Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Closing Arguments In Trump's Civil Fraud Trial: Heated Exchanges And Judge's Intervention; DeSantis And Haley Clash In CNN Debate As Iowa Caucuses Approach; Trump's Defense In Civil Fraud Trial: Political Persecution Or Legal Battle?; Boeing Faces Federal Investigation After Alaska Airlines Plane Incident; Hunter Biden Arrives In Court To Face Federal Tax Charges In Los Angeles. Aired 2- 2:30p ET

Aired January 11, 2024 - 14:00   ET

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

[14:00:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BORIS SANCHESZ, CNN ANCHOR: Thanks so much for joining us this afternoon on CNN NEWS CENTRAL. I'm Boris Sanchez alongside Brianna Keilar in Washington. We're closely tracking the closing arguments in Donald Trump's civil fraud trial in New York. The prosecution is set to begin in just a few minutes, and a short time ago during the Trump defense argument, the judge allowed the former president to address the court, and Trump used the opportunity to reiterate the claims that he's made outside the courtroom almost every time he's appeared at this trial, to the point that the judge cut him off after five minutes.

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN ANCHOR: But Trump is making sure that he will have his say. This hour, he's also going to be making public remarks, once again using a court appearance as an unofficial campaign event. We have full coverage. CNN's Paula Reid and Kara Scannell, who is inside of the courthouse, are there right now outside of the courthouse in downtown Manhattan. Paula, tell us, where do things stand?

PAULA REID, CNN CHIEF CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, closing arguments are supposed to be an opportunity for lawyers to summarize their case, in this case, in front of a judge. But they're not only speaking to the judge today, they're also making their closing argument in the court of public opinion, trying to frame this entire civil case as a political persecution. And yesterday, the judge appeared to close the door on the possibility of Trump participating in today's closing arguments.

And for the first few hours, it was just Trump's lawyer, Chris Kise, summarizing their case, emphasizing that they believe he is being targeted for political reasons, emphasizing that their client had, you know, no motivation to defraud Deutsche Bank. Now, at the very end, though, Kise asked if his client, former President Trump, could speak. The judge allowed it. And not surprisingly, Trump went on a bit of a rant, attacking the district attorney, attacking the judge, attacking the entire process. Now, as you noted, our colleague Kara Scannell was in court today. This was a little bit of a surprise, but it wasn't really a surprise that Trump got the final word, right?

KARA SCANNELL, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Right. I mean, it wasn't supposed to happen. But with this trial, a lot of things happened that we don't see coming. And the reason why the judge let Trump speak, as he said initially, was because Trump had the most to lose in this case. His business in New York is on the line. He could face a fine or a disgorgement of $370 million, so really a significant amount of money. So the judge let him speak. And he gave him about five minutes. They had a hard stop at 1 o'clock for lunch, and that is the reason why the judge cut him off. But my colleague Lauren DelValle (ph), who was in there, said that Trump was speaking pretty rapidly, wanting to make the points that he wanted to make.

And he did go beyond just the facts of the case, attacking the New York attorney general, Letitia James, in the process. You know, at some point, the judge, you know, he's not one that's quiet. He's had a lot of back and forth during the closing arguments today with Trump's attorneys. And the same was true when Trump was there speaking before the judge. The judge saying to Trump, you have your own agenda. I understand that. And then saying to Chris Kise, Mr. Kise, please control your client, trying to rein in Trump a little bit. But Trump got his chance to give his say. And he said, Your Honor, look, I did nothing wrong. They should pay me for what we have had to go through, what they've done to me reputationally and everything else.

[14:05:09]

So, Trump getting a little bit of his words there before the judge. He did testify in this case and he's going to be making more public statements later before the cameras of which he has used though every opportunity coming to court as an opportunity to speak to the public.

Now, but the real work being done with the lawyers today was to try to convince the judge that he shouldn't find Trump and his two adult sons liable, that he shouldn't ban them from doing business in New York and that he shouldn't dissolve their businesses, which he has already set in motion. So, they were trying to stick to the facts of this case here, saying that the attorney general's office did not put on a single witness to say that they were defrauded in this case. The allegations are here is that Trump had given false financial statements with values of his properties, Mar-a-Lago, his triple X apartment, overly inflated, had given them to banks and insurers to get better terms on policies and interest rates on loans.

So they were saying they did not hear from one person in this case who said that they would have done anything differently had they had financial statements that they said were accurate. They also made the point that these financial statements did comply with accounting rules and the judge interrupting at various times saying that he didn't find some of their witnesses that credible in this case. So, he has already indicated that he does not fully buy their arguments. But of course, he was hearing them make their final case today. And also a lawyer for Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump, his sons who are running the business. He was just imploring to the judge that there is so much on the line

for them. Again, this judge likes to make jokes and stuff. And he was saying, now is not the time, Your Honor. This is a serious business. Their business, their livelihood is at stake here in this decision that you will ultimately render. And now we're expecting in just a short while from now the New York attorney general's team will give their closing statements. They will have, they said they think they'll go about an hour, but they will have until the end of the day today. Court closes at 4:30. So we could hear from them at length as they try to recount their case, remind the judge that they put forward and convince the judge to find in their favor.

REID: And you make an important point about the Trump family. For them, this is incredibly personal. But for former President Trump, it's also political. And he had three chances already to speak to the public. He addressed cameras on his way in. He spoke to the judge, spoke briefly on the way out. And then he is expected to give a statement. We're not sure if it'll be a press conference where he'll take questions, but a press availability shortly thereafter.

Now, this is quite a contrast from what we saw in federal court on Tuesday. Of course, he showed up kind of trying to do something similar to oral arguments in D.C. But federal court is quite a different thing. There are no cameras in the courtroom. There's no pool spray. And you pull into a garage. No one sees you. He really didn't get much of a return on his investment showing up to federal court. So, making sure to make the most of it today, because, of course, not only does he have these various legal problems, he's, of course, once again running for the White House. So as important as the legal arguments were today, the arguments that he is making to the electorate about how to solve political election interference, he calls it, just as important for him, of course. Brianna, Boris.

KEILAR: All right. Paula and Kara, thank you so much. Let's bring in former federal prosecutor Elliot Williams, Republican strategist Alice Stewart, and Joe Biden, biographer Evan Osnos with us. Pretty interesting to hear what Trump said in court, this monologue, although he was cut off. But I just wonder what you thought about the closing argument, if it was convincing.

ELLIOT WILLIAMS, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Not any more convincing than what's already come out. Now look, the argument that the former president is making is that, number one, this is politically motivated. You can set that aside because that's not a legal argument. It's a political one. It's a social one, whatever it is. And then this other point that valuing real estate is inherently subjective. Who among us, ladies and gentlemen, has not overvalued a property by a factor of three, which is essentially the argument that he's making.

And they're just trying to play to that. They know, I think, at this point that they're going to lose money on this. It's just a question of what the judge decides how much it is going to be.

ALICE STEWART, CNN REPUBLICAN STRATEGIST: And I think Elliot is assuming that the reason that Donald Trump went into that courtroom was to make a legal argument. And we all know that wasn't the case. He went into that courtroom to make a political statement. And he did so. He went up there saying, look, my documents were in perfect order, nothing to see here. And he also relies in his mindset on what he does know. Letitia James is the attorney general of New York, campaigned on taking Donald Trump down. And Donald Trump has relied on that.

And he's been doing that for a long time, despite the fact she has put forth evidence to show that he overinflated the value of his homes. Despite the fact that she's put forth evidence to say that he -- showed that he didn't apply to accounting standards. He is ignoring all of that. And he's making his case in the court of public opinion that she is using this as a political witch hunt, that he is a victim. And this is one of many legal cases against him. There are nothing more than weaponization of prosecutors, weaponization of the DOJ. Again, I don't agree with that, but that's his argument. And he's not making as much to the courtroom today, but as a court of public opinion writ large.

[14:10:09]

SANCHEZ: And so far, at least when it comes to polling, Evan, it appears to be working for him. The rivals on the Republican stage last night in the CNN debate, Nikki Haley and Ron DeSantis, try to make the case that this would be a distraction for voters. It doesn't seem to be hurting him in Iowa. In a general election, though, the way that the White House sees this, it's an advantage.

EVAN OSNOS, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: Yeah, I think, look, the reality is what you also heard on that stage last night was Nikki Haley saying to people, do you want to return to chaos? And what this what this court case has been for many Americans, if you're not already in the Trump camp, is a reminder of all of the theatrics, all of the drama, all of the expended dinner table conversation that goes on when Donald Trump was at the center of the action. From the Joe Biden campaign perspective, that's fine. They're not looking to win over a whole lot of people who are at the core of Trump's base. They want people who say on time, it's time to move away from that.

KEILAR: So one of the things and I think this is part of the reason why this case, even though we pay so much attention, to the federal election subversion case, this case is so critical because it really goes to Donald Trump's identity. He purports to be the shrewd businessman. And at stake here is whether or not he will be able to conduct business in New York. I mean, the idea of that is almost unfathomable. So do you see that happening? And if that were the case, I mean, what would that even look like? Do we know?

WILLIAMS: Yeah, well, it's just sort of like the movie from I guess it was the 90s. It's complicated. Yes, he would. The Trump organization would see to have the ability to operate in New York if its business certificates were taken away. Now, it gets a little bit complicated because what do you do with existing loans that they might have? What do you do with assets? Do you sell the companies? Could they move to another state, reincorporate there and then do business there? So, what what would happen is you just open up more litigation and more legal wrangling.

And I don't think anybody knows for certain what would happen given how complicated the Trump organization is and their business relationships are not just in the city of New York, but around the country. But yes, principally speaking, they're going to lose the ability to lose business in New York to do business in New York. And it's just it's not good for them.

SANCHEZ: Elliot, what does an appeals process look like in this case?

WILLIAMS: So, they would have a right to appeal to the appellate division in the state of New York based on the ruling that the judge makes. Now, the judge here is going to write up, I would assume, a very lengthy opinion. He has to document his reasons for why he's assigning the money payment. He is what remedy if it's, you know, it's forcing them to sell or take away their business certificates. And then the appeals court will assess what was this supported by law or did the judge make any errors here? And because of how complicated this case was and how many feelings there were, you know, did he step in something along the way? That's for the appeals court to sort out.

KEILAR: You mentioned that you didn't necessarily agree with it. But as he's trying to cast that this is a political agenda. It's worth mentioning that the -- this is the New York AG who took on Andrew Cuomo. Right. I mean, he had, over his accounting of COVID deaths in his state, that really hurt him politically, put a huge dent in his image following COVID. I don't know how he actually makes that case factually.

STEWART: Well, because it works in his favor. I mean, clearly she is an equal opportunity law enforcement officer and going after whoever breaks the law, regardless of what side of the political aisle you're on. But to your point, this is more than just a legal case against Donald Trump. It is more than losing an election.

This is the core of Donald Trump's bravado is being a real estate tycoon in New York City. And if this case were to come down and strip him of that ability to brag on that, that hurts him to the core. So, he is going to push back on this and use this as he has done all of these cases, saying that he has done nothing wrong and this is just an overzealous liberal justice and law enforcement official going after him.

WILLIAMS: There was a powerful point earlier in trial, earlier, I think it was today or yesterday, where the argument was made that, well, you know, my client is an expert in business. And the judge slapped that down saying, well, no, in order to certify someone as an expert in court, there's actually a legal process based on his education, training and experience. And you can't say that here. You can say nice things about him, but you can't call him an expert in court for this reason.

OSNOS: And I think it's a sign that Donald Trump knows there's a political risk for him here. His defense has been expensive. They've put more than two million dollars into getting experts to go out and make the case. He wouldn't do that if he thought that this was an unambiguous win. The reality is at the end of this process, it will no longer be a rumor, a allegation, the question of whether Donald Trump inflates his business identity. It will be a matter of fact. It will be a matter of the record. That is a fundamental difference from where it was in 2020 and in 2016.

SANCHEZ: Repeatedly, we've heard Trump call this a political hit job, as Alice was alluding to, pointing the finger at President Biden for putting his hand on the scale. But if Trump becomes the Republican nominee, how does Biden attack him while simultaneously seeming as though he's not involved at all in the Justice Department and their proceedings?

OSNOS: Well, it's no accident that you haven't heard Joe Biden coming. out and talking about this case a great deal. He is deliberately not putting his finger, his thumbprint on the scale in a public way. He knows that would be a disaster. For one thing, one of the cases he's made is that he's not going to interfere in the Justice Department the way Donald Trump has. From his perspective, he's happy to let the process play out on its own. It seems to be working pretty well to the Biden campaign's advantage.

[14:15:19]

KEILAR: This could be very expensive because you have the AG wanting $370 million in return profits. It's called disgorgement because Trump is arguing that there's no victim here, but it's not like -- you can't steal $10 from your mom, make $50, so you put the $10 back, you keep the $40. I think everyone knows that's not okay, right? You actually (ph), Boris, we're going to talk after the show, but no, you really shouldn't do that. I don't know. That's just my little example of that.

But she sort of is this late ad, put that dollar amount. Do you see, I mean, when would Trump, if would that be the award? When would he have to pay if there is some sort of award?

WILLIAMS: Sure. Once he's exhausted his appeals and if he's lost, he will have to pay. And if not pay, sell properties off like we were talking about earlier or figure out a way to make that money come up. But again, the judge has to document how he's getting to that dollar amount, regardless of whether the prosecutor added it at the late stage. The judge has to have a basis for awarding it. And whether it's ill-gotten gains on the part of Trump or punitive or whatever it might be, you just got to be able to substantiate why you're doing it. And that's a big thing here.

SANCHEZ: Elliot, Alice, Evan, a pleasure to have the conversation. Mom, I swear I'll get you those 10 bucks back. I promise.

KEILAR: Yeah, he'll bring you the 40 too, is the point. He's going to give you the---

(CROSSTALK)

SANCHEZ: I have not made such promises. (CROSSTALK)

STEWART: (inaudible)

SANCHEZ: We'll figure that out later. Anyway, still ahead, four days to go until the Iowa caucuses. Ron DeSantis, Nikki Haley going head- to-head in the CNN debate. The fight for number two is on. We'll walk through who came out on top and how they might plan to take on Trump and eventually President Biden.

KEILAR: Plus, we have some breaking news. The FAA opening in investment into Boeing's quality control after that terrifying Alaska Airlines incident when a part of the plane, that door plug, just popped off midair. And one of Michael Strahan's teen daughters diagnosed with a malignant brain tumor. What we're learning about the cancer and how many others suffer from this same kind.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:19:59]

SANCHEZ: After all the polls, pundits, and predictions, we're just four days away from the first actual votes in the race for the White House in 2024. The Iowa caucus countdown, you're looking at it right now. Caucus goers got their first chance to see Republicans, Ron DeSantis and Nikki Haley square off. One-on-one at the CNN debate last night. The two contenders went more after each other than the man they have to beat, frontrunner Donald Trump. Here's a taste of last night.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

NIKKI HAYLEY, PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE (R): I've said it again, Ron, so stop lying.

RON DESANTIS, PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE (R): And then she said she never said it, of course, you're lying.

HAYLEY: It doesn't change the fact that Ron's lying because Ron's losing.

DESANTIS: I thought he lied a lot. Man, Nikki Haley gives him a run for his money.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: Let's discuss with veteran pollster and communications strategist Frank Luntz. Frank, thanks so much for being here with us. You posted that Ron DeSantis won last night. Why do you say that?

FRANK LUNTZ, POLLSTER AND COMMUNICATIONS STRATEGIST: Yes, I was there at the debate. And by the way, can I give CNN props for hosting what was a really insightful, intelligent discussion with the two candidates. Sure, they went at each other, and they went at each other in a significant way. When you call someone a liar, that's really, really tough politics. That said, smart questions, smart approach. You kept the candidates in order. You asked what people wanted to know. The reason why DeSantis did well was because in the first 30 minutes, he did a better job of articulating precisely why he is the better alternative than either Donald Trump or Nikki Haley. It was an anti- government, anti-Washington, pro-states rights. The message was so crystal clear. And it was him at his best. And one has to wonder, where has this Ron DeSantis been over the last six months?

SANCHEZ: I have to admit, Frank, I had zero to do with the moderating, the excellent moderating of my colleagues, Jake Tapper and Dana Bash, but I will take the credit for them. So, thank you, Frank. On a serious note, though, is there enough time for DeSantis to really do anything in Iowa that will help him catch up to Trump?

LUNTZ: Well, he has to come in second. And Nikki Haley is gaining and gaining fast. She was effective yesterday in criticizing the chaos that goes with Donald Trump and the idea that you have to make sure that you can beat Joe Biden. In fact, Haley's best argument is an electability argument, that she is the candidate who gets the most votes from the most states that put her over the top. Is there enough time? Yes, there's enough time. But with four days to go, who wins? Who comes in second in Iowa is up for grabs. And the actual winner of New Hampshire, which is eight days after the Iowa caucus, that is absolutely too close to call.

SANCHEZ: There was a zinger that caught my attention that Haley hit DeSantis on. It has to do with his organization, his campaign organization. But one caucus goer that CNN spoke to didn't feel like it was much of a hard hit. Let's listen to what that caucus goer said.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BETH ENGELS, STORY COUNTY IOWA REPUBLICAN: I felt like she was weak. And when she couldn't come up with some answers, she kept deferring to how DeSantis isn't a good leader because he can't manage his campaign finances.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: Now, there is dysfunction we've reported on with DeSantis' PAC. I'm wondering why you think that line from Haley may not have worked and also if some of that dysfunction could hurt DeSantis in the long run.

LUNTZ: It hurts DeSantis, but make no mistake. That's good that you showed it to your viewers. Nobody cares about how a campaign is run. Frankly, nobody cares whether they run negative advertisements. What they care about is, number one, the ability to win.

[14:25:19]

And what did not happen yesterday was a case to be made against President Biden. Although something I'll say to your viewers, imagine Joe Biden against either of those two candidates. What would happen in that debate? Nobody cares about process. They care about results. The second thing is they care about issues, social issues, economic issues. And on those, the two candidates were very impressive. What I was surprised at is something that I have trouble doing, even in an interview like this. No ums, no ahs. They spoke fast. They spoke clearly. They gave eloquent presentations.

And I was frankly thinking, what happens when you put Joe Biden into that debate setting? What is he going to do? And that should have been what either those two candidates talked about. Because in the end, it is a Republican caucus debate, a Republican primary debate. You have to be looking at what comes next in September and October.

SANCHEZ: Frank, I noticed a social media post in which you alluded to some of what you're talking about now, issues that you see with President Biden. You said in that social media post that if you had to bet, you would bet that Donald Trump would win the 2024 election. Break down the logic for us. Why do you believe that?

LUNTZ: It's a very tough thing for me, to be honest with you. I don't know if I'm going to include, but I'm watching. Number one is trend. Where are the numbers going? Number two is can you project nine months, ten months in the future? And in each of these, the Republican candidates are gaining. Inflation is lessening. The economy is strong. And yet the president isn't getting any credit for it. We have global problems. We have this issue in the Middle East. We still have the challenge of China.

Once again, not getting any better at all. And as I look at those projections, and I see where they stand right now, Trump continues to gain despite the trials, despite the felony accusations, despite all the things that have been raised, Trump is gaining. And this is him and his weakness and Joe Biden at his strength. So it really is remarkable that Trump should be leading at this point in the campaign.

SANCHEZ: Frank Luntz, we're going to pick up the conversation at a different point in time, likely after Iowa. Very quickly, any prediction in Iowa outside of Donald Trump winning?

LUNTZ: No, because it really is too close to call. But I urge you, I urge you to focus that what happens 15 days from now could well determine who our next president is. And that's the New Hampshire primary. Too close to call.

SANCHEZ: All right, Frank Luntz, thanks again. Appreciate the time.

LUNTZ: Thank you.

SANCHEZ: Still ahead, Boeing is now being investigated by federal officials after part of an Alaska Airlines plane ripped off midair. The Boeing CEO says the door plug was the issue, and it was caused by a, quote, quality escape. What we're learning about the investigation and the safety of certain 737 MAX 9 planes. Plus, breaking news, we just learned that Hunter Biden has arrived in court to face federal tax charges in Los Angeles. We're going to take you there for a live report in just moments.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)