Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Now, Trump in Court for Critical Hearing on Trial Date; Today, Final Arguments as Fani Willis Fights Disqualification; Trump, Biden Pitch Clashing Messages During Dueling Border Trips. Aired 10-10:30a ET

Aired March 01, 2024 - 10:00   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:00:00]

JIM ACOSTA, CNN ANCHOR: Good morning. You are live in the CNN Newsroom.

Right, now Donald Trump is in a Florida courtroom as he pushes to delay his classified documents trial.

And defiance in Moscow as thousands of Russians gather to pay their respects to Alexei Navalny.

Crowds chanting his name and turning his funeral into a protest against Vladimir Putin.

Plus, an extreme winter storm is slamming California bringing 100 mile per hour wind gusts and dumping up to, get this, ten feet of snow. We'll talk about that in a little while from now.

In the meantime, I'm Jim Acosta in Washington. This is the news right now.

And we begin with former President Donald Trump returning to his playbook of attempting to delay another trial. This morning, Trump is set to appear inside a Florida courtroom. As a matter of fact, we think he just arrived a few moments ago in the federal criminal case over his handling of classified documents. A judge could determine whether the trial will go ahead in May or be delayed.

CNN and Chief Legal Affairs Correspondent Paula Reid is live outside the courthouse for us in Fort Pierce, Florida. Paula, what do we think we're going to see today?

PAULA REID, CNN CHIEF LEGAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: Well, Jim, we know the former president did just arrive a few minutes ago. And any time now, this hearing, this high-stakes hearing is expected to get underway.

And the judge overseeing this case, Trump-appointee Judge Aileen Cannon had scheduled this trial. This is the trial where Trump faces approximately 40 charges related to his alleged mishandling of classified documents. She had put this on the calendar for May 20th, but signaled she will likely push it back and asked both sides of this case, the special counsel and the Trump legal team, to come prepared today to talk about scheduling.

Jim, in any other case, scheduling would be a routine matter. But here, timing, scheduling, this is the most consequential issue. We know there's a tension between the special counsel and Trump legal team. The special counsel wants to move as quickly as possible. But Trump's team wants to delay this potentially until after the November election.

Now, Trump some lawyers are arguing that their clients should not be in a federal courtroom when he wants to be out campaigning. They insist that's a violation of his First Amendment.

Now, I'll also note that, Jim, if Trump is reelected he could, through his attorney general, make this federal case and the other one he faces go away, so another incentive for him to the delay.

But the special counsel is urging the judge to put this trial on as quickly as possible, suggesting July 8th as a possible start date.

Now, I'll note the Trump team conceded that if this trail has to go they would be okay with it starting on August 12th.

Now, I want to note there's a little bit of gamesmanship going on here. If they can take up some time with this try on the calendar in August it could make it more difficult for other trials to be scheduled and they could always come back and try to get it delayed again.

So, very high-stakes here, all eyes on Judge Aileen Cannon.

ACOSTA: Yes. Paula, I thought they wanted this trial postponed until, I don't know, the next millennium or something.

REID: Approximately, yes, I think they'd be down for that because they hope that their client will be re-elected, and he can make his attorney general fire Jack Smith and get rid of these cases.

But, Jim, I mean, right now, the only thing we know for sure is that the former president will face his first criminal trial to state level case to not one that he could make go away, even if he was re-elected, in just a few weeks.

On March 25th, he faces that hush money case in Manhattan. The district attorney there, Alvin Bragg, also framing that as an election interference case, but if you look at that calendar, that's the only trial that we know for sure will go before the November election.

ACOSTA: All right. Paula Reid, outside the courthouse in Florida, one of many courthouses you're outside of these days, Paula, thank you very much.

Turning now to a different trial involving former President Donald Trump, we are just hours away from final arguments in Atlanta where Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis is fighting to avoid disqualification in prosecuting the Georgia election subversion case against Trump.

And CNN's Nick Valencia joins us now from outside that courthouse. Nick, I guess Trump can't be at both of these at the same time, a slightly different matter where you are. His final arguments there, what can you tell us?

NICK VALENCIA, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yes, good morning, Jim.

[10:05:00]

Defense attorneys for Donald Trump and his allies are expected to try to prove that Fani Willis, the D.A. here in Fulton County, and the top prosecutor, Nathan Wade, lied on the stand about the extent of their relationship and when it started.

In order to underscore that, their argument, they're going to introduce cell phone data that they secured through a subpoena, which they say shows thousands of phone interactions between Wade and Willis during a time period that was before they said they started dating.

That cell phone communication, according to Trump attorney Steve Sadow, also allegedly shows that Nathan Wade visited the area where Fani Willis had a condo at the time multiple times and some of those visits allegedly going late into the evening and early morning hours.

The judge presiding over this case, Scott McAfee, he spoke earlier this week and he talked about how he expects today to go.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JUDGE SCOTT MCAFEE, FULTON COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT: Friday would just be argument and council can proffer why they think it's significant. And if once I've heard the law and the argument of counsel, I decide that that is going to have some material bearing on the outcome, then we will -- we can reopen the evidence and have it properly admitted and authenticated and subject to cross-examination.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

VALENCIA: The motion to disqualify Fani Willis began over allegations that she financially benefited by hiring Nathan Wade as the top prosecutor. But now, defense attorneys arguments have evolved into whether or not Fani Willis and Nathan Wade lied on the stand during questioning. Jim?

ACOSTA: All right. Nick Valencia, thank you very much.

Let's discuss more now with former U. S. Attorney for the Southern District of Florida Marcos Jimenez and CNN Legal Analyst and former House Judiciary Special Counsel in Trump's first impeachment trial, Norm Eisen,

Norm, you're here in the studio. Let me start with you first. What do you think? I mean, obviously, I mean, we're talking about delays with the documents case down in Florida. I mean, this is a delay in the Georgia case, potentially. How do you think this is going to play out? Do you think Fani Willis gets disqualified here?

NORM EISEN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Jim, just based on Georgia law, which requires some actual harm to the defendants to have a sufficient conflict for disqualification and the evidence that has come in here, including Fani Willis' very strong performance as a witness in rebutting the judge's primary concern was she essentially setting up a secret bonus arrangement for herself where she was incentivized. She said, no, we went Dutch. We were a couple. We went Dutch.

The law and the evidence don't support disqualification, but the judge has had to preside over a gigantic disqualification and he is going to be struggling with, can he just say, oh, it's all fine, move along. That's why I've said there needs to be some compromise. Mr. Wade should say, hey, I'm willing to voluntarily step away. We don't know if he'll do it, but on the law and the facts, no, Fani Willis should not be disqualified.

ACOSTA: Yes, really got into the weeds of her personal life during all this. And, Marcos, just this week, Trump succeeded in delaying his other federal trial when the Supreme Court got involved in that. How do you think he's going to do? Is he going to be successful with this documents case down in Florida? What do you think?

MARCOS JIMENEZ, ATTORNEY: Well, that's his best play. In my opinion, this classified documents case is the one that presents the most legal jeopardy to him. Recall that most of the conduct that occurred in this case was after his term of office. So, his legal or presidential immunity claim is extremely weak. I think the other defenses he's raised are very weak.

So, the defense attorneys here are doing a very good job so far of delaying this. And I think Judge Cannon will delay the trial. She'll probably set it prior to the election. But I doubt very much that this case will go to trial before the election. I think that the judge will listen to the defense attorneys and give them as many opportunities as possible to delay this case.

ACOSTA: Yes. I'm hearing a recurring theme here. These delay tactics are working, Norm. I mean, it sounds as though he's going to get away with delaying almost all of these cases, potentially except for the Alvin Bragg case up in New York, which you've talked about many times. What about this documents case? Do you do you think that that he might be successful here as well?

EISEN: Well, certainly, Marcos is right. This is a judge, Judge Cannon, who's shown outrageous bias and partiality towards Donald Trump. She's been reversed twice by the extremely conservative 11th Circuit earlier in the investigation for moves she made favoring him. They repudiated her for saying a president has special legal standing. It's an unbelievably bad pattern.

That being said, you do see the elements of a compromise possibly emerging. Jack Smith says July. Trump says, I don't want to go to trial, but if I have to, August. [10:10:00]

And Trump has some motivations to do this. The Supreme Court, in his D.C. case, is going to reject absolute immunity. That case will go to trial. They won't decide that any later than the end of June. That case will go to trial if this one doesn't.

So, maybe Trump will say, well, favorable judge, Florida jury, that's a lot better than D.C., we're going to use this case as a blocking maneuver.

And then, of course, you have the 2016 election interference and hush money case that is definitely going to trial. So, I wouldn't be surprised if we got two trials. There's room for two. If I were betting, I would say don't rule out that second trial as a companion to the 2016 election tampering case.

ACOSTA: Yes. Marcus, what do you think about that? Do you think Jack Smith is going to be able to present some kind of a case, to have some kind of a trial in one of these two cases before November?

JIMENEZ: Well, look, I'm a pessimist by nature, and I would like these cases to go to trial before the election. But I don't see how that happens. I agree with Norm that there is an avenue for something to potentially happen.

But, first of all, let's go to the classified documents case. Classified documents cases are very difficult procedurally because they involve classified documents and review and specialized procedures. You have a defendant who is in four different cases and has conflict schedules. He just filed motions to dismiss, which, if they're denied, he will appeal. And that's going to take additional time.

So, there are many avenues in the classified documents case for this to be delayed. And I don't want to speak about Judge Cannon's motivations or her prejudice. I think she is a fine judge, however, she was appointed by this president. And I think she has shown some inclination to listen to his lawyers, which all judges actually do.

And if the defense attorneys can present credible grounds to delay this trial past the election, they absolutely will. I don't think their strategy is to try this case first. I think their strategy is to try no cases first.

ACOSTA: They said August, well, we'll do August now, Marcos. I don't know where they kind of said, well, we'll do August now.

JIMENEZ: Because they have to say something before the election. They can't say to the judge, because it's so obvious, hey, judge, how about December? I mean, that's just very obvious. So, they're picking a date in August that's relatively close to the election and gives them enough time to employ additional defensive maneuvers and delay this trial.

ACOSTA: Yes. I mean, Norm, to the folks who are sitting at home and watching this, they're saying, only Donald Trump, I have to think that some folks are saying, only Donald Trump can get away with this. Just about anybody else on planet Earth cannot delay this many trials and employ these kinds of tactics to push everything past what is an obvious date that he has marked on his calendar, November 5th.

EISEN: Well, Jim, I made a good living for over 30 years as a white collar defense lawyer with delaying cases. And I will tell you that in our country, the wealthy and powerful can take advantage of the inherent caution of the system, which is not a bad thing. We're a country that is built on checks and balances. We want prosecutors to be tested.

So, it's not -- and some of these, the Supreme Court consideration of immunity, that's actually an expedited schedule, relatively speaking, for the Supreme Court. It's a structure of the system that he's taking advantage of.

ACOSTA: Particularly playing the system like a fiddle, though, and he's and he's doing it.

EISEN: He is pushing the levers that are there in the system. We don't know if he's going to succeed with that second case. There's three candidates for that second case. He may not be able to dodge all three of those cases. No one knows for sure.

I think there're reasons for Trump. That's why I think Mar-a-Lago might go. He wants to use that case to block the case that he's the most afraid of, the federal 2020 case. If that case is going, then when the Supreme Court rejects immunity, Judge Chutkan can't put that case back on if Mar-a-Lago is happening.

ACOSTA: It's in the way, yes.

EISEN: Trump has a motivation, and nobody knows for sure. Marcos and I are having a heated agreement, a lot of uncertainty. I just think it's too soon to say never. And my hunch is you've got a shot at a second case to go with 2016 election interference.

[10:15:00]

ACOSTA: All right, very good. Marcus and Norm, guys, thank you very much. I really appreciate it.

Coming up, it's the one thing President Biden and Donald Trump seemed to agree on, that something needs to change at the border. They have radically different ideas how to do that. We'll talk about all that in just a few moments.

Plus, thousands of defiant mourners gather in Moscow to say their final goodbyes to Alexei Navalny.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: For us and for me, personally, was like, I don't know, Russian Nelson Mandela or Russian Martin Luther King. So --

MATTHEW CHANCE, CNN CHIEF GLOBAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: People are chanting and saying that.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Yes, his last name, Navalny.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:20:00]

ACOSTA: Now, the situation at the southern border during dueling border visits on Thursday, President Biden and former President Donald Trump blamed each other for the border crisis. The president slammed Trump for torpedoing a bipartisan border security bill for political purposes and invited him to collaborate on new legislative solutions. Trump blamed Biden for recent crimes allegedly committed by migrants. He spewed baseless conspiracy theories and incendiary rhetoric widely associated with white nationalists.

And joining me now to talk about this is Democratic Congresswoman Veronica Escobar of Texas. She's also the co-chair of President Biden's reelection campaign. Congresswoman, thanks so much for being here.

What was -- I mean, people were talking about this split screen yesterday, these dueling visits. What was your response to what you saw yesterday? You saw the president kind of call on Trump to come halfway and solve something. How did you feel about that?

REP. VERONICA ESCOBAR (D-TX): To me, it was a signal that the Republicans in Congress will take their orders from Donald Trump. And as soon as Donald Trump told them not to support the bipartisan Senate bill, which, by the way, gave Republicans everything they wanted, offered nothing that Democrats wanted, basically said, we'll do it your way.

But when Donald Trump said to them, I need you to walk away because we want the issue, not the solution, what President Biden said yesterday was a recognition of that, that it will take Donald Trump giving the green light to Republicans because they take their orders from the former president.

ACOSTA: And Trump was talking about actions that he would take if he gets back into the White House. Of course, this has been in the news. He's talked about massive deportation programs. Some of his aides have talked about camps, detention camps for migrants. Let's listen to what Trump had to say.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP (R), FORMER U.S. PRESIDENT, 2024 PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: We have to deport a lot of people and they have to start immediately.

We're going to give immunity to police and we're going to let the police do the job that they have to do. The local police are going to turn them over and we're going to have to move them back to their country. (END VIDEO CLIP)

ACOSTA: It was going back to using this rhetoric that they're poisoning the country. I mean, he was doing all of the stuff that he's done over so many years. What was your response to what you heard from him?

ESCOBAR: It should be terrifying to every American in our country. He is wanting to take us back decades to very dark eras in our country's history.

And I think it's so important, Jim, for us to kind of have a broader context. Democrats have been willing over the decades to not just address border security as a whole but also to address our workforce needs and to make sure that we remain a country of immigrants. Immigration is good for us economically. It's important for us to recognize that.

In 2006, in 2014, 2018, this year, every time Democrats have said, we're willing to work together, we're willing to compromise, to create security, but also legal pathways, it's been Republicans who walked away. Republicans have created the current situation, and we need solutions.

But what Trump is signaling is horrific. He really does want to take us back to an era where people feared being in their own country simply because they belong to a minority group.

ACOSTA: Yes, and he was talking about -- again, he's lying about what is taking place and saying that countries are emptying out their insane asylums and their jails. And he's been asked, his campaign has been asked several times, where's the evidence of this? He doesn't present any evidence of this. Do you think the president should be making this appeal to Donald Trump if he's going to employ this, I mean, wildly dishonest and racist rhetoric? I mean, should the president just call out Republicans and say, you guys had a chance to pass something and you didn't do it? Do you think he needs to be a little tougher?

ESCOBAR: He's been doing that. And I'm very proud of the way the campaign and the president, you know, both separate and together have been pointing out to the American people we that we, I should say, Senate Democrats and many House Democrats were willing to give Republicans everything they wanted and they walked away because Donald Trump instructed them to.

And I think he's been pointing out, the president has been pointing out that that he would have signed that bill the minute it got to his desk.

ACOSTA: Do you think there's any hope of that legislation getting out of the Congress?

ESCOBAR: No, not unless Donald Trump signals that it's okay for Republicans to do it. I mean, the constituents of these House Republicans and Senate Republicans need to recognize that the party that once existed is gone forever, and it is now the MAGA Trump Party.

[10:25:10]

And whatever Donald Trump wants, his acolytes will follow their orders. Donald Trump wants a serious situation at the border. Republicans are going to follow suit. Donald Trump wants no solutions. Donald Trump has even said he wants the economy to collapse. These people are willing to do whatever he tells them to do.

ACOSTA: And when you hear him talking about detention camps, a massive deportation program, what does that say here?

ESCOBAR: That signals to me that he's willing to violate the Constitution, violate our civil rights, violate constitutional rights. And let me tell you, it is impossible to deport every undocumented person in this country. There simply are not the resources, nor is it advantageous to us. I mean, I'm sure you've seen the reports, Jim, that it has been immigrant labor, the immigrant workforce that has actually propped up our economy.

The challenge we face is that Congress has not created legal pathways for them. We can have both a manageable immigration system and a well- managed border, but it takes congressional action.

ACOSTA: But when you have cases like the case down in Georgia, the case up in New York where you have migrants committing crimes that get a lot of attention, horrific crimes, is there a need on the president's part to start calling some of this out? Even though you look at crime in these cities where migrants have been bused up to places like New York and so on, crime is actually coming down in those places, but you do have these high-profile cases. Does The president need to speak out more on some of these cases?

ESCOBAR: Look, we, every human being, from the president to members of Congress, to every American, mourns the loss of anyone and we need to see justice prevail, criminals prosecuted. But as you mentioned, the fact of the matter is immigrants commit crimes at less significant rates than native-born Americans. And in communities where migrants have been bused, crime has gone down.

Anyone who commits such a horrific crime absolutely needs to be prosecuted within the full extent of the law. But also the fact of the matter is when Donald Trump was in office, over a million migrants were released. I'm sure that there was a fraction of those migrants who also committed crimes.

The issue is not that migrants commit crimes. The issue is we have not reformed a system that is badly broken and it's been Republicans standing in the way of that every year that we've tried this for decades. We can still do this, but we need Republicans to have the spine to come to the table and take a vote.

ACOSTA: All right. Well, Congresswoman, thank you so much for coming in, Congresswoman Veronica Escobar. Thanks for being in the studio with us.

ESCOBAR: Thanks so much.

ACOSTA: Great to see you. I appreciate it. All right, thanks so much.

Coming up next, thousands risk arrest to attend the funeral for Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny. We'll take it to Moscow, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:30:00]