Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Hamas Defiant; Interview With Rep. Dan Meuser (R-PA); New Evidence Unsealed in Trump January 6 Case; Harris and Trump Campaign in Michigan. Aired 1-1:30p ET

Aired October 18, 2024 - 13:00   ET

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

[13:00:47]

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN HOST: Destination Michigan, both presidential candidates barnstorming the swing state today, fighting to win over blue-collar workers with their economic messages. We are on the trail.

ALEX MARQUARDT, CNN HOST: And Hamas defiant after its leader was killed. The militant group says that hostages will not be returned until the war ends in Gaza and Israeli troops withdraw. But Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu says that Israel will not stop fighting until they're all back home. We will be live in Israel.

And a Texas death row inmate's life is spared, for now. What we're learning about the fight over Robert Roberson's fate, a man convicted in the death of his 2-year-old daughter.

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

KEILAR: Welcome to CNN NEWS CENTRAL. I'm Brianna Keilar with Alex Marquardt.

MARQUARDT: So good to be with you.

KEILAR: Thanks for being in for Boris today.

And we are beginning, of course, with breaking news. Nearly 2,000 pages of documents that former President Trump fought to keep secret have just been made public with just 18 days until the election,special counsel Jack Smith releasing this huge trove of documents that are nearly entirely blacked out.

MARQUARDT: Almost entirely redacted.

They are part of the prosecutor's election subversion case, the January 6 case, against former President Donald Trump. Prosecutors have charged Trump with four crimes stemming from his actions following his 2020 election loss, including conspiracy to defraud the United States, as well as obstruction. Trump, of course, has pled not guilty.

CNN's Evan Perez is here with us now.

So, Evan, you and your team are still going through these 2,000 documents. What can you tell us about what you have seen so far?

EVAN PEREZ, CNN SENIOR JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: Well, a lot of them -- a lot of these documents, we can't see just yet. I mean, eventually, we presume, if we have a trial, that the jury will get to see a lot of this evidence.

But for now, the judge has kept a lot of this under seal. We are seeing, though, a few documents that really underpin what the prosecutors say is the evidence to prove that Donald Trump is guilty of these four crimes that you pointed out.

One of them is a previously partially redacted document that is an interview with a White House aide that was there in the Oval Office, that was there in the presidential residence on January 6 as the riot is happening at the Capitol.

And, again, this is an interview that was done with the January 6 Committee, and we're now seeing parts of it. You can see right there. He says: "There's rioting down at the Capitol."

And he says: "What do you mean?"

I said: "It's like they're rioting there at the Capitol."

And he says: "Really?"

And then he said: "Let's go. Let's go now."

And so they bring him a television, and, according to this aide, he says: "I stopped -- I stepped out to get him a Diet Coke, come back in, and that's pretty much it for me. He was watching it, and he was, like, seeing it all for himself."

This is the former president and his conduct on January 6. This is part of the evidence that Jack Smith wants to use to say that he could have tried to intervene to stop some of the violence and chose not to. That's again part of what they are going to try to bring this in court.

Now, Judge Tanya Chutkan is the one who decided to release these documents, and the former president has argued that this is election interference, 18 days from the election. Why are you putting this out now? She responded to that with this statement.

She said: "If the court withheld information that the public otherwise had a right to access solely because of the potential political consequences of releasing it, that withholding could itself constitute or appear to be election interference."

In other words, the public has a right to see this information, and, therefore, this is why it is coming out now.

KEILAR: Evan, thank you so much for taking us through that.

Let's bring in CNN legal commentator Tim Parlatore, a former lawyer for Donald Trump. And, Tim, as we noted, nearly all of the pages out of nearly 2,000

appear to be completely redacted. I wonder if you think this actually has the effect that the Trump team was worried that it would.

TIM PARLATORE, CNN LEGAL COMMENTATOR: I don't think it does.

[13:05:00]

I went through them briefly myself, and I didn't really see much of anything new. Evan just pointed out a couple of pages, but I'm sure that, once everything is gone through, there's not really that much to come out.

I think that really what the Trump team is probably more worried about is just the focus going away from the campaign issues, going back to this case in the last a couple of weeks before the election. But I don't think -- I haven't seen anything that's really going to move the needle factually.

MARQUARDT: Tim, we also heard Evan reference what Judge Chutkan said about the Trump claims of election interference. I want to put that back up there.

This is from the judge, saying: "If the court withheld information that the public otherwise had a right to access solely because of the potential political consequences of releasing it, that withholding could itself constitute or appear to be election interference."

Do you agree with that argument?

PARLATORE: I do. I think that the judge is in a very difficult position here, because she really kind of highlights the idea that she's damned if she does, she's damned if she doesn't.

And it really goes more not so much to the court, but more to DOJ's decision to be doing certain things before the election. I mean, the parties could have decided to hold off this briefing until later. But as to the judge's position, she really doesn't have much of a choice here. And I think that she kind of perfectly illustrated the position that Jack Smith put her into.

KEILAR: From what we can see, which, as we note, is not a whole heck of a lot here, do you get a sense of where Jack Smith is planning to go with his argument that Trump wasn't acting in his official capacity as president and he shouldn't be immune from prosecution?

PARLATORE: Sure.

I mean, from what I have seen so far, it doesn't really seem like anything new that we didn't see in his briefing before. His argument is going to be splitting between candidate Trump and President Trump and trying to focus everything on what he did as a candidate.

And I think that, in certain circumstances, that's very murky and, in other circumstances, it's pretty clear. But he's trying to just take the court's attention solely over to that. But even to Evan's point a couple of minutes ago, when he starts to get into the things that he could have done and didn't, that's when Jack Smith runs the risk of going right back over to, well, should the president have done something to intervene versus should the candidate have done something.

So it is a sticky situation for him.

KEILAR: Tim Parlatore, thank you so much for your insights.

PARLATORE: Thank you.

KEILAR: On the heels of more evidence being released in Trump's federal election interference case, today, the former president turns his focus to battleground Michigan.

He will rally in Detroit just a week after comparing the city to a -- quote -- "developing nation."

Let's talk now with Republican Congressman from Pennsylvania Dan Meuser, who is co-chair of the Trump campaign in that state.

I do, Congressman, want to get your reaction to the timing of these court documents, even though they do seem to be considerably redacted. What do you think?

REP. DAN MEUSER (R-PA): Well, your own analyst -- good to be with you, by the way -- called it an October cheap shot.

Jack Smith has more than just a legal case. He seems to have a personal vendetta against the president. I think his case was weak. It was, of course, taken down by a higher court. He's brought it back, which is completely inappropriate, again, according to one of your analysts.

And to do this right now is a political maneuver to try to damage the president's credibility, former President Trump.

(CROSSTALK)

KEILAR: Yes, I do want to ask you about how things are going in Pennsylvania, and specifically something that you are involved in there, which is a lawsuit that challenges ballots from overseas in Pennsylvania.

And that, of course, would include from the military who are overseas deployed, their family members as well overseas. Military families, including some I have spoken with, see this as an attack on their right to vote.

What do you say to them?

MEUSER: Entirely not.

It's a real shame that voting has become this battle. And my -- this lawsuit wouldn't have occurred if our secretary of state, who I actually have a good relationship with, not put an issue in the (AUDIO GAP) that said covered voters are exempt from election code I.D. requirements.

Overseas voters are no longer -- are exempt from voter I.D. requirements. And why would he (AUDIO GAP) in Pennsylvania? And it's federal law, by the way, but he (AUDIO GAP) or they, his office. He seems like (AUDIO GAP) guy actually (AUDIO GAP).

[13:10:05]

And what that means is, we have 15,000 -- in Pennsylvania, we have 15,000 eligible overseas voters; 3,300 of them are military. So, 85 percent are not military. So it's not a military thing.

My God, we want every eligible registered voter citizen to vote. But when you remove deliberately a week, three weeks before the election the standard voter I.D. requirements that have existed for decades, we said, why are you doing that? We feel you shouldn't be doing that. And we're having to file a law-abiding court-based protest is really what it is. Leave the federal law alone.

And I will tell you what. I'm involved in another lawsuit. We have -- Biden issued an executive order, Biden and Harris.

(CROSSTALK)

KEILAR: Well, I want to ask you about this one, the UOCAVA, the Uniformed and Overseas.

MEUSER: OK.

KEILAR: Because I hear you saying that some of these are not military ballots, but they're all together. They're all governed by the same law.

MEUSER: Absolutely.

KEILAR: You -- if you throw out the bathwater, you're throwing out the baby here, or if you hold it to, as you want to say, verify it, you're -- it's all together. There's no separating the two. I just want to be very clear. You can't separate the uniform from the overseas. They're all together.

But what evidence do you have...

MEUSER: I'm just making it clear that it's not -- it's certainly not about the military. That's crazy.

(CROSSTALK)

KEILAR: Well, but it does -- it is about the military, because they're included in these votes. So it's going to affect them, what you're talking about.

But what evidence...

MEUSER: It is. We want the same standard.. KEILAR: But what evidence -- Congressman, what evidence do you have

that this is being exploited or is going to be exploited? What is your concern about how that would be exploited?

MEUSER: Our concern is, we have a federal statute that states that these I.D. requirements are required for overseas citizen voters.

And in Pennsylvania, we're not aware -- I think there's a couple of other states that have tried to do this as well. They have waived the I.D. requirements that have existed for decades. OK, in very way -- very much a way, it protects our military because they are eligible citizens. We don't want an ineligible citizen -- an ineligible individual to vote when they're not -- when they -- when they shouldn't be, thus eliminating the vote of a military personnel.

Military personnel are obviously American overseas citizens. But we want the requirement. And my guess is all of those military men and women overseas appreciate the idea that we require some sort of I.D., as does 90 percent of the country. He shouldn't have waived it. It was...

(CROSSTALK)

KEILAR: It's not new. I think what may be new is this focus on trying to do GOTV on -- get-out-the-vote when it comes to overseas voters. That's something that is new on the part of Democrats.

MEUSER: Well, Democrats did that unbelievably well in 2020, and we're doing our best to do it effectively this time around, very simply, of course, not do it engaged in illegal behavior, such as ballot harvesting, but simply a lot of door-knocking and reminding people that they sent in a mail-in -- they got a mail-in ballot application.

We encourage them to fill it out. But there's nothing -- there's nothing outside the bounds of legality surrounding that. Look, we just want the current laws to be followed. We can't change the rules weeks before an election.

(CROSSTALK)

KEILAR: Experts say -- well, there are a lot of rules being changed before this election, as you're aware. We're seeing that in some states, including in Georgia.

But experts say it would be very difficult to create some sort of widespread fraudulent voting, because -- I just want to be clear to our viewers about how this works. People have to go through their local election jurisdictions.

So you're talking about broadly for the whole country 75 -- I think more than 7,000 jurisdictions. You would have to know who was overseas, their identity, where they are, where their home of record or where they are -- their home of record or their address of record is in the state you're talking about, in this case in Pennsylvania. Could be another state.

This is something that would be very difficult. Is this a problem in -- is this a solution and in search of a problem?

MEUSER: And they changed the election code, allowing overseas eligible -- we hope they're eligible voters, not to provide an I.D., any sort of I.D. that they provided in the past.

We know our military personnel will have that I.D., make a copy, send it in along with -- and we match it up. The directive was to our county commissioners to not require the I.D. match.

[13:15:06]

KEILAR: But it wasn't weeks ago. It wasn't weeks ago.

I'm just looking at it here. It wasn't weeks ago. September of 2022. Is that what you're talking about?

MEUSER: I'm talking about when we issued our suit against this, right? Because now the...

(CROSSTALK)

KEILAR: But you're saying -- well, no, you're leading our viewers to believe that this was a change put in place here recently on the I.D., and it wasn't.

Explain that, because that's not good faith.

(CROSSTALK)

MEUSER: Well, what it is that we just became aware of it. And we have a very serious election. And we want to inspire voter integrity.

(CROSSTALK)

KEILAR: That's not -- OK, that's your problem, though.

(LAUGHTER)

MEUSER: Maybe so.

KEILAR: You're making it sound like they did this -- you're making it sound like they did this.

MEUSER: Go ahead.

KEILAR: The only thing that is new here in the last few weeks is a blog that -- known for conspiracy theories posting about how this is going to be exploited, without a basis, and then Trump posting on TRUTH Social about how Democrats are going to cheat about this.

There's no new I.D. thing that you have been saying is somehow brand- new. I wanted to make sure I wasn't calling you on something inaccurate, but it turns out that that's just not true.

MEUSER: Well, here's what is true, Brianna.

We have a lot of questions. My constituents...

(CROSSTALK)

KEILAR: But why didn't you raise them in 2022?

(CROSSTALK)

MEUSER: ... a lot of questions.

KEILAR: Why didn't you raise it before the last election?

MEUSER: We are -- we are on the side of creating voter confidence, as are many Democrats. And I mentioned our current secretary of state.

KEILAR: There was no problem with these votes even in 2022, before this no I.D. -- so, this no I.D. is put in place. There's an election. There's no problem with the votes, and now you're raising the issue. Why?

MEUSER: Well, we're raising the issue because we have a presidential election coming up that's going to be very close, and it was apparently just discovered.

I -- it just was brought to my attention.

KEILAR: By who?

MEUSER: If I would have known about it in '22, I would have signed on to it then.

But we're doing it now. And we will see what happens. And we will bring it to the attention, and maybe reasonable minds will say, yes, we should have an I.D. matching for overseas voters.

KEILAR: Well, why do you think you didn't notice it before?

MEUSER: I can't speak to that. You know what? I'm a member of Congress.

I'm not a -- I didn't intend to be a election and voter expert, which unfortunately I have had to become over the last several years because of the changes that take place.

KEILAR: OK, well, I'm assuming -- OK, Congressman, but I'm assuming you have military voters, military family voters in your district.

(CROSSTALK)

MEUSER: ... correct.

KEILAR: It's hard -- have you ever facilitated a military member voting overseas? It is hard. And a lot of them report that, even though they have requested absentee ballots, they don't get them.

It is a hard thing to do. Even the guarantees in the law that say they should be able to vote don't always end up in them voting. And if you talk to those voters, they will tell you this. I mean, these kinds of things go into effect and they have continually revised laws to protect these voters to preserve their ability to vote, which is enshrined in federal law.

That's why these changes are there. I mean, if they're your voters, you could know this.

(CROSSTALK)

MEUSER: I.D. helps enshrine that and inspiring confidence. Why would they minimize the need to require to mandate an identification that's existed for decades? That that's really just a very weak argument.

All we're asking for is to abide by the federal law that exists, OK? It's not as if we're trying to even add a new law, abide by what exists, provide I.D. And the military are not the problem. OK, maybe there is no problem. But, again, we're just maintaining a security level that has existed for decades.

And I think that's very reasonable. I do not suspect we will have a voter integrity accusations and blame, because we are all working together well. When you see things like this -- meaning in Pennsylvania. But when you see things like this, we need to do something about it. I don't like it. I don't like what -- it's a slippery slope.

When you diminish the need for an identification for an overseas ballot, that does not make sense to me. That doesn't equal voter integrity, right? I.D. does equate to voter integrity.

KEILAR: Well, this was done an election ago, more than two years ago, just to be clear. You could have raised it then.

Congressman...

MEUSER: I could have. If it would come to my attention, I perhaps would have.

KEILAR: Well, it comes to your attention, I guess, when you're looking for it.

Congressman Dan Meuser, thanks so much for being with us.

MEUSER: We're looking for free and fair elections. That's all we're looking for. And I think we're actually going to get it.

KEILAR: Yes, let's -- I mean, I think we're all hoping for that, sir.

MEUSER: That's the work we're doing.

KEILAR: Congressman, thanks for being with us.

MEUSER: All right, thank you.

KEILAR: Still to come: President Biden acknowledges that the death of Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar alone will not resolve the situation in the Middle East, as Hamas remains defiant following Sinwar's killing. We are live from the region.

[13:20:09]

MARQUARDT: Plus, a Texas inmate's execution is put on hold at the 11th hour. We will tell you why it was halted and where that case goes from here.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

MARQUARDT: And now to the Israel-Hamas war, where Hamas is defiant despite the death of its leader, Yahya Sinwar, just yesterday announced by the Israelis.

He was, of course, the chief architect of the October 7 massacre in Israel just over a year ago. The Israeli military released this remarkable drone video, which they say shows Sinwar's final moments in the southern city of Rafah in Gaza.

A senior Hamas official is now saying that Hamas will not return any hostages to Israel until -- quote -- "aggression against the people of Gaza stops." That is among several of their hard-line conditions.

[13:25:03]

But, this morning, President Joe Biden did express hope that Sinwar's death will be a turning point that could end the violence in Gaza. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOE BIDEN, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I told the prime minister of Israel yesterday, let's also make this moment an opportunity to seek a path to peace, a better future in Gaza without Hamas.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MARQUARDT: And joining me now is former hostage negotiator Gershon Baskin, who has extensive experience dealing with Hamas. He's also the Middle East director of the International Communities Organization.

Gershon, thank you so much for being back with us.

I wonder if you agree with the president and his administration that this is a moment here, a moment to try to resurrect these efforts around a cease-fire and a hostage deal. How much of an opening is there, do you think?

GERSHON BASKIN, FORMER ISRAELI HOSTAGE NEGOTIATOR: There is a moment here of opportunity, if it is exploited by the Israelis, both in appealing to people who are holding hostages in Gaza to release them in exchange for safe passage out of Gaza with their families and a lot of money to go along with that.

There is also an opportunity for Israel to appeal to the Egyptians and the Qataris and say, we're willing to reenter the negotiations on a deal that will bring all the hostages home at once in a very short period of time that will also lead to the end of the war.

There are conditions that Hamas has made that they will not retract from. And that includes ending the war. It includes releasing Palestinian prisoners. Hamas is not going to surrender. And I think this is the mention of defiance that we're talking about, but I think that each side has their ability to present in their own way their victory picture.

And Netanyahu got his with the killing of Sinwar. And Hamas spokespeople have said we fought the Palestinian issue back to international attention. This is their victory here.

But we can't really talk about victory when so many people have been killed, when so much damage has been done, when both Israeli and Palestinian societies are living in trauma. We need to get this done. We need to get the hostages home. And President Biden needs to use his influence and the leverage of the United States over the government of Israel to make sure that this is done.

The Egyptians and the Qataris and others can put pressure on Hamas, but it's time for this war to end.

MARQUARDT: Well, how much do you think that the death of Sinwar could complicate those talks and perhaps endanger the lives of the hostages who are still being held? And how much do you think hinges on who could succeed Sinwar?

BASKIN: There is talk that Sinwar gave orders to people holding hostages that, should he be killed, they should execute the hostages. We don't know if that's being done, if that will be done. It is a very dangerous moment for those hostages as well.

And who will succeed Sinwar? They will find something. There's a competition for leadership already going on. We probably won't hear anything in the next days of a real decision because they will have a three-day mourning period.

But there is a void of significant leadership in Gaza right now. Yahya Sinwar's brother Mohammed Sinwar is one of the military commanders there, but he's not a political leader. There are a few members of the Shura Council, the upper politburo of Hamas, who are in Gaza, but we haven't heard much from them since the beginning of the war.

The primary leadership is outside of Gaza. There are at least two significant Gazans who are in Doha right now, Khalil al-Hayya, who was the deputy of Sinwar. And he's a contestant for leadership. And Khaled Mashal, the old leader of Hamas, definitely wants to come back as leadership.

And then the question is, does the outside leadership have the ability to enforce a deal should they reach one with Israel? Can we ensure that they will release hostages and that the war will be over from the point of view of the Hamas fighters in Gaza? We don't know that.

This is going to be tested and verified. MARQUARDT: Gershon, we only have a couple of moments left. But you

mentioned something that Netanyahu said yesterday, which was essentially calling on Hamas members to release hostages and they will be allowed to live.

And this is something we're starting to hear from U.S. officials as well, an effort or pressure to try to get whoever's holding hostages to release them piecemeal, given the disorganization right now in Gaza.

Do you think there's a chance of something like that happening?

BASKIN: I think there's a chance, not for all the hostages, but for some. Maybe we can retrieve some of those hostages.

It's not enough for Netanyahu to say that you will be able to live. They need to be offered and guaranteed free passage out to another country. There are countries that would accept them. And I think they should be encouraged by knowing that they will also receive a large sum of money to encourage them to do this.

This is breaking discipline, and it'll be very difficult for them to do it. But I imagine that some of those people holding hostages would rather take the money and run and let the hostages live than end up possibly getting killed by Israel following not releasing the hostages.

MARQUARDT: Well, it is clear, of course, that the administration sees this as a real turning point, with the potential to finally get this war to end. Whether Israel and Hamas agree, that remains to be seen.

Gershon Baskin, thank you, as always, for your thoughts and for your time today.

BASKIN: Thank you.

MARQUARDT: And a new report on what Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said after the 2020 election about then-President Donald Trump.