Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Congress Questions Defense Secretary on Disclosure of Hospitalizations; Israel-Hamas War; Biden Comments on Deadly Food Line Incident in Gaza; Trump's Appeal for Immunity to be Heard by Supreme Court; Retraction Requests About Justice Thomas's Activist Wife; 2024 U.S. Election; Judge in Illinois Strikes Trump Off Ballot, Citing "Insurrection". Aired 10:30-11a ET

Aired February 29, 2024 - 10:30   ET

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

[10:30:00]

REP. JOE COURTNEY (D-CT): And a regulation that basically states that this now will be communicated in all instances to the President of the United States. So, that the -- whatever confusion surrounding the lack of communication now has been now codified at the department to make sure it doesn't happen again. Isn't that correct?

LLOYD AUSTIN, DEFENSE SECRETARY: That's correct, sir. And we had the opportunity to put those procedures in play when I went back to the hospital on February 11th. And it was timely notification in a seamless fashion.

COURTNEY: So, speaking of gaps, let's talk about the supplemental, because on February 13th, the United States Senate -- actually by a vote of 77 to 21, it was more than the 70 votes that my friend Mr. Smith decided, overwhelmingly endorsed a package which will provide $60 billion to Ukraine who is in a very dire state today.

So, 16 days later, we're here in this room. We're thankfully going to -- it looks like we're going to move forward on a FY24 final package soon. But the fact is, is that nothing has happened in the House to follow up what the Senate did. The Speaker explicitly said he will let the House work its will in terms of next steps with the supplemental package. I think everybody in this room knows, if the bill was brought to the floor, we would get an overwhelming majority vote, pretty darn close to two-thirds. I've talked to some Republicans who said it would be 300 votes. What's the risk of that gap, in terms of our national security and helping our allies?

AUSTIN: Well, we're seeing the risk play out on the battlefield each and every day as the Ukrainians fight valiantly to defend their sovereign territory. And I would remind everyone that we're not -- with our support in providing security assistance, they have taken back half of the territory that Russia seized.

But each and every day, we see the Russians continuing to push and make incremental gains, and that's very troubling. And without our support, the Ukrainians will be outgunned in terms of artillery, and they will also be at risk because of JIM ACOSTA, CNN ANCHOR AND CHIEF DOMESTIC CORRESPONDENT: All right. We're going to break away now from that hearing. President Biden is speaking on the deadly incident in Gaza. We talked -- told you about the top of the hour. Let's listen in.

JOE BIDEN, U.S. PRESIDENT: I was on the telephone with the people in the region. I'm still -- probably not by Monday, but I'm hopeful morning.

(CROSSTALK)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Do you know what happened in Gaza City where more than a hundred civilians were killed.

BIDEN: I was just -- we're checking that out right now. There's two -- there were two completely (ph) versions of what happened. I don't have an answer to that.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Are you worried about those complication (ph) negotiations?

BIDEN: I know well.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BIDEN: I don't agree with that position.

ACOSTA: All right. There is President Biden commenting on that deadly Gaza food truck incident that we told you about at the top of the hour. The president there saying that he knows that this will complicate the negotiations that have been going on about releasing the hostages from Hamas and also getting some sort of a ceasefire in Gaza.

Let me go to CNN's Arlette Saenz. She's over at the White House right now. Arlette, we heard the President just a few moments ago, addressing all of this. And it was earlier this week when he sounded very hopeful that there might be some kind of a ceasefire hostage release agreement, but that is going to be in doubt now given what we just saw earlier this morning.

ARLETTE SAENZ, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Yes, there's big questions of whether those negotiations would be able to be met by that Monday timeframe that President Biden had previously outlined. He said at the very top there that hope springs eternal, but also acknowledged that it actually might take a bit longer for those negotiations to conclude and come together.

But I think that what he said, in response to a question for me about the situation in Gaza City, it was quite noticeable. The president acknowledging that he believes that this deadly incident, while they're still working to determine exactly what happened, he does believe that it could complicate the negotiations that are underway. U.S. officials have been working around the clock with quite a bit of urgency. Trying to get the sides to an agreement to release hostages, get more humanitarian aid in, and have a temporary ceasefire. Now, the administration will really be watching this all developing very closely to see how this Gaza City incident might impact those talks going forward. The president has been quite keen on trying to get some type of release deal done for these hostages, and U.S. officials have also been working towards that timeframe of the beginning of Ramadan when they hope to have some type of an agreement.

[10:35:00]

So, we will see what else the White House has to say about the specific incident involving those aid trucks in Gaza City. Earlier, they said that this is a serious incident, and they will be trying to get the information about exactly what happened as quickly as they can. But certainly, the president there, at least acknowledging that it could complicate, bring some difficulty to the negotiations that are currently underway.

ACOSTA: All right. Arlette Saenz, thank you very much.

And we were showing that drone footage down in Gaza where this food truck incident happened earlier today. Absolutely devastating images coming out of Gaza this morning. We'll have more on this as the day develops. We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:40:00]

ACOSTA: The Supreme Court is handing Former President Donald Trump a big win even before issuing a ruling. Justices have agreed to decide whether Trump can claim presidential immunity from prosecution. The court will hear arguments the week of April 22nd. It could take months to hand down a ruling after that. That means his federal trial on charges of election subversion may not begin, much less end before the presidential election.

Let's discuss all of this. Joining me now, CNN Senior Law Enforcement Analyst Andrew McCabe, a former deputy director over at the FBI. Republican Strategist Doug Heye. And CNN Senior Crime and Justice Reporter Katelyn Polantz.

Andrew, let me go to you first. I mean, did the Supreme Court, basically, hand Trump a gift here? That's what a lot of folks have been saying over the last 15, 16 hours since this came out. What's your sense of it?

ANDREW MCCABE, CNN SENIOR LAW ENFORCEMENT ANALYST AND FORMER FBI DEPUTY DIRECTOR: In all likelihood, a massive gift. I mean, his strategy all along in these cases has been to postpone them till after the trial. What happened with yesterday's decision is, in all likelihood, the January 6th case will not go to trial before the election.

Now, it's hard to predict because there are so many variables in between where we sit today and actually getting that case in front of a jury. But when you start to walk through the dates and the supposedly quick schedule, but in reality, not nearly quick enough schedule that the court has put their own hearing on and you would think about the other cases that are trying to jump into those months. I think it's really hard to see this thing going before the trial.

ACOSTA: It's tough. And Katelyn, this is not what Jack Smith wanted, the special counsel.

KATELYN POLANTZ, CNN SENIOR CRIME AND JUSTICE REPORTER: Not exactly what they wanted. Although, the special counsel did ask for something that looked like this, if the Supreme Court wanted to hear this case. Now, the special counsel, they wanted to hear -- them to hear it a long time ago, and they also wanted them to not hear it at all. They wanted it to stay with what the lower court, the D.C. Circuit, said in their strong, unanimous opinion saying, Trump would not have immunity.

But the special counsel asked for a schedule that would be quick, and they wanted the Supreme Court to settle all of the questions here. The Supreme Court said that they would do both of those things. And what the special counsel also said is they -- they've never said they want to try this before the election. They just want a resolution as quickly as possible. And if the Supreme Court were to take this, they want it to be resolved by the end of the Supreme Court term.

And so, that is what it appears the Supreme Court is going to do. What happens after that is totally up in the air.

ACOSTA: And Doug, as you know, I mean, polls show public approval for the Supreme Court has taken a hit in the last couple of years. Big reason why, the Dobbs decision overturning Roe v. Wade. Might this, handling of the immunity situation contribute to that?

DOUG HEYE, (R) FORMER GEORGIA LT. GOVERNOR, REPUBLICAN STRATEGIST, AND FORMER RNC COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR: Potentially so. Look, we've seen an erosion in support in anything that's an institution in this country and even globally. Certainly, the Supreme Court, Congress, the presidency, regardless of who that president is, the media, the NFL. Anything we look at, there's less public support. Less public trust.

ACOSTA: But nobody likes us. But that's --

HEYE: But this is something that Donald Trump has been able to exploit to his benefit. So, whatever the decision is, you know, whether it's a postponement, which works for his sort of four corners offense to delay everything, or a decision against him. You know, Donald Trump is able to advantage himself with this. And it's part of a long-term strategy forum and it's worked for him thus far.

ACOSTA: It has worked. I mean -- and Andrew, I mean, one of the questions I have dissolved this call in the question whether it was a good idea for the Justice Department to go after the little fish first, work their way up to the big fish. They may not get to the big fish.

MCCABE: They may not. And I think there are very legitimate questions about what took them so long to start shifting their focus -- or I should say splitting their focus between the rioters in one hand and the actual alleged co-conspirators in this effort to overturn the election. You know, we know there's been a lot of reporting about concerns and reluctance among some in the FBI to even pursue the search warrant at Mar-a-Lago.

So, I think it's -- it would be appropriate to go back and look at the reasoning and the decisions that we now know cost the government, maybe two years in the investigation of the absolute uppermost levels of this conspiracy.

ACOSTA: What's your sense of why didn't they go after Trump sooner?

MCCABE: It's a great question, Jim, and I can't answer it sitting here. But I think that, you know, there's a lot of potential factors there. There's certainly -- I mean, the bureau has not had to look far to find themselves, receiving a beating from another member of Congress or particularly from folks on the right. There is -- it would be an understandable reluctance to wade (ph) into a highly politicized investigation, one in which they know, you know, half the country would essentially look askance at it.

So -- but those are not reasons to not do the job of protecting the country and upholding the Constitution. So, these are questions that really need to be answered.

[10:45:00]

ACOSTA: And Katelyn, you and I have talked about this issue before. I mean, what's your sense of it? I mean, as to the strategy that the Justice Department had, they may not get to try Donald Trump before the election.

POLANTZ: Yes, I mean, remember where things were in 2020? I don't know if we're looking back, we can say if they did the right thing or not. But at that moment in 2020, we were coming out of the COVID pandemic. The Justice Department had a backlog of cases going through the courts, and then all of a sudden, they were looking at trying hundreds, if not thousands, of cases potentially of rioters.

And so, the department started small, or not small, they started small in a geographic sense. They drew a line and said the people who went into the building first, that's who we focus on. And that's how the riot cases started.

ACOSTA: Yes.

POLANTZ: And there was an overwhelming -- overwhelmed sensed at least in the prosecutor's world of how are they going to handle all of these. They eventually got up to speed. But, again, that is a different thing than looking at the political class and whether there should be charges against people like Trump.

ACOSTA: And, Doug, I mean, can you imagine if -- you know, even under the best circumstances for Jack Smith, if they get this trial September, October.

HEYE: Going -- ACOSTA: Early voting starts --

HEYE: Going potentially. And this is part of the argument that every Republican candidate should have been making. Nikki Haley certainly is now. Donald Trump is going to be distracted by court cases and can't be on the ground in swing states.

And it's amazing how quickly things change in politics, you know, in the context of yesterday with Mitch McConnell's announcement. When Merrick Garland was a martyr for Democrats. If you look at the chatter around Merrick Garland in the Department of Justice today, Democrats are apoplectic and they go after him almost every day. He went from martyr to, at this point, being a huge disappointment in this administration for Democrats.

ACOSTA: And Andrew, are you surprised that Clarence Thomas has not recused himself in all this?

MCCABE: Should he? I think Thomas's connections through his wife to the pre-January 6th activities raise legitimate questions about whether or not he should be involved in deciding any cases that touch on January 6th, certainly including this one.

ACOSTA: Yes, Justice Rehnquist, we should note, recused himself in USA vs. Nixon --

MCCABE: That's right.

ACOSTA: -- because of his connections to some of the figures in the Watergate scandal.

MCCABE: That's right.

ACOSTA: Katelyn, one last question. A judge in Illinois ruling that Trump engaged in insurrection on January 6th, saying Trump is now ineligible to appear on that state's ballot. We're waiting for the Supreme Court to weigh in on Colorado too.

POLANTZ: We are. It's going to affect Colorado, Illinois, and Maine now, those are the three states. Courts in Colorado and Illinois say that Trump is ineligible to be voted for in their primaries. Maine, it was their -- the people who run the elections there saying that.

What is happening in Illinois is a little bit different though because the way this decision yesterday came in is it empowers the state to figure it out and says if the Supreme Court overturns what we're doing here, sure, we'll take him off the ballot. We won't count his votes. But the way it's set up is the Supreme Court now has the stakes raised for them. Not only to make a decision whether states can do this. Can they remove Trump from the ballot? Can he be called an insurrectionist? Does this apply to the office of the presidency?

ACOSTA: Interesting. We all thought that the Supreme Court would punt on the immunity issue and perhaps give Trump a favorable ruling on this challenge, this ballot challenge. What if the reverse happens?

POLANTZ: Well, I -- it's all --

ACOSTA: Nobody's betting on that.

POLANTZ: I don't think we can predict what anything will happen here, but a lot of it's coming down to timing. Timing, timing, timing. Not just on the trials, but also how quickly the Supreme Court works in this 14th Amendment case.

HEYE: It's like relationship status on dating apps, it's complicated.

ACOSTA: It is complicated. And Trump has played the delay playbook masterfully. I mean, you have to say that is exactly what has worked out in his favor. Katelyn, Andy, and Doug, guys, thank you very much. Appreciate it.

Coming up, we should note right now, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin has been on the hot seat. He remains on the hot seat. A live report from the Pentagon straight ahead. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:50:00]

ACOSTA: Happening now up on Capitol Hill, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin is testifying before Congress. Members of the House Armed Services Committee are asking for answers about his failure to inform the White House senior officials about his recent hospitalization.

Natasha Bertrand is over at the Pentagon for us. Natasha, what are you taking away from this?

NATASHA BERTRAND, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY REPORTER: Well, Jim, it's a lot of questions to Secretary Austin about just how this happened. Because it happened not only once but twice when Secretary Austin went into the hospital for a procedure, for follow on care and did not notify either his deputy or the White House that he was going to be receiving treatment in the hospital and be engaged in the ICU.

So, not only that he was entering the hospital for prostate cancer early in December, but also again for follow on care for following complications from that surgery in January. And so, the questions from the House Armed Services Committee here have really focused on whether there were any gaps in power during that -- during his hospitalization. Whether there was any moment when there was a lapse in the chain of command.

And Secretary Austin has been extremely adamant that there were never any gaps there. That he immediately delegated authorities to his deputy, Kathleen Hicks, when his staff realized that he was going to be put into the intensive care unit at Walter Reed.

[10:55:00]

But still questions remain of course about why there was so much secrecy surrounding his hospitalization. He did not notify the White House after his January hospitalization until two days after he first entered the hospital there. And it was not until that Friday, three days after he entered the hospital that Congress and the general public were made aware that he was hospitalized.

And so, there is a lot of bipartisan agreement here on this panel about the fact that these notifications to the public, to the White House, to his own deputy. They obviously need to be fixed. They need to be done better. And according to Austin, he has reiterated that after a 30-day review by the Pentagon, there have changes -- there have been changes that have been made that he says are going to address a lot of these issues. But clearly, a grilling here on the Hill. Trying to get to the bottom of what exactly happened, Jim.

ACOSTA: All right. Natasha Bertrand, thank you very much. Of course, we'll be watching that.

A quick note before we go, I do want to say my condolences to the family of comedian Richard Lewis, who passed away. He's a friend of mine, and I will miss him dearly. Thank you very much for joining us this morning. I'm Jim Acosta. Our next hour with Wolf Blitzer in the "Newsroom" starts after a short break. Have a great day.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[11:00:00]