Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Senators Brace for Battles Over Controversial Cabinet Picks; Trump picks Project 2025 Co-Author to Lead Budget Office; Today, Menendez Brothers Have Court Hearing in Bid for Release. Aired 10- 10:30a ET

Aired November 25, 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: Breaking developments in a possible ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah. We're live in Jerusalem with the latest on the negotiations.

Plus, for the first time in 28 years, the Menendez brothers will be back in court as they try to get a reduced sentence for killing their parents. L.A.'s newly elected district attorney will join all of us to discuss.

And days before Thanksgiving, workers at Charlotte's airport are on strike, how it could affect Travelers during this busy week in the skies.

Good morning. I'm Jim Acosta in Washington. You are live in the CNN Newsroom

But we begin this hour with President-elect Donald Trump spending his Thanksgiving week at Mar-a-Lago, fresh off finalizing all of his cabinet picks. The next test ahead, the confirmation battles, and those could be uphill battles for at least two of them, Pete Hegseth for secretary of defense and Tulsi Gabbard as the director of National Intelligence. Gabbard is getting these kinds of reactions from senators.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. TAMMY DUCKWORTH (D-IL): She is, in terms of the intelligence community, very unqualified. Plus, she is potentially compromised and could be and has -- is there questions about whether or not she is now a Russian asset?

SEN. JAMES LANKFORD (R-OK): Well, we'll have lots of questions. She met with Bashar Assad. We'll want to know what the purpose was. There's comments that are floating out there, but we want to be able to know the rest of the story.

SEN. MARKWAYNE MULLIN (R-OK): This isn't a new administration coming in. And so when people are criticizing his picks, the president has done this job before. He knows exactly what he needs. (END VIDEO CLIP)

ACOSTA: All right. CNN's Lauren Fox and Mark Preston are with me,

Mark, Matt Gaetz is out, but it sounds like now the focus is on Tulsi Gabbard and Pete Hegseth. I mean, could these nominations face some serious challenges? What do you think?

MARK PRESTON, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: Well, they're certainly going to face challenges in the sense that they're going to have to go through the nomination process if they don't withdraw beforehand.

But I would think that important to point out that they're going to have a little bit of an easier time had Gaetz not get tossed aside. I mean, in many ways, and I've been saying this for weeks, is that I think Gaetz was a sacrificial lamb. If they had gotten him through, great, but the reality is, Jim, we all know this, he could put anybody at the Department of Justice as long as that person does what he wants them to do, then he wins.

ACOSTA: Yes. Lauren, I mean, what do you think about these confirmation hearings? I mean, we have not seen these kinds of controversial picks for a presidential cabinet, I mean, maybe in modern times. I mean, so -- I mean, obviously what we're potentially going to see is going to be some fireworks up there on, on Capitol Hill.

LAUREN FOX, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes. I mean, we are still months away though, and I think that this is an important perspective to keep in mind. Lawmakers are really just waking up to these nominees just be getting their own vetting processes. Also, these are phone calls, meetings, all things that lawmakers have to do as part of this process.

And so we're still a long ways away from sort of those high-profile confirmation hearings that you get on Capitol Hill. And as we saw with Matt Gaetz, a lot can change in not a very long period of time. I was talking to some lawmakers and aides last week who do have some concerns about Pete Hegseth, and not just the issues related to that police report that came out last week, but also just questions about what he has said about the Pentagon, whether or not he's qualified to lead such a huge bureaucracy in Washington D.C. These are real issues.

And these nominees have a process where they have to convince senators who do think pretty highly of their role in advice and consent, that they're up to the job.

PRESTON: You know, Jim, let's just go back to -- prior to Election Day. We said, it all comes down to seven states, right? You know, this is what the election is going to be on all comes down to seven states. Think of the United States Senate the same way. It's all going to come down to a handful of senators, right? So, as we're talking, they're all going to have different reasons perhaps for trying to block or maybe not support somebody.

So, for instance, like Joni Ernst, I mean, she's been very public about being a rape survivor. Will that influence her at all when it comes to Pete Hegseth given the allegations that have been, you know, launched against him? You know, do you look at somebody like Lisa Murkowski, who says, I'm not going to go along with this? And remember Mitch McConnell, the Senate -- a former Senate Republican leader, he's still in the Senate right now. He's an institutionalist. So, that's where the fireworks going to come down to.

[10:05:00]

The Democrats, you know, it will be fun to watch. You know the hearings. The reality, though, is that it's going to be a handful of senators, you know, who make the call and Donald Trump can lose three of them, can lose three of them and still get a nominee through.

ACOSTA: Yes. And, Lauren, the other issue that I think might rear its ugly head is, I mean, Trump is also facing backlash over the lack of FBI background checks for some of his picks. We've all worked in Washington a long time. FBI background checks are sort of, you know, pretty standard stuff, yes, around the doorway. Trump is at the moment just thumbing his nose at these. And you have to wonder whether the senators are going to say, hey, wait a minute, we want to see these things.

FOX: Yes. I mean, I think one thing we learned from the Matt Gaetz week-long episode and drama on Capitol Hill last week was that lawmakers prefer more information, not less, and that includes Republicans, because, again, they do think that their job matters here. They do have a vote. They want to see all the information. And you can bet with someone like Tulsi Gabbard, they want more additional information given some of her past comments and some for past actions. This is a really important post and they are talking about national security. And that is something that the Senate Intelligence Committee is a very bipartisan committee behind closed doors.

ACOSTA: And --

PRESTON: I was just going to say, and to Lauren's point though, it's going to put more pressure on Senate Republicans come the new year because these FBI background checks are not being done now. That means it's going to be delayed going into the new year. So, while we traditionally have these hearings being held, you know, even before the president gets sworn in, who knows when they're going to happen?

ACOSTA: Right. And I mean, the other thing that we have to talk about is some of the other picks that came in over the weekend. Late last week, Russ Vought has been picked for the Office of Management and Budget. He was a key author, architect of Project 2025. Mark, you and I, Lauren, we all listened to what was happening out on the campaign trail before the election. Donald Trump again and again denied that he had any knowledge of Project 2025, that Project 2025 would have anything to do with his administration, and he picks Russ Vought to head OMB.

PRESTON: And Vought is going to come in and work basically hand in glove, you know, with the new heads of DOGE or however you pronounce it. ACOSTA: DOGE, I think, it's --

PRESTON: It's DOGE, there you go. It's what the kids are saying, right? So, you know what, you know, with Musk and Vivek. But, I mean, this is a guy, Vought is a guy who has been very clear in what he wants to do. He wants to peel back government.

So, I think someone like him being named shows that Trump is being very serious when, you know, putting people that are going with cleavers and not knives. They're not going to go in and fillet around. They're going to go in and start chopping.

ACOSTA: Yes. And I heard from -- you know, I heard from a former Trump administration official from the first time around who said, Trump means what he says. When he makes these kinds of picks, he means what he says.

FOX: Yes. I think one thing to keep in mind, though, is there is actual legislation that has to get passed in Congress. They're going to have to do a big spending deal probably sometime early in the New Year that he's going to be a part of. Also, they're going to have to raise the debt ceiling. And that is another place where potentially you will have to set budget caps. But important to keep in mind, you do not have a filibuster-proof Senate. That means it has to get through with 60 votes, which means a handful of Democrats are going to have to support whatever they come up with.

ACOSTA: Interesting. And to your point, Mark, a handful of Republican senators who may not be, you know, willing to go along with Trump on everything here on out.

PRESTON: Yes, I mean, look, it's going to be a lot easier. It's going to be a lot easier for him than I think most people suspect. But Lauren's right, it does have -- if they have the backbone that they should, then they'll obviously serve as the, you know, third co-equal branch of government.

ACOSTA: All right. Guys, thank you very much. I appreciate it.

All right, joining me now, Democratic Congressman Ro Khanna of California to talk about this, his district includes much of Silicon Valley. And, Congressman, there's been a lot of controversy, we were just talking about this a few moments ago, swirling around the Tulsi Gabbard pick for director of National Intelligence. Where do you stand on her nomination?

REP. RO KHANNA (D-CA): She should have a fair hearing, but there should be pointed questions asked questions about why she met with Assad, what the purpose was, questions about whether she would stand for Ukraine's sovereignty, questions about making sure that she opposes Putin. So, the American people deserve a hearing with fair, pointed questions.

ACOSTA: And I do want to ask you about, we were just talking about this a few moments ago, DOGE, as it's called, this Department of Government Efficiency led by Vivek Ramaswamy and Elon Musk. You come from Silicon Valley. You represent that part of the country. What are your thoughts on this? I mean, should this be taken seriously? Should two people from outside of government, like Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy, have that kind of sway over what stays and what goes in the federal government?

KHANNA: Well, ultimately, they're going to provide recommendations. It's Congress that appropriates money. Let me provide an area where there could make be bipartisan collaboration. I mean, the defense budget, which is nearly a trillion dollars, is dominated by five primes.

[10:10:00]

There has been tremendous reporting about the waste, fraud and abuse in that budget. The Pentagon hasn't passed an audit and has failed the last six or seven audits. So, if they go to say there needs to be more open competition, not the monopolization in defense contractors, and propose recommendations, that's something that I think could be supported. If they find areas of truly wasteful spending across the government, they would get support. But if they start to recommend cuts in Social Security or Medicare or Title 1 Education Funding, they'll face strong resistance. So, it really just depends what they recommend.

ACOSTA: And as you know, former Republican Congressman Matt Gaetz is out. Pam Bondi is in for attorney general for President-elect Trump. You know, she has been quoted in recent months as saying that the investigators should be investigated inside the Justice Department, inside the federal government. When you hear those kinds of comments, what's your reaction to that?

KHANNA: Well, they're concerning. And I think that she should be asked these questions at a hearing. But my hope is I think the American people want to turn the page. They want to focus on solving their problems on inflation, on the cost of groceries and rent, on a secure border with a humane immigration policy. That's why they elected President Trump. I don't think they want Donald Trump to go politicize the judiciary or Justice Department, even if he believes that it was politicized against him, which I reject. But I think people really want the country to move on. And I think that those questions need to be asked. Who is she going to target?

ACOSTA: And I do want to ask you about something. I want to get your reaction to the incoming border czar, Tom Homan, saying that Trump plans to withhold federal funding from states that refuse to cooperate with his mass deportation plans. Let's listen to this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: To me, you've got a powerful weapon among others, which is okay, no federal funds, boom. Last thoughts?

TOM HOMAN, INCOMING TRUMP ADMINISTRATION BORDER CZAR: And that's going to happen. I guarantee you, President Trump will do that.

(END VIDEO CLIP) ACOSTA: Congressman, California, the state you represent, is already passing measures to protect immigrants from deportation. What do you make of that threat from Homan?

KHANNA: Well, it's very concerning and scary. People want a secure border. They want to make sure that violent felons aren't in this country. But Donald Trump and Tom Homan have talked about actually having the military involved in going into businesses and conducting raids, asking people for their paperwork. And I don't think that's what the American people want. That will violate the rights, not just of those who may be undocumented and here for years paying taxes, but also potentially American citizens who are caught up in the process and ask for their paperwork.

So, anything that needs to be done has to be done with respect for our Constitution and our values and the specifics of what has been proposed are deeply concerning.

ACOSTA: And I know you have some thoughts on President-elect Trump's pick for labor secretary. I also understand you have some thoughts on the federal minimum wage, which currently sits at $7.25, hasn't budged since July 2009. I mean, it's kind of incredible to think that that is the minimum wage of this country. You say you hope to persuade a few Republicans to pass an increase to that. Is that possible? I mean, a lot of folks are not really in the mood for bipartisanship these days. Could that be a place to start?

KHANNA: I hope so. I mean, look, AMLO, the president of Mexico, increased the wage there from $4.65 to almost $14 a day. And that was one of the reasons for his popularity and why his successor won. We need to increase the minimum wage here. And I would work with Republicans. There were some Republicans who voted for it in the past to do that and to work with the Senate.

And Sean O'Brien, the president of the Teamsters, he's played a role in trying to get Republicans to be for increased wages for basic things like the Pro Act. I actually think fairly highly in the context of the new labor secretary because she did vote for the Pro Act. And so my hope is that we can find progress on an agenda to increase the minimum wage, to have labor neutrality.

Now, if they don't live up to that, then that's something that the Democrats can point out in 2026 or 2028. But we have to start with the sense that most Americans won the new president, new Congress to succeed in helping improve their lives and be willing to work across the aisle where we can do that.

ACOSTA: All right. Congressman Ro Khanna of California, thanks so much for your time. We appreciate it.

KHANNA: Thank you.

ACOSTA: All right, coming up, Erik and Lyle Menendez are about to face a judge for the first time in nearly three decades. The incoming L.A. district attorney will join me next to talk about the brothers' bid for freedom 35 years after they killed their parents. That's coming up.

[10:15:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

ACOSTA: In just a few hours, Erik and Lyle Menendez have a hearing schedule, what would be their first public court appearance in 28 years. The brothers are serving life without parole for the murder of their parents in 1989. Last month, Los Angeles District Attorney George Gascon recommended that a judge resentence them, which could allow for their immediate release.

But Gascon lost his reelection bid a few weeks ago to our next guest. Nathan Hochman will take office next week as the new L.A. County district attorney. He has some tough decisions to make regarding whether or not these brothers are going to have a new day in court and what their chances are for their release.

[10:20:03]

Let me talk to him now. Nathan, good to see you this morning, we really appreciate it.

So, what do you think? I mean, what are your expectations from today's status hearing? And I guess it is a little stunning that this is the first time these two brothers have been in court in 28 years. Is that correct?

NATHAN HOCHMAN, LOS ANGELES COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY-ELECT: That would be correct. They're going to be in court virtually. And right now, the Menendez case is on three different tracks. Today is the habeas track. That's the track that started back in May of 2023 when a motion was filed that introduced new evidence. And the question for the habeas proceeding is, is this new evidence compelling enough to meet the legal standard to get a new trial?

The second track is clemency. Clemency is entirely up to the governor at any point since the governor has been in office since 2017. He can grant clemency. He could do it today if he wanted to. The third track is called resentencing. Resentencing is something that was filed by my predecessor, George Gascon. It triggers a procedure that looks at the interests of justice. And it incorporates rehabilitation into the analysis and says, should they go from life without the possibility of parole to what has been recommended of 50 years to life, which would qualify them for parole, which would then if the parole board granted the parole land back on the governor's desk for an ultimate decision.

ACOSTA: Mr. Hochman, you said that you need time to review the case. Have you had some time to review it? What are your thoughts? Do these brothers deserve some kind of hearing as to whether or not -- or more than a hearing, as to whether or not they should be released from prison earlier than where things stand right now. What are your thoughts on that?

HOCHMAN: So today is the hearing on the habeas motion. If the judge were to grant that, it would be decided before I would take office on December 3rd. If, on the other hand, the resentencing goes forward on December 11th, what I've said is that I don't have access to the thousands of pages of prison files, the thousands of pages of trial transcripts from months-long trials. I haven't spoken to the prosecutors, law enforcement, the defense counsel, and victim family members.

I would do a thorough and complete review of the facts in the law because the Menendez brothers, the public, the victim family members, owe nothing less than having the D.A. do that review. I don't have access to many of those documents at this point. But if it does go forward, I will try to be ready by December 11th. If I'm not ready by December 11th, I'm not going to ask for delay's sake. I'll go ahead and expeditiously review all these records and be ready to defend whatever position I take in a court of law.

ACOSTA: And, Mr. Hochman, I hope you don't mind me just pressing just a little bit on this and it sounds as though I know you're going to say that you don't have enough in front of you to make a firm judgment or drawing, you know, final conclusions and all this. But, I mean, you obviously aren't doing this with every murder case that's come through L.A. over the last couple of decades. This case appears to be somewhat special in the regard that it's received so much national attention in recent months because of this Netflix docuseries and so on.

Are there elements or aspects of the case that make you say, okay, this does give me a little bit of pause, these allegations that the brothers were abused by their father, those sorts of things?

HOCHMAN: So, again, resentencing is a very unique legal concept. It asks you to look at a whole variety of factors to determine whether or not you're going to upset a 35-year-old verdict that has already gone through the courts, it's gone through a jury, a judge, the California appellate courts, the federal appellate courts, back to the governor's desk. So, you want to make sure you take the time and the effort to go through all that information. I won't rely on just a Netflix documentary or a Netflix docuseries as the source of my information to make this very, very important decision.

ACOSTA: Sure, of course. And, I mean, as you know, Gascon announced his support of resentencing late in the race when he was behind in his bid for reelection. There were critics who said that a lot of this was political, something he denied. What were your thoughts on all of that? Do you think that there were -- do you think that he was looking at this in a sort of a cold clinical way, as any district attorney would? And does that perhaps bolster your thinking and taking a second look at this?

HOCHMAN: Well, actually just the opposite. The original habeas motion came in May of 2023. The resentencing motion came in February of 2024. So, if Gascon had wanted to release the Menendez brothers, he could have done it 8 to 16 months ago. He could have even filed the motion the day after the election since he's going to be the district attorney until December 2nd.

[10:25:01]

Instead, he waited 12 days before the election when he was 30 points down and out of money to have a media event around the resentencing.

What that has done is it's cast a cloud of credibility on whether or not the decision is just for just a political ploy. By actually my doing the hard work of reviewing all the facts and the law, I'm going to remove that clout from any ultimate decision I take on the matter.

ACOSTA: All right, Nathan Hochman. I tried a couple of different ways to ask you the same question, but I appreciate playing along and giving us what you had to say there. Thanks very much for your time. We'll be following along these developments in this case. I really appreciate it. Nathan Hochman, thanks for your time.

HOCHMAN: Thank you very much.

ACOSTA: All right. Coming up Donald Trump's so-called DOGE team to slash the federal government is taking shape, but is cutting $2 trillion from the budget realistic? That's what some of the talk is inside that effort. We'll talk about that next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:30:00]