Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Judge Threatens To Kick Trump Out Of Court For Audible Comments; Trump's History Of Leaning Into Racist Rhetoric; Biden Meeting With Lawmakers As Govt Shutdown Days Away; Rep. Ralph Norman (R-SC) Discusses About Spending, Border Security And Deals. Aired 3- 3:30p ET

Aired January 17, 2024 - 15:00   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[15:01:05]

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN HOST: Donald Trump back in federal court, reacting physically and verbally to testimony from the woman who won a sexual abuse case against him, so much so the judge threatening to kick him out of the courtroom. We're getting new details from the courtroom as E. Jean Carroll retakes the stand.

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN HOST: And when it comes to the 2024 race, former president, Trump, is going after Nikki Haley by invoking her birth name. We'll show you how this tactic echoes racist dog whistles that he's used against other opponents in the past.

And King Charles heading to the hospital soon for treatment. This as we learn that the Princess of Wales, Kate Middleton, could be in the hospital for weeks after undergoing surgery. The Palace releasing very few details on this.

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

SANCHEZ: So today, Donald Trump has been in federal court, hearing hours of testimony from E. Jean Carroll in a second civil defamation case. A previous jury already found Trump liable for the sexual abuse and defamation of Carroll. Trump's attorneys are now cross-examining her.

KEILAR: She has already testified that Trump's defamatory remarks ruined her reputation, that they made her fear for her life. And during parts of that testimony, Donald Trump, the defendant, reacted physically and also verbally. This actually prompted the judge to warn him multiple times. And the judge even threatened to kick him out of the court.

We have CNN's Kara Scannell who is outside the courthouse.

Kara, Trump apparently acting out there in the courtroom and now going at the judge on social media.

KARA SCANNELL, CNN REPORTER: Yes, Boris and Brianna, it's been a tense day inside this courtroom. E. Jean Carroll has been on the stand for hours telling her story saying, as you said, that Donald Trump's actions denying her rape allegations, saying she wasn't his type and that she made up the story for money helped shatter her life.

And it was when she first said that shatter her life, we saw the first physical reaction by the former president, who is sitting there just two tables away from her, looking straight ahead. And we saw him shake his head side to side as if to say no. Then throughout her testimony, as she's describing the threat she received, people saying that she should die. Trump is leaning over, talking frequently to his attorney.

It was at one of these breaks with the jury out of the room that a lawyer for Carroll brought up this communication saying that where they were sitting, they could hear words such as witch hunt, and it really is a con job and they were concerned that the jury could hear it.

Now, initially, the judge had given Trump a warning. Then after a second break, just before lunch, Carroll's lawyers brought it up again. And this is when the judge said to Donald Trump, they're facing each other. He looked at him and said that Trump has a right to be here, but that right can be forfeited if he is disruptive, saying, "I hope I don't have to consider excluding you for that."

Trump threw his hands up in the air. The judge saying to him: "I understand you're eager for me to do that," to remove him from the trial. And Trump said audibly, "I would love it." The judge saying, "I know you would."

Then they broke for lunch. Everything kind of simmered down. Trump returned after the lunch break, and he's been in there listening to Carroll continue her testimony. She was talking about some of the things that happened to her after the verdict last year, where that other jury found that Trump had defamed her, saying that she would still receive a flurry of messages from people, from strangers, threatening her, saying that they wish she would die.

So testifying that the harm that Trump had made through these statements is continuing even up to this trial. The - her attorney showed a post on social media where Trump was referencing Carroll, saying that she was a liar. And as you said, Trump today, between those lunch break, after he had this exchange with the judge, posted on his social media platform about the judge saying that he was biased and that he was hostile.

[15:05:06]

Trump's attorneys said that they thought the judge should recuse himself. The judge quickly denied that motion. And now Trump's lawyers are beginning to cross-examine Carroll. That's been underway for just a little bit while they're kind of just setting up, asking her questions about her background and how she became a writer in this case. But it's definitely going to become a bit more pressing.

They have said that they are going to say that Carroll had actually benefited once she went public with these allegations and saw her career improve. That is something that Carroll has said is quite the opposite has happened. But this will be underway until the end of the court day finishes today. Boris, Brianna?

SANCHEZ: Yes, briefly some tense moments there in the cross- examination with Trump's attorneys and the judge as well. He basically put his foot down at one point, saying, this is my courtroom and that's the end of the story.

Kara Scannell, thanks so much for the update.

Let's get some analysis now with CNN Legal Analyst, Norm Eisen. Norm, it's as if Donald Trump is testing the very structure of the justice system, going head to head with this judge, seeing how far he can go.

NORM EISEN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Unlike his excesses in the political world or on the campaign trail, when he does that testing, Boris, there are consequences in court and the judge has made that very clear to him. If Donald Trump keeps up with these statements that Carroll's lawyers said that it's a witch hunt, that it's a con job, that can taint the jury, the judge is not going to have it.

This is a very experienced federal judge, a very tough federal judge and Donald Trump had better not cross those lines.

KEILAR: So clearly, though, he wants everyone talking about this. He knows what he's doing in that regard. What is the hope? Is it a PR campaign? Is it hoping that someone on the jury might get wind of this? The jury, we should mention, wasn't there in the courtroom as this happened. What are the possibilities of the outcomes he's seeking?

EISEN: I think the legal advantage is really secondary. We know from the jury pool, the larger group of potential jurors. Who came in that there were those who had supported Mr. Trump. There were those who did not believe that he lost the 2020 election.

As far as we know, individuals like that who might have a bias were screened out. I don't think it's the jury. He has figured out that he can use his legal problems for advantage on the political trail to perpetuate this narrative, which is very effective in the primaries, at least, that he's a victim, and that seems to be the objective here.

The problem is that you don't get to the White House just by succeeding in the primaries. You have to get into the general election. You're going to have to persuade independents and there's a lot of evidence that this is a two edged sword and will work against him further down the line.

SANCHEZ: So the judge has essentially said that what a prior court found, that Donald Trump was liable of sexual assault and defamation stands. So his defense isn't arguing against that. The jury is just trying to figure out damages for E. Jean Carroll, right? How could this kind of interruption impact or, as you said, taint their decision making there?

EISEN: Well, first of all, when he's making comments that it's a witch hunt or a con job, that is if the jury hears it, that reopens the question ...

SANCHEZ: Right.

EISEN: ... that the judge has said is not going to be re-litigated. There's nothing special about that when it comes to Donald Trump, that's a legal principle. It's called collateral estoppel. He litigated that in front of another jury. They rejected it. They said that Donald Trump had libeled her, that there had been a sexual assault. That's done.

So that's the prejudice when he makes these comments in front of a jury. Conversely, it's evidence if he keeps acting out. That shows his intent, his malice, his anger that he has something personal against this defendant. So these exchanges are very important.

SANCHEZ: Could he potentially be found to be in contempt of court?

EISEN: Not yet. The judge would have to give him another warning if he had a true eruption and he went well beyond what the judge has already made clear, he could be.

But I think you're going to see judges - this judge, other judges - they like to build that record, give them enough rope, because, of course, anything they do is reviewed on appeal. And Trump's lawyers already saying this judge is biased, already moving for his recusal. So he'll more likely take a step by step.

But Judge Kaplan's very tough. He could do anything.

[15:10:01]

SANCHEZ: Yes, we'll have to wait and see.

Norm Eisen, thanks so much for joining us.

EISEN: Thanks, guys.

SANCHEZ: Of course.

KEILAR: From the courtroom to the campaign trail. Nikki Haley has been closing. The polling gap with former president, Trump, in New Hampshire, just six days before the primary there. And now he's training his rhetorical sights on her, doing it with one of his tried and true methods, the racist attack.

Trump calling Haley by her full given name, Nimrada, misspelling it significantly, by the way. It's not inherently racist to call someone by their own name, true. But there's no other reason for Trump to highlight Haley's South Asian ethnicity than to hope that voters will see it as different. And some of them even might see it as inferior and that is the point.

Just as Trump emphasizes former President Barack Obama's Arabic middle name, Hussein, which is commonly used in the Muslim world, although Obama himself is not a Muslim. Most recently, Trump did it after Hamas attacked Israel in October as he blamed Obama and President Biden for the attack.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: This problem was caused, in my opinion, by his boss, Barack Hussein Obama. You remember Rush Limbaugh? He used to - do we like Rush? Right? We all, whatever. He used to go, "Barack Hussein Obama."

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KEILAR: One of the hallmarks of Trump's presidency and his reign over the Republican Party has been taking racism out of the shadows and into the mainstream to social media, campaign rallies and even the presidential debate stage in 2020.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOE BIDEN, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: ... you, old buddy.

TRUMP: If Pocahontas would have left two days early ...

BIDEN: Well, I'll tell you.

TRUMP: ... you would have lost every primary ...

BIDEN: ... all he knows how to do is hurt ...

TRUMP: ... on Super Tuesday.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KEILAR: Trump was referring there to Massachusetts senator, Elizabeth Warren, who had long claimed to have Native American ancestry. When those claims were questioned, Warren took a DNA test, which angered the Cherokee Nation, who saw the test as an effort to claim a connection to the tribe, and she ended up apologizing.

But that doesn't change that calling her or anyone Pocahontas is a racial slur. Trump has been consistent, suggesting the U.S. has become a "dumping ground" for everybody else's problems when he said Mexico was sending rapists over the border when he launched his 2016 presidential campaign, saying an Indiana-born judge overseeing a class action lawsuit against the now defunct Trump University couldn't be impartial because he was Mexican, saying just a few weeks ago that immigrants are "poisoning the blood of America."

This racially charged behavior goes back decades to the 1980s, with his full-page ad calling for the reinstatement of the death penalty for The Central Park Five, four black and one Hispanic teens who were convicted in a brutal gang rape. They were later exonerated, and in 2014, New York paid them a $41 million settlement.

But in a 2016 statement to CNN, Trump refused to acknowledge the men were innocent. They admitted they were guilty. He said, "The police doing the original investigation say they were guilty." He said, "The fact that that case was settled with so much evidence against them is outrageous. And the woman, so badly injured, will never be the same," he said. And in 2019, it was much the same.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: You have people on both sides of that. They admitted their guilt.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KEILAR: Or the early 1970s, when the DOJ of the Nixon administration, mind you, found an extensive pattern of the Trump family real estate business discriminating against black would-be tenants. The business then helmed by Trump settled the case.

And back to present day, Trump's latest attack, accusing Haley's - or using Haley's name - follows his recent efforts to popularize a conspiracy theory that Haley might not be eligible to be president because her parents weren't citizens when she was born. Trump is using an insidious rubric that we have seen before, one that he honed as the birther-in-chief, questioning whether former President Obama was born in Kenya instead of Hawaii.

In August of 2012, Trump tweeted that a source told him Obama's birth certificate was a fraud and this went on for years. Trump finally getting a little squishy on the question of whether Obama was born in America, but not really backing down.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: Who knows? Who knows? Let's - who cares right now? We're talking about something else, okay? I mean, I have my own theory on Obama. Someday I'll give - I'll write a book.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KEILAR: Until September 2016, when Trump appeared to be lagging Hillary Clinton in the general election and he finally reversed himself.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: President Barack Obama was born in the United States, period.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KEILAR: Well, here is the fact check on the latest Trump birther conspiracy theory. Nikki Haley is a natural-born citizen.

[15:15:05]

She's eligible to be president, says the Constitution. But that's not really what this boils down to.

It boils down to this, even as Haley talks publicly about her heritage, Trump is trying to weaponize it, reminding voters that Haley's family hasn't been here in the U.S. all that long compared to theirs, that her family is not like theirs, that she's not like them. And is that really who they want representing them in the White House. And as long as that gets through, Trump's mission is accomplished.

We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: The spending showdown on Capitol Hill is taking a high-stakes detour to the White House. Right now, lawmakers from both parties are there, scheduled to meet with President Biden, to try to stop the government from partially shutting down in three days. Sources say the President will stress the urgent need to pass aid to Ukraine in its fight against the Russian invasion.

[15:20:00]

Now, a short time ago, Republican senator, John Cornyn, urged House Republicans to take a deal. He said this: "You either, you know, get the votes and get half a loaf, or you get nothing at all."

Joining me now is Republican congressman Ralph Norman of South Carolina.

Congressman, thank you so much for joining us.

Using that metaphor from Sen. Cornyn, are you willing to get half a loaf with a compromise bill that isn't House Resolution 2 on immigration or are you sticking by your guns?

REP. RALPH NORMAN (R-SC): Well, all I can speak for, Boris, is what I'm going to do. This is not that complicated. We had - Speaker Johnson had said early on, this - the border invasion is the issue to down. Simply, you cut the money off for the - you shut the border down. You force the Biden administration to do that.

And anything short of that, I will vote against. We've got a national security problem with what's happening. I've been to the border and it's awful what's going on. And it's against humanity. It's against America.

So it's very simple for me. I don't take what Cornyn said, I wouldn't take his advice on that. The House controls the first strings and we've got to start acting like that.

SANCHEZ: When you say shut the border down, what exactly does that entail? Because if you shut down traffic between the United States and one of its largest trading partners, that could be disastrous for the economy.

NORMAN: No, what you do is you - we've got people coming in from over 150, 160 different countries. We don't know who's coming in America. What about the terrorists that we know of that are getting across the border?

No, you shut - you complete the wall. You get the military if you have to. You shut the border down. It's not the trafficking, the fentanyl. We cannot sustain this. Last month alone, we had over 350,000 illegals come across the border. We've got over 8 million that we know of. That's insane. You don't do that and so you stop it.

SANCHEZ: I believe those numbers are encounters from Customs and Border Protection, sir. Not actual numbers of people that are crossing the border.

Nevertheless, when it comes to H.R. 2, it's a non-starter in the Senate. You're not going to get it through the Senate. So is there any way that you would allow the White House to strike a deal with Senate Republicans that does have some of the restrictions that you're looking for, cutting down on asylum claims, expedited deportation.

You're saying that you won't compromise at all if you don't get everything you want, is that fair?

NORMAN: No, the devil is in the details. I haven't seen anything yet that even comes close to doing - getting the job. I've seen words being spoken. I haven't seen anything yet. I mean, bear in mind, we've got over 8 million. And you say encounters, they don't know. They're just basically letting them. It's a sieve and it's not fair in America.

SANCHEZ: That's actually from Customs and Border Protection. It's an encounter. In other words, they came across someone who was trying to cross the border. It doesn't mean that 8 million people are getting in. They could have multiple encounters with the same person. That also doesn't account for people that are deported, so that number is a rough estimate.

Nevertheless, I don't want to talk about the numbers right now. I'm curious to get your perspective on what it is that you ultimately want. Do you want to just have this symbolic bill that is not going anywhere in the Senate or do you actually want legislation that will do some of the things that you want, like cut down on asylum claims, like expedited deportation, but it doesn't go perhaps as far as you want it to go?

NORMAN: Well, I'm not for anything that - like Central Langford (ph) that I've heard about. And, again, the devil's in the details, but from what I'm hearing, it's basically just a watered-down version of what this president has been doing.

Now, as far as the spending, the 773 for nondefense discretionary, the 886 for the military, I want to fund the military. But I do not want to fund a government that is letting an invasion happen on the border and we can't do it any longer. They're going on the public dole of the taxpayers and that's not fair to America and it's really not fair for the taxpayers at all.

SANCHEZ: Congressman, I want to ask you about spending. The speaker was obviously criticized by members of your conference for the deal that he struck with the Majority Leader, Chuck Schumer. He argues that this deal is an improvement over previous arrangements between Republicans in the House and Senate Democrats.

It's not that much different from the deal that was brokered by former Speaker Kevin McCarthy that got him kicked out of that position. Do you see this as an improvement?

NORMAN: No, I do not. You're accepting the Pelosi level - Pelosi- Schumer level spending, 1.67 trillion.

[15:25:04]

That's unacceptable, very little - few cuts.

Now, I think Speaker Johnson mentioned some things that were less, but we've got a treasure of things that we could cut, like the wokeness, like the funding of walls in other countries. It's ridiculous what we're spending money that we don't have.

So, no, it's not an improvement and Kevin McCarthy is no longer Speaker.

SANCHEZ: Yes. Lastly, I do want to get this question in before we go, Congressman. You're supporting Nikki Haley for president in 2024. I want to get your reflections on former president, Trump, deliberately misusing her birth name in a social media post about her. He doesn't give a clear reason why he's doing that, but he's done that with similar opponents in the past. He questioned whether she could be president because her parents weren't born in the United States. There weren't U.S. citizens when she was born. He's done that with Ted Cruz. He's done that with Barack Obama.

Do you see those attacks as xenophobic, as racist and why is it that you think Donald Trump consistently goes there?

NORMAN: Well, look, everybody runs their own campaign. President Trump is his own man. Nikki Haley is her own person. Those type of, I guess, criticisms, I wish we could put them both on a debate stage, let's see. And it makes her feistier when she hears things like that. But everybody run - everybody's got a right to say what they want. President Trump has his right. Nikki Haley has her right to respond. Let's get them on the stage and let's let them both respond.

And I don't criticize anybody. I mean, this is a free country. We're in a republic right now and hopefully we can get them both on the stage. Let's see how it works.

SANCHEZ: I think the fact that you would attempt to utilize someone's birth name as a form of criticism, as a pejorative speaks for itself. Congressman Ralph Northam - go ahead, sir.

NORMAN: No, it's Ralph Norman.

SANCHEZ: I know, sir. I misread the teleprompter, but go ahead.

NORMAN: No, I'm not going to focus on Donald Trump. He's his own man and Nikki Haley is her own person. Again, let's get him on the stage. Let's let him debate. It'll be - it would be a fun debate. And I don't criticize anybody for saying the xenophobic. You let the public - let the American people be the judge when they hear it.

SANCHEZ: We'll see if Donald Trump decides to debate her. Congressman Ralph Norman - made sure I got your name right - thank you

so much for the time.

NORMAN: (Inaudible) my pleasure.

SANCHEZ: Of course.

So the United States has taken another step to stop Houthi attacks on ships in the Red Sea. We have the details on what they're trying to accomplish next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)