Return to Transcripts main page

CNN This Morning

Concern About Gas Pollution as Iceland Volcano Erupts; Trump Already Fundraising Off Colorado Ballot Decision; Trump Disqualified Form 2024 Ballot in Colorado. Aired 6:30-7a ET

Aired December 20, 2023 - 06:30   ET

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

FREDERIK PLEITGEN, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice- over): 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. Officials took no chances, though, evacuating the population after weeks of tremors. Thousands of shakes were filled in November and all knew what they could bring. Thankfully, none were in Grindavik town when the volcano around two miles away finally did erupt. This crack in the surface of our world close to four kilometers or more than two miles long spewing lava.

(On camera): This is as close as the authorities are going to lead us to the volcanic eruption in the south west of Iceland. It's a so- called fissure eruption, that means an eruption along a crack that can be several miles long, rather than on a volcanic cone.

Now, one of the good things about these eruptions is that actually usually they don't spew ash into the atmosphere very high, which can and has, in the past, disrupt air travel internationally of course in a place like Iceland, that can have massive effects.

(Voice-over): Previous eruptions in Iceland have lasted weeks or even months. In the town of Grindavik, the earthquake damage is clear, the lava may follow.

HALLGRIMUR INDRIDASON, JOURNALIST: If this activity goes on, then the big question is, will Grindavik be inhabitable in the long run?

PLEITGEN: Whether people can ever move back here depends on a new set of geological circumstances being created right now.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

PLEITGEN: And just to give you an idea guys of the geological circumstances, the folks here in Iceland tell me that this area was actually dormant for about 800 years. But now in the past two years, they have had four major eruptions. None of them nearly the size of the one that's going on right now, guys.

PHIL MATTINGLY, CNN ANCHOR: All right, Frederik Pleitgen, keeps posted. Thank you.

POPPY HARLOW, CNN ANCHOR: Donald Trump's Republican rivals rushing to defend him this morning after the Colorado Supreme Court rules he cannot be on the state's primary ballot. How this could all affect the race?

MATTINGLY: And CNN investigates Ron DeSantis and his links to medical marijuana and its market in Florida, how key figures courted DeSantis to get a financial boost and how they gave the Governor a political lifeline. It's coming up.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[06:35:55]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CHRIS CHRISTIE, (R) PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: I do not believe Donald Trump should be prevented from being president of United States by any court. I think he should be prevented from being President of United States by the voters of this country. I think this is probably premature and jumping ahead of it. And I think it would cause a lot of anger in this country if people had the choice taken away from them.

VIVEK RAMASWAMY (R), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: We need elections we can trust, that we can believe it. That means yes unelected judges are not going to decide willy nilly across the state who ends up on a ballot and who doesn't.

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

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HARLOW: To a person Donald Trump's competitors bashing the ruling from Colorado Supreme Court late yesterday that bans Trump for now from their primary ballot.

MATTINGLY: Ron DeSantis posting on X that the U.S. Supreme Court should reverse the ruling. Leah Wright Rigueur, John Avlon are back with us. Also with us, Senior Political Correspondent for PUCK, Tara Palmeri.

Tara, I won, this was the most -- you could have predicted these were going to be the responses because nothing lights up the anti, anti- Trump group of Republicans like a legal ruling that they feel like is one sided. They're all running against him though.

TARA PALMERI, SENIOR POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT, PUCK: Crazy, right? But I mean, this is -- I was getting text messages last night from people who are affiliated with these other campaigns. And they're just like, ah, how is this happening before Iowa. This is going to turbocharge the base. This is not what we want. We don't want our candidates out there, siding with Donald Trump. It again reaffirms his argument that he's a political dissident in the Biden administration. The DOJ is after him. And it's just like, it's the rocket fuel he needs. It's like another indictment, this case, and it might be overturned before January 4th is when they -- the Supreme Court is thinking of taking it up. So if he's vindicated, he's going to take that all the way to Iowa on the trail. And I just think there's a lot of concern that this is going to be a win for him.

MATTINGLY: On that point, did any of those campaign people consider the possibility that they could take a different tact?

PALMERI: Well, they're afraid of alienating his base. They are -- and that's why you've never actually seen them go for the jugular and actually attack Trump on the campaign trail. It's -- and then he comes out with about 15 people, senators, members of Congress, like they're all supporting, and this is only going to activate even more endorsements, is what he wants. He wants all of Washington to line up and support him before Iowa, and this is going to help with that.

HARLOW: John to Phil's good point, David Frum writes about this. We just had him on, he's like, look, I'm still Republican, but he writes that this is the last exit. That's the way he puts it. This was the last exit for his Republican challengers to actually go after him. And he argues until now, they've shown themselves to be too scared to fight and too weak. The question is, are they too scared, too weak, even when the win is presented to them by the courts? This is their last exit. And I guess he drove past it.

JOHN AVLON, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: To extend the metaphor, yes. I mean -- and that's the absurdity of this situation, right? Again, this was a party that once prided itself on being constitutional conservatives. This is consistent with the principle of being a constitutional conservative. I understand everyone's concerned about the base. But what Trump does is he plays the rep, whenever there's accountability, he tries to make it look like that'll be bad politics for the people imposing accountability, even when it's a matter of law at a party that allegedly believes in law and order.

The argument that the candidates are making in private in their campaigns are saying, "Hey, see, we told you he'd be a chaos candidate." Obviously, this is more chaos. You're going to really nominate someone who couldn't be disqualified from the ballot who's already under indictment, all these further unknowns. Yes, there's some short-term rally around Trump impacted could have. But there's also the bigger picture, which is any candidate with the stones can say, "See, this guy cannot be our party's nominee." There are simply too many chaotic questions around whether can hold office.

HARLOW: Is there a fair question, though, to be asked? One of the dissents in this case, Leah, was that he hasn't been convicted of inciting an insurrection. In fact, that is not part of Jack Smith, the Special Counsel chose not to -- to charge on that front. Is that a fair -- John thinks that's a mistake.

[06:40:04]

AVLON: That was a mistake.

HARLOW: But do you think that's a fair argument that, look, you can't take someone off if they're not even convicted of inciting an insurrection?

LEAH WRIGHT RIGUEUR, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST & HISTORIAN: Right. So it's -- it's part of this idea of justice under the law. I also think it's part of this argument that some of the -- one of the dissents, or actually several of the dissents in this case have pointed out is that the due process clause has not been followed in the -- in the way that this has been executed.

With that being said, I think the other argument to be made is how do you hold someone accountable for their participation in an insurrection which everyone saw. And in fact, at every single level of this case that we've, you know, that we've seen up to this point, the one thing that has been in agreement is that Donald Trump did participate in an insurrection, that he tried to overthrow democracy.

I think there is, you know, the real point of contention is going to be, does he have the right to essentially a trial by public, as opposed to a court handing down a decision on these issues?

AVLON: And I just want to make two additional points to that. First of all, everyone's saying, well, let the people decide. Well, that's the argument around 2020. And the people decided, and he tried to overturn the results of the people, so keep that in mind.

Second thing is, in his second impeachment, a majority of members of the House of Representatives and Senate said he was guilty of insurrection, that was the charge inciting an insurrection. They did not hit the constitutional threshold for impeachment in the Senate to convict, but majorities of both houses said he had committed insurrection, incited insurrection. That could be relevant going forward. I think it shouldn't be relevant.

And so just, you know, all the legalisms around this stuff. Keep in mind, the bigger picture the constitutional principle, and we are in unprecedented territory. Yes, that's because we've never had a president trying to overturn an election before.

HARLOW: Stay with us. Thank you guys. Appreciate it very much.

MATTINGLY: Well, triple duty for the Supreme Court as justices face another Trump related case they could be getting the ballot case in Colorado, almost certain to at this point. We're going to take a closer look at that.

HARLOW: Also deadly flooding up and down the East Coast, people trapped. Look at that whole family there. We'll go live to one of the hardest hit places ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[06:46:38]

HARLOW: Well, this morning, the Supreme Court could face what may be the most -- if they take it up, it will be the most consequential election case since Bush v. Gore 23 years ago. Donald Trump's team says it will appeal this Colorado Supreme Court decision to the High Court.

MATTINGLY: This adds one more Trump related case the justices docket they've already agreed to hear whether presidential immunity shields Trump from prosecution for alleged crimes while in office and they will hear a case about the scope of the federal obstruction loss central to the Special Counsel's election subversion case.

HARLOW: So let's bring in our CNN Senior Supreme Court Analyst, Joan Biskupic. Joan, so good to have you on a morning like this. Wow, if people are waking up to this news, this is totally untested, we say a lot unprecedented. This is definitely unprecedented. And you make the point that using the 14th Amendment in this way, again, hasn't happened.

If the Supreme Court takes up this case, what are they going to have to decide? What's the root of it?

JOAN BISKUPIC, CNN SENIOR SUPREME COURT ANALYST: Well, wow is right and Poppy and Phil. And the next couple of weeks are going to be epic at the Supreme Court. So there are two sort of sets of questions the Supreme Court would -- would weigh. And there's some procedural ones that are mentioned.

But first, just on the pure substance, the question of did he engage in an insurrection? You know what the 14th Amendment says it covers individuals who have engaged in some way in an insurrection and how is that defined? Donald Trump has not been convicted of insurrection. But the lower court judges have said that, you know, this would apply -- apply to the conduct from January 6, 2021.

The other question, though, and it came up in a lower trial court judge in Colorado heard the case, does this section of the 14th Amendment even apply to the president? That's a very real substantive question. And then to go to another procedural issue, Poppy and Phil, who -- who is it that exactly decides whether a certain name is on the ballot or not? Here, there's a presumption that it is the state officials in Colorado because that's how they've -- they've assessed this. But, you know, there are some arguments that could only be Congress assessing that. So the Supreme Court will have some threshold issues of, you know, timing, and who can actually bring such a case, but then also very serious, substantive ones having to do with, should Donald Trump even be covered by the 14th Amendment section at issue here?

MATTINGLY: To ask the layman's term as you guys nerd out over the details, which I learned a ton from every time you guys talk. When is this going to happen? Right? Everybody's looking at January 4th or January 5, but there's no actual timeline here. Supreme Court can move as fast as they want, I guess.

BISKUPIC: Yeah. Oh, no, no, they can move fast. I mean, if you'd look back and think of, you know, where we were 23 years ago, with Bush v. Gore, you know, they moved really fast in a matter of weeks. And then they actually decided the case, you know, like 24 hours after oral arguments. So they can -- they can move fast. But these issues are very, very difficult. And as you said in the opening, Phil, they're also already grappling with whether Donald Trump should be immune, as he has argued from criminal prosecution. And that goes to the pending case right up there now, that Special Counsel Jack Smith has brought. So they've got two cases of great urgency. And let me -- let me go

back to your original question on the Colorado case, and then we'll get to the other one that's pending. The Colorado case, the Secretary of State has said, you know, January 5, they have to already start getting things onto the ballot. And last night's opinion have been -- has been delayed until at least January 4, so that Trump's lawyers can get to the Supreme Court.

[06:50:17]

But as I said, we're looking at things happening every other day between now and early January, and it truly is going to be epic. It will not be easy for the Supreme Court. But they are the nine people who have to decide this once and for all, this and the immunity question, Phil and Poppy.

HARLOW: Yeah. There's no off ramp for this one.

BISKUPIC: No, no.

HARLOW: Thanks very much.

BISKUPIC: Thank you.

MATTINGLY: Low approval numbers causing high anxiety for Democrats Biden's supporters but his campaign has a message for them. Chill out, new reporting on the pulse inside the President's re-election headquarters.

HARLOW: Also new legal challenge to the Texas law targeting migrants illegally crossing the border but new numbers reveal the struggle that these border towns continue to face.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

MATTINGLY: There's a new poll following a trend line that shows there is no clear leader in the race for president. "The New York Times" and "Siena College" found essentially a dead heat between President Biden and former President Donald Trump. That, of course, is making many Democrats very nervous. But new reporting from "New York Magazine" suggests that people inside the Biden campaign itself are, quote, "chill."

[06:55:12]

HARLOW: Joining us now is the person who wrote that piece. It's certainly getting a lot of attention, "New York Magazine's" National Correspondent, Gabriel Debenedetti, spent months reporting within the inner circles of the Biden campaign on this. I would just say, this is not a headline, I would expect. They're truly that calm, take a chill pill. It's going to be OK. We're going to win?

GABRIEL DEBENEDETTI, NEW YORK MAGAZINE NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: What I would say -- yeah, great question. What I would say is more than total chill, it's more this sense of guys seriously, we know what we're doing. It's this message that they've been trying to send to nervous Democrats, especially all over the country, for the last few months. They've been doing these briefings, where they essentially say, listen, yeah, the election is a year out. A lots going to change between now and then. You know what, I keep hearing is, at this point in 2019, no one knew who -- no one knew what COVID was. Trump hadn't been impeached yet. So a lot is going to change. People's view of the economy is going to improve.

But crucially, and this is a point that they make over and over, a vast majority of the American people really have not locked into the fact that this is likely going to be a binary choice of Trump versus Biden. People just have not really clicked into this fact. So for them, they think that the dynamics of the race are going to change entirely over the next few months. And they've been building up an infrastructure to get ready for that. But yes, the message is, guys, we know what we're doing, which you can imagine, for a lot of people who are looking at these polls is not exactly the most reassuring message.

MATTINGLY: The way you open the -- it's a great piece. And to your point, there's a lot of nuance here. They're not like sanguine, and sanguine and Zen just chilling out, like they have a process and a plan.

DEBENEDETTI: Right.

MATTINGLY: But the opening of the piece at the kind of Obama reunion, and there's just a dramatic difference between Obama and Obama people and the Biden and the Biden team, which is much, much smaller. Do they care that Democrats are freaking out right now?

DEBENEDETTI: Listen, you have to understand that a lot of people around Biden know that or believed that the vast majority of the party is going to come around to him. But then look at the last few years, the last 10 years, really, and they have a big chip on their shoulder. And I'm talking about the real inner circulars here. They think that Biden has been consistently underestimated, not just during his time, as President, you know, all you have to do is look at recent elections, or, you know, the midterms, when everyone assumed that Republicans were going to have this big wave, and then Democrats overperformed, with Biden as president.

But if you look at the 2019 to 2020 experience, a lot of them look at what's happening now and say, you doubted us, then we won that primary, we won that election, folks get on board. This is, you know, we know what we're doing here. That briefing that I wrote about, you had a number of the top people from Biden world, talking to people who they used to work with their, you know, these Obama administration and Obama campaign alums, and essentially trying to run through the game plan here.

Listen, a lot of people on the Obama team said, "Fine, we get it. It's not going to look very good for a while, but eventually it will." But a lot of them walk away saying, "I get it. I'm not questioning this specific strategy." But are you really mean to tell us that there's -- there's nothing else. There's nothing else you can do right now. HARLOW: There's a lot that's different now, though, then before. He's

older, right? That'd be the oldest president. He has the war in Israel going on. That is really cost him among young voters. Do they recognize how many things are different now?

DEBENEDETTI: Yeah, absolutely. A message that I got over and over was this can't just be a rerun of 2020. And, you know, in some ways, structurally speaking, it can't be. That was a COVID election when, you know, he really wasn't out there campaigning as much voters. You know, there wasn't door knocking in person. Democrats weren't doing that which they will this time. But the other, you know, fundamental thing is he's the incumbent now. He's the president, he has to run on his own record.

Now, there's not really like a consensus view of how to message on the age question. How to even message on the question of the economy, which, you know, they say, listen, that all the big numbers are going well. But there's a real divide even within his world over, do we just go around and tell people the economy is getting better. Or as Biden himself often likes to say, do we need to acknowledge to voters, we get it. we understand that you're hurting right now.

So there's not a really easy answer here. But he typically have a reelection campaign. You know, there have been other reelection campaigns where the incumbent is not looking so good approval rating wise, and then does come back to it, and just look at Obama himself in 2012, look at Bill Clinton. But a typically for that they're really betting that this race is not just going to be a referendum on Biden on the incumbent, it's really going to be a stark choice. And that choice is really going to click in for people at some point in the New Year.

MATTINGLY: It's -- it's a really great piece, and I'm pretty critical when it comes to covering the White House or Biden campaign. You really kind of nail it and have the nuance. But even get a peek under the hood of what Rob Flaherty and the team have been working on and voter contact, voters file. I highly suggest people read it whether you agree or disagree with the Biden team's theory of the case. Gabe, we appreciate it. Thanks, man.

[07:00:09]

HARLOW: CNN This Morning continues now.