Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Biden Targets Inflation; Kyle Rittenhouse Trial Continues; Trump Continues Efforts to Stop Document Release. Aired 1-1:30p ET

Aired November 11, 2021 - 13:00   ET

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

[13:00:00]

JOHN KING, CNN HOST: This quick programming note.

More than 20 years after her death, Princess Diana's story is having a moment. Go inside her lasting legacy on a new episode of the CNN original series "DIANA." That's Sunday night 9:00 Eastern and Pacific right here on CNN.

Thanks for joining us on INSIDE POLITICS today. We will see you back here tomorrow.

Ana Cabrera picks up our coverage right now.

Have a good day.

ANNOUNCER: This is CNN breaking news.

ANA CABRERA, CNN HOST: Hello, I'm Ana Cabrera in New York.

We begin with breaking news this hour, former President Trump with a last-ditch, desperate attempt to keep documents and other records concerning the January 6 insurrection secret. Trump right now 0-2 when it comes to legal challenges on this matter.

Nonetheless, his team just asked an appeals court to pause the release of certain documents he does not want people to see. Why? And will he get a win this time? Big questions as a critical deadline nears. We are now counting down with just hours until these records could be released to lawmakers.

CNN's Kara Scannell is following the breaking details.

Kara, what more do we know?

KARA SCANNELL, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Ana, that's right.

So the former president has filed a motion with an appeals court here in Washington, D.C., asking them to briefly stop the National Archives from turning over records to the House committee investigating January 6. The former president's lawyers saying that there are big constitutional issues at play here and have asked the court to briefly pause this. These records were due to be turned over by 6:00 p.m. tomorrow. Now, in this filing, the former president is saying that one of the things here that they are hoping to persuade the appeals court to do is that they have reached an agreement with the House that they have an expedited briefing scheduled. That means that these briefs could be done by as early as Monday or Tuesday of next week.

That would put this before the appeals court if they agree to take it up and get a resolution to this soon. So they're hoping to do this on an expedited schedule. And the issue here is that the former president is trying to block the committee from getting 46 records. These records include White House visitor logs, call logs, drafts of speeches, as well as three handwritten memos from Trump's former Chief of Staff Mark Meadows.

This is just the first of many tranches. There are as many as 700 documents that the committee is hoping to get from the National Archives, the former president here saying that he wants to block some of them from going over because of executive privilege. That has been denied twice by a lower judge. Now they're bringing this up to the appeals court and hoping to get a brief pause on this to give them time to argue before these records get turned over by 6:00 p.m. tomorrow -- Ana.

CABRERA: And they aren't stopping on requesting new people to testify, new documents from a number of different sources. We're learning the January 6 Committee ISIS targeting former Vice President Mike Pence's inner circle as well.

Bring us the details on that.

SCANNELL: That's right, Ana.

So reporting from my colleagues that the committee is focused on trying to get information from at least five people from Mike Pence's inner circle. Those include his former National Security Adviser Keith Kellogg. He was with the former president on January 6. They're also hoping to get information from his former chief counsel Greg Jacob, as well as his former Chief of Staff Marc Short.

Now, sources tell my colleagues that some of these people may voluntarily cooperate. They may ask for a friendly subpoena, and use that in order to give testimony and provide information to the committee. I mean, the big question here is, a lot of the former president's allies have relied upon executive privilege as why they have not cooperated with this investigation.

If this court does move quickly, that could potentially have ramifications for those people's current efforts to not cooperate -- Ana.

CABRERA: Kara Scannell, thank you so much for all of your reporting.

Joining us to discuss, Kim Wehle, law professor at the University of Baltimore, former assistant U.S. attorney and author of "How to Read the Constitution -- and Why" So, Kim, back to this new filing from Trump and his team asking for the Court of Appeals to put a pause on this tranche of documents that are set to be released tomorrow to the committee. Walk us through what happens next. And do you think this court will grant Trump this emergency stay?

KIM WEHLE, FORMER ASSOCIATE INDEPENDENT COUNSEL: Well, it's interesting, Ana.

This is almost a motion for an injunction on an injunction. This is a pretty rare move, what was filed today. That is, they already have settled for a potentially expedited briefing. The question of the big injunction, that is, should they stay the disclosure of the documents pending a resolution of whether Donald Trump has this authority, and then they asked for a mini-stay pending that discussion.

So what they indicate in the papers is that the other side, Congress, has not taken a position it. So Congress isn't pushing back and saying this, this is harming us by waiting. So my guess is the Court of Appeals might just grant it just for the sake of everybody getting along.

But I think the arguments on the merits, that this is preliminary relief that Donald Trump has that he has to show that he's likely to win. And at the end of the, day this is a duel between a sitting president and a former president.

[13:05:07]

He's essentially arguing that his rights as a former president supersede Joe Biden's rights as a sitting president when it comes to executive privilege. The problem with that is that these aren't his personal records. These are his official government records. They belong to the people, under the Presidential Records Act.

And Joe Biden, in this moment, is a representative of the people under the Constitution, not Donald Trump. So I think, ultimately, he's going to lose. The question, will the delay be enough to basically thwart the January 6 Commission's work until the midterms, when I think the Republicans hope to take over the House and cancel the entire process?

CABRERA: So how long could the delay last if this pause is granted?

WEHLE: It could potentially last months.

That is, if the pause is granted and there's an expedited review on the merits and, say, the District -- the Court of Appeals agrees with the lower court, so he loses again, that could still go to the Supreme Court of the United States.

They could either say, listen, we're not touching this, we're going to let the lower court's rulings just control and then Congress will get the documents. But this Supreme Court is sort of whimsical. We don't know when they're, in this moment, going to jump in and take things on an expedited basis or not. It's really hard to predict with this 6-3 conservative majority. Frankly, Ana, this is exactly the issue that came up with S.B.8 and the abortion law in Texas. And many of us lawyers and law scholars thought, because of this emergency concept, the Supreme Court should have stopped that law in Texas. But it allowed abortion rights to be violated every day.

And here we're having a conversation as to whether Donald Trump's tangential rights to keep this information from Congress warrant a delay. It's just kind of head-spinning. I think, ultimately, he will lose, but he might win the sort of the rush for time.

CABRERA: We will see. OK, a lot could happen here in the next few hours, maybe during this show. Thank you so much, Kim Wehle. We will get you back and have you back when we have new developments.

Right now, testimony resumes and the double homicide trial of Kyle Rittenhouse, after a day of intense drama and courtroom confrontations, the teen shooter breaking down in sobs while testifying that it was self-defense, he says, when he killed two people and shot another during a night of unrest in Kenosha, Wisconsin, and the judge angrily and repeatedly lashing out at the prosecution.

Today, more friction as a possible mistrial hangs over this case, which could go to the jury as early as tomorrow.

CNN's Shimon Prokupecz in Kenosha.

Shimon, the defense continues calling witnesses today. Fill us in.

SHIMON PROKUPECZ, CNN CRIME AND JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: Yes, so they called a expert witness. His name is John Black. He's a force expert on use of force.

He testified this morning about the sequence of events, the timing, the number of seconds that it took between each of the gunshots to be fired. He's going to be returning to the stand, perhaps now after lunch, for cross-examination.

But in the meantime, the defense also-called two additional witnesses. One is a police officer who collected shell casings, and then now an eyewitness, they say someone who is an eyewitness who had video that he took on his own of the events surrounding the shooting. So that witness is now on the stand.

Also, what happened today was, during the direct examination of this expert witness, there were some questions asked. The prosecutor got up and objected to some of the questioning. And then the judge sort of commented. He noticed some facial expressions that the prosecutor was making.

And here's what the judge said in response to that.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JUDGE BRUCE SCHROEDER, KENOSHA COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT: I'm a little bit challenged when you say -- is there something that I'm seeing that draws the face that you're making?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PROKUPECZ: And so what happened there was that the prosecutor was sort of saying, you yelled at me yesterday about basically the same thing that the defense attorney here is trying to do.

And then the judge responded, said, well, you had -- what you were trying to do yesterday was basically violate the Fifth Amendment. And so that was really the only time that the prosecutor and the judge addressed what had occurred yesterday.

It is expected that the defense is going to wrap up their case this afternoon. And then we had heard that the prosecution may have some rebuttal witnesses, but we will wait and see if that is in fact the case.

But, as you said, this case could be wrapping up tomorrow, Ana.

CABRERA: All right, Shimon Prokupecz, thank you for your reporting.

Joining us to discuss, CNN legal analyst Joey Jackson now.

And, Joey, another terse exchange today between the judge and the prosecutor. You see the comments on social media, saying, ooh, this judge doesn't like the prosecutor. What do you make of all that?

JOEY JACKSON, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Yes, good to be with you.

This is what happens in courtrooms every day, just to be clear. This is not a unique experience, right? Number one, judges have to control the courtroom. And so, in the event that the judge believes that the courtroom is being disrespected, pivoting quickly to yesterday, Ana, with respect to a prosecutor attempting to violate someone's constitutional rights -- just to remind you, the prosecutor yesterday was going into issues as to why the defendant didn't tell his story earlier.

[13:10:23]

And the judge was like, what are you talking about? You know he has a right not to say anything. And to the extent that you bring that up, right, you're really violating his rights. And you can't be doing that, because I could declare a mistrial. So the judge had something to say about it.

In addition to that, yesterday, the prosecutor started to go into something that the judge precluded, prohibited, said you can't do. And so the judge had that exchange. And just to make it clear, I have been scolded, right, by judges before. My adversaries have been scolded by judges before. This is what happens in courts in America.

And so switching to today, apparently, the judge was uncomfortable with the demeanor or comportment, facial expressions of the lawyer and said, hey, what's going on here? So this judge controls his courtroom. I don't see anything nefarious or untoward about it, right? People will formulate their own opinions. I'm not supporting or protecting a judge.

I'm telling you that, when you go into a courtroom, if you violate the directives and decorum of the court, the judge will let you know, just like judges have let me know and my adversaries know. Whether you're on the prosecution or the defense, you don't follow the rules, you're going to hear it. And that's exactly what I heard. And that's exactly what I make of what's going on.

CABRERA: And this is the same judge who is weighing a defense motion for a mistrial with prejudice, this after what happened today, after he went off on the prosecution yesterday for getting close to or even crossing, he said, some constitutional boundaries.

Remember this? Let's watch.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SCHROEDER: That problem is, this is a grave constitutional violation for you to talk about the defendant's silence.

And that is -- and you're right. You're right on the -- you're right on the borderline. And you may -- you may be over. But it better stop.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CABRERA: So, he is still taking the mistrial under advisement. He hasn't made a decision. What does that tell you?

JACKSON: Yes.

So, you know what, Ana? Just to be clear, what happens is, judges, look at them as referees. Judges really monitor what evidence is seen by the jury, what evidence cannot be seen, what the rules of engagement are going to be. And the jurors assess what the facts are going to be. It's in their domain, that is, the jury, what the facts are.

It's in the judge's domain to look at, evaluate what the actual procedures and what evidence comes in. Why do I say that? Because when you have the judge saying that, hey, listen, counsel, you're an experienced trial lawyer. You know that a person has a right to remain silent.

To the extent that you bring that up to infer that he was silent -- that is, Mr. Rittenhouse -- because he was guilty, that's improper. You're a prosecutor. You can't do it. That means a mistrial in the event that judge wanted to go that way.

Now, yesterday, saying he will take it under advisement means, when you make a motion to the court, it's not only supported or predicated upon your verbal statements, Ana. You have to back it up by case law. What lawyers do is, they look at prior cases. How was that handled? We're very much into precedent.

It's called stare decisis. It's been decided. Judges don't have to reinvent the wheel. So if a judge feels that an attorney acted in bad faith in doing that, he could declare a mistrial. And what would that mean? It would mean the trial would be over, because they, the defense, asked for a mistrial with prejudice.

That means, if the judge dismisses the case, he cannot be retried, it doesn't go to the jury, and everyone goes home. So that's a very serious consequence.

CABRERA: It's obviously not the same as a miss trial because of a juror issue or a hung jury in the end when they're deliberating. It would be, like you said, a situation in which case closed.

Joey Jackson, we could see the jury get this case tomorrow, we are told. So there is a lot that we will have you back to discuss here in the next 24 hours, or even early next week. Thank you so much, Joey, for being there for us.

JACKSON: Looking forward, always. Thanks, Ana.

CABRERA: President Biden now sounding the alarm on inflation after initially downplaying the rising prices in July. But is there anything he can do?

Plus, Houston police and lawyers for Travis Scott now pointing fingers at each other over who should have stopped the concert. It comes as lawsuits over the tragedy keep piling up.

And nearly one million kids ages 5 to 11 now have their first COVID vaccine shot. Is this the key to getting out of the pandemic?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[13:19:03]

CABRERA: Inflation quickly becoming a bigger issue for President Biden.

He acknowledged that prices are too high and that it is -- quote -- "worrisome." Everything from gas to groceries are costing consumers more money. In fact, the U.S. Commerce Department says inflation is now surging at its fastest rate in 30 years.

And with Thanksgiving just two weeks away, we are all feeling the pinch.

CNN's Vanessa Yurkevich is in Iowa talking to residents there about how rising prices are impacting their wallets.

Vanessa, what are people telling you?

VANESSA YURKEVICH, CNN BUSINESS AND POLITICS REPORTER: Well, Ana, if you could see just behind me, over $3 a gallon for gas, that is what Iowans have been paying for about a month now, just one of the rising costs they're facing ahead of this holiday and winter season.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

YURKEVICH (voice-over): There's a chill in the air in Iowa. Winter is coming.

JOHN HOSKINS, IOWA RESIDENT: It's coming. So we put the fireplace on and get a little heat that way, instead of turning the furnace up.

[13:20:01]

YURKEVICH: That's because heating bills for many Iowans could nearly double this winter, a warning from the state's largest power provider, MidAmerican Energy.

HOSKINS: We're all hardworking middle-class folks. So we can't go too far out of our means to make ends meet. But you still got to eat. You still got to live.

YURKEVICH: On Wednesday, the U.S. once again woke up to sticker shock, gas, cars, energy and food just some consumer goods that rose 0.9 percent together on average in October and are up 6.2 percent this past year, the biggest 12-month increase since 1990.

HOSKINS: Bacon was pretty high. I have kind of seen it on the news a little bit, but, yes, it's jumped up a few dollars. So...

YURKEVICH (on camera): Did that stop you from buying anything today?

HOSKINS: I thought I'd buy it and put in the freezer, to be totally honest with you.

YURKEVICH (voice-over): The Lentzes were also out shopping early for their Thanksgiving dinner.

(on camera): Did you notice that prices were a little bit higher?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Yes, quite a bit, quite a bit higher.

YURKEVICH (voice-over): And soon the couple will escape the Iowa cold and their high energy bill for Arizona. But it will still cost them.

GARY LENTZ, IOWA RESIDENT: We have a motor home. It costs a lot to go to Arizona, but we're going anyway.

YURKEVICH: Gas in the state is nearly $3.20 a gallon, up more than $1 in the last year.

Ben Thompson is trying to avoid the pain at the pump.

BEN THOMPSON, IOWA RESIDENT: I price-shop some. That's how I'm out here. The Casey's that I was at was about 44 cents more expensive per gallon than this one.

YURKEVICH: He says his 16-gallon tank cost him $10 more on average.

(on camera): So what did you tap out at today?

THOMPSON: Forty-six eighty-seven. And I wasn't out of gas.

YURKEVICH (voice-over): At Dewey Ford car dealership in Ankeny, a lot that typically holds 900 cars has just 61.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I cannot keep hybrid vehicles on my lot. They want to be able to have that, so they're not going to the gas pumps to have to go through that.

YURKEVICH: Customers may save on gas by going electric. But the prices of cars are higher than ever. Used cars jumped 2.5 percent last month, with new cars up 1.4 percent, a fallout from labor shortages, a supply chain crunch and consumer demand all meeting the road.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Customers are really struggling at this point. When you go back through the last few years, nobody's ever paid full price for cars.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

YURKEVICH: And it is a little bit easier for folks to go and save money and price-shop in the grocery store, even here at the gas station.

But it's a lot harder for folks to save money and cost -- cut costs on their energy bills. They're expecting a cold winter here in Iowa. And it's very hard to save any money when you're trying to keep your family warm this winter -- Ana.

CABRERA: It looks cold already with that wind whipping through your hair. Thank you, Vanessa Yurkevich. Appreciate your report.

Joining us now is Justin Wolfers. He's a professor of economics and public safety at the University of Michigan.

Justin, good to have you back.

With consumer prices rising, no end in sight, what options are there to ease the inflation? And just how quickly can that happen?

JUSTIN WOLFERS, UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN: Well, I think first of all, there is an end in sight.

Much of what we're seeing is the disruptions of an economy trying to recover after probably the biggest upheaval in my lifetime, and so that it's -- there are a few fits and starts along the way aren't so surprising. And so I think, two years from now, we will look back, and, hopefully, the current inflation scare will look like it was much ado about nothing.

CABRERA: But two years is a long time for most of us to wait.

Yes, in the big picture, historically, maybe it won't be a huge blip. But when we're talking about inflation that is the highest rate in 30 years, that is significant, and everyday Americans are feeling it.

WOLFERS: Absolutely.

It's also worth adding a bit of context to all of this, which is, yes, inflation today is at the highest rate in 30 years. The past 30 years has been a period of unbelievably low and stable inflation. One of the great miracles of this period is we have spent 30 years basically not talking about inflation, not thinking about inflation, because it hasn't been a presence in our lives.

Hopefully, it's not going to be one for too much longer. One of the things that's difficult about the present moment is there are some prices that are really salient to you and I and to your viewers, things like gas, things like food. Those prices are going up particularly quickly, but they're not representative of what's happening to the broader cost of living, which is rising at a somewhat slower rate.

CABRERA: OK, so that's good to have that perspective.

So as to the question about what you can do about it, Senator Joe Manchin has expressed some concern that the president's Build Back Better bill, the big social safety net package, could make inflation worse. What do you think? Will it make inflation worse, or could it help?

WOLFERS: I'm not really sure concerned about Build Back Better. I'm also not really concerned about the big infrastructure bill.

[13:25:04]

This is the government. And the government doles out money very slowly over very many years. The inflation problem is a today problem. Those big fiscal bills are not just today problem -- issues. They're money that's going to come out over many, many years. So I'm worried less about that.

I think the most important thing the U.S. government can do to try to tame inflation is, when we talk about supply chain issues, they're never very clear what we mean by it. But one of the most important things is, around the world, COVID continues to be a problem.

And a couple of workers come in with COVID, and they shut the factory down. They shut down a chip factory, there are fewer chips left for car manufacturers, and that then leads the price of cars to rise.

So, believe it or not, one of the most important economic policy things we can do to reduce inflation in the United States is help vaccinate the world.

CABRERA: OK, COVID obviously tied to the economic situation in a huge way.

I think there are questions, not just by people on the other side of the aisle, but Democrats, including the former Treasury Secretary Larry Summers, who are wondering if the Biden administration is taking the right path. He served during the Clinton administration, and he has been warning about inflation for some time.

He's been very critical of the Biden administration on this issue. He was on CNN last night. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

LAWRENCE SUMMERS, FORMER DIRECTOR, WHITE HOUSE NATIONAL ECONOMIC COUNCIL: They said it was transitory. It doesn't look so transitory. They said it was due to a few specific factors. Doesn't look to be a few specific factors. They said when September came and people went back to school that the labor force would grow, and it didn't happen.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CABRERA: So what are your thoughts on that? Does the Biden administration get it?

WOLFERS: I think they do get it.

And the part of the equation that Larry wasn't talking about there is the risk of doing too much on inflation that could slow the economic recovery. Look, there's still roughly eight million fewer people in jobs than we would have expected if the pandemic hadn't happened.

And so, yes, I share concerns about the rising cost of food and groceries and the like, but there are a lot of families trying to get by with no wage earner whatsoever. And if we were to slow the recovery, those people might find it difficult ever to get back to work. So it's a very difficult balancing act.

CABRERA: Justin Wolfers, I really appreciate your expertise. Thank you so much for joining us.

WOLFERS: Always good fun.

CABRERA: At least 58 lawsuits have now been filed over the Astroworld tragedy, as local police and an attorney for Travis Scott point fingers at each other.

Who, if anyone, could be held responsible?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[13:30:00]