Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

New York Stock Exchange Experiences Technical Issue; President Biden Set to Take Executive Action on Immigration?; Dr. Anthony Fauci on Capitol Hill; Jury Selection Continues in Hunter Biden Trial. Aired 1-1:30p ET

Aired June 03, 2024 - 13:00   ET

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

[13:00:38]

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN HOST: Jury selection is under way in the first trial against the son of a sitting president. We are live outside the courthouse in Delaware where Hunter Biden is facing three felonies for allegedly buying a gun while using illegal drugs. How his father, the president, is reacting.

And fighting words on Capitol Hill, as Dr. Anthony Fauci testifies to lawmakers about the origins of COVID-19 and the U.S. response to the pandemic.

JESSICA DEAN, CNN HOST: And brace yourself. The thermostat police in your house going to be pretty busy this summer. I will look at how much it will cost you to stay cool and how that number has risen over the past five years.

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

KEILAR: Just days after former President Trump was convicted of 34 felonies in his hush money case, another unprecedented criminal trial with major political implications is getting under way, Hunter Biden now facing judge and jury for alleged gun violations.

It's the first time in American history that the child of a sitting president is going to trial. Hunter Biden has pleaded not guilty to three felony charges, accused of illegally purchasing and possessing a firearm while abusing or being addicted to drugs.

If convicted on all three counts, the president's son could face up to 25 years in prison, though he doesn't have a prior criminal record and first-time offenders often get much lower sentences. The president and first lady both offering their support to Hunter today. Jill Biden is attending the trial's first day, and President Biden issued a statement this morning.

It said in part: "I am the president, but I am also a dad. Jill and I love our son and we are so proud of the man he is today. Hunter's resilience in the face of adversity and the strength that he has brought to his recovery are inspiring to us."

Biden went on to say that since he's the president, he -- quote -- "won't comment on pending federal cases" -- Jessica.

DEAN: And let's discuss more with CNN legal analyst Carrie Cordero, who's here with us now.

Carrie, great to have you here in studio with us.

Let's start first with the fact that this case is make -- has made it to trial. There was a plea deal in place that just fell apart.

CARRIE CORDERO, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: There was. And so a year ago it looked like today would was never going to happen. Hunter Biden had entered into a plea deal with the special counsel in this case.

It would have been knocked down to misdemeanors. He would have never been in jeopardy of serving any jail time. And the judge, unusually, I think, rejected that plea deal and threw it out. And the reason it was sort of unusual is because usually -- usually, plea deals are accepted, first of all.

Most cases in America plead. Most federal cases plead out. It's rare even for cases to go to trial. And when a judge does throw it out, usually, they do it because it's a circumstance when it is advantageous to the defendant. So, in other words, they think that the prosecutors are getting the better end of the deal.

And this was the opposite of that.

DEAN: Yes, it's so interesting.

I want to -- stay with us. I want to go out to Evan Perez, who is there at the courthouse with the latest reporting.

Evan, how are things playing out there?

EVAN PEREZ, CNN SENIOR JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: Well, things are moving pretty quickly at this point, Jessica.

There are 20 -- at least 25 people have been qualified to serve in the jury. They're going to eventually narrow this down to 12 jurors, four alternates. There were 250 potential jurors who were brought to the courthouse here in Wilmington today.

And the questions that they're getting are all really framing up what this trial is really about. The issue of gun rights has come up, also the issue of addiction and recovery. We heard from both sides who were trying to -- who say that they were going to dismiss a critic of Donald Trump who was in the jury pool here and who said that they support banning all guns.

She said that after Donald Trump's election in 2016, she joined what she called a resistance group to oppose what's now the former president. We have also heard Abbe Lowell say that he was going to use one of his strikes to remove a potential juror who is a retired police officer from Wilmington who said that he believed Donald Trump, and particularly the New York City trial that just concluded against the former president, that that's an indication that prosecutors sometimes bring political cases, cases for political reasons.

[13:05:20]

He said that, to his knowledge -- or he didn't -- he wasn't aware of whether Democrats also have the same fate. We also heard from some jurors who've talked about family members, very personally about family members struggling with alcohol abuse and drugs, and a few of them said that they believed they could set aside those personal views to judge this case fairly.

We expect this proceeding to wrap up perhaps as soon as today. Jessica, it's moving very, very quickly. And from talking to the lawyers, we're looking at a possible trial that lasts about a week, perhaps a little longer.

KEILAR: And it's really interesting, Evan, as you mentioned, this idea of addiction is coming up in the jury process.

I want to ask you about that, Carrie. It's -- I assume that you might -- depending on what side you're on, those are the folks that you want in the jury, or those may be the folks that you want to screen out. But it seems like they're just sort of representative of the experience of people.

CORDERO: Yes. I mean, well, the juries are regular citizens who experience every type of thing, and drug addiction is a huge issue in the country.

Many, many families all across the country have dealt with family members who have suffered from addiction, some who have faced consequences in the legal system as well. And so that particular issue, as far as the jury's concerned, really could cut either way, whether they view -- they potentially would view Hunter Biden as a sympathetic person, or whether they would view consequences as an important factor as well.

DEAN: And, Carrie, I want to go back to what we were discussing before we talked to Evan about that plea deal that you said kind of rarely falls apart in the way that it fell apart in this issue that the judge rejected it.

Is there any situation now where they could cobble that back together, or is it full steam ahead with this trial?

CORDERO: I think that's unlikely.

(CROSSTALK)

DEAN: OK.

CORDERO: I think they're past that point at this point. Now they're already seating the jury. If there was a time that the defense and the prosecution were going to be able to make any agreement, it would have already happened.

I think now this trial is under way. And what the defense is really going to be looking at is they're going to focus on these issues that the prosecutors have to prove as far as what Hunter Biden knew at the time. So it's really -- it's only a three-count indictment. And the fact that he had a weapon doesn't seem to be a disputed fact.

So the questions here are really going to pertain to, did he know that he wasn't supposed to have it at the time? And that gets into the issues of what the nature of his addiction was or wasn't at that time.

DEAN: Yes, if he knew he was addicted, I guess, right?

CORDERO: Right, if he knew, because there's two pieces. There's a falsification of a form that is being alleged and then there's whether he knew he was possessing a weapon when he is what's called a prohibited person, when he wasn't supposed to.

And so his knowledge and his understanding of what he was doing at that time is really relevant both for the prosecutors to prove and for the defense to launch its case.

KEILAR: Are you surprised we're at this point? Do you think that he would have been prosecuted if he were someone else?

CORDERO: I think that's a great question. I think that the fact that this investigation took so long to get to a point that is a three- count indictment of a not -- a type of case that maybe for a first time offender would not reach the stage of trial is unusual.

I mean, it's a fairly straightforward three-count indictment, and it shouldn't have taken a five-year investigation to get there. So I think the fact that there was a special counsel obviously is a unique situation particular to an individual who has political relevance and the fact that this wasn't just a standard case handled by the U.S. attorney's office.

And I do -- as I mentioned earlier, I think the fact that the judge threw out the plea agreement was unusual in this case.

DEAN: And so looking ahead to the defense's case here, how do they go about building a case that I would assume they're going to try to prove he didn't know either he wasn't supposed to have it or wasn't in the right mind to be able to say I'm an addict, I shouldn't have this?

CORDERO: Right.

And so that's why I think there was a decision I guess over the weekend where the judge said that the defense is a potential witness for the defense that -- who would have been an expert witness to testify about sort of the nature of addiction and what knowledge a person who is addicted has, what that means.

That -- the judge has said that person cannot testify. So I think part of what the defense will be doing is, yes, they will have to find through witnesses or potentially documents, but I think probably more witnesses, whether or not there's a way they can demonstrate that he does not satisfy any of those knowledge elements.

[13:10:03]

And then they're going to be also preserving issues for appeal.

KEILAR: What about the tax issues? What's going to happen there when it comes to Hunter Biden?

CORDERO: Well, so that's a separate case that is based out of L.A. And as I understand, that case is set for trial in September, again, a really sort of low level in terms of the dollar amounts that are relevant in that particular case, also brought by the special counsel.

And so we have this situation where you have got the son of a former president who has been charged by a special counsel in two different jurisdictions, two different trials.

And so it really just highlights the fact that unusual circumstances where these could not have been relieved through plea agreements, probably based on the fact that it was the special counsel's investigation, as opposed to just an ordinary tax case or an ordinary firearms case.

KEILAR: Carrie, thank you so much for taking us through all that. We appreciate it.

And still to come: Republican lawmakers turning up the heat on the man who led the U.S. government's response to the COVID pandemic. Dr. Anthony Fauci is on the Hill right now, and he is very much in the hot seat, and we're following it.

Plus, President Biden is set to announce big moves on the border. We're going to explain his immigration plan and why Republicans aren't happy about it, despite calls to secure the southern border.

DEAN: And Supreme Court justices are preparing for the end of the term. Several decisions remain, from guns, and abortion, to former President Trump's claim of absolute immunity.

We have more all, ahead on CNN NEWS CENTRAL.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[13:15:58]

DEAN: Happening now on Capitol Hill, Republican lawmakers continue grilling the man who led the U.S. response to the COVID pandemic.

For the past three hours, Dr. Anthony Fauci has been in the hot seat, testifying about the government's response and the origins of the virus. Dr. Fauci also fielding questions on a number of right-wing conspiracy theories.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. JAMIE RASKIN (D-MD): Would you have any reason to cover up any new scientific evidence relating to the origins of the COVID-19 virus? DR. ANTHONY FAUCI, FORMER CHIEF MEDICAL ADVISER TO PRESIDENT BIDEN:

Absolutely not, and that's the reason why it was important to get people together, that -- to discuss this in a transparent way.

RASKIN: Have you spent your whole life trying to determine the causes of infectious diseases and then to stop them to protect the American people?

FAUCI: Yes, I have.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

DEAN: CNN congressional correspondent Lauren Fox is covering this for us on Capitol Hill.

Lauren, have we learned anything new from Dr. Fauci's testimony today?

LAUREN FOX, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes, a lot of this ground has already been something that Republicans have been attacking Dr. Fauci on for years at this point, Jessica.

This is really part of a months long investigation that Republicans have conducted into the origins and protocols surrounding the coronavirus pandemic. And they have attacked Dr. Fauci for a series of issues, from everything from his guidance on masking to the CDC's guidance on social distancing, arguing that there are things that Dr. Fauci himself had argued were the right thing to do in the midst of the pandemic that turned out to be less scientifically sound as time went on.

Now, Dr. Fauci has argued they were in a pandemic. They were in the midst of chaos. They were trying to understand and protect people in the American public the best that they could, while making sure that the -- that the vaccine was prepared and ready to go within a year's time.

But that didn't not stop some Republicans for just attacking Dr. Fauci on every single thing that he had done. Here's one of those.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. MARJORIE TAYLOR GREENE (R-GA): Is it right for scientists and doctors getting paid by the American people, government taxpayer paychecks, to get patents, where they're paid millions and hundreds of millions of dollars in royalty fees, especially when the NIH and these government agencies, most powerful agencies in our country, are recommending medical suggestions and advice and making up guidelines like six-feet distancing and masking of children?

Do you think that's appropriate? Do the American people deserve to be abused like that, Mr. Fauci, because you're not doctor. You're Mr. Fauci in my few minutes.

No, I don't need your answer. I want to talk about this right here.

(END VIDEO CLIP) FOX: And Democrats continued -- during this course of this hearing are arguing that Dr. Fauci was doing the best that he could, that he was instrumental in making sure that Americans were protected during the coronavirus pandemic and arguing that he's shown a lot of patience over the course of this testimony today and behind-closed-door testimony that he gave back in January as part of this committee's investigation -- Jessica.

DEAN: All right, Lauren Fox, for us on Capitol Hill, thanks so much -- Brianna.

KEILAR: The White House is taking aim at one of its biggest criticisms from the GOP, that it isn't doing enough to secure the border.

Sources say President Biden is gearing up to roll out a sweeping executive action that could drastically impact asylum seekers at the southern border. And an announcement could come as soon as tomorrow.

CNN's M.J. Lee is at the White House live for us.

M.J., this proposal could mean major pushback from progressives, from liberals in the president's own party. What more are you learning about it?

M.J. LEE, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Yes, could get major pushback from not only progressives, but also immigration advocates as well.

What we are told by sources who have been briefed on this executive order that we're told could be announced as early as tomorrow is that the administration could effectively shut down the U.S.-Mexico border to asylum seekers if the daily number of crossings reaches a certain number.

[13:20:11]

We are told that unaccompanied children are expected to be exempt, which would also be worrisome to advocates, because they think that this could actually incentivize and actually encourage some families to send children to the border on their own.

Now, the president would be using an authority called the 212(f). This was regulation, you might recall, that was used by Donald Trump, the former president, during his administration and was widely denounced and criticized at the time. So you could easily imagine that President Biden could be criticized for being hypocritical by leaning on this authority.

Politics, of course, looms very large over this decision. We know that border security happens to be one of the biggest political vulnerabilities for President Biden and for Democrats. They have been getting a lot of pressure to do more to get a better handle on the situation at the border.

And, of course, the timing is incredibly significant, given that we are now just a few weeks away from that first presidential debate hosted by CNN between President Biden and former President Donald Trump. Now, as you can imagine, the White House is not getting ahead of this expected announcement tomorrow.

But a White House spokesperson did say this in a statement to CNN. They said: "As we have said before, the administration continues to explore a series of policy options, and we remain committed to taking actions to address our broken immigration system."

Now, the important caveat that I should note is that there could still be changes to that final text before this expected announcement tomorrow. But, as you said, this is something that could draw for the president a significant amount of backlash, but certainly he is hoping and the White House is hoping that this could also strengthen his political hand as well -- Brianna.

KEILAR: All right. M.J. Lee, live for us at the White House, thank you.

And still to come: It could be a frenzied few weeks for the Supreme Court. The justices are readying potential blockbuster decisions on everything from abortion to guns to presidential immunity -- so what they could mean in a pivotal election year.

And the cost of keeping cool this summer will likely be higher for you than it has been in the past. We're going to show you by how much ahead on CNN NEWS CENTRAL.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[13:26:54]

KEILAR: The New York Stock Exchange says a technical issue that caused trading halts for multiple stocks has now been resolved. All of the impacted stocks have since reopened.

We have CNN's Matt Egan with us now.

So, this was a glitch. What caused it?

MATT EGAN, CNN REPORTER: Well, Brianna, we are still learning details about exactly what happened.

Here's what we know. About 15 minutes into trading, there was a trading pause for multiple stocks. Ultimately, dozens of stocks were halted. And some of them had bizarre stock prices that really didn't make any sense, most notably, Berkshire Hathaway.

That's the big holding company run by legendary investor Warren Buffett. Now, as of 9:44 here in New York, everything looked normal, right? This stock, Class A shares were trading above $600,000. That's where they actually normally trade. And then, suddenly, with no explanation, this stock was listed at just $185.

And there were no trades in between to indicate why that stock had gone down. There was no news released. So, clearly, something was wrong here because that would amount to a 99 percent drop. Now, as you can see on your screen, this stock has reopened. It's trading back to where it should be above $600,000 a piece.

And the New York Stock Exchange says that all of the impacted stocks have reopened. All systems are operating normally. Now, as far as what caused it, this appears to be related to something called limit up, limit down.

This is basically a time-out or a cooling-off safeguard in the stock market where, when a stock trades too high or too low, there's a pause instituted. Now, New York Stock Exchange says that what happened was there was a glitch, a technical issue with the data that is published industry-wide and that impacts limit up, limit down.

But I talked to market structure expert Joe Saluzzi, and he told me he's not buying that explanation because it doesn't really square with the trades that we saw that took place. Now, one thing though, Brianna, we don't think this is related to is cyber.

A major bank executive that's been in touch with the New York Stock Exchange's parent company told our colleague,Sean Lyngaas that the New York Stock Exchange has not seen any indication at this point that this was related to a security incident.

KEILAR: Yes, that's always our question when we see something strange happen, right?

Matt, thank you so much. We appreciate the explanation -- Jessica.

EGAN: Thanks, Brianna.

DEAN: We are now in crunch time for the highest court in the land. The Supreme Court has a batch of potentially blockbuster decisions to announce before its summer recess.

And the issues left to be decided range from whether abusers can have guns, to if federal agencies can urge disinformation to be taken down, and a whole lot more.

CNN senior Supreme Court analyst Joan Biskupic is here with all the details.

And, Joan, we have a big deadline that's coming up and so many cases yet to go. What's the latest?

JOAN BISKUPIC, CNN SENIOR SUPREME COURT ANALYST: Yes. You understand deadlines. I understand deadlines.

(LAUGHTER)

DEAN: Yes.

BISKUPIC: Well, they just had one on June 1.

DEAN: Mm-hmm. BISKUPIC: All the arguments have been held. They were held from October to April. Preliminary votes have been taken among the nine justices. Opinions have been assigned. The drafting process has already started.

But, on June 1, that's the traditional deadline for everyone to finish up at least their majority opinions.