks By Attending And Leaving Contempt Hearing; Trump Leads In Iowa, DeSantis And Haley Battle For Second; Trump Barred From Speaking In Fraud Trial Drama; Blinken Urges Israeli- Palestinian Cooperation Amid Conflict; Georgia D.A. Faces Controversy Over Alleged Improper Relationship; Ecuador Gripped By Violence Surge: Masked Gunmen Disrupt Live TV. Aired 2-2:30p ET
Aired January 10, 2024 - 14:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[14:01:19]
BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN HOST: A political circus on Capitol Hill. Hunter Biden's stunning lawmakers as he shows up unannounced at an oversight committee contempt hearing. Absolute chaos ensues. We're live from the Hill with the latest. Face-off in Des Moines. Ron DeSantis and Nikki Haley going toe-to-toe in Iowa just five days before the caucuses. Their political futures may be at stake, but can they shrink the gap with frontrunner Donald Trump enough to stay in the race?
BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN HOST: And even as we see temperatures rise and the threat from climate change grow, there is some good news about pollution in the United States. We're following these major developing stories and many more all coming in right here to CNN News Central.
KEILAR: All right, thank you for joining us. I'm Brianna Keiler alongside Boris Sanchez today here in Washington. And there is drama here in the nation's capital today. Hunter Biden in the spotlight on the Hill. The president's son shocking lawmakers and really pretty much everyone this morning by showing up unexpectedly to sit in the audience during his own contempt of Congress hearing. Several minutes later, he departed the hearing while it was still in progress.
Biden quietly listened to some of the contentious squabbling among members of the House Oversight Committee. Republican lawmakers, remember, subpoenaed him late last year to testify in a court hearing. A closed-door deposition as part of an impeachment inquiry into his father. Hunter Biden has said he will only testify in public. Democrats in the hearing room this morning urged Republicans to let him speak right then and there. But Biden and his team abruptly got up and left when Republican Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene began speaking.
CNN's Melanie Zanona following the latest on Capitol Hill. We also have CNN's MJ Lee at the White House with that angle of all of this. Melanie, first to you. How are lawmakers reacting? How are Republicans reacting to this surprise, unexpected appearance?
MELANIE ZANONA, CNN CAPITOL HILL REPORTER: Well, I can tell you that Republicans and Democrats alike on the House Oversight Committee were completely surprised by this appearance today from Hunter Biden. But that is pretty much where the similarities end in terms of their reactions. Democrats, for their part, welcomed Hunter Biden's appearance. They said this shows that if Republicans really wanted to hear from the president's son, that they had the opportunity to do so today.
And that is a point that Hunter Biden himself and his legal team have made over and over again. They said he would testify. They said he would testify publicly under oath. But he just does not want to sit for a closed-door deposition because he's worried that Republicans would selectively or cherry-pick, selectively leak his testimony. Now, Republicans have pushed back.
They said that's not how congressional subpoenas work, that he doesn't get to dictate the terms of his appearance. And they requested and demanded that he sit down for a closed-door deposition back in December. So his appearance today created even more drama and political theatrics. It led to some really tense moments. Really, Republicans saw this surprise appearance as nothing more than a political stunt. Let's listen.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
REP. JIM JORDAN, CHAIRMAN OF F THE JUDICIRY COMMITTEE (R): I think it shows just more how blatant the contempt is. It's like, I'll tell you, I'll show you. So, I think it just displays even, you know, just the fact that he was supposed to be here on December 13th in a deposition and goes to the Capitol grounds and says, I'm willing to answer any question publicly. And then leaves when the press wants to ask him questions. I think it just shows. Just how blatant and brazen the contempt is.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ZANONA: Now, that voice you heard just there, that was Jim Jordan. He is the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, which is also currently considering a resolution to hold Hunter Biden in contempt of Congress. So, the expectation here is that both the House Oversight Committee and House Judiciary Committee will sometime this afternoon approve those contempt resolutions.
[14:05:09]
It will then head to the House floor where we're expecting it could get a vote as soon as next week. After that, though, it is up to the DOJ to determine whether they're actually going to prosecute the president's son. But really just a remarkable moment here on Capitol Hill today as we saw this showdown between congressional Republicans and the president's son.
SANCHEZ: Melanie Zanona on Capitol Hill. Lets go to the White House now with MJ Lee. MJ, we heard from Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre in the last hour, and she would not answer directly as to whether the White House knew that Hunter Biden was going to show up on Capitol Hill today. MJ LEE, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Yeah, that's right,
Boris. The White House had really been quiet all day long about this issue since we saw Hunter Biden on Capitol Hill. And I'm just coming out of that briefing where, as you said, the White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre fielded a number of questions about Hunter Biden's appearance on the Hill, including that question of whether the White House had been given any kind of heads up that he would be doing this. And multiple times she declined to answer that question, saying that Hunter Biden is a private citizen and referring any detailed questions to his own legal team.
Something that I pushed Karine on was just this idea that the president's son has pulled this stunt of his own. When the White House has consistently said that everything related to the impeachment inquiry, which obviously has everything to do with the president's son, has been a political stunt. That's something that the White House Press Secretary wouldn't engage on either. This is sort of an interesting difference from the last time that we saw Hunter Biden on Capitol Hill, when he, instead of sitting down for a deposition, decided to give a press conference instead and made this impassioned speech trying to separate out his own father, President Biden, from his own legal troubles.
At the time, you might remember that White House officials said that had been forceful. And that the president himself had been given a heads up that he would be giving those remarks. But obviously today, the White House, much more tight-lipped and really not engaging on, again, multiple questions that they got at the White House press briefing. I can tell you for sure, there are many other things that the White House would rather be talking about, would rather be getting questions about, particularly given this moment in time that we are now in the calendar year 2024, the re-elect campaign.
The election is just around the corner. This is certainly a tough issue for them and a very sensitive issue for this White House, anything related to the president's son. One question that a colleague of mine just asked in the briefing was whether this was a political headache for the White House. That's not a question that Karine Jean- Pierre would answer either. Guys.
SANCHEZ: MJ Lee, she may not answer it, but it seems like we might have an inkling as to what the answer actually is. Thanks so much, MJ. We do have some breaking news in Donald Trump's New York civil fraud trial. Sources tell CNN that the former president had discussions with Judge Engoron on allowing Trump to speak in his defense during closing arguments tomorrow.
KEILAR: That's right. But we've now learned that the judge does not expect Trump to speak in the court because Trump failed to comply with the preconditioned terms by the deadline. He wouldn't agree to them. This is what we've learned. His attorney said he would not agree to them. CNN's Kara Scannell with us now. Tell us about this. What were these terms and why wouldn't the former president agree to them?
KARA SCANNELL, CNN CORRESPONDENT: So, Brianna and Boris, this was a highly unusual request to begin with that the former president wanted to speak as part of his team's closing arguments in the case. And the judge said that, you know, it wasn't usual, but he would allow Trump to do it because he had the most to lose in this case. And it's not before a jury. The judge himself will make the final decision in this. So, he said Trump can do it, but he has to comply with the order, which is he has to make closing arguments. He can't testify. He can't try to introduce new evidence. He can't start campaigning. And he can't just start talking about irrelevant matters. And he said he wants Trump to agree to that before he starts speaking in court as well as in advance.
And so Trump's team came back and said that Trump wouldn't agree to that because he shouldn't be restricted in saying what he wants to say. Now, if you remember when Trump testified, he went off script. He started speaking, essentially turning the campaign, the witness stand into a podium where he was campaigning. And the judge had to try to rein him in, telling Trump's attorney, then you need to control your client or I will. So, the judge saying if Trump won't agree to these terms, he's going to cut him off. He's not going to let him speak. And if he violates his gag order, he's going to have him escorted out of the courtroom and find no less than $50,000.
So, Trump's team saying that he would not agree to these terms. And the judge having extended this deadline for them several times because they were having some issue getting in contact with Trump. He said ultimately take it or leave it now or never. Trump's team had until noon today to respond.
[14:10:09]
So, at 12.12, the judge had informed Trump's team by email that he was not going, -- he's not expecting him now to speak because he did not agree to comply with these terms. We have not heard anything officially from the Trump camp in terms of whether they're going to try to reopen this. But Trump's attorney, Alina Habba, said, is anyone surprised anymore? They have already signaled that they're going to appeal this decision. Boris, Brianna.
SANCHEZ: Kara Scannell, thanks so much for that reporting. Let's get some analysis now with CNN senior political analyst Ron Brownstein and CNN legal analyst and former federal prosecutor Elliot Williams. All right, Elliot, what do you make of this move by the judge in the Trump case?
ELLIOT WILLIAMS, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: On the one hand, it's bad for the judge to first say that he was going to allow something and then not. But it would have turned this trial into a circus. Now, the judge was absolutely right in wanting to limit what someone can say at closing arguments. Closing arguments are meant to sum up the evidence that has been seen. Not provide a political speech and turn what would have certainly been a somewhat somber occasion, maybe not the right word, --
(CROSSTALK)
KEILAR: Serious. It supposed to be serious. WILLIAMS: but serious, -- it supposed to be serious and would have turned into a political speech and declaring war on the deep state and all of the above. So it was the right decision to do. Why -- what circumstances there would have been for someone who is already represented by competent counsel to give his own crazy closing statement would have been is beyond me.
SANCHEZ: Outside, Ron, the likelihood that Trump wanted to use this as a as a platform to give what amounts to a campaign speech. I mean, he has said that he's going to appeal this decision. So legally in the process, what justification other than campaign motives would there be for Trump to seek this?
RON BROWNSTEIN, CNN SENIOR POLITCAL ANALYST: Well, as Elliot said, I mean, you know, what would be the argument on a legal, you know, from a legal point of view, there really is no argument for doing this yourself when you have competent counsel. And it is, you know, just another day in what has been a very successful strategy for him in the context of a Republican primary, you know, basically saying that all of these indictments against him are politically motivated and they're going after me because they really want to silence you.
It just has to be underlined again and again that polling sends a very different signal about how all of this may play in a general election. And there are still, I think, consistently in polls, a majority. There's a majority of Americans who are concerned about Trump's action and who are reluctant to, you know, elect someone who may face the kind of legal judgments that he's facing, even amid all the discontent we know about Biden. So, in some ways, Boris, I mean, he may be trying to squeeze too much juice out of the lemon by highlighting these when he is already in such a strong position in the Republican primary. It's not as clear to me that keeping the focus on this is as nearly as beneficial for him in a general election.
KEILAR: That's really, that's a really important point. interesting point. Okay, now to the drama today in Washington. Hunter Biden showing up to be in the audience of his own contempt hearing, sort of this wait, what is happening right now moment this morning? But does this help him, Elliot, legally try to avoid prosecution by the DOJ for ultimately not testifying?
WILLIAMS: I don't think it helps or hurts, and here's why. The crime of contempt is for an individual who's aware of a subpoena and knowingly violates it, and the case right now against Hunter Biden for contempt isn't so strong only because there have been negotiations with him, now a lot of it in the press and a lot of it at these sort of silly press conferences, but he's still agreeing to appear. Compare this to some of the last high-profile ones we've seen. Number one, Steve Bannon, former aide to former President Trump, who declared war from the moment the subpoena came out, and he was charged with contempt and ultimately convicted.
Compare that to Mark Meadows, White House President. Chief of Staff, who actually did, despite what people think about him, go back and forth with Congress, provide some documents, and at least attempt to appear. He was not charged and not convicted. So, it's just not, because of these efforts, some of them being made in letters and in comments by Hunter Biden, it's just not as strong a case as it is with some others.
SANCHEZ: You're skeptical that the DOJ would prosecute him for contempt of crimes?
WILLIAMS: But again, not because of some vast political bias against prosecuting him, just the case simply does not, it's more in the Mark Meadows realm than the Steve Bannon realm. And I think just right now, it doesn't appear that charges are likely.
SANCHEZ: And yet, to Ron, it strikes me that Republicans will likely use it to argue that there is an unbalanced system of justice, that they'll argue that it's unfair that DOJ didn't prosecute Hunter Biden for this.
BROWNSTEIN: Yeah, well, I mean, but as Elliot points out, they did prosecute Bannon and Peter Navarro, and there are others who are not prosecuted. Look, I think the right word is the one that you used before in talking about this. This is a headache for the White House, but ultimately, it is a sideshow. I mean, Joe Biden has, you know, serious issues with inflation and people worrying that he's too old. But there are, it's hard to imagine there are a large amount of voters out there who would otherwise vote for Joe Biden, but would not because of Hunter Biden's activities.
[14:15:09]
You know, even questionable as some of them may have been about kind of like many in Washington, trying to emphasize his proximity to powerful people to, you know, promote his own his own business interests. I think the Republican goal here, I think, is not so much even to weaken Biden, President Biden through Hunter Biden, as it is to create some kind of equivalency through all of the legal troubles facing Trump.
I mean, I really I think it's just another manifestation of how far they will go in every possible direction to defend Trump's interests. And I think in this case, it's just to kind of create as much dust as possible around the idea of they all do it. KEILAR: There is some clear hypocrisy on this idea of a congressional subpoena. It should mean something, Elliot.
WILLIAMS: Yes.
KEILAR: Right. But we hear Jim Jordan talking to our Melanie Zanona and he's saying this is blatant contempt. And it's like, dude, you defied -- a member of Congress and you defied a congressional subpoena to talk about clearly something that you should have talked about.
WILLIAMS: Jim Jordan himself, now the chair of the House Judiciary Committee, but also many members of the Trump administration themselves. Wilbur Ross, the former Commerce Secretary, just didn't show up to a hearing. There was a long pattern of blowing off congressional subpoenas. And so, this idea that all of a sudden Congress has this power that Hunter Biden is fighting is just is simply not the case. So you got it.
KEILAR: Yeah. It's just a shame sort of where we are, that it means nothing.
(CROSSTALK)
WILLIAMS: And again, that's politics. They go back and forth and they can. There's hypocrisy all the time. But specifically on this issue where there's law and past conduct and precedent, particularly from the chair of the committee, it's sort of silly right now.
SANCHEZ: Ron Bronstein, Elliot Williams, appreciate the conversation.
BROWNSTEIN: Thanks for having me.
SANCHEZ: Of course. Still ahead, we're hours away from the CNN Republican debate in Iowa. How coming in a strong second in the caucuses could propel Nikki Haley or Ron DeSantis. We're going to break down those numbers.
KEILAR: Plus, Secretary of State Antony Blinken urging Israel to work with Palestinians on a path to statehood. We're going to speak live with a senior advisor to the Israeli prime minister who has been very much opposed to that about what comes next in the war with Hamas. And new reporting on the Georgia district attorney who is spearheading the racketeering case against Donald Trump. Why she is in the spotlight for an alleged improper relationship with a lawyer she hired.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[14:20:01]
KEILAR: Tonight on CNN, Governor Ron DeSantis and Nikki Haley going to take the stage. This stage that you see here in live pictures coming to us from Drake University at Des Moines, Iowa. They will take the stage for this primary debate just days ahead of the Iowa caucuses. They'll be going one on one with frontrunner Donald Trump once again qualifying to be there, but again, a no show.
SANCHEZ: Kind of an absence that these two candidates should be used to by now. Certainly, something that Iowa Republicans are used to. Trump has yet to debate, but he's only gained in polls in Iowa. The margins do matter, though. So whatever the candidates are asked tonight, the big question is, can they? Can they cut into Donald Trump's lead with five days left? Let's discuss with CNN senior data reporter Harry Enten. Harry, how high are the expectations for Trump in the Hawkeye state? How big a lead are we anticipating?
HARRY ENTEN, CNN SENIOR DATA REPORTER: They are sky high, to be perfectly honest with you. I mean, if you got in a 737 and went all the way up to 35,000 feet, you wouldn't even reach the expectations for Donald Trump. I mean, look at this lead that he had during the month of December. Now, I'm going to be interested to see what the polling looks like that comes out just before the caucuses.
But he was at 54 percent of the vote. Had an over 30 point advantage over Ron DeSantis, who was back at 20 percent. Nikki Haley at 15 percent. As you pointed out, Boris, his lead has only gotten larger. And to put this into a historical context, which, you know, I love to do, look back at the biggest winners in Iowa caucus history on the GOP side. Bob Dole had the largest win ever at just 13 points. George W. Bush at 11 points. Mike Huckabee at nine points. Of course, Donald Trump right now is ahead by 34 points on average. So, he is well ahead of anybody else in history. Of course, we're just going to have to wait and see what actually happens in those caucuses.
KEILAR: Yeah, I mean, I don't know if anyone has ever wanted to be a silver medalist more than going into these caucuses. Explain, Harry, why it's so crucial for DeSantis to be that silver medalist.
ENTEN: Yeah, you know, oftentimes you want to go for the gold, although I like the bronze. But these folks are going for the silver. Why is Ron DeSantis interested in getting this? Because the fact of the matter is, if he can't do well in Iowa, where can he do well? He's polling at just 5% in New Hampshire. In fifth place, he was behind not just Haley, Trump, but he was behind Christie and Vivek Ramaswamy. South Carolina, he's just at 13% in third place. Nationally, he's just at 11% tied for second. Iowa is his best state, perhaps outside of the state of Florida. So, if he can't win in Iowa, I think there's going to be some real questions about whether or not he can actually, actually stay in the race. So for Ron DeSantis, Iowa is really important. That silver medal, although not gold, is really, really important.
SANCHEZ: What about Nikki Haley? Is a second place finish in Iowa still a possibility for her?
ENTEN: Yeah, it's absolutely possible. I mean, she was only five points behind Ron DeSantis in that last poll. And in fact, if you listen to some of the reports on the ground, she's in fact been surging. And, you know, I want to give you an idea of why that silver medal for Nikki Haley is so important. And if you look, historically speaking, look at the people who closed the biggest polling deficits in the state of New Hampshire. It was those who outperformed their Iowa polls.
And, of course, that's Gary Hart back in 84. He came in second in Iowa, yet had a massive surge and came in first in New Hampshire. Pat Buchanan came in second in Iowa, but again, outperformed his Iowa polls and had a massive surge and came in first in New Hampshire. John Kerry also had a massive Iowa surge and actually came in first in Iowa. And then first in New Hampshire.
[14:25:19]
At this particular point, Nikki Haley is below 20 percent in Iowa. So, the idea is essentially, okay, can I outperform my polls there and then perhaps turn it around and do well in New Hampshire? And keep in mind, remember, we spoke about that New Hampshire poll yesterday, guys. And what did we see in New Hampshire? We saw that Nikki Haley was down, but she was only down by seven points.
And there is plenty of history of folks overcoming deficits as large as Nikki Haley's at this point. Gary Harden, 84, Pat Buchanan, 96, John Kerry in 04, who, of course, went on to win the nomination, and the same for John McCain in 2008. So, Nikki Haley has a lot to gain by coming in silver. She wants to get that silver, knock DeSantis out of the race, and then perhaps go on to New Hampshire and then maybe go on to South Carolina or home state and win there. So, there's a road for Nikki Haley. Ron DeSantis, Iowa could get a little scary for him.
KEILAR: That was a bunch of pictures of people who are never president.
SANCHEZ: Precisely. Yeah, maybe a historical precedent there, but not president.
ENTEN: That is true, --
(CROSSTALK)
KEILAR: Silver medalists.
ENTEN: -- but they did win nominations. Two of them did anyway.
SANCHEZ: Fair. Fair enough. Harry Enten.
KEILAR: Better than nothing.
ENTEN: Better than nothing.
SANCHEZ: Appreciate the breakdown. Thanks so much.
ENTEN: Thank you.
SANCHEZ: Still ahead on News Central, a living nightmare. Masked gunmen storming a live TV broadcast as gang attacks and kidnappings terrorize the country. What we're learning about this wave of violence gripping Ecuador.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
