Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Russian Military Blogger Killed In Cafe Bombing; Tornado Hits Arkansas, Gov. Huckabee Visits the Area; Tuesday Is Trump's Arraignment, His Legal Team To Challenge The Decision; U.S. Calling For American Prisoner's Release From Russia; WHO Considering Weight Loss As Essential Medicines. Aired 5-6p ET

Aired April 02, 2023 - 17:00   ET

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

[17:00:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

JIM ACOSTA, CNN HOST: You are live in the CNN NEWSROOM. I'm Jim Acosta in Washington. We begin with a Russian pro war blogger killed and 30 others wounded when a bomb exploded in a cafe in St. Petersburg today. We are now hearing from Russian state media that the explosive device may have been hidden inside a figurine presented to the blogger. The dead blogger had more than half a million followers on his pro- military blog where he aggressively supported the war in Ukraine yet openly criticized the setbacks Russian troops face there.

Let's get right to CNN's Matthew Chance in Moscow. Matthew was this looking like a targeted attack?

MATTHEW CHANCE, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: I mean, you've got to be thinking that way, haven't you, given the circumstances that are being set out by the investigators and the eyewitnesses that are speaking to Russian state media, saying that basically this character, this pro-war military blogger who was the guest speaker at an event packed with the other supporters of the war in Ukraine.

He was basically given a statue, you know, a figurine, a little statuette by somebody in the crowd who was a supporter of his supposedly. And shortly after he received that the explosion took place. And so, eyewitnesses are saying, are linking it to the device potentially being in the figurine. It's not been officially confirmed yet. Investigators are still at the scene at that cafe in the Russian city of St. Petersburg, you know, sweeping up the area forensically to try and get to the bottom it bottom of it.

But, you know, clearly, this was an attack designed to specifically take out this individual. And that's exactly what happened because there's one confirmed person who's dead. Vladlen Tatarsky. It's not his real name. His real name is Maxim Fomin, but that was the name he went by.

There are 30 other people who have been injured. You can see from the scene after the blast inside that cafe. We're watching those numbers very closely in case they have climbed. The health ministry in Russia saying six people in a serious condition, Jim. ACOSTA: All right, Matthew Chance. Thanks for following that for us. We'll stay on top of it. We know you will as well. We appreciate it. Now to the extreme weather just slamming the U.S. since last weekend. More than 50 people have been killed by tornadoes and powerful storms. And this hour the threat shifts to the southern plains, including the Dallas Fort Worth metropolitan area -- 13 million people face the risk of severe weather. Meanwhile, the death toll is inching up this evening in this weekend's devastating tornado outbreak; 32 people are now confirmed killed from the storms that hammered the south and the Midwest.

And an update from the deadly roof collapse that we told you about yesterday during a concert in Belvedere, Illinois. Governor J. B. Pritzker toured the site today and announced that of the 48 people hospitalized, five remain in critical condition. CNN's Derek Van Dam is in Wynne, Arkansas, one of the most devastated places in this week's tornado outbreak.

Derek, the destruction I saw was all around you today and you spoke with some local officials on the ground today. What'd hey tell you?

DEREK VAN DAM, AMS METEOROLOGIST: Yeah, we actually spoke to the governor of Arkansas, Sarah Huckabee Sanders. She arrived on the scene of the devastation here you see around me in Wynne, Arkansas. She was flanked on either side by several federal employees, including FEMA administrators all the way to the National Weather Service.

And, you know, I leaned into the conversation that they were having and I heard that between the National Weather Service representative and Governor Sanders, and he told her that they believe that early estimates that this was an EF-3 tornado, that means winds were sustained or maximum at 136 mph to 165 mph. So, to put that into context, the Rolling Fork, Mississippi tornado from eight days ago was an EF-4, high end with winds of 190 mph.

I asked Governor Sanders whether or not the meteorologist save lives, in this instance. Have a listen to what she said.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

VAN DAM: So, it sounds just from your press briefing that you did believe that the meteorologist gave adequate warning time for this particular tornado. Do you feel like that saved lives and can you elaborate on that?

[17:04:57]

SARAH HUCKABEE SANDERS, GOVERNOR OF ARKANSAS: Absolutely. There's no doubt that the warnings that came from meteorologists certainly save lives. You know, one of the things that I found pretty unbelievable as the folks on the ground in Little Rock certainly, as the storms were moving through there, they were literally watching their own neighborhoods as they were reporting and warning people knowing that their families were right in harm's way.

They stayed on T.V. They continued to warn people. They continue to give people notice and did that as best they could throughout the day on Friday and we're thankful for their willingness to keep -- stay on the air, even though it was really difficult for them personally as well.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

VAN DAM: You know, Jim, as a meteorologist who covers natural disasters regularly, this has got to be some of the most catastrophic damage that I have ever witnessed in my life. You're getting just a drop in the bucket. You're looking at what was a daycare here in Wynne, Arkansas. We saw earlier residents and volunteers coming to help the woman who owns this particular day care to carry some of her personal belongings to see if she could perhaps restart her business in a different location and help rebuild. Jim, terrifying moments here for these residents, to say the least. Back to you.

ACOSTA: It must have been terrifying. Derek, the destruction is just all around you there, it's devastating. All right, Derek Van Dam, thank you very much. Now, to former President Donald Trump and his scheduled arraignment on Tuesday. Today his re-election campaign announced the Republican frontrunner will speak just hours later from his Florida estate.

CNN's Kristen Holmes is near Mar-a-Lago and joins us from West Palm Beach. Kristen, what is the Trump legal team saying? Are they concerned about the potential that his remarks might impact the case in some way? I would imagine some of them might want to hear them really not very much at all after this arrangement.

KRISTEN HOLMES, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yeah. Jim, of course, as you know, from covering Trump for so many years, this is the ongoing dilemma of being an attorney for former President Donald Trump. You have the things that you say in court, the motions that you filed, but you have a client who will go out there and say what he is thinking, even if it could potentially cost him legally.

Now, I'm spoken to a number of legal advisers who say that they are worried about certain Truth Social posts. They are worried about, maybe potentially something that, he says. But when I talked to his team, it really seems as though there are two separate things going on. They have a political machine and a legal machine and this speech will be very much part of that political machine, that part of trying to take control of the narrative.

Now, when it comes to the legal side, we are learning from sources that they are talking actively about what they are going to do when they get that indictment. They have been somewhat of a holding pattern because they don't know what the charges actually are. And we heard from Joe Tacopina, one of Trump's lawyers all over the networks today, talking to, including our Dana Bash, talking about what they're going to do as soon as they see that indictment and potential challenges they might make. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOSEPH TACOPINA, ATTORNEY FOR FORMER PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: We will take the indictment. We will dissect it. The team will look at every, every potential issue that we will be able to challenge and we will challenge it of course. I very much anticipated motion to dismiss coming because there's no law that fits this.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HOLMES: And he went on to talk about different processes saying this had to actually play itself out and again, stressing that literally nothing can be done until they see this indictment, until they know what those charges are. And the one thing will be keeping a very close eye on as we've discussed over the last several days, Jim, we have heard so many Republicans out there defending the former president, talking about how this is a political witch hunt.

Of course, we've heard the former president himself doing that. But when we hear from him on Tuesday night, that will be the first time we hear his response after we know what those charges are, so listen for that. And the other thing to listen to, does Republican messaging shift at all once they find out what exactly he's being charged with. Jim?

ACOSTA: Yeah, Kristen, Donald Trump likes to be in charge of the narrative, but he's not fully in control of that narrative. Not right now. Not until they know what that indictment says. All right, Kristen, thank you.

Former federal prosecutor, Renato Mariotti joins us now, Renato, media organizations, including CNN, are formally requesting that the judge unseal Trump's indictment early. Obviously, we would like that very much. What do you think? What would be the reason to keep it under wraps for now?

RENATO MARIOTTI, FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR: Well, that's what New York law says. So even if the defendant agreed in, other words, if Trump agreed to unseal it at this point, I don't think that the judge would be able to. I expect we're going to be waiting until Tuesday. That's my understanding of New York law, and I think that will shift things quite a bit as you suggested. That's going to shift the narrative once we know, actually with the charges are.

ACOSTA: And these same news organizations are also asking to broadcast Tuesday's proceedings again. That is something we would very much like to see. We think the public would want to see. Any reason why cameras would not be allowed in?

[17:10:010]

MARIOTTI: Good question. You know that's been a debate in a lot of courtrooms because there is a public interest in knowing what is happening in legal proceedings. And of course, everyone has a right to a public trial, which is why the press can be present. My understanding typically in that courthouse is that there are cameras allowed in the hallway so we would see him walk into the courtroom.

We would also get to see maybe still photograph. They have one pool reporter that would've a still photograph. But there's an intense debate about cameras in the courtroom, and a lot of judges don't like them because they believe the attorneys will showboat for the cameras and they're going to change their behavior for the cameras.

There are also concerned about potentially witnesses and or jurors being -- becoming identified or things along those lines. I think that generally speaking, I'm in favor of more transparency, but that's the sort of argument that judges have.

ACOSTA: And one of Trump's lawyers told CNN that they'll look to challenge every potential issue once the indictment is unsealed. What do you think they're going to be looking for?

MARIOTTI: So, great question, Jim. I mean, I think they're definitely going to look on the front end to untest that legal theory. So, for example, the standard of what the proof needs to be regarding intended to fraud is not fully settled in the court of appeals in New York, so that's one where I could see a motion there.

If this turns out to be very focused on campaign finance charges, which we don't know for sure whether or not that's the case, but if that turns out to be the case, I would expect motion regarding that because there's really never been a case quite like this one on that's a campaign finance case under New York law.

I could also see potentially, you know, depending on there, if it's a tax, ultimately a tax crime that underlies this there being a motion regarding let's say the allegations versus you know, regarding the extent to whether or not there's enough completion of a crime here regarding to a tax fraud case under New York law.

But I have to say, an important thing to note, even if he makes this -- even if he makes those motions and he's denied, he will not be able to appeal them until after the trial. It's not going to delay things. So, you know, ultimately there will, you know, be discovery battles and then a trial, you know. And the question, I think, is when that trial will be.

ACOSTA: And as you know, Trump and his allies, they've been going after the Manhattan D.A., Alvin Bragg, calling the indictment political, claiming he has an agenda against the former president. Here's what Bragg's predecessor said about those comments specifically from Trump and his team. Here's what he had to say.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CY VANCE, FORMER MANHATTAN DISTRICT ATTORNEY: I've got to say that I was disturbed to hear the former president speak in the way he spoke about the District Attorney Bragg, and even the trial court in the past week. And I think if I were his lawyer and believe me, no one has called up to ask for my advice, I would be mindful of not committing some other criminal offense like obstruction of governmental administration.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ACOSTA: What do you make of that? And do you think that Trump and his allies with all these statements about the D.A. might be putting themselves in a position where the judge might say, okay, we don't want you to talk anymore publicly about this case. In other words, they might be hurting their own cause.

MARIOTTI: Yeah, great point, Jim. You know, in the, you know, some of the prior cases like for example, you know, there was a gag order that that was placed on the Roger Stone case where Roger Stone was using social media to attack the judge and the prosecutors. Ultimately, the judge said, fine, no one's going to talk about this case publicly, including the defense to ensure that there's a fair trial to the defendant.

Could that happen here? It'll be challenging because obviously Trump's a presidential candidate, but it's certainly possible. I will say that with, you know, Cy Vance is saying, is what any competent criminal defense attorney would tell Trump in this circumstance. I would also just caution the viewers that anybody who feels very strongly and has intense opinions about indictment they've never read, you know, you should take all of those opinions with a grain of salt.

ACOSTA: Indeed. And there's new reporting on the classified documents investigation at Mar-a-Lago from the "Washington Post." It says, "After the subpoena was delivered this is according to the "Washington Post," Trump looked through the contents of some of the boxes of documents in his home, apparently, out of a desire to keep certain things in his possession again." That's according to the "Washington Post." What does that mean to you or Renato, in terms of potential obstruction charges?

MARIOTTI: So, first of all, I just -- Jim, that case is always seemed extremely strong to me because you have the DOJ not only subpoenaing these classified documents but actually personally visiting Mar-a-Lago to ask for them, and the former president kept those documents anyways.

[17:15:07]

They literally had to retrieve them via search warrant execution. But that evidence, if it pans out, if that turns out to be the case, that would be extraordinarily strong evidence for the government because it would just show first of all Trump's knowledge regarding the -- what the documents were.

It shows that he knew that those documents were, you know, desired by the government that he personally was aware that the government sought to possess those, and that he was taking steps to take, you know, separate out some of those documents to keep them from the government. Very, very problematic for the former president if that is the sort of proof that Jack Smith has.

That indictment is ultimately going to be the biggest problem for Donald Trump and we'll be -- we'll view what work or we're going to be talking about this upcoming week as a distraction from that.

ACOSTA: Yeah. That very well might be the case. All right, Renato Mariotti, thanks -- thanks again. We appreciate it. Before Trump's indictment is even unsealed, Republican lawmakers are flying to the former president's defense. What they're saying we'll lay it out ahead on the "CNN Newsroom."

Plus, the new efforts to free an American journalist being held in Russia. Former New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson helped get Brittney Griner back home. He joins us live coming up in a few moments.

And later, the battle for gun reform in America. Why one man says it's not hopeless. You're live in the "CNN Newsroom."

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[17:20:00]

ACOSTA: U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken is calling for the immediate release of detained Americans in Russia. In a phone call today with his Russian counterpart, Blinken called the detention of journalist Evan Gershkovich unacceptable and to immediately release wrongfully detained American citizen Paul Whelan. Former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations and former New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson joins us now.

Governor, great to see you. Thanks so much for being with us. We all know you played a key role in the release of basketball player Brittney Griner from a Russian prison three months ago. That was a welcome relief to a lot of Americans. Are you involved in the -- any negotiations that are happening potentially right now to get these Americans released?

BILL RICHARDSON, FORMER NEW MEXICO GOVERNOR: Well, Jim, I just got back from a successful mission to Mexico this weekend where we freed an American navy veteran, James Frisvold from a Mexican prison. He'd been there 13 years wrongfully charged, declared innocent. So, I haven't been totally up to speed. I do think it's important.

First of all, if I am to get involved to help the family of Evan, of the journalists, has to request that we don't charge them anything. We don't work for the government. But we have our ways as we -- as you mentioned, with Griner and Trevor Reed that had some success with the Russians. I think the Secretary of State did the right thing, calling Foreign Minister Lavrov who's a practical guy.

At that level, I think the negotiations should happen. There are channels that are lower level that maybe have not worked so well, but this one I think this call was good. They should keep talking to each other and I believe there will be progress. But I'm ready to help. I'm ready to get involved. I don't need the okay from the U.S. government, but I do need a request from the family and that's up to them. But I'm ready to help.

ACOSTA: And governor, I have to ask you your thoughts on a U.S. journalist being detained. Apparently, this is the first time this has happened since the Cold War that you've seen a U.S. journalist detained for espionage in Russia. What do you -- what do you make of that? RICHARDSON: Well, I think there are three reasons why the Russians did

this. One, the deteriorating relationship between the U.S. and Russia, it's hit rock bottom and that's not good. Secondly, this is an espionage charge. Now, obviously, Evan was doing this job. He's a good journalist. But with the Russians as they have with Paul Wheelan, the espionage charge is something that is most serious to them and they use that rather frivolously.

Third, there was an American -- there was a detainee from Russia that was indicted in Brazil by the Justice Department. So, it's a little bit of a tit for tat. But this is very disturbing. This is leveling higher the issue of American hostages and hostages around the world.

I think journalists are being the most vulnerable worldwide. I think, Jim, what is needed is an international effort, intelligence gathering, not just the U.S. but the European Union, African nations, Middle East nations, because what is happening with Iran, Venezuela, Russia, many other countries, they are taking hostages, especially journalists as bargaining chips and that's really unacceptable.

ACOSTA: Right.

RICHARDSON: So, I think there has to be an international effort. You know, the British, a lot of their hostages are taken all around the world, this is happening, and we have to have a multilateral front. And I think the media has to play a role. On the Griner case, there was a very effective media campaign, and here, not just "The Wall Street Journal," a very respected newspaper, but the international media community has to rise up and raise the level of consciousness of journalists and many others being taken as hostages, as bargaining chips around the world.

ACOSTA: Yeah, and I think you're going to see that, there's no question about it. And some of that has already begun.

[17:24:54]

But you know, Paul Wheelan, you know, the former U.S. marine, still in a Russian prison serving out a 16-year sentence for the same or sort of the same espionage charges as Gershkovich. He was not included in that release of Brittney Griner. That was a one for one deal. Could he be part of a two for two arrangements? Is that something that can be worked out this time around? Was there any indication on the Russian side of things that we might be a little closer, edging closer to being part of some kind of a deal?

RICHARDSON: Well, I think the administration effectively had wanted a two for two, but that didn't happen at the last minute. The Russians said one for one, Whelan for Bout -- Brittany Griner for Bout. Now, my concern is that the Whelan's and Marine who's not as prominent as Evan, the journalist, you know, it's kind of sidelined. I think we have to press for both.

And there are three others there, too. We're working on them. Three other Americans that I believe are wrongfully detained. So, I think we have to have high level contact but also outside people, the administration should reach out to other entities that have ties in Russia to make sure that we bring especially not just Evan, but Paul Whelan home.

Here's a marine. He's been there four years, wrongfully detained. This espionage charges are not real as it is for Evan, but it's got to be negotiated, diplomacy, contact, engagement. You can't just throw darts at each other. I think we got to talk and separate humanitarian issues from the geopolitical issues that separate the U.S. and Russia and the whole Ukraine issue.

ACOSTA: Yeah. And governor, let me ask you this, and this I think dovetails off of the conversation that we're having. Russia is now heading the U.N. Security Council, as you know. It's a rotating presidency. But I mean, given what is happening in Ukraine right now, given Russia's pattern of taking Americans hostage.

I know you were the U.N. ambassador for the U.S. during the Clinton Administrations. What's your response to that? I mean, should the rest of the world just accept that, that the Russians are going to be heading up the U.N. Security Council? What do you think?

RICHARDSON: Well, look, you can't do much about it because there's veto power that the Russians have. It's only for 30 days and then it's a rotating security council. So, chairmanship, so this happens and you got to deal with it. You've got to be pragmatic. I think this is why high level bilateral and multilateral contacts are needed to deal with hostages.

But, again, this can be vetoed by the United States. I'm not talking about the chairmanship, but all kinds of issues, the United States, Russia, China, Britain and France. But, you know, we can't do anything about it. They are Security Council president for 30 days. It's unfortunate, but it's happening and it's going to happen.

We should deal with other issues to get our hostages out, and that should be the primary responsibility of this administration. Get our hostages out, our veterans. There are over 70 wrongfully detained. There are others like Frisvold that I just got out, that are unlawfully detained and rotting in prisons around the world.

ACOSTA: Yeah. Well, it's very important work that you do. Best of luck and keep us posted if you get any kind of contact from the Gershkovich family. I suspect you might get a phone call.

RICHARDSON: Thank you.

ACOSTA: Thanks, governor. Governor Bill Richardson, appreciate it. Republican lawmakers are speaking out today about Donald Trump's indictment. What his allies and primary adversaries are saying next. You're live in the CNN NEWSROOM.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[17:30:00]

ACOSTA: Before Donald Trump's indictment is even unsealed, Republican lawmakers are flying to the former president's defense, that includes some of his potential 2024 adversaries and his GOP allies in Congress. CNN's Alayna Ttreene joins us now. Alayna, I guess this is not too unexpected, but what are some of these Republicans saying?

ALAYNA TREENE, CNN REPORTER: Yeah, it's not that unsurprising, Jim, but we haven't even seen the extent of the charges that the former president is facing and yet already Donald Trump's top allies on Capitol Hill are coming to his defense and attacking the case as political persecution. We heard this from a series of lawmakers around the Sunday shows today who went after the Manhattan district attorney, Alvin Bragg, and try to explain why they think this case is politically motivated.

And one of those people was Mike Turner. He's the Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee. He was on CNN this morning where he said that he thinks this is politically motivated, and he also is worried that this could change the way that the public views the criminal justice system moving forward. Let's listen to what he had to say.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. MIKE TURNER (R-OH): When this comes out and we finally get to see what's happening. If this is politically motivated, this will be a shame on our criminal justice system. It's one thing when you have a cancel culture. It's another when you have a canceled criminal justice system, and I hope that we're certainly not turning to that.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TREENE: So that was Congressman Mike Turner. And he'0s actually, I'll argue, trying to make his committee, the House Intelligence Committee a little bit more bipartisan, and he feels this way. But not all of the Republicans are viewing this case the same as he is.

[17:35:00]

I'd actually argue there are some divisions within the party when it comes to this. It's very notable that the top two Senate Republicans, Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and Minority Whip John Thune, have been silent on this issue ever since the news of the indictment broke on Thursday. We also heard today from Senator Bill Cassidy. He was also on the Sunday shows and he really urged caution as it relates to this case and said that everyone needs to let this process play out before jumping to conclusions.

He also argued that he's concerned that this is going to devolve into political theater and that it could distract from a lot of other important issues that people on Capitol Hill are facing.

ACOSTA: Yeah. And it could get trickier as other potential indictments come down the road, but all right. Alayna Treene, thank you very much. We have a lot to talk today about with CNN political analyst and historian Julian Zelizer. Julian, great to see you. How big of a moment is this going to be on Tuesday do you think?

JULIAN ZELIZER, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: Very big. We have not had a former president in this situation, indicted, and now, you know, turning himself in. And I think even with all the questions of politics, we shouldn't forget that here is a former president being held accountable and a legal process underway to see what he is guilty of. And so, when he has that day, I think we should put aside some of the other issues for a second and feel the weight of it.

ACOSTA: Well, and that leads me to my next question. I mean, looking back in American history, you know, there's been a lot of discussion about what this case means for the presidency, what it means for Donald Trump, obviously. Maybe the past is finally catching up with him. That sort of thing. But what about the importance of the rule of law in this country? The future of the American judicial system? I mean, a lot of that is hanging on this case.

ZELIZER: Well, it cuts both ways. I think for some observers, it's very important that the president is being held accountable, the former president. That the argument is since Gerald Ford pardoned Richard Nixon in 1974, we have abandoned efforts to achieve accountability, and this is a first step in the direction of accountability.

On the other hand, the kinds of attacks that are coming already before anyone really knows the details of the case, on Bragg, on the judicial system, are damaging. It's like during the Trump years, so many institutions were attacked from the media to the legislative branch. They're hard to undo. So, I think it's actually going to push in both directions at the same time.

ACOSTA: Yeah. You're right about that. And let's turn to gun violence. That has been in the news, obviously, a lot this past week with the school shooting in Nashville. You've written a new opinion piece for CNN.com, titled "The Reality of Gun Violence in the U.S. is Bleak, But History Shows It's Not Hopeless." You wrote in this column this must be an issue raised and highlighted every election cycle and candidates should be forced to go on the record as to where they stand when it comes to the kinds of weapons that are consistently used in mass shootings."

Do you see is it as it just going to be unrelenting political pressure that gets to some kind of solution to the school shooting problem in this country? I mean, what else is there?

ZELIZER: That is essential. We've now seen many times that the crisis itself is not enough to force politicians to act, meaning the crisis of these shootings. So, the model I think that's very important. What is the history of legislation? We had, for example, an assault weapons ban in 1994 that eventually expired, but was effective when it was in place.

And the Parkland students who many people remember mobilized politically. They put pressure on candidates in the midterm and I think that's going to really be essential to make sure that people who are in favor of gun control, pay attention and fight for this issue and those who don't feel political consequence for standing in the way of any kind of common-sense measures to curb the violence. ACOSTA: Yeah. And we were talking with David Hogg, one of the

survivors of Parkland yesterday about this and he said there are going to be student protests this coming week calling for change. And you're right, when Parkland students were out there protesting, America was paying attention. Julian Zelizer, thanks so much. Great to see you. Appreciate it.

ZELIZER: Thanks for having me.

ACOSTA: All right, investigators are trying to learn what caused a new train derailment today. We'll have the latest just ahead. You're live in the CNN NEWSROOM.

[17:40:00]

ACOSTA: This just in to CNN. Severe weather has forced a ground stop at both Dallas airports. All flights are grounded until at least 6:00 p.m. eastern. A tornado watch is in effect for the area. Emergency officials have already activated sirens for large hail and is urging those in the area to seek immediate shelter. We'll continue to follow all of this and bring you the very latest, but please be careful. If you're traveling around the Dallas Fort Worth area, there are very severe thunderstorms and hail moving through that very busy metropolitan area. Please be careful. Be safe.

We have another freight derailment, train derailment to tell you about this time in a remote area of western Montana. It happened this morning near Paradise, Montana about 70 miles north and west of Missoula. Officials say at least 25 freight cars derailed. It's unknown what the train was carrying, but according to the sheriff's office in that area, it does not appear any hazardous materials were on board.

Should drugs that help you lose weight be considered essential medicines? The World Health Organization is considering that question. One of those drugs is the active ingredient in Ozempic, a diabetes medication that some people are now using just to lose weight, and CNN's Elizabeth Cohen explains.

ELIZABETH COHEN, CNN SENIOR MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT: Jim, the World Health Organization regularly comes out with this essential list of medications. These are medications that they say every public health system needs to have.

[17:45:01]]

Now, we don't hear much about this, so let's talk a little bit about what it is. On this list there are more than 400 medicines, just for everything from antibiotics to cancer drugs to vitamins to blood pressure drugs, lots of different medications. What's interesting now is that the WHO is considering whether to put an obesity medication on that list. It's the same active ingredient is what's in Ozempic, which of course, has become very, very popular.

So, some people are saying, look, this is an essential medication. Obesity is a problem in much of the world. There should be a medication in there to fight obesity. Whereas other people say you know what, obesity isn't a problem everywhere and we don't know really how well this drug works long term.

So, it's not clear that it will end up on this list, but certainly the fact that it's even being considered tells you how big of a public health problem obesity is, at least in parts of the world, Jim?

ACOSTA: And thank you to Elizabeth Cohen for that. Donald Trump is slamming prosecutors and even the judge involved in his indictment. No surprise here. What effect might that have on people's trust in the judicial system? Closer look next here in the "CNN Newsroom."

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[17:50:00]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNKNOWN: My song raked in so much cash, I thought, why stop there? That's why I'm putting out my new album, "Now That's What I Call My Legal Defense Fund" aka Trump bops and I'm bringing all the hits.

(MUSIC PLAYING)

ACOSTA: James Austin Johnson there. Some levity for us as Donald Trump as "Saturday Night Live" pokes fun at the former president's indictment. Former President Donald Trump is set to be arraigned on Tuesday after his indictment in a Manhattan hush money investigation. As he awaits his day in court, Trump has spent the last few days predictably lashing out at prosecutors and the judge overseeing his case on social media.

In one post, Trump claiming acting New York Supreme Court Justice Juan Marchawn hates him and was handpicked by prosecutors. This morning, Trump's attorney said there is no reason to believe that is the case.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TACOPINA: I have no issue with this judge whatsoever. He has a very good reputation. I have no reason to believe the judge (inaudible). I've not been before him on this matter. So, we have to let this process play out.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ACOSTA: And joining us now is CNN's senior Supreme Court analyst Joan Biskupic. Joan, great to see you. And this is something that we've seen from the former president before. I remember when he attacked the judge handling the Trump University case many years ago. But what do you think about the impact that this is going to have on American's confidence in the judiciary? I mean, that's part of that -- that's part of what's riding on this case.

JOAN BISKUPIC, CNN SENIOR SUPREME COURT ANALYST: You know, that's exactly right. You're referring to when he attacked Judge Curiel, calls him a Mexican judge -- ACOSTA: Right.

BISKUPIC: -- who wasn't going to treat him fairly.

ACOSTA: Yes.

BISKUPIC: And then we had time after time, you know, that was just in 2016. When he became president, he continued to disparage the judiciary, including the Supreme Court, which is what I've certainly been focusing on. You know, he always makes it so personal to him too. You know, he says things like, don't you get the impression that the Supreme Court doesn't like me?

I, in terms of law (ph), Jim, how is this going to affect the proceeding? What I've seen over time, particularly during his four years in office, is that judges blow past his bluster. They just try to brush it aside. Try to stay focused on what the case is. I'm sure the judge in Manhattan is going to try to lower the temperature in that courtroom on Tuesday as much as possible and just hope that it inspires public confidence.

But that's exactly the issue. You know, Chief Justice John Roberts said those kinds of comments from the former president will exactly what undermine public confidence in an impartial judiciary.

ACOSTA: Yeah. And he did that to so many different institutions, the press, scientists, and so on during his presidency. But you talk about Trump's influence on the court in your new book. Let's talk about this.

You write, "Through some combination of his sheer presence and brazen arguments, as well as his particular character of his judicial appointees, Trump had an outsized impact on the court. Hs effect on the justices' relationships with each other was even at times pernicious and he sowed distrust. Whatever the outcome of this case, it will likely be appealed by one side or the other."

But the distrust that is created here, you know, he just has a way of going in there and magnifying it

BISKUPIC: He does. There's a certain taint. And as much as, you know, I just said how judges and justices try to pull back and not heed what he's saying, not let it infect their proceedings. I found that it did affect them.

You know, Chief Justice John Roberts would try to, you know, come up with rulings that were not as polarized as the other branches were, but you know, individual justices and judges would then second guess the motives of their colleagues whenever there was a Trump case because it was natural that some of the justices on the far right thought that their colleagues on the far left were, you know, ready to rule against Trump just because of all that Donald Trump stood for.

ACOSTA: Yeah.

BISKUPIC: So, it was, you know, he pulled them down into the muck with them many times. And I think that, you know, this case, this New York State case, you know, it's unlikely that the Supreme Court would get it at any time soon because of the pastor (ph) of the case, but think of all the other investigations going on.

[17:54:58]

Think of all the other potential for a Donald Trump related case to yet again come back to the Supreme Court. And I think the justices, as they did before, are going to thread very lightly once more.

ACOSTA: And there has to be a huge potential that these investigations, these cases because they might get appealed and go back and forth various levels through our system of justice. They might drag into the next campaign cycle. I mean, we are in the middle of the campaign cycle, but into next year.

BISKUPIC: Oh, definitely. There's -- it would -- it's easy to predict that they will go into 2024.

ACOSTA: Easy to predict.

BISKUPIC: And actually, we're talking many years down the road to depend on what Donald Trump does.

ACOSTA: Which obviously raises the prospect of the self-pardon if he were to somehow get into the White House. We'll talk about that another day.

BISKUPIC: Right. Right.

ACOSTA: Let's not go down that road today. But Joan, thanks so much and best of luck on the book. Joan's new book is "Nine Black Robes: Inside the Supreme Court's Drive to the Right and its Historic Consequences." A very important book from Joan who knows the subject better than anybody. It comes out Tuesday. Best of luck on the book.

BISKUPIC: Tuesday, pub day and arraignment day.

ACOSTA: And arraignment day. All right, best of luck to you. You'll be busy.

In the meantime, New York is taking special security steps to get ready for Donald Trump's indictment. We'll show you what they're doing in a live report just ahead here in the CNN NEWSROOM.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[17:59:59]