Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Supreme Court Allows Abortion Restrictions to Remain in Texas; Homicides on the Rise; Prices Rising; Trump's Legal Troubles. Aired 3- 3:30p ET

Aired December 10, 2021 - 15:00   ET

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

[15:00:01]

PAULA REID, CNN SENIOR LEGAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: So, it was interesting.

Yesterday, we saw really four key figures in this investigation paraded up on Capitol Hill in front of cameras, just as a show of force for the committee to really sort of drive home the point that they are getting work done.

And, yesterday, of course, the committee also had a big win at the Court of Appeals, which ruled against former President Trump in his efforts to keep secret his White House records from the committee.

VICTOR BLACKWELL, CNN HOST: Paula Reid with the latest in Washington, thank you.

Well, Donald Trump's legal troubles, they are piling up, as we just heard, more subpoenas there, but the former president now has two weeks to ask the Supreme Court to review his claim of executive privilege. That's after a federal appeals court rejected his request to block the 1/6 Committee from getting his White House records.

ALISYN CAMEROTA, CNN HOST: And, in New York, the state's attorney general, Letitia James, wants to question Donald Trump as part of that financial fraud probe into the Trump Organization.

Joining us now to discuss all of this, we have Dave Aronberg, the state attorney for Palm Beach County, Florida, and veteran journalist and Donald Trump biographer Michael D'Antonio.

Great to see both of you.

Michael, I just want you to frame this for us before we get into the nitty gritty. You say that yesterday was the second worst day of Donald Trump's year. Why do you say that?

MICHAEL D'ANTONIO, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: Well, I think, for him, the very worst day was when he jetted off as the former president and Joe Biden was inaugurated as the 46th president. So that was a very, very bad day for Donald Trump.

But yesterday was exceedingly bad as well, especially given his loss at the circuit court of appeals on this demand by the 1/6 Committee for his participation in their work.

And I also think Letitia James's desire to subpoena him is something that he's going to have trouble fighting. It's -- there's no leverage, actually, there in New York state. And I wonder, too, if, with the Supreme Court, where he's bound to appeal, he may have less leverage than he imagined when he appointed members of the court.

They are involved in other controversies, they may want to protect the Supreme Court from further controversy by just letting the circuit court decision stand. But I have no crystal ball where that's concerned.

BLACKWELL: So many legal questions for you, Dave. And I know you have no crystal ball. But tell us if you think first, that the Supreme Court will even take the case.

DAVE ARONBERG, PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA, STATE ATTORNEY: Victor, I don't think they will, because this Supreme Court wants people to buy into them as a non-political body.

So why would they want to step into this political mess? They would be stepping on a rake. And, besides, the lower court took great pains to create an argument that they thought that conservatives on the Supreme Court would like, the separation of powers argument, that, hey, this is an executive decision, don't let the judges get involved in executive branch decisions.

That's an argument that will appeal to Justice Kavanaugh and others on the right wing of the court. And so I think they're unlikely to take the case. But even if they did, I agree with Michael that it's unlikely they would overturn the lower court decision, because, remember, in the tax case, they rule 7-2 against Trump on his taxes, including all three justices that Trump himself appointed.

So this is a case with bad facts, and bad facts make bad law. And I don't think the conservative justices want any part of it.

CAMEROTA: So, Dave, where does that leave us? If they don't take the case, let's just go with that scenario, then what does that mean for getting these records?

ARONBERG: In two weeks, that means, Alisyn, that those records would have to be turned over.

Now, I do expect with 100 percent certainty that Trump will appeal to the Supreme Court. And I think that's when they will say, no, we're not going to hear it.

But even if they do hear it, as I said before, bad facts make bad law. Remember, executive privilege is designed to protect the republic, not the president, and especially not a former president. And, here, the Trump legal team would be asking the Supreme Court to accept an argument that a former president can use executive privilege to conceal a criminal conspiracy, the conspiracy of overthrowing the government of the United States.

That's why I think it's farfetched that they will rule his way. He's not going to win in this.

BLACKWELL: David, let me -- I'm sorry. Let me come to Michael with this on this reporting from Axios.

We are learning about the former president souring over his relationship with the former Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Spicy language coming here.

So it was after the inauguration and former President Trump was not happy that Prime Minister Netanyahu congratulated President Biden. And he explained it this -- quote -- "It was early OK. Let's put it this way. He greeted them very early, earlier than in most world leaders. I have not spoken to him since. F. him."

[15:05:05]

Sounds on brand for former President Trump, I guess.

D'ANTONIO: It's perfectly on brand. And, gee, I wonder if anyone would be surprised that he considers himself the center of the universe and believes that everyone, including Bibi Netanyahu, should consider Donald Trump the center of the universe as well.

Everything is determined around how it affects him. He can't look at Netanyahu and say, well, this man has an obligation to communicate with the incoming president. He represents his own country of Israel. It's a vital relationship. Instead, Trump wants him to be loyal to him.

It reminds me of the monarchs who would say, I am the state. It's the same problem Trump has with these requests for documents and his assertion of executive privilege. He's not the state. Bibi Netanyahu was relating to the state of the United States of America, and its new leader, Joe Biden.

So this is an appalling demonstration of his self-centeredness, but it's par for the course and, as you say, victor, very much on brand.

CAMEROTA: All right, Dave Aronberg, Michael D'Antonio, thank you both.

ARONBERG: Thank you.

D'ANTONIO: Thank you.

BLACKWELL: A key measure of U.S. inflation found consumer prices jumped 6.8 percent over the past year, the biggest spike in almost 40 years. That's probably not a shock for a lot of people who have seen the prices of groceries and coffee specifically, new cars, even furniture go up.

CAMEROTA: But demand for goods remains strong. That's a positive sign for the economy.

President Biden said today that inflation is a real problem, but he feels the U.S. is at the peak of the crisis. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOE BIDEN, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: A real bump in the road. It does affect families. When you walk in the grocery store and you're paying more for whatever you're purchasing, it matters. It matters to people. When you're paying more for gas, although in some states, we have got the price down below three bucks a gallon.

But the point is, it's not gone down quickly enough. But I think it will.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CAMEROTA: OK, let's discuss some CNN economics and political commentator Catherine Rampell.

She's also an opinion columnist for "The Washington Post."

So, Catherine, how are we supposed to interpret all of the different signs today?

CATHERINE RAMPELL, CNN ECONOMICS AND POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well, to some extent, this report is backward-looking and conditions have changed a little bit since these numbers were measured.

For example, energy prices have come down since mid-November, when these numbers were gathered. That's because of a combination of things. It's partly because of fears about Omicron. It's partly because the weather has been a little bit warmer, and it's forecast to continue being warmer in the months ahead.

So it's not necessarily because of Biden, per se. But it does suggest that at least that component will look a little bit better, hopefully, the next time this report comes out.

But there are also some more worrying signs in this report. The inflation that we saw today in this report was quite broad-based. And in areas like rent or other measures of shelter costs, those prices are still quite high, the growth in those prices is still quite high. And that suggests we could be stuck with this problem for a little while longer.

BLACKWELL: So, as you say, we're stuck with this problem for a little while longer. The president there said he thinks that we're at the peak of inflation, and it could drop quicker than most people think.

Is that in line with what most economists believe, that this is the peak?

RAMPELL: I think there's a wide range of views here.

If you look at forecasts for a year from now, yes, economists do think, generally speaking, that inflation pressures will abate, that we will return to something more like what we have been able to enjoy for many, many years, which is lower-level inflation. But we don't know. Those forecasts have been consistently wrong, unfortunately, over this year. And that's partly because we have had new complications in the pandemic, right, new variants, which have, unfortunately continued to disrupt supply chains, have made it more difficult for global supply chains to normalize.

You also have the fact that it still remains somewhat risky for consumers to partake in services, things like travel or dining out. And so they're trying to buy more goods at exactly the same time that there are these supply chain disruptions, which also pushes up prices.

So it's very hard to say. And I think, as we learn more about the Omicron variant, we will have a little bit better information about the economic consequences, including what happens to prices that fall out as a result of this pandemic.

CAMEROTA: President Biden said in a speech earlier that this has nothing to do with government spending. But, of course, Republicans are seizing on this inflation.

[15:10:00]

And so do you think he's right and what do you think this means for the future of the rest of his agenda, Build Back Better?

RAMPELL: I think it's reasonable to say that part of the reason why demand is so strong, why consumers are going out and trying to buy as much as they are has to do with policy, has to do with the fact that we had huge transfer payments earlier this year in terms of both stimulus checks, as well as child tax payments and a number of other benefits, like unemployment checks, for example.

That has definitely fed demand. Now, we would still probably be having problems with higher prices no matter what, because the economy is reopening. And you have reopening pains, sort of growing pains associated with that fact, particularly because we have all of these disruptions around the world, like I was just talking about, at ports and shortages of truckers and factories getting shut down in China and what have you.

So it's partly a supply-side issue. It's partly, frankly, the fact that policy has juice demand, but demand would be strong probably no matter what. And there's not really that much in terms of policy levers available to President Biden right now to deal with any of this.

The argument he could be making, of course, is like, hey, we have inflation, but it's for a good reason. We wanted to run the economy a little bit hot. That's risky politically for him to say.

CAMEROTA: Right. Right. Good point.

Catherine Rampell, thank you for explaining all of this.

BLACKWELL: Thanks, Catherine. So the Supreme Court says the controversial Texas abortion law can

stay in place, but providers can still fight the law in federal court. We have got more on that.

CAMEROTA: And homicides are spiking in many major U.S. cities. So we're going to talk to the Baltimore police commissioner, as his city is on track to surpass last year's murder rate. What's going on?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[15:16:30]

BLACKWELL: Homicides are hitting record levels in a lot of U.S. cities.

A CNN analysis of more than 30 cities shows that 23 recorded more homicides this year than last year. And this increase is driven by a spike in gun violence.

CAMEROTA: At the same time, retailers are also seeing an uptick in those smash-and-grab thefts.

Just yesterday, 20 CEOs of major companies wrote a letter to Congress urging action.

Here now to discuss what's behind all this is Baltimore Police Commissioner Michael Harrison.

Commissioner, thank you so much for being here.

I will just pull up some of the numbers in some major cities. I mean, there are more than this, but homicides up in Chicago, up in New York, up in Philadelphia, and up in your city of Baltimore.

So what's going on, Commissioner? what's causing this?

MICHAEL HARRISON, BALTIMORE, MARYLAND, POLICE COMMISSIONER: Well, first of all, thank you for having me.

As I talk to my colleagues across the country, and certainly what I'm seeing here in Baltimore, is an increase in gun violence. And it's conflict, or the lack of the ability to resolve it the appropriate way, petty beefs, petty arguments, petty disputes, where people enact their violence and their anger on someone else with gun violence.

And then there are retaliations from these acts and previous bad acts with gun violence again, just continuing the cycle of gun violence.

CAMEROTA: Yes.

HARRISON: And we grapple with this. And we are working hard to, number one, stop them from committing gun violence, because the decision to pull the trigger is not made when the trigger is pulled. The decision to pull the trigger, Alisyn, is made when an individual puts their hand on their gun and walks out of their door.

They have already predetermined that, if they need to use that gun, they have it and they will.

CAMEROTA: Yes.

HARRISON: So it's about consequences or the lack of consequences or there is no fear of those consequences, because, for the last 18 to 20 months, we're just getting on track now, because we have had no trials, no indictments, no grand juries.

And so there's a perception out there in the street that, even though we might arrest you, there are no real consequences. And we have to get back to them understanding those consequences.

CAMEROTA: OK.

I want to -- there's a lot to unpack there, commissioner, and I want to dive into it. First, let's start with guns, OK, because there's always been petty beefs, obviously. There's always been conflict. But these cities are awash in guns. You have pointed out that there's an enormous number of guns coming into cities right now, because they can be ordered online, they can be assembled in one hour, they cannot be traced.

So how much is that influx of guns complicating your life? And what can be done?

HARRISON: It is tremendously -- oh, it is tremendously affecting, negatively affecting what we're doing here in Baltimore, because, as you stated, yes, they -- and even children are ordering them.

If you have access to a credit card, you can order it online, assemble it, put it together, and you have a fully functional gun, just like you would get in any gun store. And we're finding that not just on people we arrest, which we arrest every day.

There are over 1, 300 arrests for the year. And we have seized over 2,000 guns this year. And this year, for ghost guns, the ones that can't be traced, we're well over 300. And so that's causing a problem and young people are having access to them.

And then they're handing them off and selling them on the streets to one another after they obtain them illegally.

(CROSSTALK)

CAMEROTA: That sounds like a huge problem, Commissioner. So what's the answer to that?

HARRISON: Well, the answer is obviously some level of regulation to make sure that they're serialized and we can identify the owner who buys them and track them in some kind of way.

And so that's number one, just like we do with any other gun you would buy from a gun store, regulations on who can buy them and what restrictions are put on those who get them.

[15:20:05] Then there's the willingness to use the guns because of, as I stated, consequences, or the lack thereof, or the people who don't have any fear of consequences.

CAMEROTA: OK.

So let's talk about that, because you basically are suggesting that prosecutions have ground to a halt, probably because of COVID or mainly because of COVID over the past 18 months. But are you talking about consequences for lower crimes, lesser crimes, or are you talking about for homicides?

HARRISON: I'm talking about for gun crimes.

CAMEROTA: Those have to be prosecuted still, right?

HARRISON: Yes, well, absolutely, those are being prosecuted. But for 18 months, we didn't have any trials. And we didn't have any trials for shootings and/or gun offenses.

Just think about the illegal possession or illegal carrying of a firearm, which is the precursor to using the firearm. And people are carrying guns, and because there's so many on the street, and there are reasons why people think they have to do that. But they are solving their conflicts with gun violence.

That's the inappropriate way. But there's so easy access to the guns, they think that that's the easiest way to solve it, but it's the most detrimental way. And it's causing us problems all around.

CAMEROTA: Absolutely. I mean, we see it every day, Commissioner, obviously, between school shootings, between what you're describing as the ease of access to guns and not being able to trace them. It's just a huge problem.

And then at the other end of the spectrum, where you're talking about in terms of lesser crimes, the state attorney in Maryland in March announced that they would stop prosecuting this list of offenses. So there was drug possession. There's attempted distribution, paraphernalia possession, prostitution, trespassing, minor traffic offenses, open container, rogue and vagabond crimes, and then urinating and defecating in public.

So just let me get this straight. If you see somebody trespassing or distributing drugs or defecating in public, you can't arrest them, or they won't be prosecuted, or what?

HARRISON: Well, they're not going to be prosecuted for those crimes, but we absolutely instruct the officers to engage.

There is some level of enforcement that we can take to deter and displace that. And there are other things we can do and provide people the services they need who are in need of help. That's why they are living that kind of life.

However, the fact that those crimes are not being prosecuted has not led to an increase of crime. As a matter of fact, all of our other crime indexes have gone down.

CAMEROTA: OK, that's interesting.

HARRISON: And in some cases, like robbery and burglary, way down, way down.

CAMEROTA: OK, so let's dive into that for just one second.

So all of those, you don't -- you don't think that those are leading to a spike in violent crime. You think lead guns are leading to the spike in violent crime?

HARRISON: The availability, ease of access to guns and the willingness to use them, because perhaps of a lack of consequences or they're not any fear of those consequences, people carry those guns.

And when they engage, the people -- by the way, most of these shootings and homicides, above 80 percent, are people who know one another. And when they engage one another, and then either are solving a beef or a dispute or retaliating from a previous bad act, they are using firearms, in many cases, untraceable firearms, like the Polymer80 ghost guns that we have been talking about.

CAMEROTA: Yes.

HARRISON: So it's compounded an already bad problem.

The fact that we're just getting on track from two years of no trials has further exacerbated that. Now we're back on track. Chiefs around the country, along with what we're doing here in Baltimore, are working to, number one, identify these bad actors who are carrying guns, but create comprehensive strategies to go after them, and change their minds about the bad decisions they're making.

CAMEROTA: Yes.

Commissioner Michael Harrison, thank you for explaining all this. Really appreciate you shedding light onto what's going on in some of these cities. We will talk to you again.

HARRISON: Thank you so much.

BLACKWELL: Now let's turn to this major ruling from the Supreme Court.

The justices allowed Texas to keep its near total ban on abortions, but providers can still fight the law in federal court. We will explain what that means ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[15:28:35]

CAMEROTA: A major decision from the Supreme Court today.

The justices decided to leave in place that controversial Texas abortion law that bans abortion after roughly six weeks of pregnancy.

BLACKWELL: But the justices also ruled that abortion providers have the right to challenge the law in federal court.

CNN Supreme Court reporter Ariane de Vogue joins us now.

So it's a complicated decision. What does it mean?

ARIANE DE VOGUE, CNN SUPREME COURT REPORTER: Well, look, what it means is, this controversial law that bans most abortion before many people even know they're pregnant, it remains in effect.

However, what the justices said is that abortion providers could get their foot into federal court to challenge some Texas officials in an attempt to try to block the road down the line. So that's a very narrow victory.

And let me explain why. It all has to do with how this law was written, this unusual law, because Texas said from the beginning, look, nobody can sue us in court because we're not charged with enforcing the law. That means that abortion providers can't sue us. That means the Department of Justice can't sue us. Those lawsuits can't be brought.

But what the Supreme Court said today is, well, wait a minute. You can't sue the Texas attorney general, some state officials, but these providers can come in to sue a small subset of state officials.