Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Trump Election Interference Hearing in Washington; Four Dead in Georgia School Shooting; Apalachee School Shooting Suspect Questioned Last Year. Aired 10:30-11a ET

Aired September 05, 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]

JIM ACOSTA, CNN ANCHOR: But it sounds as though there's a lot to untangle here and -- but Judge Chutkan is pressing forward.

MICHAEL VAN DER VEEN, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY AND FORMER TRUMP IMPEACHMENT ATTORNEY: Yes. You know, she's in an interesting position because this isn't the kind of case really any judges had to handle before. But she's going to really have to try to parse out on this in new indictment, what types of evidence can come in and what types of evidence can come out. And I think that the more you get into the weeds on that, I think the more you're going to see barring in the courtroom.

ACOSTA: Yes. And just a few moments ago, Judge Chutkan said she has to decide whether the conversations that were going on with Former Vice President Mike Pence and so on were outside the bounds of official presidential conduct. Michael, it sounds as though the crux of this case is going to be -- and some of this is going to get sorted out, it sounds like, from the judge before we even get to a trial, which actions from the former president, then-President Trump, were considered official acts of the office of the president of the United States, and which actions were those carried out by somebody who was trying to get re-elected? Michael, are you still there? You froze for a sec.

VAN DER VEEN: Yes. No, that's absolutely right. They have, you know, set up several different buckets of evidence, what were official acts and what are private acts, and the official acts evidence will be admissible and the private acts evidence won't. But, you know, how you differentiate between the two is going to have to do with the timing of evidence being created that the conversations and whatnot and who else was involved.

ACOSTA: And Elie, this is important right here. You were just saying that this this argument that is going to be happening over filing briefings on immunity and so on, this is key.

ELIE HONIG, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: Yes, so Trump's lawyers just said, we need a full and robust record and Trump's lawyers just said, we need an evidentiary hearing, meaning we want live witnesses.

ACOSTA: They want an evidentiary hearing.

HONIG: I actually thought -- I thought it would be the opposite, right?

ACOSTA: Oh, interesting.

HONIG: And the complaint that they made earlier -- we talked earlier about grand jury transcripts, right? The prosecutors have said, well, we would like to submit grand jury transcripts and attach them to our briefs.

ACOSTA: And it says, Lauro says they were not suggesting the case should go into the fall of next year, but that the issues at hand need to be dealt with carefully.

HONIG: Right. So, he wants to slow down here.

ACOSTA: Slow down, yes.

HONIG: He wants a hearing, but certainly not before the election. But what Trump's team is saying is, we're not satisfied with grand jury transcripts because they're one sided. It's only the prosecutor asking questions of the witnesses. There's no defense lawyer. There's no cross-examination.

ACOSTA: And they feel -- the Trump team feels as though the judge is going to dismiss this case once they see their filings. The judge says that immunity needs to be dealt with as early as possible.

HONIG: Yes. I'm skeptical of the first part of that. I don't think the judge is going to throw the indictment out.

ACOSTA: Yes.

HONIG: But yes, I mean, look, the judge clearly wants to deal with this and they recognize they have a long road ahead. Trump's team is trying to slow it down and the judge seems aligned with prosecutors here to, let's move as quickly as we can.

ACOSTA: Yes. Michael, I mean, you would agree that the Supreme Court has given Judge Chutkan a lot to unpack, a lot to untangle. This case becomes very complicated, does it not?

VAN DER VEEN: It certainly does. I mean, procedurally, you know, you're going to have motions passed under constitutional grounds. And now, under this Supreme Court decision, you're also going to have a lot of motions and limine on evidence. There are -- you know, it's not going to be one evidence you're hearing, you know, it's going to be days and days really to go through all of the evidence that they wanted to use. I know they cut out a lot in the indictment. We also left a lot in it.

ACOSTA: Michael, is that a good idea for Trump's defense team to want an evidentiary hearing, particularly before the election?

VAN DER VEEN: Well, you know, those are two different things. There are two different considerations there. You know, one is the legal system and being a criminal defense lawyer and the other one is he's in the end of a campaign. And that's the balance his lawyers had to fight all of the time. But they need to know what evidence that they think the judge is going to let in to then craft other motions from there.

ACOSTA:

VAN DER VEEN: So, they got to have hearing and if they could have it afterwards, of course, but they also need to move with the pace that the court requires.

ACOSTA: Yes. And Trump's attorney is saying it is inherently unfair and inequitable process for prosecutors to immediately file immunity arguments. Elie, I mean, Trump's team and Donald Trump, they've been playing this delay playbook for months now, years now, and they want to continue it.

HONIG: Well, they've already largely succeeded by evidence, by the fact that we're not going to have a trial between now and the election. But it's important to understand what's happening here. Prosecutors are saying, let's get the immunity arguments started quickly. We want to submit the first brief within two or three weeks. We're going to attach grand jury transcripts to show the world what's been said and testified to in the grand jury. And Trump's team is saying, oh, no, no, we don't want that. That's one sided. And we want it to happen much more slowly than that.

[10:35:00]

ACOSTA: And the judge is saying there's nothing inherently violative of due process to have the prosecution's timetable here.

HONIG: And what John Lauro says here is exactly what I just said.

ACOSTA: He's going back.

HONIG: Yes.

ACOSTA: Incredibly unfair.

HONIG: That Trump's lawyer -- incredibly unfair that they, the prosecutors, are able to put in the public record evidence against Trump at this time.

ACOSTA: So, they don't want the prosecution to put evidence into a filing at the court before the election. That's apparently what Trump's team is saying right now.

HONIG: Yes, and in the papers leading up to this, Trump's team said we shouldn't even dig into the immunity argument until December.

ACOSTA: And, Karen, what's -- why is that important? If I can get a quick thought from you before going to break.

KAREN FRIEDMAN AGNIFILO, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Yes, it's important because if you are immune from prosecution, that's a threshold question, it means you cannot be prosecuted. It means you're not guilty. And so, what they're saying is that would be prejudicial to put all this stuff out there.

ACOSTA: And, Karen, I don't -- I'm sorry to interrupt. Trump's attorney just suggested it's too close to the election, according to our reporter side panel. And Judge Chutkan says, ah, in response to that, maybe I'm -- maybe it's a too long of an ahs. I'm reading it there. But she says, ah, in response to that. Go ahead, Karen. And she -- and the judge says, I understand there's an election impending. Go ahead. Sorry about that, Karen. Go ahead.

AGNIFILO: No. Really, that's what she was trying to get them to say on the record, that the whole reason -- there's no reason, for example, in a criminal case to delay things as long as judge -- as long as Lauro, Trump's lawyer, wants to delay things. And so, that's why she keeps asking and pushing them, why are you asking for this timetable? And they finally admitted, it's because of the election. She just wanted to put that on the record because she doesn't think these issues will take that long.

ACOSTA: Yes, she says, you've said before and I will say again, that the electoral process of what needs to happen before the election does not matter here. So, Judge Chutkan -- and folks thought she was going to cool her jets after the Supreme Court and what they decided, not so much.

HONIG: Yes, she's made clear that she -- and she's made clear from the start that she doesn't care about the election. We can argue whether that's a good thing or a bad thing, right or wrong for a judge, but she's using Trump's own position against him, saying, before you were sort of insistent that we shouldn't do this before, you're still insistent we shouldn't do this before.

ACOSTA: And she says, this court is not concerned with the electoral schedule.

HONIG: She has said that many times before.

ACOSTA: This court?

HONIG: Right.

ACOSTA: Yes.

HONIG: Sure, interesting.

ACOSTA: Very interesting choice of words there from Judge Chutkan. All right. We got to get to break. Get to some other news, but very interesting. The judge in this case and Trump's attorneys going back and forth about whether or not some of this evidence that the prosecution wants to put into court filings with the court, whether or not that's going to be allowed to happen before the election, very key arguments right now in this election interference case hearing playing out right now here in Washington. Be right back after a quick break. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:40:00]

ACOSTA: And welcome back. We're continuing to follow this hearing that is taking place in Donald Trump's election interference case since the Supreme Court's very important landmark ruling on immunity in all of this. And we can see Judge Chutkan and Trump's attorney going back and forth. Lauro arguing that Judge Chutkan may rule that the Pence evidence is immune, and as an initial matter, the court can dismiss this case right away.

And so, it sounds as if -- Chutkan says, the Supreme Court could have decided the entire indictment was flawed. So, they're going back and forth over Trump's actions when he was president of the United States, which the Trump team is saying, OK, that falls under actions of the president. And Judge Chutkan is saying, not so fast.

HONIG: Yes. So, the key battleground right here is Mike Pence. Now, in the Supreme Court's ruling, and there was discussion about this earlier, the court said that evidence relating to Trump's conversations with the vice president is presumptively immune, not automatically immune. Now, the judge says, yes, she has -- she does not agree that she can dismiss the superseding indictment altogether.

ACOSTA: That's what they want. They want this to be thrown out.

HONIG: Right. Trump's team is saying, if the conversations with Trump and Pence are immune, you need to throw this whole indictment out. But what Judge Chutkan is saying here is, not necessarily, what I need to do is parse this thing. Maybe go paragraph by paragraph and decide some parts are in some parts are up, which the judge does seem to be indicating that she's leaning towards allowing the Mike Pence testimony in the case.

ACOSTA: And help me, Elie, just for a second for our viewers, just so we don't overlook the importance of what we're talking about here. When we're talking about the Mike Pence conversation, we're talking about Donald Trump attempting to twist Mike Pence's arms into overturning the election results as part of his procedural duty presiding over the counting of electoral votes on January 6th.

HONIG: That's exactly the issue. And it's interesting because Lauro just --

ACOSTA: Which is kind of important.

HONIG: Kind of important. Yes. It kind of matters to the story as a whole.

ACOSTA: Yes.

HONIG: Lauro, who's Trump's lawyer, keeps arguing the Supreme Court already said Pence's testimony is out, and Judge Chutkan correctly says, no, that's not quite what they said. They said it's presumptively out, but it's still up to me, the district judge, to consider whether it's in or out. There are some categories that are automatically out. This is sort of that middle category of probably out, but not necessarily. And so, the judge is right in characterizing the Supreme Court opinion and she's pushing back on the Trump team pretty hard.

ACOSTA: And Trump's attorney says, the indictment should be dismissed immediately over grand jury issues and that arguing over immunity would no longer be necessary. And so, he's throwing the kitchen sink at this.

HONIG: Yes, he's tried that five times already. And Judge Chutkan keep saying no. So, that's not going anywhere.

ACOSTA: All right. Fascinating developments. Obviously, this case continues. It's going to be pretty hard fought there in court between the judge and Trump's attorney. We're going to keep monitoring all of this. We have other news to get to after a quick break. We'll be right back. Thanks, Elie.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:45:00]

ACOSTA: All right. We will get back to Trump's immunity hearing in just a moment, but yet, another American community is reeling this morning, shattered by a mass shooting. Four people were killed at Apalachee High School in Winder, Georgia. The suspect, a 14-year-old student. And while the investigation is just beginning, I do want to take a moment to honor the victims, the two students and two teachers who went to school yesterday and never came home.

[10:50:00]

This is Mason Schermerhorn. He was 14 years old. New York Times reports that his friends and family described him as a lighthearted teenager who likes reading, playing video games, and visiting Disney World. Christian Angulo was also 14 years old. Look at this photo. He's lighting the candles on a 14th birthday cake. His sister says he was very sweet, so caring, and so loved by many. This is Richard Aspinwall, the 39-year-old father, taught math at the high school and was an assistant football coach. Christina Irimie was also a math teacher. She was 53 years old. And here is how one of her students described her to CBS.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

ISAAC SANGUMA, APALACHEE HIGH SCHOOL STUDENT: Ms. Irimie -- when I first came into class, Ms. Irimie, she be telling corny jokes. And at the time, it's just like, you know, when you a student, you just like, what is she talking about? But now, it's just like, dang, like, you know? You could get a question wrong on the board, And she not going to make you feel dumb. She really make -- you know, she'll make you feel welcome.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ACOSTA: For those who survived the horror, panic, and trauma of yesterday will stay with them. These are the messages between a 17- year-old student and his mother as the shooting was happening, her son says, school shooting right now. I'm scared, please. I'm not joking. His mother responds. I'm leaving work. She started rushing toward the school. And then he sends I love you. Not knowing if that would be his last message. His mom texts, love you too baby. She later described what was going through her mind at that moment.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ERIN CLARKE, MOTHER OF APALACHEE HIGH SCHOOL STUDENT: I hope he's alive when I get there. And this is really happening. And I just prayed that he would be OK when I got there. And thankfully he was.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ACOSTA: And we are learning more this hour about the red flags coming from the suspect in the Georgia high school shooting. More than a year ago, law enforcement officials questioned him in connection with anonymous online threats about carrying out a mass shooting at his school. Officials say there was no probable cause to arrest him as he denied making the threats. The suspect is expected to make his first court appearance tomorrow.

CNN's Nick Valencia is outside Apalachee High School. Nick, just an awful day for the community there. What more can you tell us?

NICK VALENCIA, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Jim, there are a lot of questions here. The principal one being, what more could have been done to stop this, especially when you consider what the FBI released in a statement last night, along with local law enforcement, saying that this individual last year, when he was 13 years old, was questioned by law enforcement officials because of a series of anonymous tips about postings made on social media, threats made on social media.

The then-13-year-old denied making those threats. It was determined that the father had a hunting rifle, but that the then-13-year-old did not have unsupervised access to it. More questions this morning, though, considering that interaction if police could have taken that more seriously or question the parents more further.

You know, how was this weapon obtained? That's another big question this morning. We learned overnight that this style caliber weapon was an AR-15 rifle that was used. The other big question is how it could have gotten into this school. And lastly, you know, one of the major questions that is being underscored here by the community, there was a series of phone calls made yesterday, threats that were called into this school indicating that a shooting was going to happen here and that it was going to begin here at Apalachee.

We're told from the timeline of events that the school did not go into lockdown right away after that threat, and it wasn't until the shooting began that the lockdown ensued. So, all of those questions really unanswered here so far a day after the shooting. Jim.

ACOSTA: All right. Nick Valencia, thank you very much. And we'll have more from Winder and the Trump hearing at the top of our hour with Wolf Blitzer. I want to leave you with a moment from last night's vigil as that community mourns four lives lost. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We know that we have confusion and anger. We have questions that we want answered. We want to see justice done. We want to see right be done. And yet, in this moment tonight, we've all gathered in this place because we need something more than we can provide for ourselves.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:55:00]

WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: You are in the CNN Newsroom. I'm Wolf Blitzer in Washington. Happening now. The Federal Special Counsel Jack Smith and lawyers for Donald Trump, they are back in the courtroom. A key hearing is underway in the former president's federal election interference case. It's the first hearing since prosecutors revised their initial indictment after the U.S. Supreme Court's controversial decision on presidential immunity.

There are no cameras allowed in the federal courtroom. Therefore, on the left of your screen, you will be seeing what's unfolding as it happens direct from our reporters who are in the room right now and they're briefing us and telling us on what's going on.

CNN's Chief Legal Affairs Correspondent Paula Reid is just outside the courthouse here in Washington this morning. So, where do things stand so far, Paula?

PAULA REID, CNN CHIEF LEGAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: Wolf, it is getting heated inside this federal courthouse, this is a much more combative hearing than what my sources anticipated.

[11:00:00]