Return to Transcripts main page

CNN This Morning

Trump Disqualified from Ballot in Colorado; Trump Surrogates, Allies Rail Against Colorado Ruling; Israeli Official: No Hostage Deal Yet with Hamas; Lava Flow Eases, Gas Pollution Could Reach Capital of Iceland. Aired 6-6:30a ET

Aired December 20, 2023 - 06:00   ET

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

JOHN AVLON, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST/ANCHOR: 'Tis the season. Who doesn't love Mac Daddy Santa? Come on now.

[06:00:05]

CAROLYN MANNO, CNN SPORTS: Yes. 'Tis the season for good traditions.

AVLON: All right, Carolyn. Thank you so much. Some great highlights there.

Thanks all of you for joining us, certainly. I'm John Avlon. CNN THIS MORNING starts right now.

POPPY HARLOW, CNN ANCHOR: Morning, everyone. It is Wednesday, December 20. I'm Poppy Harlow with Phil Mattingly in New York. And we are waking up to a moment that has never happened before in America.

Former President Donald Trump disqualified from holding office again by Colorado's Supreme Court, accused of inciting an insurrection on January 6th. The Republican frontrunner removed from the GOP primary ballot in that state.

What does this mean nationally for the primary and for the general election?

PHIL MATTINGLY, CNN ANCHOR: Trump advisers are already vowing to appeal, setting up another high-stakes Supreme Court case. His Republican primary rivals rushed to his defense, and one wants candidates to boycott the Colorado primary altogether.

Also developing this morning, talks underway for a potential new deal to free hostages held by Hamas. The new Israeli proposal floating around this morning that could lead to a second temporary truce.

CNN THIS MORNING starts right now.

HARLOW: Here's where we begin. Donald Trump kicked off the ballot in Colorado in an historic ruling that could throw the 2024 presidential election into chaos.

The president [SIC], advisers vowing to take this extraordinary case all the way up to the Supreme Court just weeks before the crucial GOP primary season officially kicks off.

MATTINGLY: So here's what happened. Colorado Supreme Court ruling last night that Trump is disqualified from running for president again, because he engaged in an insurrection. They're citing the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, from the Civil War era.

The justices say Trump conceived, set in motion and, quote, "directly participated" in the plot to stop the peaceful transfer of power on January 6th.

As for Trump's Republican rivals for the presidential nomination, they are quickly coming to his defense.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

NIKKI HALEY (R), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: I will beat him fair and square. We don't need to have judges making these decisions. We need voters to make these decisions.

CHRIS CHRISTIE (R), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: I do not believe Donald Trump should be prevented from being president of the United States by any court. I think he should be prevented from being president of the United States by the voters of this country.

VIVEK RAMASWAMY (R), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: I will withdraw. I pledge to withdraw from the Colorado GOP primary ballot, unless and until Trump's name is restored.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HARLOW: While the former preponderate did not waste any time fund- raising off of this ruling, his campaign sent out emails immediately, trying to fund-raise, accusing Democrats of trying to keep Trump off the ballot, because he will beat President Biden.

So let's start our coverage with CNN's Marshall Cohen. You know this case inside and out. Explain what it means to people this morning.

MARSHALL COHEN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Poppy, good morning.

This is a historic level of accountability for January 6th, and for Donald Trump's actions on January 6th.

Now, as you mentioned, this is probably not the final word, because Donald Trump will appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. But for this moment in time, this is a huge dose of accountability and a punishment for January 6th.

The Colorado Supreme Court, in a 4-3 decision ruling that Donald Trump engaged in the insurrection, that the insurrectionist ban in the 14th Amendment applies to the presidency, and that he is ineligible to hold any future office. That's the finding from the majority opinion.

Let me read for you a quote, a pretty searing quote where they hammered Trump for his conduct that day. The justices wrote, quote, "President Trump did not merely incite the insurrection. Even when the siege on the Capitol was fully underway, he continued to support it by repeatedly demanding that Vice President Mike Pence refuse to perform his Constitutional duty, and by calling senators to persuade them to stop the counting of electoral votes. These actions constituted overt, voluntary, and direct participation in the insurrection."

It's those actions, Donald Trump's own behavior, that, according to the challengers and the justices on the Colorado Supreme Court, is the reason why he's disqualified.

Let me play for you a clip from Sean Grimsley. He was one of the attorneys who led this challenge in Colorado. He took a victory lap last night with our colleague, Kaitlan Collins.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEAN GRIMSLEY, ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFFS IN COLORADO 14TH AMENDMENT CASE: And Donald Trump is the only person to blame for this. I understand that his supporters may be upset that he could be off the ballot, but he needs to look in the mirror as to what he did on January 6th and the days leading up to it.

He is the one. It is his actions that are going to be the thing that keeps him off the ballot.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

[06:05:03]

COHEN: Look, so it contrasts with what some of those Republican candidates saying, right? He's saying this is the Constitution. This is the law of the land. We're just following the law.

But guys, we'll see what the final word is from the U.S. Supreme Court.

MATTINGLY: Yes, Marshall to that point, do we have any sense of time? There's a stay in effect, at least in the near term. Do we have a sense of the timing of how this is all going to play?

COHEN: Well, look, the Supreme Court can move quickly when it wants to. As I'm sure you'll remember, Bush v Gore was decided in just a few days 23 years ago.

But there are a lot of deadlines in the calendar here. The election officials in Colorado say they have to certify the final list of the names for the primary by January 5th.

It's not so clear if that deadline will be met. But we all know what the end game here. The end game is the presidency, stopping Trump from the White House. That's the goal of the challenger.

So if he's still on some primary ballots, you can believe they'll continue this fight into the general. So we'll see. We'll see how it goes. HARLOW: Marshall, before you go, and your reporting on this has been

really excellent, can you explain what this would mean for the general election if he becomes the nominee?

COHEN: Well, look, if he becomes the nominee, he will face more challenges. This is something that we've never grappled with before as a nation, Poppy.

So there's not a lot of case law on this. He'll probably be challenged again if he wins the nomination, and he could even be challenged if he wins the election, but before his inauguration.

HARLOW: Marshall Cohen, thank you.

MATTINGLY: Joining us now to discuss, CNN senior political analyst John Avlon; CNN political analyst and historian, Leah Wright Rigueur; and CNN senior legal analyst Elie Honig.

I want to drill into the legal pieces of this in a moment, but to start, to Marshall's point, there's not a lot of case law here. I don't think there's any. To some degree, there is no precedent for this. This is unquestionably historic. We've had 12, 14 hours to digest this. What are your thoughts?

LEAH WRIGHT RIGUEUR, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST AND HISTORIAN: So my thoughts are split into two camps. The first is that we shouldn't get overexcited, that this is just, you know, I think it doesn't necessarily mean that Trump's ruled out.

It's clear that the Supreme Court, I think, of the United States, will probably take up this case. This may mean just a setback. We may even see Trump on the ballot if the Supreme Court takes up the case before January 5th, which is the day for certification of candidates on the ballot.

But on the other hand, it is historic, because it is a preview of what is to come. That this is something that is part of this kind of -- these ideas about insurrection, about overthrowing democracy, about accountability that is all step stemming from the Trump presidency and January 6th.

This is, I think, a defining case in terms of thinking about how these things are going to play out over the course of not only the next year and this next presidential election but also even beyond that.

So it's opening the door for other cases. It's opening the door for the courts to establish what does it mean to be an insurrectionist? What does it mean for the presidency, a person who is in the office of the presidency, to take part in an insurrection? Does that amount to disqualifying in some way, shape or form?

And it's going to force not only the courts of this country to make a decision, but also the American public.

HARLOW: You know, the real question here, Elie, also is, this is a procedural decision. The district court already said a finding of fact that the former president engaged in an insurrection. But this court is taking it one step further and reading Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, a way that no court has so far.

ELIE HONIG, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: Yes, and here's where I think the problem comes in with the ruling we got from the Colorado Supreme Court yesterday, even if we take it as a given, that Donald Trump engaged in an insurrection, and I'm willing to sign onto that, given all the facts. I think quite clearly. We still don't know, even as we sit here now, we don't know how this works.

We don't know who gets to decide whether a person engaged in insurrection. We didn't know 100 years ago. We didn't know yesterday. We don't know now.

The problem is, the Constitution tells us how we're supposed to know, the 14th amendment says Section 5, Congress is supposed to pass laws telling us how this works. Congress has not done that.

And so what Colorado did is they sort of made up this procedure. They had this quasi-hearing over five days. And now the Supreme Court of Colorado by a 4-3 margin is saying, Good enough, he's out. That is a violation of due process, and that is why I think this ruling from the Colorado Supreme Court is going to be struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court.

HARLOW: Avlon, I want you to respond, but we'll get to three of the justices on the court, dissented because of due process concerns.

AVLON: But also, there have been a lot of roadblocks in this effort based on a lot of people finding technicalities. The Constitution says what it says. The Colorado Supreme Court decided that the Constitution still matters and it applies to Donald Trump.

The 14th Amendment, Section 3 specifically says, we had the language up there, that "No person who took an oath to uphold the Constitution and engages in an insurrection or rebellion or gives aid or comfort to said insurrection or rebellion, is eligible to hold any office."

[06:10:06]

That's the language, any office. Civil or federal.

And people can parse, well, is it -- was it anticipated to be under a president? Under a president? I know if you read the articles, the debates around the ratification, senators at that time are saying, this is also forward-looking. This is not just about the confederacy and the U.S. Civil War.

I take Elie's point, seeing as he and I had a long, vigorous agreement about the application of this. But the Constitution exists for a reason.

And if people keep looking for loopholes to excuse Donald Trump for accountability about the Constitution, that's where you reap the whirlwind. This is not partisan. This is about applying historic principles. HONIG: Due process is not a loophole. Due process is in Section 1 of

the 14th Amendment. By the way, when Donald Trump lost dozens of his election suits in 2020, what did Donald Trump's people say? Oh, those are technicalities. Those are loopholes.

Those matter. Due process matters. We can't just throw it out.

AVLON: This is not -- Respectfully, I don't think this is an issue of due process. This is an issue about whether Donald Trump engaged in an insurrection, and whether, therefore, the constitutional remedy for that applies.

And -- and I think people are going to put all sorts of partisan spin on the ball. And I'd encourage them not to. Shouldn't cheerlead this from the left, and you shouldn't deny it from the right.

If you believe -- and I'll say if consistency is going to hold the day. Any originalist on the court would say, well, the text in the Constitution matters and states' rights matters with regard to Colorado.

Listen to Judge Luter (Ph). Read the 74-page document by the two Federal Society jurists, legal scholars who went into this impartially and said, You know what? It does apply when you look at the full context.

HONIG: Or look at the six other states that have rejected this. I'll just put it this way.

If you had gotten 100 brilliant lawyers, scholars, historians, a week ago, two years ago, and said how does impeachment work? Everyone would have given you the same answer. We have a process for that. The House votes by a majority. Then the Senate votes, has a trial, votes by two- thirds.

You got that same group together two years ago and says how does the 14th Amendment work? You'd hear a hundred different answers. That's why this is a due process problem.

RIGUEUR: So just one thing, though. I think it's worth pointing out, though, that even as we have these debates and even as we, you know, try to think about, is this a question of, you know, the Constitution, is it due process, the real question is what is the Supreme Court going to do with this when they take this up? Because they inevitably will take it up.

And the question is, when will they take it up? What will they say? And how does that fall?

And so I want to say, perhaps think about what happens when the Supreme Court takes it up. Because as much as we want to kind of divorce it and think about the Supreme Court as this kind of objective body that is, we all can sit here at the table and know that the Supreme Court is not that right now.

The Supreme Court has been politicized. The Supreme Court has three Donald Trump appointees on it. And I think this does have implications for not just the question of, you know, can he be on the ballot, but all of these other kind of questions that surround Donald Trump and criminal charges, Donald Trump and insurrection.

And that's going to be, you know, I'm sure Jack Smith, for example, is watching this with baited breath. People want to know.

And the Supreme Court is going to have to weigh in at some point or another, to tell us what to think. They're going to be making these legal parameters and these decisions.

HONIG: For sure.

MATTINGLY: We've got a lot more to get to. There's also an election?

RIGUEUR: There's that, too.

MATTINGLY: And some politics. And a Republican primary that seems even more scrambled today than it was prior. So we're getting to all that and more, coming up, guys. Stay with us.

HARLOW: Still to come, we're going to dive deeper, obviously, into how this ruling could impact the broader race for the Republican nomination.

MATTINGLY: And Trump is also responding to the growing backlash over his comments that immigrants are, quote, "poisoning the blood" of the country. What he's saying about claims that he's echoing Hitler. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[06:17:29]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Well, I think it's more unreasonable issues they're doing against Trump again, as usual.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: They attack him for, they file court proceedings against him, but the Democrats can get away with everything. Two-tier justice.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MATTINGLY: Lest you think those are anecdotal, look at the polling. The Republican primary is very much in the same spot on that. Those were voters in Iowa, responding to our colleague, Jeff Zeleny, to the ruling from Colorado's Supreme Court disqualifying Donald Trump from the 2024 GOP primary ballot.

HARLOW: So the former president did not explicitly mention the ruling last night at this campaign rally in Waterloo, but he did post several Truth Social messages with clips from FOX News commentators, defending him and calling the ruling, quote, "election interference."

So let's go to Jeff Zeleny, our chief national affairs correspondent. He joins us live in Des Moines this morning.

That's just a sampling of what probably a lot of Trump supporters are feeling this morning as they look at this. What are you hearing?

JEFF ZELENY, CNN CHIEF NATIONAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: Hey, good morning, Poppy and Phil.

It was a sampling, but certainly the sentiment of Trump supporters, simply saying election interference, once again, is trying to stop their preferred choice for president. That's Donald Trump.

So, election interference, once again, will be a rallying cry. But the former president, uncharacteristically, did not talk about this at all.

The ruling happened just a few moments before he took the stage last night in Waterloo, Iowa. His campaign had already called for the Supreme Court to review this decision. They said it was un-American.

But the former president did not speak about this. We asked his aides why, and they said they were simply digesting this information.

But what was clear is, as we've seen this pattern happen again and again throughout this primary season, is that this is something that the Republicans, essentially, circle the wagons around him.

His own rivals: Nikki Haley here in Iowa campaigning, she said, we don't need judges to make these decisions. We will win this the right way.

Even Chris Christie, of course, who has made criticizing Donald Trump the centerpiece of his campaign, he said judges and courts should not be making these decisions.

So now 26 days before the Iowa caucus voting begins, clearly once again, we're seeing a familiar pattern of Republicans coming to Donald Trump's defense.

MATTINGLY: Yes, echoes of the New York D.A. case and the immediate response in the aftermath of that, to some degree.

ZELENY: Sure.

MATTINGLY: Jeff, I have to ask. I was reading the transcript last night, the log that our great folks on the ground send from the rally. And I have to say I did a triple take at some of what Trump did talk about, including kind of reacting to the backlash from his comments on immigration. What did he say?

[06:20:11]

ZELENY: He did. He did not shy away from his harsh rhetoric on immigrants that he has been saying in recent rallies. In fact, he repeated it, and he amplified his comments.

But he did say that he is not specifically echoing the words of Adolf Hitler.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: It's crazy what's going on. They're ruining our country. And it's true: they're destroying the blood of our country. That's what they're doing. They're destroying our country.

They don't like it when I said that. And I never read "Mein Kampf." They said, Oh, Hitler said that, in a much different way.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ZELENY: So that was the former president there, saying Hitler himself, for the first time. He had not mentioned that before. But a similar comment about immigrants.

And when you talk to his supporters, what do you think of these comments? It is a familiar pattern, as well: Oh, we don't like exactly how the former president talks about some things.

There was very little applause, if any, during that. It is simply one of a litany of things his supporters have grown accustomed to him saying.

But he did not shy away from that at all. Again, not surprised.

And he is -- has a commanding lead of this race, 26 days before the voting begins.

MATTINGLY: Jeff -- Jeff, real quick, while I have you. You're one of the premier political correspondents last several decades. Have you ever heard a candidate, unsolicited, deny reading "Mein Kampf" before?

ZELENY: I certainly have not. Phil, you've been on the campaign trail here in Iowa a lot, as well. This is my seventh presidential campaign I've covered, so a couple of decades, I guess.

No, of course not. Not a mainstream candidate has ever talked about this directly. Certainly not one who's in a commanding lead to, once again, perhaps win this Republican nomination.

MATTINGLY: It's a very different moment. Jeff Zeleny, as always. Thank you, my friend.

HARLOW: All right. We have a lot more on this ruling out of Colorado, but also new this morning, Israel proposing another deal to free more hostages held by Hamas, in exchange for a temporary truce.

MATTINGLY: And that volcano in Iceland continues to spew lava and toxic gas. You see the pictures right there. Live on the ground, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[06:26:12] HARLOW: Well, new this morning, an Israeli official tells CNN there is no deal yet on another hostage release, and that right now, it is still in the negotiation stage.

CNN political analyst Barak Ravid is reporting that Israel has proposed a weeklong pause in fighting in Gaza in exchange for 40 more hostages held by Hamas to be released.

Our Will Ripley joins us live from Tel Aviv. I mean, Barak's reporting on this has been really second to none. That would be a really big shift for Israel, to come to the table again and agree to a week pause.

What do you know?

WILL RIPLEY, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: There's certainly a lot of pressure on Israel to do something to stop the daily bloodshed, including in the Jabaliya refugee camp, where there's reports of another at least 20 people killed.

However, details here are crucial, and the last hostage release took more than a month to hammer out.

So while it would -- they would love for things to come together, there are still huge differences between what Hamas wants and what Israel wants, which is why Israeli officials are telling us this morning that any final deal is still far away for now.

But basically, one of the sticking points is, what kind of Hamas prisoners would be released? Heavy-duty prisoners is what Hamas is asking for, as opposed to the mostly teenagers and women released by the Israelis last time.

Israel, let me just show you onscreen here, the deal that Israel is proposing to Hamas, being presented by Qatar. It would include, as you mentioned, Poppy, a weeklong pause in fighting the release of some 40 hostages, prioritizing women, the elderly and those in need of urgent medical care.

Now, when you look at the numbers, these hostages are -- are the leverage that Hamas has. And it's believed that right now, there are around 129 hostages remaining in Gaza, around 108 of them believed to be alive. The remaining hostages, 21 of them, believed to be dead.

So the number of hostages is dwindling, and Hamas had said that a permanent ceasefire could be needed for all of those hostages to be released.

However, Israel, of course, is calling this -- would call this a temporary humanitarian pause before the fighting resumes. Because again, Poppy, their main objective is to eliminate Hamas leadership. And they say they have not done that yet, even though there's growing international pressure to stop this bombing and the military activity, which is taking civilian lives, including accidentally over the weekend, three Israeli hostages.

HARLOW: Yes, we wonder if that was an impetus for Israel to come more to the table on this.

Will Ripley reporting from Tel Aviv, thanks very much.

RIPLEY: Yes.

MATTINGLY: Well, this morning, there are new concerns about that volcano that's been erupting in Iceland since Monday.

Now, less lava is shooting out, but some of those magma fountains are still nearly 100 feet high. And officials are growing worried about the potentially dangerous gas pollution that could hit the capital, Reykjavik today.

CNN's Frederik Pleitgen is two miles from the volcano. Fred, can you tell me, how real is the risk right now, as this continues to be a problem, clearly?

FREDERIK PLEITGEN, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes, good morning, Phil. I think the authorities are taking this risk very seriously.

In fact, one of the things that we saw last night as we were around the volcano, they actually let us fairly close to it; I'd say a couple of hundred yards away from the volcano.

But at some point, they said the situation had changed, and then we had to sort of move to a new location.

So they certainly are taking the risk of those toxic gases quite seriously. I think right now, though, evacuations not set to happen until the situation once again could change.

Again, one of the things that we are noticing, Phil, is that the activity of the volcanic eruption seems to have diminished a little bit. There was, of course, that gigantic wall of magma that we saw in the early hours.

The authorities this morning say there's still three major events that are still spewing magma, as you said, more than 100 feet into the air. It certainly is a natural spectacle that we are witnessing here in Iceland. Here's what we're seeing.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

PLEITGEN (voice-over): The arctic night illuminated as the earth breaks apart; from the fissure bursts its molten core. Weeks of earthquakes led to this display of our planet's fire and force.

It's never possible to say exactly when or if a volcano like this one near the town of Grindavik will erupt.