Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Newsroom
Paul Gosar Retweets Violent Video; Rittenhouse Jury Continues Deliberations; Defendant Testifies in Ahmaud Arbery Trial. Aired 1- 1:30p ET
Aired November 18, 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]
ANA CABRERA, CNN HOST: We are following two big trials today.
And we began with stunning testimony in Georgia. The man who shot and killed jogger Ahmaud Arbery retakes the stand. And the prosecution takes aim at his account.
For hours, the prosecutor walking defendant Travis McMichael step by step through the deadly decisions he made that day and the inconsistencies in his story that followed, the questioning forcing McMichael to explain in greater detail why he shot Arbery and why he felt a man who spent several minutes trying to run away from him was a threat.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
LINDA DUNIKOSKI, COBB COUNTY, GEORGIA, ASSISTANT DISTRICT ATTORNEY: You pulled up to him once. He doesn't want to talk to you. You back up. He doesn't want to talk to you. You pull down Burford. Your dad's yelling, cut him off, cut him off.
And all of a sudden, he runs back, he doesn't want to talk to you. That's three times he's demonstrated to you that he does not want to talk to you, correct?
TRAVIS MCMICHAEL, DEFENDANT: Yes.
DUNIKOSKI: He's also demonstrate he's no threat to you. He hasn't pulled out a gun.
MCMICHAEL: That's correct.
DUNIKOSKI: He hasn't said one word to you.
MCMICHAEL: He has not.
DUNIKOSKI: He's threatened to you in any way, verbally or physically.
MCMICHAEL: No, ma'am.
DUNIKOSKI: So, at this point, you get out of the truck, correct?
MCMICHAEL: That's correct. DUNIKOSKI: And you get out with your shotgun.
MCMICHAEL: No, I got out when my father got out to get in the back. And then my shotgun slipped. And it was in the floorboard, where my feet were all over it.
Once I'm out of the vehicle, it was safe to -- I'm not going to reach -- I wasn't going to grab it while Mr. Arbery was right there. There was no reason for it. He's run off.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CABRERA: Outside the courthouse, a sea of support for Arbery's family, hundreds of pastors including Reverend Jesse Jackson, forming a prayer wall.
CNN's Martin Savidge is live in Brunswick, Georgia.
And, Martin, walk us through other significant moments of what we have seen so far today.
MARTIN SAVIDGE, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Hey, Ana.
Yes, it was very dramatic testimony. And, of course, it was a very vigorous cross-examination that was conducted by Linda Dunikoski, who is the lead when it comes to the prosecution.
And time and time again, she kept returning to what has been the basis of the defense here. First and foremost, these three men have said they were trying to conduct a citizen's arrest of Ahmaud Arbery on the day they pursued and killed him.
She was able to get Travis McMichael to admit on the witness stand that they never said that. They never actually said to Ahmaud Arbery they were placing him under arrest or even using words to that effect. That's a very strong moment there.
And then the other thing, which comes to self-defense, the struggle over the shotgun, which Ahmaud Arbery lost -- he was shot three times, struck twice. There, you get this depiction where initially Travis McMichael told authorities in the police report he didn't really remember.
He'd like to say that Ahmaud Arbery grabbed the shotgun, but he's not sure he did, whereas, when he testified in the witness stand yesterday, Travis McMichael says, yes, he grabbed the shotgun. That kind of inconsistency when you're talking about self-defense doesn't go over well.
So the state's able to show that, well, wait a minute, the first time he told that story, you said he never grabbed the gun. And that's something that could stick in the minds of jurors.
But one other thing I will point out. Just before the end of the morning, there was another witness called, really just a person from the neighborhood to talk about the issue of crime. And after the defense had finished, the state got up and asked one question.
I'm going to play this for you. This is Larissa Ollivierre. It triggered a firestorm. Take a listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
LARISSA OLLIVIERRE, PROSECUTOR: Do you believe that someone stealing is deserving of the death penalty, Mr...
(CROSSTALK)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Objection. Relevance, Your Honor.
OLLIVIERRE: I will withdraw the question, Judge.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It's inappropriate. It's incendiary. It's prejudicial. It's improper.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Given all the time that we put into this trial, and I'm talking about everybody in the judicial system, before making that motion, if the court will allow me, I'd like to have the lunch break to confer. Maybe there's something I'm missing here. That's not the appropriate thing to ask for.
But if I have to do it now or lose it, and I'm going to move for a mistrial?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SAVIDGE: Well, the judge considered that over the lunch break and finally came back and said the court does find the question inflammatory and irrelevant, however, ruled against the mistrial motion.
Instead, the judge will admonish that prosecutor in front of the jury and tell the jury to forget they heard that question, if they can -- Ana.
CABRERA: Martin Savidge in Brunswick, Georgia, thank you.
With us now is Jennifer Rodgers, former federal prosecutor, and Eric Guster, criminal and civil trial attorney.
Thank you both for being with us.
Jennifer, I want to play another longer moment from the testimony. It is the first moment Travis McMichael points his gun at Arbery. Let's listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DUNIKOSKI: You have moved out in the road. You have aimed this shotgun at Mr. Arbery.
MCMICHAEL: I did.
DUNIKOSKI: Mr. Arbery goes to the passenger side of the track.
MCMICHAEL: Yes.
DUNIKOSKI: Yes.
[13:05:00]
Your dad is still yelling at him, because we can hear him go: "Stop, goddamnit. Stop," right?
MCMICHAEL: Yes.
DUNIKOSKI: You could have easily just stepped back to your pickup truck and watched him keep going, right?
MCMICHAEL: I could have, yes, but I was -- I still didn't know what he would, could have done right there where I couldn't see him.
And to get closer to the pickup, to get closer to dad, to get to the truck, if he's going to try to come to the truck, I will be right there. So I was thinking that he was a threat, that he might -- he's going to -- he might go after myself, my father or the truck.
DUNIKOSKI: So you're telling this jury that a man who has spent five minutes running away from you, you're now thinking is somehow going to want to continue to engage with you, someone with a shotgun, and your father, a man who's just said, "Stop or I will blow your (EXPLETIVE DELETED) head off" by trying to get in their truck?
MCMICHAEL: That's what it shows, yes, ma'am.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CABRERA: So, Jennifer, how pivotal was this?
JENNIFER RODGERS, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: This was really key, Ana, because this is the important point was self-defense.
You can only use deadly self-defense if there's imminent harm to you of death or serious bodily injury. The point is, if he had other options, if his dad is right there waving his own weapon around, if he can step back, if he can kind of de-escalate the situation and get out of a box where you have to shoot or you're going to be killed, then you cannot legitimately claim self-defense.
So this admission was really, really critical, because it tells the jury he had other options. He chose not to exercise those options, and that's why Arbery is dead.
CABRERA: Eric, as the prosecutor was trying to poke holes in McMichael's account and his claim that he was protecting himself and his father, she brought up this about his father. Let's listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DUNIKOSKI: You father had 30 years of law enforcement; is that correct?
MCMICHAEL: I believe so.
DUNIKOSKI: All right. So he knows how to take care of himself, doesn't he?
MCMICHAEL: He knows how.
DUNIKOSKI: I know. And he's got a handgun with him. Right?
MCMICHAEL: Yes.
DUNIKOSKI: And he's on higher ground, isn't?
MCMICHAEL: He -- yes, yes. I would say higher ground. I would say vulnerable.
DUNIKOSKI: And you never once anywhere in your police statement said you were ever worried about your father or him being attacked at all, never said that once in any of your statements.
MCMICHAEL: In the statements, I guess not, no, ma'am.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CABRERA: Eric, how will this resonate with jurors?
ERIC GUSTER, CRIMINAL AND CIVIL TRIAL ATTORNEY: This prosecutor is poking holes like Swiss cheese in their stories.
When you start asking questions -- it's easy to give statements and not be challenged. But this prosecutor is challenging every single statement. For example, in this particular case, the dad had law enforcement experience. And the prosecutor is pointing Ahmaud was running away. He was unarmed. He was not a threat. He was trying to get away.
And similarly to what was just mentioned, you can't claim self-defense or defense of others when someone's trying to want to run away from you. And that's what the prosecutor was hammering on over and over and over again on cross.
And it was extremely effective in this case.
CABRERA: Jennifer, you felt there were a lot of holes to poke in Mr. McMichael's account. Was there anything you feel the prosecution missed during this cross-examination or any moment that maybe fell flat?
RODGERS: Well, I did think she missed a few opportunities. I mean, the best cross-examiners don't let the witness get away with anything. So even during that last clip that was playing when he talked about his father, and the prosecutor saying, well, he has 30 years of law enforcement experience and he has a gun, right?
And McMichael says, well, he's old. I mean, she could have said, oh, wait a minute, I'm sorry, so because of his age, you were concerned that he wouldn't actually be able to defend himself with his weapon? And that would have forced him to say, well, no.
So, I mean, there were chances that she could have taken to really hammer home that what he was saying was not believable. But, generally, I thought she did a good job with a lot of material to have to get through.
CABRERA: And, as you point out, his dad had a weapon too. They were both armed. And Arbery wasn't at all. He was just jogging.
So, Eric, I'm wondering, was putting McMichael on the stand the right call by the defense?
GUSTER: When you're raising a self-defense case, you have to have testimony. You typically have to have testimony from the defendant saying, I feared for my life.
So they were trying to establish that they were afraid. They were trying to establish his experience in armed forces, where he was used to engaging people. But it really fell flat because they kept hammering home, Ahmad was unarmed, Ahmaud was running away, Ahmaud was scared. And then you all were three men in two trucks who ran him down and murdered him.
And that's what this case really hinges on.
CABRERA: Again, there are three defendants. We have only heard from one of them.
And the man who filmed the encounter, William Bryan, who was in another vehicle, another truck, his attorney says at this point Mr. William Bryan has no plan to testify in this case.
But,, has a precedent now been set? Should the other two defendants take the stand? Because what message would it send to jurors if they don't?
[13:10:07]
RODGERS: Well, the jury always wants to hear from the defendant, but very few defendants actually testify. And the judge will admonish them strongly that they cannot take any sort of inference from the fact that they don't.
So I think that they will not I mean, I don't know what the other McMichael will do, the father. But Mr. Bryan apparently will not testify, and I think that's OK, because his lawyer's tack really has been to try to separate him from the McMichaels.
So he's just going to say they were doing their thing. He just was kind of there. He's the one who filmed it. That's why we have all of this information. Don't lump him in with the other two. So, for him, I think that's the right call, and then we will see what McMichael Sr. decides to do. CABRERA: And, quickly, I do want to play some sound from the attorney
of Ahmaud Arbery's father. This is Benjamin Crump. And he basically boils it down to this. Listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BENJAMIN CRUMP, ATTORNEY FOR FAMILY OF AHMAUD ARBERY: Now, if the roles were reversed, you would not hear any of this. If that was a black father and son who chased an unarmed young (AUDIO GAP) killed him, everybody would say that this was bloody murder, and the court's rulings would support such.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CABRERA: Eric, do you agree with that?
GUSTER: I do agree with that.
When you look at cases and the law and how this case took place, it took a while for them to even be charged. And that was very disturbing, when you look at the facts of this man was unarmed, chased by three men, three white men in a truck, and in the South.
I'm in Birmingham, Alabama. We're in the South, where we have a history of this type of violence. It is very disturbing, as an African-American man, watching this case and thinking, if I go out jogging, will someone try to chase me down? And that's a reality that we have to think about and what we have to really be mindful of.
But if roles were reverse, it wouldn't even be a case.
CABRERA: Right. We know that law enforcement essentially gave the defendant in this case initially the benefit of the doubt. And it wasn't until months later, when video of this incident leaked to the public, that these arrests were made.
Eric Guster, Jennifer Rodgers, I really appreciate both of your expertise, and joining us today with your thoughts and perspective on what we heard. Thank you.
Let's head to Wisconsin now and another high-profile case, where jurors in the Kyle Rittenhouse homicide trial are well into day three of deliberations.
And CNN' Shimon Prokupecz is live outside the courthouse in Kenosha.
Shimon, I understand the judge just banned anyone from MSNBC from entering the courthouse. What happened?
SHIMON PROKUPECZ, CNN CRIME AND JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: Well, there was an incident, the judge says, last night with someone who was employed by MSNBC. He says that the police, the Kenosha police, who issued a statement in a tweet saying that this person they believe was trying to photograph jurors.
The judge says that this person was following the jury van. And so police became suspicious and so they pulled him over. They issued citations. But there you see the police issuing a statement saying that a person who's alleging to be affiliated with a national media outlet was briefly taken into custody and issued several citations, and that they believe that this person was trying to photograph jurors.
Now, NBC has issued a statement. Let me pull that up here now. They confirm that a freelancer received a traffic citation. And they say that the traffic citation took place near the jury van. The freelancer never contacted or intended to contact the jurors during deliberations and never photographed or intended to photograph them.
And then they say that they regret the incident and that they intend to fully cooperate. This all took place this morning. The attorneys came in. The judge had a brief meeting with them. And he explained to them what was happening. And then the judge came out, took the bench, didn't announce that he was going to do this or that there was this issue, just took the bench and started telling us in the media what was going on because we were asking questions.
And that's when he relayed the information. And just to, like, give you an idea of what goes on here, there is intense security around the jurors. They're taking out a back way. They're in this van there. They are taken to an off-site location and picked up at an off-site location.
And the van is covered so you can't see inside. So there's a lot of security. And as you can understand, a lot of people get very nervous anytime someone gets near any of the jurors.
CABRERA: There been a lot of twists and turns so far in this trial, and, again, the jury continuing their deliberations.
Shimon Prokupecz, thank you.
We have some breaking news just in. CNN has learned that Iranian cyber actors targeted the 2020 U.S. elections. And the Treasury Department has now slapped sanctions on both individuals, as well as one company.
CNN's Kylie Atwood joins us live to break it all down.
What are we learning, Kylie?
KYLIE ATWOOD, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: Well, this is some breaking news from the Treasury Department, rolling out these new sanctions on, as you said, six Iranian individuals, one Iranian entity for attempting to influence the 2020 elections.
[13:15:07]
And what's pretty fascinating here is that Treasury gets into some detail as to what these Iranian actors were attempting to do over the course of the month surrounding the 2020 presidential election, from August to November of 2020.
I just want to read to you some of these details here. They were seeking to get us voter information from state election Web sites, so essentially like trying to get into those Web sites to get voter information. They were also sending threatening e-mails, and those were trying to intimidate voters, obviously, who are going out voting.
And then they were also crafting and disseminating information about election and election security. They were also trying to get into U.S. media companies, though there's a line in here that said the FBI was able to leverage this act and make sure that it was ultimately an effort that was thwarted, so some really stark details here about what they were trying to do.
The Biden administration, Treasury making it clear that those who attempted to meddle in the elections are going to pay a price by rolling out these new sanctions today.
CABRERA: Kylie Atwood for us in Washington, thank you.
No remorse and a quick return to the toxic behavior that got him punished by Congress. Republican Congressman Paul Gosar continuing to defend and even retweeting a video depicting the killing of Democratic Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, even after getting censured for it.
Plus, the nation's number two military general revealing new details about a new weapon in China's arsenal, a hypersonic missile that can travel all the way around the globe.
And Dr. Anthony Fauci issuing a new warning for fully vaccinated Americans, as cases rise, why he says all adults should get their booster.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[13:21:17]
CABRERA: Disciplined, but still defiant.
It took Republican Congressman Paul Gosar all of an hour to mock the House vote to censure him and strip him of two committee assignments. All the House Democrats and two Republicans, just two, discipline Gosar for tweeting a Photoshopped video with him killing Democratic Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.
Gosar's response minutes later, retweeting a post from one of his supporters containing the exact same video again, firing up his base and outraging those not amused by the idea of killing a member of Congress, especially not after the January 6 attack on the Capitol.
I want to discuss this with Charlie Dent, former Republican congressman from Pennsylvania and now CNN political commentator.
Congressman, only two Republicans, two, Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger, voted with Democrats for this censure resolution. More Republican lawmakers were actually standing with Gosar, showing solidarity with him.
What kind of message does this send?
CHARLIE DENT, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well, I think it's pretty clear that if you ask most of those House Republicans, they felt that Gosar deserved to be sanctioned. I think many did not want to remove him from his committee.
That said, Gosar has become an embarrassment and a distraction. His behavior is incendiary and reckless. And he deserved this.
There used to be a time, Ana, when a member of Congress who was sanctioned, reprimanded, or censured in this case, they would experience reputational damage.
CABRERA: Right.
DENT: And it would be career ending in many cases. And he's wearing this as a badge of honor.
Taylor Greene, I believe, was also sanctioned by the House, removed from committees. And this is a very big deal. And that's what I think has changed, is the standards of conduct have not been maintained or enforced. And the standards bar is now very low.
I was chairman of the House Ethics Committee. And I used to have to deal with situations like this. And this was not pleasant. This was not fun. I was involved with the Rangel censure years ago, 10 years. That was the last time there was a censure. And, believe me, this is a hard thing to do.
And I just -- I'm almost at a loss for words to describe how this seems so bizarre and surreal that a member could just be so cavalier about the whole thing.
CABRERA: Right.
Well, I'm glad you feel that way, because, as an outside observer, it certainly seems crazy. I mean, there used to be a time -- you said it -- when this kind of punishment would make a difference, right?
But Gosar seems empowered, he's emboldened vs. remorseful. What does his retweeting the video tell you?
DENT: Well, it tells me that he's simply unapologetic. I don't think he really ever apologized. I think he expressed some regret in a closed-door meeting. But he's unapologetic.
And what's sad about today's politics is that people like Paul Gosar are Marjorie Taylor Greene are able to monetize their notoriety. Ordinarily, if you have been sanctioned like this, you would lose a lot of friends and people would be less inclined to support you and your campaign.
And it would probably be the end of your career. But, nowadays, they're able to go out there and raise a lot of small-dollar contributions, and they will make money off of this, but I think it's incumbent upon House leaders, in this case, House Republican leaders, to deal with problems within their own conference.
I witnessed John Boehner and Paul Ryan deal with members who became distractions or embarrassments, forcing them to resign. Nancy Pelosi did the same thing with Anthony Weiner and Eric Massa and others. I remember these experiences. They dealt with their problems internally, and so to avoid a public spectacle, like we witnessed yesterday.
CABRERA: Some Democrats have said this censure is not strong enough condemnation, that it should be expulsion. What do you think?
[13:25:00]
DENT: Well, expulsion, I believe there have been -- there have been a total of five expulsions in the history the U.S. House of Representatives, three during the Civil War for treason, the other two because of felonies, Ozzie Myers during Abscam and James Traficant, both of whom were convicted of felonies and refused to resign.
I would be very hesitant to go down the expulsion route, just based on the precedents. Ordinarily, what should happen, the Republican leadership should sit down with people sit down with people like Gosar and Greene and try to force resignations.
Again, I have seen it happen. I probably counted about 14 or so resignations during my time of members because of misconduct, and they resigned for those reasons.
CABRERA: And yet, instead, this is how House GOP Leader Kevin McCarthy is responding to this. He actually said this today about both Gosar and Marjorie Taylor Greene if Republicans win the House in next year's midterms. Listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. KEVIN MCCARTHY (R-CA): They will have committees. The committee assignment they have now, they may have other committee assignments. They may have better committee assignments.
I think, with Gosar, those are the ones he wants. Taylor Greene, she was just a freshman. I know she has requested others. She has the right to serve on committees.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CABRERA: Rewarding these types of Republicans who do these types of things?
DENT: Well...
CABRERA: Do you see Republicans ever being held accountable and policing their own?
DENT: Well, they must. They must police their own.
In fact, I said at the time that Marjorie Taylor Greene was nominated back in the summer of 2020 -- she was espousing at that time QAnon conspiracy theories and making all sorts of racially incendiary comments and just wild statements.
At the time, I said she should not be welcomed into the GOP Conference and not assigned any committees and she should be told that we will work with the Georgia GOP to defeat her in the 2022 primary and say enjoy your time in Congress. That's how you deal with people like this. You do not bring them into the mainstream. You marginalize them.
You put them on the fringe. What's even worse, Ana, is that they spent -- on Tuesday morning, they spent 90 minutes in the House Conference, GOP Conference, excoriating John Katko, an honorable congressman from New York, for voting for an infrastructure bill.
They weren't talking about Paul Gosar. They were talking about John Katko. And here's a normal, mainstream guy in a very swing district, and trying to harm him, while excusing people who are embarrassments and who are engaged in conduct that brings discredit upon the House.
I mean, the whole world's upside down, it feels like.
CABRERA: And what happened to serving the American people? It seems like everybody who's going down that route is there to serve themselves right now.
Charlie Dent, I appreciate the conversation, former Congressman Charlie Dent. Good to see you.
DENT: Thank you, Ana. Great to be with you.
CABRERA: It can travel around the world largely undetected.
And, according to the number two military general in the United States, it's pretty accurate too -- the stunning new details about China's hypersonic missile next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[13:00:00]
ANA CABRERA, CNN HOST: We are following two big trials today.
And we began with stunning testimony in Georgia. The man who shot and killed jogger Ahmaud Arbery retakes the stand. And the prosecution takes aim at his account. For hours, the prosecutor walking defendant Travis McMichael step by
step through the deadly decisions he made that day and the inconsistencies in his story that followed, the questioning forcing McMichael to explain in greater detail why he shot Arbery and why he felt a man who spent several minutes trying to run away from him was a threat.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
LINDA DUNIKOSKI, COBB COUNTY, GEORGIA, ASSISTANT DISTRICT ATTORNEY: You pulled up to him once. He doesn't want to talk to you. You back up. He doesn't want to talk to you. You pull down Burford. Your dad's yelling, cut him off, cut him off.
And all of a sudden, he runs back, he doesn't want to talk to you. That's three times he's demonstrated to you that he does not want to talk to you, correct?
TRAVIS MCMICHAEL, DEFENDANT: Yes.
DUNIKOSKI: He's also demonstrate he's no threat to you. He hasn't pulled out a gun.
MCMICHAEL: That's correct.
DUNIKOSKI: He hasn't said one word to you.
MCMICHAEL: He has not.
DUNIKOSKI: He's threatened to you in any way, verbally or physically.
MCMICHAEL: No, ma'am.
DUNIKOSKI: So, at this point, you get out of the truck, correct?
MCMICHAEL: That's correct.
DUNIKOSKI: And you get out with your shotgun.
MCMICHAEL: No, I got out when my father got out to get in the back. And then my shotgun slipped. And it was in the floorboard, where my feet were all over it.
Once I'm out of the vehicle, it was safe to -- I'm not going to reach -- I wasn't going to grab it while Mr. Arbery was right there. There was no reason for it. He's run off.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CABRERA: Outside the courthouse, a sea of support for Arbery's family, hundreds of pastors including Reverend Jesse Jackson, forming a prayer wall.
CNN's Martin Savidge is live in Brunswick, Georgia.
And, Martin, walk us through other significant moments of what we have seen so far today.
MARTIN SAVIDGE, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Hey, Ana.
Yes, it was very dramatic testimony. And, of course, it was a very vigorous cross-examination that was conducted by Linda Dunikoski, who is the lead when it comes to the prosecution.
And time and time again, she kept returning to what has been the basis of the defense here. First and foremost, these three men have said they were trying to conduct a citizen's arrest of Ahmaud Arbery on the day they pursued and killed him.
She was able to get Travis McMichael to admit on the witness stand that they never said that. They never actually said to Ahmaud Arbery they were placing him under arrest or even using words to that effect. That's a very strong moment there.
And then the other thing, which comes to self-defense, the struggle over the shotgun, which Ahmaud Arbery lost -- he was shot three times, struck twice. There, you get this depiction where initially Travis McMichael told authorities in the police report he didn't really remember.
He'd like to say that Ahmaud Arbery grabbed the shotgun, but he's not sure he did, whereas, when he testified in the witness stand yesterday, Travis McMichael says, yes, he grabbed the shotgun. That kind of inconsistency when you're talking about self-defense doesn't go over well.
So the state's able to show that, well, wait a minute, the first time he told that story, you said he never grabbed the gun. And that's something that could stick in the minds of jurors.
But one other thing I will point out. Just before the end of the morning, there was another witness called, really just a person from the neighborhood to talk about the issue of crime. And after the defense had finished, the state got up and asked one question.
I'm going to play this for you. This is Larissa Ollivierre. It triggered a firestorm. Take a listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
LARISSA OLLIVIERRE, PROSECUTOR: Do you believe that someone stealing is deserving of the death penalty, Mr...
(CROSSTALK)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Objection. Relevance, Your Honor.
OLLIVIERRE: I will withdraw the question, Judge.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It's inappropriate. It's incendiary. It's prejudicial. It's improper.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Given all the time that we put into this trial, and I'm talking about everybody in the judicial system, before making that motion, if the court will allow me, I'd like to have the lunch break to confer. Maybe there's something I'm missing here. That's not the appropriate thing to ask for.
But if I have to do it now or lose it, and I'm going to move for a mistrial?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SAVIDGE: Well, the judge considered that over the lunch break and finally came back and said the court does find the question inflammatory and irrelevant, however, ruled against the mistrial motion.
Instead, the judge will admonish that prosecutor in front of the jury and tell the jury to forget they heard that question, if they can -- Ana.
CABRERA: Martin Savidge in Brunswick, Georgia, thank you.
With us now is Jennifer Rodgers, former federal prosecutor, and Eric Guster, criminal and civil trial attorney.
Thank you both for being with us.
Jennifer, I want to play another longer moment from the testimony. It is the first moment Travis McMichael points his gun at Arbery. Let's listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DUNIKOSKI: You have moved out in the road. You have aimed this shotgun at Mr. Arbery.
MCMICHAEL: I did.
DUNIKOSKI: Mr. Arbery goes to the passenger side of the track.
MCMICHAEL: Yes.
DUNIKOSKI: Yes.
[13:05:00]
Your dad is still yelling at him, because we can hear him go: "Stop, goddamnit. Stop," right?
MCMICHAEL: Yes.
DUNIKOSKI: You could have easily just stepped back to your pickup truck and watched him keep going, right?
MCMICHAEL: I could have, yes, but I was -- I still didn't know what he would, could have done right there where I couldn't see him.
And to get closer to the pickup, to get closer to dad, to get to the truck, if he's going to try to come to the truck, I will be right there. So I was thinking that he was a threat, that he might -- he's going to -- he might go after myself, my father or the truck.
DUNIKOSKI: So you're telling this jury that a man who has spent five minutes running away from you, you're now thinking is somehow going to want to continue to engage with you, someone with a shotgun, and your father, a man who's just said, "Stop or I will blow your (EXPLETIVE DELETED) head off" by trying to get in their truck?
MCMICHAEL: That's what it shows, yes, ma'am.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CABRERA: So, Jennifer, how pivotal was this?
JENNIFER RODGERS, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: This was really key, Ana, because this is the important point was self-defense.
You can only use deadly self-defense if there's imminent harm to you of death or serious bodily injury. The point is, if he had other options, if his dad is right there waving his own weapon around, if he can step back, if he can kind of de-escalate the situation and get out of a box where you have to shoot or you're going to be killed, then you cannot legitimately claim self-defense.
So this admission was really, really critical, because it tells the jury he had other options. He chose not to exercise those options, and that's why Arbery is dead.
CABRERA: Eric, as the prosecutor was trying to poke holes in McMichael's account and his claim that he was protecting himself and his father, she brought up this about his father. Let's listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DUNIKOSKI: You father had 30 years of law enforcement; is that correct?
MCMICHAEL: I believe so.
DUNIKOSKI: All right. So he knows how to take care of himself, doesn't he?
MCMICHAEL: He knows how.
DUNIKOSKI: I know. And he's got a handgun with him. Right?
MCMICHAEL: Yes.
DUNIKOSKI: And he's on higher ground, isn't?
MCMICHAEL: He -- yes, yes. I would say higher ground. I would say vulnerable.
DUNIKOSKI: And you never once anywhere in your police statement said you were ever worried about your father or him being attacked at all, never said that once in any of your statements.
MCMICHAEL: In the statements, I guess not, no, ma'am.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CABRERA: Eric, how will this resonate with jurors?
ERIC GUSTER, CRIMINAL AND CIVIL TRIAL ATTORNEY: This prosecutor is poking holes like Swiss cheese in their stories.
When you start asking questions -- it's easy to give statements and not be challenged. But this prosecutor is challenging every single statement. For example, in this particular case, the dad had law enforcement experience. And the prosecutor is pointing Ahmaud was running away. He was unarmed. He was not a threat. He was trying to get away.
And similarly to what was just mentioned, you can't claim self-defense or defense of others when someone's trying to want to run away from you. And that's what the prosecutor was hammering on over and over and over again on cross.
And it was extremely effective in this case.
CABRERA: Jennifer, you felt there were a lot of holes to poke in Mr. McMichael's account. Was there anything you feel the prosecution missed during this cross-examination or any moment that maybe fell flat?
RODGERS: Well, I did think she missed a few opportunities. I mean, the best cross-examiners don't let the witness get away with anything. So even during that last clip that was playing when he talked about his father, and the prosecutor saying, well, he has 30 years of law enforcement experience and he has a gun, right?
And McMichael says, well, he's old. I mean, she could have said, oh, wait a minute, I'm sorry, so because of his age, you were concerned that he wouldn't actually be able to defend himself with his weapon? And that would have forced him to say, well, no.
So, I mean, there were chances that she could have taken to really hammer home that what he was saying was not believable. But, generally, I thought she did a good job with a lot of material to have to get through.
CABRERA: And, as you point out, his dad had a weapon too. They were both armed. And Arbery wasn't at all. He was just jogging.
So, Eric, I'm wondering, was putting McMichael on the stand the right call by the defense?
GUSTER: When you're raising a self-defense case, you have to have testimony. You typically have to have testimony from the defendant saying, I feared for my life.
So they were trying to establish that they were afraid. They were trying to establish his experience in armed forces, where he was used to engaging people. But it really fell flat because they kept hammering home, Ahmad was unarmed, Ahmaud was running away, Ahmaud was scared. And then you all were three men in two trucks who ran him down and murdered him.
And that's what this case really hinges on.
CABRERA: Again, there are three defendants. We have only heard from one of them.
And the man who filmed the encounter, William Bryan, who was in another vehicle, another truck, his attorney says at this point Mr. William Bryan has no plan to testify in this case.
But,, has a precedent now been set? Should the other two defendants take the stand? Because what message would it send to jurors if they don't?
[13:10:07]
RODGERS: Well, the jury always wants to hear from the defendant, but very few defendants actually testify. And the judge will admonish them strongly that they cannot take any sort of inference from the fact that they don't.
So I think that they will not I mean, I don't know what the other McMichael will do, the father. But Mr. Bryan apparently will not testify, and I think that's OK, because his lawyer's tack really has been to try to separate him from the McMichaels.
So he's just going to say they were doing their thing. He just was kind of there. He's the one who filmed it. That's why we have all of this information. Don't lump him in with the other two. So, for him, I think that's the right call, and then we will see what McMichael Sr. decides to do.
CABRERA: And, quickly, I do want to play some sound from the attorney of Ahmaud Arbery's father. This is Benjamin Crump. And he basically boils it down to this. Listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BENJAMIN CRUMP, ATTORNEY FOR FAMILY OF AHMAUD ARBERY: Now, if the roles were reversed, you would not hear any of this. If that was a black father and son who chased an unarmed young (AUDIO GAP) killed him, everybody would say that this was bloody murder, and the court's rulings would support such.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CABRERA: Eric, do you agree with that?
GUSTER: I do agree with that.
When you look at cases and the law and how this case took place, it took a while for them to even be charged. And that was very disturbing, when you look at the facts of this man was unarmed, chased by three men, three white men in a truck, and in the South.
I'm in Birmingham, Alabama. We're in the South, where we have a history of this type of violence. It is very disturbing, as an African-American man, watching this case and thinking, if I go out jogging, will someone try to chase me down? And that's a reality that we have to think about and what we have to really be mindful of.
But if roles were reverse, it wouldn't even be a case.
CABRERA: Right. We know that law enforcement essentially gave the defendant in this case initially the benefit of the doubt. And it wasn't until months later, when video of this incident leaked to the public, that these arrests were made.
Eric Guster, Jennifer Rodgers, I really appreciate both of your expertise, and joining us today with your thoughts and perspective on what we heard. Thank you.
Let's head to Wisconsin now and another high-profile case, where jurors in the Kyle Rittenhouse homicide trial are well into day three of deliberations.
And CNN' Shimon Prokupecz is live outside the courthouse in Kenosha.
Shimon, I understand the judge just banned anyone from MSNBC from entering the courthouse. What happened?
SHIMON PROKUPECZ, CNN CRIME AND JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: Well, there was an incident, the judge says, last night with someone who was employed by MSNBC. He says that the police, the Kenosha police, who issued a statement in a tweet saying that this person they believe was trying to photograph jurors.
The judge says that this person was following the jury van. And so police became suspicious and so they pulled him over. They issued citations. But there you see the police issuing a statement saying that a person who's alleging to be affiliated with a national media outlet was briefly taken into custody and issued several citations, and that they believe that this person was trying to photograph jurors.
Now, NBC has issued a statement. Let me pull that up here now. They confirm that a freelancer received a traffic citation. And they say that the traffic citation took place near the jury van. The freelancer never contacted or intended to contact the jurors during deliberations and never photographed or intended to photograph them.
And then they say that they regret the incident and that they intend to fully cooperate. This all took place this morning. The attorneys came in. The judge had a brief meeting with them. And he explained to them what was happening. And then the judge came out, took the bench, didn't announce that he was going to do this or that there was this issue, just took the bench and started telling us in the media what was going on because we were asking questions.
And that's when he relayed the information. And just to, like, give you an idea of what goes on here, there is intense security around the jurors. They're taking out a back way. They're in this van there. They are taken to an off-site location and picked up at an off-site location.
And the van is covered so you can't see inside. So there's a lot of security. And as you can understand, a lot of people get very nervous anytime someone gets near any of the jurors.
CABRERA: There been a lot of twists and turns so far in this trial, and, again, the jury continuing their deliberations.
Shimon Prokupecz, thank you.
We have some breaking news just in. CNN has learned that Iranian cyber actors targeted the 2020 U.S. elections. And the Treasury Department has now slapped sanctions on both individuals, as well as one company.
CNN's Kylie Atwood joins us live to break it all down.
What are we learning, Kylie?
KYLIE ATWOOD, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: Well, this is some breaking news from the Treasury Department, rolling out these new sanctions on, as you said, six Iranian individuals, one Iranian entity for attempting to influence the 2020 elections.
[13:15:07]
And what's pretty fascinating here is that Treasury gets into some detail as to what these Iranian actors were attempting to do over the course of the month surrounding the 2020 presidential election, from August to November of 2020.
I just want to read to you some of these details here. They were seeking to get us voter information from state election Web sites, so essentially like trying to get into those Web sites to get voter information. They were also sending threatening e-mails, and those were trying to intimidate voters, obviously, who are going out voting.
And then they were also crafting and disseminating information about election and election security. They were also trying to get into U.S. media companies, though there's a line in here that said the FBI was able to leverage this act and make sure that it was ultimately an effort that was thwarted, so some really stark details here about what they were trying to do.
The Biden administration, Treasury making it clear that those who attempted to meddle in the elections are going to pay a price by rolling out these new sanctions today.
CABRERA: Kylie Atwood for us in Washington, thank you.
No remorse and a quick return to the toxic behavior that got him punished by Congress. Republican Congressman Paul Gosar continuing to defend and even retweeting a video depicting the killing of Democratic Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, even after getting censured for it.
Plus, the nation's number two military general revealing new details about a new weapon in China's arsenal, a hypersonic missile that can travel all the way around the globe.
And Dr. Anthony Fauci issuing a new warning for fully vaccinated Americans, as cases rise, why he says all adults should get their booster.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[13:21:17]
CABRERA: Disciplined, but still defiant.
It took Republican Congressman Paul Gosar all of an hour to mock the House vote to censure him and strip him of two committee assignments. All the House Democrats and two Republicans, just two, discipline Gosar for tweeting a Photoshopped video with him killing Democratic Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.
Gosar's response minutes later, retweeting a post from one of his supporters containing the exact same video again, firing up his base and outraging those not amused by the idea of killing a member of Congress, especially not after the January 6 attack on the Capitol.
I want to discuss this with Charlie Dent, former Republican congressman from Pennsylvania and now CNN political commentator.
Congressman, only two Republicans, two, Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger, voted with Democrats for this censure resolution. More Republican lawmakers were actually standing with Gosar, showing solidarity with him.
What kind of message does this send?
CHARLIE DENT, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well, I think it's pretty clear that if you ask most of those House Republicans, they felt that Gosar deserved to be sanctioned. I think many did not want to remove him from his committee.
That said, Gosar has become an embarrassment and a distraction. His behavior is incendiary and reckless. And he deserved this.
There used to be a time, Ana, when a member of Congress who was sanctioned, reprimanded, or censured in this case, they would experience reputational damage.
CABRERA: Right.
DENT: And it would be career ending in many cases. And he's wearing this as a badge of honor.
Taylor Greene, I believe, was also sanctioned by the House, removed from committees. And this is a very big deal. And that's what I think has changed, is the standards of conduct have not been maintained or enforced. And the standards bar is now very low.
I was chairman of the House Ethics Committee. And I used to have to deal with situations like this. And this was not pleasant. This was not fun. I was involved with the Rangel censure years ago, 10 years. That was the last time there was a censure. And, believe me, this is a hard thing to do.
And I just -- I'm almost at a loss for words to describe how this seems so bizarre and surreal that a member could just be so cavalier about the whole thing.
CABRERA: Right.
Well, I'm glad you feel that way, because, as an outside observer, it certainly seems crazy. I mean, there used to be a time -- you said it -- when this kind of punishment would make a difference, right?
But Gosar seems empowered, he's emboldened vs. remorseful. What does his retweeting the video tell you?
DENT: Well, it tells me that he's simply unapologetic. I don't think he really ever apologized. I think he expressed some regret in a closed-door meeting. But he's unapologetic.
And what's sad about today's politics is that people like Paul Gosar are Marjorie Taylor Greene are able to monetize their notoriety. Ordinarily, if you have been sanctioned like this, you would lose a lot of friends and people would be less inclined to support you and your campaign.
And it would probably be the end of your career. But, nowadays, they're able to go out there and raise a lot of small-dollar contributions, and they will make money off of this, but I think it's incumbent upon House leaders, in this case, House Republican leaders, to deal with problems within their own conference.
I witnessed John Boehner and Paul Ryan deal with members who became distractions or embarrassments, forcing them to resign. Nancy Pelosi did the same thing with Anthony Weiner and Eric Massa and others. I remember these experiences. They dealt with their problems internally, and so to avoid a public spectacle, like we witnessed yesterday.
CABRERA: Some Democrats have said this censure is not strong enough condemnation, that it should be expulsion. What do you think?
[13:25:00]
DENT: Well, expulsion, I believe there have been -- there have been a total of five expulsions in the history the U.S. House of Representatives, three during the Civil War for treason, the other two because of felonies, Ozzie Myers during Abscam and James Traficant, both of whom were convicted of felonies and refused to resign.
I would be very hesitant to go down the expulsion route, just based on the precedents. Ordinarily, what should happen, the Republican leadership should sit down with people sit down with people like Gosar and Greene and try to force resignations.
Again, I have seen it happen. I probably counted about 14 or so resignations during my time of members because of misconduct, and they resigned for those reasons.
CABRERA: And yet, instead, this is how House GOP Leader Kevin McCarthy is responding to this. He actually said this today about both Gosar and Marjorie Taylor Greene if Republicans win the House in next year's midterms. Listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. KEVIN MCCARTHY (R-CA): They will have committees. The committee assignment they have now, they may have other committee assignments. They may have better committee assignments.
I think, with Gosar, those are the ones he wants. Taylor Greene, she was just a freshman. I know she has requested others. She has the right to serve on committees.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CABRERA: Rewarding these types of Republicans who do these types of things?
DENT: Well...
CABRERA: Do you see Republicans ever being held accountable and policing their own?
DENT: Well, they must. They must police their own.
In fact, I said at the time that Marjorie Taylor Greene was nominated back in the summer of 2020 -- she was espousing at that time QAnon conspiracy theories and making all sorts of racially incendiary comments and just wild statements.
At the time, I said she should not be welcomed into the GOP Conference and not assigned any committees and she should be told that we will work with the Georgia GOP to defeat her in the 2022 primary and say enjoy your time in Congress. That's how you deal with people like this. You do not bring them into the mainstream. You marginalize them.
You put them on the fringe. What's even worse, Ana, is that they spent -- on Tuesday morning, they spent 90 minutes in the House Conference, GOP Conference, excoriating John Katko, an honorable congressman from New York, for voting for an infrastructure bill.
They weren't talking about Paul Gosar. They were talking about John Katko. And here's a normal, mainstream guy in a very swing district, and trying to harm him, while excusing people who are embarrassments and who are engaged in conduct that brings discredit upon the House.
I mean, the whole world's upside down, it feels like.
CABRERA: And what happened to serving the American people? It seems like everybody who's going down that route is there to serve themselves right now.
Charlie Dent, I appreciate the conversation, former Congressman Charlie Dent. Good to see you.
DENT: Thank you, Ana. Great to be with you.
CABRERA: It can travel around the world largely undetected.
And, according to the number two military general in the United States, it's pretty accurate too -- the stunning new details about China's hypersonic missile next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
