Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Now: Jury Deliberating In Trump Defamation Trial; Biden Takes Jabs At Trump In Hopes Of Pushing Him Off Message; UN Court: Israel Must "Take All Measures" To Prevent Genocide. Aired 2-2:30p ET

Aired January 26, 2024 - 14:00   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:00:21]

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN HOST: Right now, a New York jury is deliberating on how many millions Donald Trump must pay E. Jean Carroll after defaming her. Carroll's lawyer told the jury that the number should be at least $24 million after Trump walked out of court, we could get a decision any moment. We're live at the courthouse covering it all.

Plus, it may amount to torture. Those words coming from the United Nations, after Alabama carries out a first of its kind execution. How state officials are reacting to the criticism and what it means for capital punishment in the U.S.

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN HOST: And very real outrage over fake artificial intelligence images, some explicit and again, fake photos of Taylor Swift are circulating on social media and they'd been viewed millions of times before they were removed. It's not just happening to celebrities, but get this, children as well. I'll tell you what's being done to stop this disturbing trend.

I'm Boris Sanchez with Brianna Keilar in the nation's capital. We're following these major developing stories, and many more all coming in right here to "CNN News Central."

KEILAR: One day after jurors heard former President Trump on the stand, the case is now in their hands. During deliberations underway on this dramatic final day of the Trump civil defamation trial. The former president was there for some of the closing arguments, he did abruptly walk out in the middle of the plaintiff's presentation. The jury will decide whether Trump has to pay damages for defaming E. Jean Carroll when he was president. Her lawyer told the jury the only way to deter Trump from further disparaging Carroll is by sending a message, a $24 million message.

CNN's Kara Scannell was in court for all of this. Kara, tell us where things stand.

KARA SCANNELL, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yes, Brianna. So, the jury is now deliberating they went back behind their doors in their private room at about 1:40 p.m. And the judge gave them some outline of what that -- how this day should play out. He said they can deliberate. He's not putting any pressure on this. But he said if you're not done by 4:30 today, we will break for the day. If, however, you want to continue to deliberate after 4:30, he said we would go for a little bit longer not late into the night. And if no verdict is reached today, they will convene again on Monday and continue their deliberations.

So that came after a morning full of closing arguments and some wild moments in the courtroom with the former president himself walking out when E. Jean Carroll's attorney was giving her a closing argument in the case. Their claim to the jury is that Donald Trump must pay because that's the only way to stop him from repeating these defamatory statements that he has made against E. Jean Carroll back in 2019, which is the issue in this case, but even up to an including, as they said his testimony on the stand yesterday as brief as it was.

So, Carroll's lawyers asking the jury to say hold Donald Trump accountable and to make him pay for $24 million. What they are seeking and compensatory damages. And they're saying a large number, anything they want that they think that Donald Trump should pay as punishment. That's the punitive damages. Now his lawyers, of course, telling the jury that E. Jean Carroll in effect asked for this because she went public with her story. She wanted the attention. They said her career was waning. And when she wrote this book in 2019, and made the accusations against the sitting President she should have expected this attention and that Donald Trump shouldn't be held responsible for mean tweets and death threats that she received. The Carroll's lawyer saying that Donald Trump is not the victim in this case, it is E. Jean Carroll.

So, this is what is up for the jury to decide how much money Donald Trump should pay for the harm that that E. Jean Carroll had received as a result of the defamatory statements. Remember last year a jury awarded her $5 million for the sexual assault on defamation for statements he made in 2022. Question for this jury is how much more he will have to pay. Brianna, Boris?

KEILAR: Yes, we'll see about that. Kara Scannell. Thank you for the very latest there.

Let's bring in attorney and legal analyst Areva Martin now. Areva this walk of Trump's out of court in the middle of E. Jean Carroll's lawyers closing argument could that cost the former president?

AREVA MARTIN, ATTORNEY: I hope it does, Brianna. That was the most disrespectful display of petulance that we've ever seen. And it goes right to the heart of plaintiffs closing argument which is that Donald Trump thinks he's above the law. He doesn't have to play by the same rules that you or I or anyone else in a trial or in a courtroom has to play by. Throughout this trial, he has exhibited behavior. Trust me that if anyone else other than Donald Trump exhibited this trial, probably would have been over, the judge may have held him in contempt, he would have faced severe consequences, things like, you know, making statements under his breath in the presence of the jury that is never ever allowed.

[14:05:34] Not only that he walked out, Brianna, we should note that one of his attorneys got up and walked out after he did. Again, that attorney would have been disciplined by the judge for engaging in that kind of conduct. So, I hope the message that E. Jean Carroll's lawyer sent about Donald Trump sending this message that he's not above the law. I hope that resonates with these jurors.

KEILAR: Could we see a verdict today do you think?

MARTIN: I think we could. This isn't a very complicated case. This is a case that in many ways is very straightforward. They are not determining liability. They do not have to determine if Donald Trump did in fact defamed E. Jean Carroll, although Donald Trump's lawyer, again, playing so fast and loose with the rules have made allegations during her closing statement.

And throughout this trial, really trying to get in before the jury that there's still some question about the depth of the actual conduct, the sexual assault, and still wanting the jurors to doubt whether in fact, Donald Trump did sexually assault E. Jean Carroll, that's not an issue here. That's not being decided it's already been decided. The only issue here is should Donald Trump have to pay? And if so, how much should he pay?

KEILAR: The argument that Carroll's lawyer is making here is that you need to deter him from continued defamatory remarks. And the only way to do that is to set damages incredibly high $24 million, is the mark that they say they should be set at. The defense is arguing here that you can't blame the former president for what people did online, whether it's online threats, hate mail that Carroll received. Who do you think made the stronger case?

MARTIN: Well, I think that argument is ridiculous. We have seen time and time again that Donald Trump has the ability to inspire, to galvanize and to cause his base to take action. We've seen it before we saw it on January 6th, I think jurors are smarter than that. They completely understand that if the President of the United States uses his or hers bully pulpit, the biggest platform on the planet to come after you, then that's going to have negative consequences, particularly when the President has the kind of base that we know he has, has a base that will not only engage in threatening comments online but will actually take action.

So, I don't think jurors are going to buy that, I think they will hold sale reject that argument. And I think they are going to find that it is terribly troubling to be the subject of the President's of vitriol, which has been the case here.

KEILAR: All right. Areva, Martin, thank you. And we'll be watching to see if we do get a decision from the jury today or not.

Boris?

SANCHEZ: And the race for 2024. President Biden is employing a familiar tactic though one that's relatively new for him. He's hoping to throw off Donald Trump right off his campaign message by taking jabs at his likely Republican opponent. Recently, Biden has been mocking Trump calling him things like loser and emphasizing the former in former president. A person close to Trump actually says that he's rattled by Biden's efforts to get under his skin. Aides to the President's reelection campaign, though tell CNN that the taunting will keep up as they shift into general election mode, even if it sparks criticism that Biden is taking a page straight from Trump's playbook.

Let's discuss with CNN senior reporter Isaac Dovere. Also with us is Republican strategist and former RNC communications director, Doug Heye.

Isaac, Doug, great to be with you.

DOUG HEYE, FMR RNC COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR: Thank you.

SANCHEZ: Isaac, walk us through this reporting. This is fascinating.

ISAAC DOVERE, CNN SENIOR REPORTER: Yes, look, on the one hand, it's not that hard to see where Trump's insecurities are soft spots are and Biden has zeroed in on that, he's saying he's a loser. You see the smile that comes across Biden's face when he says he likes doing it in part because he likes taunting Trump, he likes the idea of -- of getting under his skin. He also feels in the campaign aides tell me that they agree that this is a good way of getting across some of their central messaging, right, when they say that Trump is a loser that's making people remember that Trump has not accepted the results of the 2020 election, which gets to their larger argument about democracy under threat.

And so, they want to keep pushing that in a way that breaks through more than just the high-minded way of doing it, but makes people pay attention because it's a little bit of a fight.

SANCHEZ: Yes, that high minded style Doug is something that Democrats have tried before against Donald Trump. I remember Michelle Obama at one point I believe in 2016 saying, when they go low, we go high. This is Biden playing a little bit dirty, albeit different than the kind of dirty that Trump plays.

[14:10:15]

HEYE: It is. And it's also parallel on a track with what we're seeing in the Republican primary as it remains now. Nikki Haley is doing the same thing. It's why we saw Donald Trump make mistakes. His speech in New Hampshire after the primary, very different, very negative in New Hampshire than it was in Iowa, then saying, anybody who donates to Nikki Haley is no longer allowed in the MAGA movement, than the move with the RNC.

And I will tell you the analogy I would use, Rocky 3 is the greatest of all the Rocky movies. And what Rocky Balboa would do in the second fight, he absorbed the blows from Clubber Lang trying to get him angry, so that he would make a mistake. Now, the challenge there, if you're Nikki Haley, or to some extent Joe Biden, is you got to take a lot of punches from somebody who throws a lot of punches and likes to do that. But also, are you Rocky Balboa or not? But the analogy and again, it's the best of the Rocky movies, the analogy is there.

SANCHEZ: Doug, I don't know man. Rocky ended the Cold War part four, let's never forget that.

Isaac, the other fascinating thing about this though, is it's actually working against Trump. He's getting frustrated by this.

DOVERE: Yes, people close to Trump tell us that, that they would prefer that the Trump stay on the arguments about the economy and immigration and those sorts of things, but that they cannot control Trump, that he hears this. He's seeing what Biden saying, he's hearing what Biden saying. And it gets under his skin and then he lashes back. Good example, that was a couple of weeks ago, when Biden said Trump is a threat to democracy and went after him in all sorts of ways. And Trump said no, no Biden's a threat to democracy. And it became that.

And instead of an argument about what he wants to deal with inflation, or any of the other issues that are more directly in front of the voters that they're hoping to appeal today.

SANCHEZ: That is really fascinating. Doug, I do want to ask you about the spat over immigration, because I think that is an issue that the former president wants to be central to the campaign, so much so that it appears that he's thrown a wrench into the Senate deal.

HEYE: Yes.

SANCHEZ: That has been worked on now for several weeks that tried to pair aid for Ukraine and Israel with some agreement, some consensus on immigration. And it's just a flex by Trump, isn't it to say, I know what you lawmakers want to accomplish. I know what you've been working on. But it's more important for me to win than it is for us to fix the border.

HEYE: Yes. In an election year, it was going to be very difficult to get that sort of three piece part of legislation through the Senate and the House. They're just too far away with very narrow majorities. But Trump inserting himself in there makes us a lot more political than it necessarily should be. And it already is political. It also it's a mistake by Trump to do so. Because while it does show the party bending to him, to some extent, it allows Joe Biden some offense on an issue where his numbers are terrible.

Every poll you see of Biden, on immigration, he's underwater, not by four points or 10 points, but by 20 points, 32 points. This gives him an opportunity to go on offense on somewhere where he has been on defense for years now. And also highlights the argument for Republicans now is we should hold off to let Donald Trump do that thing that he was actually unable to do when he was president. That's not a strong argument.

SANCHEZ: Doug, lastly, want to get your thoughts on the news about the RNC where you formerly worked, as we noted. Initially, they had pushed forward this resolution to essentially declare Donald Trump in the 2024 Republican nominee, and then they decided to push that back when Trump said he wanted to win by virtue of voters. But what do you make of all of that?

HEYE: Well, it clearly shows that Nikki Haley is getting under his skin, the money she's raising, and so forth. But it also highlights what some of the RNC and Trump problems are. Part of this is they need to raise money, and that's setting up what we call joint fundraising. And the RNC needs this. It's not raising the money that it needs to I worked at an RNC that didn't always raise the money it needed to. That's a challenge. Trump has that same challenge.

Unfortunately, when you then try and circumvent the process, you're going over, over and above your own states and the three members in each state, in each territory that want to have caucuses and want to have primaries. It's part of why it blew up in their face.

SANCHEZ: Isaac, perhaps the most contentious question of the afternoon, Rocky three or four?

DOVERE: I'm going to an originalist. I'm going to go through Rocky 1.

SANCHEZ: That seem more controversial. Isaac, Doug, thank you so much (INAUDIBLE).

HEYE: Thank you.

SANCHEZ: Appreciate it.

DOVERE: Yes.

SANCHEZ: Still to come on "CNN News Central," Israel in front of the International Court of Justice. Judges ordering Israel to take all measures to prevent genocide in Gaza, while stopping short of calling for a ceasefire. A senior adviser to Israel's Prime Minister is going to join us in just moments to talk about that ruling.

Plus, Alaska Airlines today planning to fly that Boeing 737 Max 9 for the first time since a door flood on one of its planes ripped off midair. We're talking about a gaping hole on a plane 16,000 feet in the air. We're digging into years of concerns about Boeing's quality control and safety issues, when we come back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:18:48]

KEILAR: Judges at the United Nations highest court have ordered Israel to take immediate steps to prevent genocide in Gaza, but stopped short of demanding a ceasefire. In a series of provisional measures handed down at the Hague today, the court says Israel must do more to prevent the killing and harming of civilians and allow more humanitarian aid to enter Gaza. It also called for the release of all hostages held by Hamas.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu praised parts of the ruling and vowed to press ahead with the war.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) BENJAMIN NETANYAHU, ISRAELI PRIME MINISTER: Israel has an inherent right to defend itself. The vile attempt to deny Israel this fundamental right is blatant discrimination against the Jewish state. And it was justly rejected. Our wars against Hamas terrorists, not against Palestinian civilians. We will continue to facilitate humanitarian assistance and to do our utmost to keep civilians out of harm's way, even as Hamas uses civilians as human shields. We will continue to do what is necessary to defend our country and defend our people.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KEILAR: We are joined now by Mark Regev, he is a senior adviser to Prime Minister Netanyahu. Mark thank you so much for being with us.

[14:20:00]

It doesn't sound like Netanyahu is taking these suggestions to heart, this isn't going to affect how Israel is prosecuting this war going forward. Is that a fair read?

MARK REGEV, SENIOR ADVISER TO ISRAELI PM NETANYAHU: I think it's important to understand that South Africa was playing the part of, of the legal team for Hamas. And they were cynically and outrageously exploiting the Genocide Convention. And using that as a tool to try to find (INAUDIBLE) to protect the genocidal terrorist organization, which is, of course Hamas. It's like cynicism has no limits here. And they wanted to say that Israel has no right to defend itself against these Hamas terrorists, against these Hamas murderers. And the core today was clear in saying there will be no measure that says Israel, you have to stop your fight against Hamas, that we had to somehow let Hamas stay in Gaza and keep our hostages held in some dungeon there underground, and to continue shooting rockets into Israel and -- and to attack us again, like they did on October 7th, given the opportunity.

So, we will continue the campaign against Hamas. And at the same time, as we've been doing, we'll make every effort to keep civilians out of the crossfire and to facilitate the arrival of humanitarian aid for Gaza civilians who are not the target of our operation.

KEILAR: No ceasefire, very, very clearly, that was something South Africa wanted, they do not get that here. The court did find it plausible --

REGEV: Correct.

KEILAR: -- that Israel has committed acts that violated the Genocide Convention. This court isn't saying though, with its finding, continue as you are going, but that sounds like the plan as you describe it.

REGEV: The court did not rule on its own jurisdiction, the jury, so to speak, is still out on that one. The court definitely didn't roll on the substance saying that Israel was -- was, you know, agreed with a South African allegations, that South African charged that way --

KEILAR: But let's talk about the substance --

(CROSSTALK)

KEILAR: Let's talk about the substance Mark of what they're suggesting here about how the war is being prosecuted, when it comes to preventing acts of genocide, punishing those who are committing them, and facilitating humanitarian aid, and basic services. They're not telling you that because they think that what is going in now is sufficient.

REGEV: So, let's be clear, Israel is conducting this war in accordance with international rules of armed conflict and international humanitarian law. We have been and we will be, and that's independent of anything, any discussion going on at the International Court for justice. We -- we -- we are a democratic country, and we uphold democratic values. And when our forces go into combat, they do so under the rules of war. We pride ourselves on that, that's part of our DNA.

Now, of course, we have no trouble with continuing to do so, to continue to facilitate humanitarian aid, and to continue to differentiate between the Hamas murderers and between the civilian population, of course, we will continue to do so. But if South Africa wanted a ceasefire, maybe that sounds good to some people watching.

But they have to understand a ceasefire that leaves Hamas in power is just a recipe for more violence further down the line. That's just a recipe for another October 7th, that's Hamas leadership itself that says they would commit the October 7th massacre, again, and again and again. And that South Africa was proposing all that just shows you that this was a cynical exploitation of the genocidal convention for political purposes to try to help their terrorist allies.

KEILAR: I do want to ask you, and I will say there have been clearly some violations by Israel standard of how this war should be perpetrated. That's -- that's very clear. But I do want to ask you about this UNWRA revelation here. The is -- Israel, providing the UN Relief and Works Agency with information alleging that several of its employees participated in the atrocities of October 7th. UNRWA has terminated contracts with those individuals. It's ordering an independent review, and I wonder if you trust that review.

REGEV: So, the owner leadership would want you to believe that what happened on October 7th, and the involvement of UNRWA employees, United Nations employees in the massacre, in the atrocities, that that's an aberration. Unfortunately, it's not an aberration, it's systematic. There's also evidence that UNRWA teachers, teachers in schools that the United Nations runs in Gaza celebrated the massacre, celebrated the October 7th atrocities. There's also evidence as has been reported, one of the hostages who came back, she was held prisoner in UNRWA employee's home. We know that the UNRWA organization, the thousands of Palestinians of Gazans who work for UNRWA, that is dominated, that is controlled by the Hamas organization.

[14:25:40] And so, you have these international people, often Europeans who come to head, the union organization, but they come and go the staff that actually runs the organization, the civil service, so to speak, the bureaucracy is Hamas. And I think it's time there was a very serious look, this organization portrays itself as humanitarian, they call itself a relief and welfare organization. But its relationship with Hamas is far from incidental.

KEILAR: Mark, we appreciate your time, obviously a very consequential day. Thank you for being with us.

REGEV: Thank you for having me.

KEILAR: Mark Regev, thank you.

And still ahead, the NRA corruption trial underway in New York, first up to testify, longtime chief, Wayne LaPierre now ousted. What he's saying about allegations that use the NRA as a personal piggy bank.

Plus, the first of its kind execution has been carried out in Alabama. Why it's so controversial, what it means now for the death penalty?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)