Return to Transcripts main page

CNN This Morning

Jury Selection Resumes Thursday In Trump Hush Money Trial; House GOP Sends Mayorkas Impeachment Articles To Senate; New Book Explores International Order In Cold War's Wake. Aired 5:30-6a ET

Aired April 17, 2024 - 05:30   ET

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

[05:30:00]

JIM ACOSTA, CNN ANCHOR: All right, a live look at the Big Apple. There it is. Just a beautiful morning there in New York City. Thanks for waking up with us. I'm Jim Acosta in for Kasie Hunt.

Jury selection resumes tomorrow in Donald Trump's hush money trial. So far, seven jurors -- four men and three women -- have been selected, one of them already appointed foreman.

After court ended yesterday, Trump was asked what he wants to see in a juror.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REPORTER: Mr. President, what kind of juror in your mind is an ideal juror?

DONALD TRUMP, (R) PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Anybody that's fair.

REPORTER: Do you believe that the jury -- the jurors seated today can be fair?

TRUMP: I'll let you know after the trial. There was nothing done wrong. This is all politics. This is coming out of the White House.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ACOSTA: Of course, that's not true. But opening arguments could begin on Monday.

Former "Apprentice" contestant and criminal defense attorney Stacy Schneider joins me now. Stacy, what did you think of what Trump had to say there? It sort of sounded to me like -- I covered him at the White House and he would be asked whether or not he was going to abide by a peaceful transfer of power and he said well, it depends on how the election goes. I mean, it was the kind of a response. I'll let you know what I think of the trial after the trial is over and what the jury did.

STACY SCHNEIDER, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY, FORMER "APPRENTICE" CONTESTANT (via Webex by Cisco): Right. I mean, I think it's ironic here that Trump keeps calling it a political prosecution, yet he was shown a copy of the grand jury indictment, which are charges. There are 34 counts of falsifying business records.

But the Manhattan D.A. in this case actually cited the evidence in the indictment. He referred to checks. He referred to check stubs, receipts, ledgers entered in the Trump corporation about this alleged business fraud.

So how Trump is using his political prosecution mantra to distract from what's going on in Manhattan criminal court is not quite fitting together this time.

ACOSTA: Yeah. His legal team dug through the prospective jurors' social media to try to find any potential bias, which is interesting considering Trump's online presence himself. I mean, is that a common practice to go through what jurors are doing online and on social media, and so on?

SCHNEIDER: It's not common because usually, defendants charged in criminal court are not as famous as a former President of the United States. But in this case, it's very relevant for the defense team to be going through those social media posts. And, in fact, one juror was dismissed yesterday because he had posted "lock him up," referring to Donald Trump. And Justice Merchan agreed that would not be an appropriate juror to sit on this case.

ACOSTA: Yeah, that's probably a safe bet.

And Stacy, we also know at one point, Trump was reprimanded by the judge. He warned Trump's legal team that he's not going to tolerate any witness intimidation. Apparently, this happened when one of the jurors was being asked about a social media post and Trump was apparently audibly speaking and gesturing toward the juror.

That does not sound like something that typically happens in court. I've covered a lot of trials. I've never seen a defendant sort of mumbling at jurors and that sort of thing.

SCHNEIDER: That's right, Jim, especially during selection when the entire panel of potential jurors is in the courtroom. They're the people, if selected, who are going to decide Donald Trump's fate. And the most important thing at his defense table with his lawyers is his demeanor during jury selection. They're being judged -- the jurors are being judged as much as he is being judged by the potential jurors. And to have these sort of outbursts -- we haven't even started evidence yet. Witnesses haven't even --

ACOSTA: Yeah.

SCHNEIDER: -- been called yet and this is already starting.

And Judge Merchan is a no-nonsense judge. He runs a very tight ship and he's not going to put up with that -- and he didn't. He admonished Trump and it wasn't a good look.

ACOSTA: Yeah. And I guess the other question is -- I mean, shouldn't there be cameras in the courtroom? What -- how do you weigh in on that? I want to show a courtroom sketch from yesterday. This is only a snapshot. But, I mean, do you really think that Trump is -- how is holding himself up in court so far do you think? I mean, if he's already glaring at jurors and nodding off and that sort of thing, it sort of begs the question why we don't -- and people are arguing back and forth as to whether or not he was falling asleep.

If we had a dang camera in the courtroom we'd all be able to see for ourselves. We'd be able to all of -- well, maybe not jury selection but --

SCHNEIDER: You know, it's so true.

ACOSTA: It's just like what is this, the 1800s? We can't have cameras in the courtroom --

SCHNEIDER: Yeah. You know --

ACOSTA: -- for a former President of the United States on trial.

SCHNEIDER: Yeah.

[05:35:00]

ACOSTA: I just don't get it.

SCHNEIDER: It's true. It's a New York state law and regulation. They don't allow cameras in the courtroom. They never have allowed. There are court stenographers and artists who have been with the Manhattan Supreme Court criminal division for decades who have been drawing defendants. There have been other celebrity defendants certainly coming through Manhattan criminal court and there are no cameras.

It's definitely to Trump's advantage in this case. I think --

ACOSTA: Sure.

SCHNEIDER: -- not having the camera, even though he's known to pan to it -- but the camera is going to catch every move he makes and the conversations between him and his lawyers. And that's also not going to be a good look for him during the trial because that's going to get out into the media and it's very hard to control what's going out in the media while these jurors are impaneled and told not to look at media.

ACOSTA: Yeah. I mean, just in this highly polarized time people aren't going to believe what this outlet says or that outlet says. But if you could just watch for yourselves you can make up your own mind as opposed to having to wait for the folks to come out of the courtroom and tell us what happened.

All right, Stacy Schneider. Thank you so much for your time this morning. I really appreciate it.

SCHNEIDER: Thank you. ACOSTA: Turning now to Capitol Hill where the fate of the Department of Homeland Security Sec. Alejandro Mayorkas is now in the hands of the U.S. Senate after House Republicans sent over two articles of impeachment against the secretary yesterday over his handling of the southern border. The historic move is expected to be quashed by Senate Democrats who say the impeachment proceedings are a political stunt. Senate Republicans, I should say, making threats if the charges are dismissed without a full trial.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. MIKE LEE (R-UT): If they take a weaselly way out of this, if they betray our constitutional obligation in the Senate, I think we have an obligation on our side to make clear that that's not OK.

SEN. RICK SCOTT (R-FL): This is so simplistic. You have a trial. And so, I think all of us should stand up and say if we're not going to get a trial then everything's on the table.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ACOSTA: And joining me now is Tia Mitchell, Washington correspondent for The Atlanta Journal-Constitution.

Tia, I mean, what is your reporting -- what's the paper saying on where Democrats are on this? Are we going to see a trial? How is this going to play out?

TIA MITCHELL, WASHINGTON CORRESPONDENT, THE ATLANTA JOURNAL- CONSTITUTION: Well, Democrats actually have not really shown their hand. I think Democrats, and even some Republicans, don't believe that Mayorkas has committed any high crimes and misdemeanors and they want to get rid of this whole impeachment issue relatively quickly.

ACOSTA: Um-hum.

MITCHELL: But whether that is a short trial that lasts a few hours versus an outright motion to dismiss or table, that's what Democrats have not indicated they will do. We'll probably learn more later today.

I'm thinking that in order to avoid the criticism -- especially of vulnerable Democrats like Tester and Brown -- that they didn't take these charges seriously, you might see at least some brief proceedings -- some brief discussion about the charges before they dispose of them.

ACOSTA: Well, and this all has to do with, they say, Mayorkas' handling or perhaps mishandling of what's taking place down at the border. But they had an opportunity to pass a tough immigration bill. I have to assume Democrats are going to bring that up once this trial process gets started.

MITCHELL: Absolutely. So there are pros and cons for both sides as far as having a trial. Republicans want the opportunity to talk about the crisis at the border. They think that will further sully Biden and the perception that he's soft on immigration. That's he not committed to the federal policies when it comes to stemming immigration.

But on the same hand, the more they talk about what Biden isn't doing, that gives Democrats an opportunity to say well, Biden tried to address it. The Senate, on a bipartisan basis, tried to address it and Republicans blocked those efforts. So, in some ways, Democrats say come on, let's have the conversation.

Again, I think Democrats would say it shouldn't happen in the context of an impeachment. This is not an impeachable offense. But it's a conversation that Republicans have been trying to push.

ACOSTA: Yeah.

And let's talk about what's been going on -- the chaos around the House Speaker Mike Johnson. Another Republican, Kentucky Congressman Thomas Massie, has signed onto Marjorie Taylor Greene's effort to oust Mike Johnson. He even asked Johnson to resign.

What's going -- I mean, let's listen to a little bit of what Mike Johnson had to say about it yesterday.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. MIKE JOHNSON (R-LA): I am not resigning. And it is -- it is, in my view, an absurd notion that someone would bring a vacate motion when we are simply here trying to do our jobs. It is not helpful to the cause. It is not helpful to the country. We need steady leadership. We need steady hands at the wheel. Look, I regard myself as a -- as a wartime speaker.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

[05:40:03]

ACOSTA: I mean, one of the problems, though, for Mike Johnson is it just takes one member of the House on the Republican side to call the motion to vacate. And his speakership could be in jeopardy and they're hanging by a very thin thread over there in the House -- a very small majority at this point. And it raises the question would Democrats come over and save Mike Johnson if perhaps Democrats can get what they want on Ukraine or --

MITCHELL: Right.

ACOSTA: -- something along those lines?

MITCHELL: Yeah. I don't see Democrats saving Mike Johnson without assurances that money for Ukraine would pass on the House floor. But that's almost a catch-22 because the more he relies on Democrats, the more support he will continue to siphon away from those conservative Republicans who believe just working with Democrats is something that a leader in their party shouldn't be doing, quite frankly.

And that's what you're hearing from Marjorie Taylor Greene -- that she believes Speaker Johnson -- he's saying he's legislating. He's keeping the government operating. She considers him too willing to work with Democrats in ways that don't reflect a true MAGA American -- America First agenda. So you have that divide.

I think it's worth pointing out this is a monster that Speaker Johnson helped to create. When he was just a rank-and-file member --

ACOSTA: Yeah.

MITCHELL: -- he was in line with the MAGA arm of the party. But again, now that he's in a position of having to govern and lead, he's seeing that puts him in a very tough position.

ACOSTA: Yeah. And, I mean, we haven't even seen legislative text, right --

MITCHELL: Right.

ACOSTA: -- of these aid bills that are obviously going to be a huge part of this.

MITCHELL: Right.

ACOSTA: Yeah.

MITCHELL: And so, Democrats -- again, I think they want the aid to --

ACOSTA: Yeah.

MITCHELL: -- Israel, Taiwan, Ukraine, but they want to see what are the details, especially that fourth bill that's going to have some conservative priorities. How does that all come together when they're all under the same kind of procedural steps but maybe being voted on separately?

And again, they're in -- they're in the driving seat in a lot of ways even though they're in the minority. Speaker Johnson has to rely on them --

ACOSTA: Yeah.

MITCHELL: -- to pass just about anything these days.

ACOSTA: Yeah. I mean, they're just sitting back and watching Republicans fight amongst themselves right now. That's essentially what they're doing -- waiting to see if Mike Johnson needs them to come to the rescue.

All right, Tia Mitchell. Great to see you. Thanks so much -- appreciate it.

All right. Coming up next, how the new alliance between Russia and China is posing a unique challenge to the U.S. Plus, LeBron James leading the Lakers to another postseason appearance. That's coming up.

(COMMERCIAL)

[05:47:08] ACOSTA: New this morning, CNN learning that President Biden will call on his administration to consider tripling tariffs on Chinese steel and aluminum.

That allows -- that announcement follows a thaw on U.S.-China military relations. Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin and his counterpart in China are talking for the first time in nearly two years. It's a direct result of a meeting between President Biden and President Xi Jinping back in November that effectively broke a month's long silence between the two nations. Yesterday's conversation zeroing in on U.S.- China relations and regional and global security issues, like Russia's war against Ukraine.

America's rivalry with two superpower adversaries is the subject of a new book, "New Cold Wars: China's Rise, Russia's Invasion, and America's Struggle to Defend the West." It was written by our next guest, the great CNN political and national security analyst and New York Times correspondent as well, David Sanger. David, great to see you. Congrats on the book.

DAVID SANGER, CNN POLITICAL AND NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST, CORRESPONDENT, THE NEW YORK TIMES, AUTHOR, "NEW COLD WARS: CHINA'S RISE, RUSSIA'S INVASION, AND AMERICA'S STRUGGLE TO DEFEND THE WEST": Great.

ACOSTA: We have it right here.

SANGER: Oh, terrific.

ACOSTA: It's very important reading.

And, I guess, David, tell us about -- I mean, it's kind -- it's -- we're in a -- in a strange place right now. We didn't think -- you know, if we were to go back 10 years from where we sit right now -- that maybe Russia would be in the place that they are right now, but that is where we are.

SANGER: We didn't think this about Russia --

ACOSTA: Yeah.

SANGER: -- or China, Jim.

And what the book tries to do is ask the question: how is it that we got this so fundamentally wrong? That after the end of the Cold War, we thought that Russia and China, each in their own way for very different reasons, would sign up with Western norms, Western institutions, and basically, for China to keep its products going and for Russia to keep its oil flowing that it -- they would both manage to sign onto an American form of world order.

So what did we discover? In 2007, Vladimir Putin went to the Munich Security Conference. He said there are parts of Mother Russia that have been ripped away from us. That's going to have to get solved. We didn't listen to him. Seven years later, he annexed Crimea. It took a year to put together sanctions, right? And then, Angela Merkel, the chancellor of Germany --

ACOSTA: Right.

SANGER: -- signs onto the Nord Stream 2 pipeline, basically saying that Russia is a reliable supplier right after they had taken over a part of Ukraine.

So what was Vladimir Putin supposed to think --

ACOSTA: Yeah.

SANGER: -- about how we would respond?

And a very similar story in China where we misjudged Xi Jinping. Didn't understand that he was out there to make sure that China was the biggest military power, the biggest economic power, the biggest technological power certainly by the time China celebrates the 100th anniversary of Mao's revolution.

[05:50:03]

ACOSTA: Yeah, and you write about this new era that we're in as having echoes of the early days of the Cold War. But you stress -- and we can put this on-screen -- "...it would be a grave mistake to think that we are simply replaying the confrontations of the twentieth century, or that the restraints that worked in the 1960s and 1970s will apply in the 2020s and 2030s."

Why? Why do you think that?

SANGER: This is a completely different dynamic than in the Cold War. There are certainly similarities when trying to contain two great powers and so forth.

But in the Cold War, we were facing essentially one enemy, right? It was a giant military power with nuclear weapons and we knew who controlled those weapons. We weren't dependent on the Soviet Union for anything except caviar and vodka, and we wouldn't want to --

ACOSTA: Yeah.

SANGER: -- give that up, right? You know, you can live without it.

Doing this now is completely different. There are two powers. They are unifying together in an uneasy partnership that it's the United States' job to go figure out how they can keep from getting too close. They are doing exactly what Nixon and Kissinger tried to keep them from doing -- coming together.

ACOSTA: Yeah.

SANGER: And in China's case, obviously, we're dependent on them and they are dependent on us. But we risk making the mistake we made with Russia, which was assuming that they would take their economic interests and that those would triumph over every territorial or other interest.

And that's why Taiwan is a big deal. We spent a lot of time in Taiwan in reporting this book, just spending time at Taiwan Semiconductor, the world's most important and the world's biggest maker of the most advanced chips, to ask the question: does the existence of this gem on the island protect the island or only protect it as long as China can't build to that quality?

ACOSTA: Well -- and, of course, China is looking at what Russia is doing in Ukraine and how the U.S. is responding to that, and whether we just demonstrate this total inability to respond to what's happening in Russia because of dysfunction here in D.C.

But you wrote about what happened in Ukraine, saying, "...from the Ukraine invasion to the serial confrontations in the Pacific to the outbreak of new conflicts in the Middle East, America is confronting an era of frequently, barely managed flashpoints. And each ingredient is made more fraught by the realization that direct superpower conflict is just one miscalculation, one missile strike, or one devastating cyber attack away."

The question I have is that -- I mean, no matter who is in the White House, this is just -- this is a huge challenge.

SANGER: It -- this is.

ACOSTA: Yeah. Yeah.

SANGER: And it really requires three-dimensional chess.

ACOSTA: Yeah.

SANGER: Think of the current crisis in the Middle East. Nine years ago, during the Iran negotiations to try to contain their nuclear program, who was sitting on our side of the table? The Chinese and the Russians were on the U.S.-European side.

If we were back in those negotiations today, which we have no chance of going back, they would clearly be on the other side. Russia is getting its drones from Iran, right?

ACOSTA: Yeah.

SANGER: China is reliant more on Iranian oil than ever before.

So we -- the risk that we run here in the new cold wars is that after 30 years of globalization -- of this idea that the internet would allow us free communications back and forth -- we are hardening into two camps. An American-Western camp that is drawing its lines around Ukraine --

ACOSTA: Yeah.

SANGER: -- and a camp that's around China, Russia, Iran, and to some degree, North Korea, and growing an increasing number of adherence. And then, a lot of countries that simply say don't make me choose.

ACOSTA: David, it's going to be a fascinating read. I can't wait to dive into it this weekend. I really appreciate the time. CNN political and national security analyst, also from this publication called The New York Times, David Sanger, author of "New Cold Wars: China's Rise, Russia's Invasion, and America's Struggle to Defend The West." It's going to be a great read. Check it out. We'll see you next hour as well.

SANGER: Great.

ACOSTA: So thanks so much.

SANGER: See you in a bit.

ACOSTA: Hang in there with us for just a while longer.

In the meantime, over in the world of sports, LeBron James and the Lakers earn a spot in the NBA Playoffs with a hard-fought win over the Pelicans.

Carolyn Manno has more in this morning's Bleacher Report. Good morning, Carolyn.

CAROLYN MANNO, CNN SPORTS CORRESPONDENT: Jim, good morning.

Positive momentum advantageous for teams going into the playoffs. We know this. And that's what the Lakers are really counting on after winning 12 of their last 15 games. Every Laker starter scoring in double figures against Zion Williamson and the Pelicans in the Play-In Tournament last night. And they needed absolutely all of them.

After leading by 18 at one point in the third quarter, L.A. had to hold off a late New Orleans rally for the 110-106 win. LeBron, at 39 years of age, playing like a man half of his age, dropping 23 in 41 minutes.

[05:55:00]

But Zion Williamson was so incredible. He scored a season-high 40. He had to leave the game early due to injury and he was quite frustrated by that and you can see why.

The Lakers advancing as the West seven-seed and will next face the Nuggets who eliminated them in the conference finals a year ago.

Afterwards, LeBron had high praise for New Orleans.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

LEBRON JAMES, FOWARD, LOS ANGELES LAKERS: That's a competitive team with a lot of pride. And we understand after we had -- we had played the last game that they was going to give us everything they had -- the whole kitchen sink and toolbox -- and they did that. So it was a great win for us and we punched our ticket to the postseason. So it was a good win. (END VIDEO CLIP)

MANNO: Meantime, it could be the end of an era for the Warriors as the star struggled against the Kings in the late game. Sacramento avenging a game-seven loss at home to Golden State in last year's first round with a 118-94 win. Steph Curry finished with only 22 points.

And Klay Thompson didn't score a single point in 32 minutes. It was just the fifth time that he's gone scoreless in his career. And that might have been his last game with the Warriors as the 34-year-old is set to be a free agency this summer.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

STEVE KERR, HEAD COACH, GOLDEN STATE WARRIORS: He's still got good years left. And I know I speak for everybody in the organization -- we want him back. Obviously, there's business at hand and that has to be addressed. But what Klay has meant to this franchise, as good as he still is, we desperately want him back.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MANNO: The Pelicans will have another chance to extend their season on Friday with a game against the Kings. And then, the Eastern Conference Play-In Tournament taking center stage tonight. The Heat and Sixers getting things started at 7:00 Eastern, Jim, followed by the Hawks and the Bulls at 9:30.

ACOSTA: All right. It's going to be a great playoffs.

Thank you so much, Carolyn. I really appreciate it.

Just ahead, a candidate for president on trial, a cabinet member impeached, a speaker on the ropes. The crazy state of American politics -- that's next.

Plus, the economic message President Biden is trying to sell out on the campaign trail. We'll talk about that in just a few moments. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL)