Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Trump Joins Town Hall With Audience of All-Women Voters; Trump Doubles Down on Calling Democrats Enemies from Within; Special Counsel Says, Obstruction Charge Against Donald Trump in January 6 Case Should Stand. Aired 11-11:30a ET

Aired October 16, 2024 - 11:00   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[11:00:00]

JIM ACOSTA, CNN ANCHOR: Good morning. You're live in the CNN newsroom. I'm Jim Acosta in Washington.

Right now, less than three weeks until Election Day, the race of the White House could come down to who women trust the most. Another network is airing a town hall with former President Donald Trump right now in front of an audience. Of all women voters were getting some of the headlines just in over the last several minutes. One of those headlines, he told the audience, that he is quote, the father of IVF. He also had this exchange with a woman about the cost of raising children. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: What kind of realistic change is that? Do you think you can provide single parents, married parents, any kind of parent, to just simply afford children in today's world with the way things are?

DONALD TRUMP (R), FORMER U.S. PRESIDENT, 2024 PRESIDENTIAL NOMINEE: I gave you the largest tax cuts in the history of our country, okay, larger than the Reagan cuts, larger -- I understand exactly what you're saying. We're going to readjust things so that it's fair to everybody, because it's really not fair to everybody.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ACOSTA: All right. Let's discuss more now. CNN Political Commentator and Democratic strategist Maria Cardona, also with us, Republican Strategist Katie Frost.

Katie, let me start with you. What do we think? What does he mean about being the father of IVF? Is this just trying to clean up what is a record with women that is not going over well with those voters?

KATIE FROST, REPUBLICAN STRATEGIST: Well, it's good to be with you, Jim. Thank you. You know, you're using family terms to discuss issues that address families. You know, it's a very simple way to look at it. And the Republican Party is absolutely the party that supports families and pro-family policies. That is why you are seeing Republicans say we need to make sure that IVF is available to families and these families rights are protected in the process.

You know, a lot of people talk about the Alabama Supreme Court decision, but they don't talk about the context around that. You know, Vice President Harris loves to talk about context. But the context in that decision is rarely discussed. This case was brought by three couples who were undergoing IVF treatments. And the medical clinic and their provider disregarded their rights to protect their embryos and their future children. Their embryos were discarded because of the medical provider's lax provisions. And now they were suing for redress of grievances.

And that is how this entire case came about. It was about protecting the rights of couples seeking IVF and making sure that they were protected.

ACOSTA: Maria, what do you think?

MARIA CARDONA, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: I think that's laughable. I think it's laughable that Donald Trump said he was the father of IVF when, in fact, he put in place the string of events that led to IVF being in jeopardy and led to so many families being in limbo and not even wondering whether their IVF processes were going to move forward. And it was heartbreaking for those families. And that is all thanks to Donald Trump and the Republican Party.

And Donald Trump is the one -- he is the father of taking away women's rights, of taking away women's bodily autonomy, of taking away the right of women to make decisions for their future, their families, their bodies. And that is what the Republican Party is suffering right now. That is why you see this chasm in terms of the gender vote. That is why you see women absolutely not trusting Donald Trump on anything.

And let me just say this as well. It is laughable as well when Republicans say that they are the party of family, because in addition to not letting women make the decisions about their own families, when it comes to policies to actually support real families, whether it's single moms, whether it's kids that need support to get food, to get diapers, whether it's families that are in poverty, Republican policies, time and time again, cut that funding. The targets are on the backs of families who are the poorest working class families, middle class families who need that kind of support the most. And those are the first policies and those are the first buckets of money to get cut from Republican budget.

So, it is laughable and hypocritical when Republicans talk about being the party of family.

[11:05:01]

ACOSTA: And, Katie. What if this election comes down to being an abortion on -- excuse me, a referendum on abortion for women voters?

FROST: Well, I do not believe that will be what this election comes down to. You look at the polling and, yes, abortion does pull higher as a priority for women than other demographics, but it's not the top issue overall. The top issues overall are the economy and immigration, two issues that impact families deeply and two issues that the Democratic Party has struggled with constantly.

You talk about supporting families when people can't afford housing, when people can't afford basic necessities because of this crippling inflation that we see because of the policies put in place by the Biden-Harris administration. That doesn't sound pro-family to me.

We need to make sure that everyone's paycheck goes further, which happened in the Trump years and is not happening now. We need to make sure that our border is secure, that our streets are safe and that our jobs are being filled by people here who need those paychecks, not importing people to take the jobs away.

ACOSTA: Maria, quick last word from you and then I've got to move forward, but I think I'm going to keep you both around. So, a quick last word from you.

CARDONA: Newsflash to Republicans. Women can go into the ballot box and think about more than one issue at a time. I have heard Republican women say to me, Maria, I know the economy is coming back, but my rights won't. I'm going to vote for Kamala Harris. I'm not even going to tell my husband because too much is on the line for me. I don't want to raise my daughter in a country where she's going to have less rights than I did. This is going to be a huge underlying issue the way it was in 2022. It's going to be even more so now.

ACOSTA: Well, we're going to continue to monitor this town hall. And as more of these clips come out, I want to keep you around and see if we can come back to you to talk about that. I really appreciate it.

And as he continues to rally supporters, Donald Trump is doubling down on his vow to use the military on his political opponents. Here's a reminder of what he said in just the last few days.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: It's the enemy from within all the scum that we have to deal with that hate our country. That's a bigger enemy than China and Russia

I think the bigger problem are the people from within. We have some very bad people, we have some sick people, radical left lunatics.

It should be very easily handled by -- if necessary, by National Guard, or, if really necessary, by the military.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ACOSTA: And joining us now, CNN Political Commentator, former Trump Campaign Adviser David Urban and CNN Military Analyst and retired Air Force Colonel Cedric Leighton.

David, New York Times headline today points out just how significant this is, noting that a presidential nominee has never threatened to turn the military against Americans who don't support him. People are voting right now, and I'm just wondering, David, are you comfortable with this kind of rhetoric coming from the Republican nominee?

DAVID URBAN, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Yes. So, Jim, let's just, let's go to a little context here. I think that that quote is -- if we ran the whole clip, Maria Bartiromo was asking him about unrest post- Election Day. She said, what if there's unrest in the streets? What if there's, you know, violence in the streets and what Donald Trump said is we have a military, the National Guard is set to take care of that. And if need be, we've got a regular military to take care of that, which is primarily the National Guard's job is to kind of police in times of civil unrest. So, I think that quote -- I think it's kind of taken out of context.

I do think that he did say some unfortunate things about Adam Schiff. I don't like him saying like maybe we should go round up Adam Schiff, but the rest of the quote --

ACOSTA: David, that's --

URBAN: The rest of the quote was --

ACOSTA: When you, when you talk about the full context, I mean, he's had, he's had several opportunities to clean this up and he is not doing it. And, you know, to have --

URBAN: Well, I'm going to clean it up for him now, Jim.

ACOSTA: Well, but you're not going to be the president. He w he would be if he wins. And to say that you're going to go and use the military or the National Guard to round people up, I mean, that just sounds bonkers. It's dangerous.

URBAN: Yes, Jim. So, again, Jim, I think that the bulk of that was addressed at Maria's point about civil unrest post-election, and then he threw in the Schiff part and he shouldn't have, because you shouldn't -- you know, the military is above that. The military is supposedly an apolitical institution, and should be, and, you know, it's the best and brightest of Americans, and it shouldn't be politicized in any way, shape, or form.

ACOSTA: Colonel, I asked this question earlier of the Pennsylvania governor -- former Pennsylvania Governor Tom Corbett, and I want to ask you the same thing. If you are a governor in charge of a National Guard, if you're over at the Pentagon and the call comes in from the president to deploy the military or the National Guard to go after Trump's political opponents, what do you do?

[11:10:06]

COL. CEDRIC LEIGHTON (RET.), CNN MILITARY ANALYST: Well, Jim, the right answer is you don't do it. And the key thing is this. It is illegal for military personnel to obey in an illegal order. So, there is something called the Posse Comitatus Act, which actually prohibits the use of military forces in a domestic situation. They cannot be used to quell an insurrection unless an exception is made for that. And the one exception that I can think of in recent history is what happened in the Los Angeles riots, where active duty personnel were used to help in that particular situation when the L.A. riots occurred under George H.W. Bush. But there's absolutely -- after the Civil War, it was very clear that the U.S. wanted to go into, in a direction where there's law enforcement and there's the military, and they're kept separate.

ACOSTA: Right. And, David, I did want to talk about Trump's ties to Vladimir Putin in his recent book, War. Bob Woodward says -- a Trump aide told him that the former president has talked to Putin as many as seven times since leaving office. And here's what Trump and Woodward both say about that yesterday.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOHN MICKLETHWAIT, EDITOR-IN-CHIEF, BLOOMBERG: You just mentioned Putin, though, and there's been this controversy the past week. Can you say yes or no whether you have talked to Vladimir Putin since you stopped being president?

TRUMP: Well, I don't comment on that, but I will tell you that if I did, it's a smart thing.

BOB WOODWARD, AUTHOR, WAR: CIA Director Bill Burns, quote, says Putin manipulates, he's professionally trained to do that. Putin's got a plan just as he did when Trump was in office at plain Trump. Now, that's not some political opponent saying that about Trump. That's the CIA director.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ACOSTA: David, I mean, Trump said yesterday that it would be smart to talk to Putin while out of office. What's going on here?

URBAN: Well, look, let's address several things in that clip, Jim. To say the CIA is not political is laughable, right, to begin with. Number two, there was no one tougher on Russia than Donald Trump.

Let's just look at the facts, Jim.

ACOSTA: No, David.

LEIGHTON: That's not true. That is not true, David.

URBAN: Hold on. Let's look at the facts, Jim.

LEIGHTON: That is not true.

URBAN: Colonel Leighton, hold on. You'll get your chance. During the Trump administration, the Trump Department of Defense deployed Marines for the first time since World War II. There's a contingent of Marines in Norway. True or false, Colonel?

LEIGHTON: That's true. URBAN: The Trump administration deployed tanks to Poland. True or false, Colonel? True. During the Trump administration, there were no incursions by the Russians into Ukraine. True or false, Colonel? True.

LEIGHTON: Here's the deal with that. Wait a second. Wait a second, David. No, you are putting words into my mouth. That's not going to happen.

Now, here's what's what really happened here. One of the key things that you have to look at is under the Obama administration, the Russians invaded Crimea and they invaded the Donbas region. That is true. And when you look at -- you know, you look at what Woodward wrote in War, it's very clear that the Biden administration, or at least Biden himself, thinks that was a mistake. And I agree with that assessment.

Now, what happened during this period --

URBAN: But that didn't happen during the Trump administration.

LEIGHTON: Hold on. What happened during the Trump administration was that the Russians were preparing to do this invasion and nobody did anything to stop this invasion. That's the key point. And, no, it's true.

URBAN: Colonel, you're wrong.

LEIGHTON: No, I'm 100 percent right.

URBAN: Talk to General Abizaid. Talk to -- I'll give you receipts, Colonel.

ACOSTA: Yes, but, David, I mean --

LEIGHTON: No, this is not true.

ACOSTA: Go ahead, Colonel.

LEIGHTON: That is not true. The key thing to keep in mind is Putin has been preparing for this operation since before 2014. And he continued his preparations for this entire time period. And he found an opportunity to go after the rest of Ukraine in 2022, in February of 2022. And you saw everything. They massed their troops. They had prepared the Russian military over a period of decades for this kind of thing.

Now, their preparations were faulty, as we found out. They couldn't take Kyiv like they wanted to, but don't tell me, don't tell anybody in America that this wasn't going on during the Trump administration because it was.

ACOSTA: Yes. Also, David, I mean, we can also -- there are other, there's a points you can bring in. David, there are other data points. Hold on. I am the host of this program. David, hold on. You can bring in other data points, metric points in here. Has NATO expanded under President Biden? True or false? That is true, yes. So, I mean, if that, that's not good for Vladimir Putin.

[11:15:02]

And at the Helsinki summit, Donald Trump was asked if he believed his own intelligence agencies or the Russian president when it came to allegations of meddling in the elections. And Donald Trump famously said, President Putin says it's not Russia. I don't see any reason why it would be. I mean, he sided with Vladimir Putin at a summit over his own intelligence community. Yes.

URBAN: Yes. Listen, I would rely on my own intelligence committee community rather than Vladimir Putin. But, again, Jim, back to the facts.

ACOSTA: I mean, from a factual standpoint, that doesn't make you tougher than anybody in history against Russia. I mean, that's hyperbolic.

URBAN: Jim, I'm just stating the facts. This is not feelings. These are facts here, okay? These are facts. The Trump administration placed Marines, which still remain in place in Norway, for the first time on the -- cooperating now with the Russian Norwegian military on the Russian border. That's a fact. That's not a feeling. U.S. put, you know, M1 Bradley tanks into Poland. That's a fact. That's not a feeling. The Russians did not incur, they did not go into Donbas. They did not go into Ukraine. They did not do any of that during the four years of the Trump presidency. That's not --

LEIGHTON: Because they already there, David. David, they were already there.

URBAN: Colonel, you're right. You're absolutely right, Colonel. But they did not go in further until the Biden administration.

ACOSTA: I do think we started this segment asking you, David, you know, what's he doing talking to Vladimir Putin?

LEIGHTON: Exactly.

ACOSTA: He didn't deny it, so I mean, I guess, what does that tell you?

URBAN: If he is talking to him, maybe he's telling him, don't do it, we're going to whack you. I don't know what's going on. I don't the conversations that are taking place, Jim. All I know is the results speak for themselves.

Listen, don't rely on me. Go take a look -- read -- listen, wait, read General H.R. McMaster's --

ACOSTA: It's getting mighty deep around here, and I don't have my boots on David, but --

URBAN: No, Jim. It's not deep. This is facts. These aren't my feelings. Jim, read H.R. McMaster. General McMaster is not a shill for the -- I'll send you his link, people can go look it up, read -- Google H.R. McMaster, free press, and --

ACOSTA: But your view is he should not be talking to Putin when he's out of office, or he should be talking to Putin?

URBAN: No. My view is do whatever you think that's going to make the American people the safest.

ACOSTA: Colonel, last word on you.

LEIGHTON: There's one thing about this. There is one commander-in- chief at a time. For a former president to do this kind of stuff, to talk to Putin or any rival of the United States, when there is -- he is not the commander-in-chief, is actually illegal. And that is something that -- if it's not coordinated with the State Department or the White House, it's something that is in contravention of U.S. foreign policy. The former president, should not have done this.

The last example of somebody who did something like that was Herbert Hoover when he went to visit Hitler back in 1938. And during that period in time, Czechoslovakia was on the table. Now, Ukraine is on the table. Similar type of things happening here, history is not exactly repeating itself, but it's certainly rhyming at this point.

URBAN: Yes. But, Jim, we don't know. Maybe Donald Trump has been in the green light by the CIA. You don't know what's going on behind closed doors and briefings. We don't know.

ACOSTA: Do you think the CIA is going to give Donald Trump the green light to talk to Vladimir Putin?

URBAN: Jim, maybe they are. We don't know.

ACOSTA: Okay. David, all right, I don't know. I don't know. I don't know.

URBAN: We'll agree to disagree.

ACOSTA: All right, David, Colonel Leighton, thanks a lot. I appreciate it. A spirited of the discussion, thanks a lot.

All right, coming up family members of the Menendez brothers are holding a press conference today. We're learning about new evidence that could lead to their case getting reheard. That's coming up.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[11:20:00]

ACOSTA: All right. This just in, the special counsel investigating Trump's alleged efforts to overturn the 2020 election is arguing that an obstruction charge against the former president should stand. In a new filing this morning, special counsel Jack Smith told the judge that the Supreme Court's decision to limit some obstruction charges against January 6th rioters should not apply to the former president.

And Paula Reed joins us now. Paula, what is, what's the special counsel saying?

PAULA REID, CNN CHIEF LEGAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: Well, Jim, we know that this case is not going to trial anytime soon, but the fights rage on. This time, the special counsel is pushing back against the Trump team's argument that this entire case should be tossed out based on something the Supreme Court said a few months ago.

And the Supreme Court actually issued two significant decisions this year that could impact this case. Of course, the most notable one is their decision on immunity, granting former President Trump some immunity, but today's filing is actually about a different case called Fischer, which covered a retired police officer who is at the Capitol on January 6th, and he was charged with obstruction, like former President Trump was.

But Fischer convinced the Supreme Court that this particular charge that he faced, obstructing an official proceeding, doesn't apply to what occurred on January 6th. Instead, that came out of Sarbanes- Oxley, and he argued that that was actually only supposed to be used if you're interfering with documents or evidence in an official investigation.

So, of course, Trump's lawyers seized on this and said, our client is also charged with obstruction, and not only should you toss his obstruction charges, you should toss the whole case based on Fischer.

But here, the special counsel points out that the type of conduct that Trump is charged with is very different, because, of course, he wasn't at the Capitol on January 6th.

[11:25:00]

He's charged with other efforts to allegedly obstruct the election, including trying to push fake slates of electors.

So, here, not surprising that Jack Smith is having none of this argument from Trump lawyers, that the entire case should be tossed.

ACOSTA: All right. Paul Reed, thank you very much, important development there.

Coming up, after nearly 30 years in a hugely popular Netflix series, the Menendez brothers and their celebrity advocates are hoping new evidence could set them free. I'll speak to a prosecutor who was there at the time. That's coming up.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[11:30:00]

ACOSTA: Later today, the family of Eric and Lyle.