Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Sources: U.S. Expects Limited Israeli Military Response To Iran; House Delivers Mayorkas Impeachment Articles To Senate; Trump's Attorneys Seeking To Have First Juror Dismissed For Cause; Judge Says Trump Gesturing At Potential Juror During Questions. Aired 2:30-3p ET

Aired April 16, 2024 - 14:30   ET

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

[14:30:00]

JASON REZAIAN, WRONGFULLY IMPRISONED IN IRAN FOR 544 DAYS: So there is quite a lot of damage that could be inflicted by any sort of attack on Iranian soil.

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN HOST: As limited in scope as this attack might be, how do you anticipate the Iranian government might respond to a strike inside its borders? It seems like we're on a path toward escalating retaliation.

REZAIAN: You know, that's one of the reasons, Boris, while I think that the assault on Saturday night was so surprising to so many people. It feels as though Iran might be courting that kind of attack from Israel.

Although for the last 35 years, since the eight-year war between Iran and Iraq ended, Iran's -- one of its claims to fame of the Islamic Republic or a success by their own metrics is that they've been able to keep military attacks from outside its borders at bay.

So I think it's quite a significant escalation. I don't know what the calculation was on the Iranian side. But the truth is, they don't have the kind of military might that Israel does to thwart the kind of air assault that they subjected on Israel over the weekend.

SANCHEZ: Given that point, short of military action, what could Israel and its allies do to potentially deter Iran? If there's a strike from Israel now and they don't want Iran to retaliate, what options do they have?

REZAIAN: Well, I think that there are the kind of options that they've employed in the past, which is targeting Iranian officials, military officials, which inspired this response by Iran in the first place.

I think that there are cyberattacks that they've shown and that they can successfully pull off against Iranian infrastructure.

But ultimately, I think it's very important that we look at what the Biden administration is doing and saying, essentially, to the leaders of Israel that if it hurts -- take an offensive approach to Iranian soil, this is not something the United States would join into.

And I think that's an indication of just how precarious this moment is.

And one thing that I want to say is that the people of Iran, in particular, are quite scared about this moment. Because they are not at all happy with the leadership that they're living under.

At the same time, this is a population that is acutely aware of what a war on its soil looks and feels like. And it's not something that people in that country want to repeat.

SANCHEZ: A moment ago, I alluded to Israel's allies. I wouldn't necessarily describe them as fast and firm allies, given the nature of the relationship between Saudi Arabia, for example, and Israel.

Nevertheless, Saudi Arabia and Jordan took steps this weekend to limit the scope of Iran's attacks inside Israel. How do you think those regional players ultimately play a role in whatever decision Israel might make?

REZAIAN: I think they play a very crucial role. As you know, there's no love lost between Iran and Saudi Arabia and the other Gulf States.

At the same time, they all live in the same neighborhood and have to co-exist to a certain degree. I think the countries that we should be looking to be the most influential trying to reduce tension, Turkey, the UAE, Jordan, as you mentioned.

But you look at Saudi Arabia as a tried-and-true American ally in many respects, and a budding allegiance, if you will, with Israel, I think that they, too, can play very critical role here.

SANCHEZ: Jason Rezaian, appreciate your perspective. Thanks for being with us.

REZAIAN: Thanks, Boris.

SANCHEZ: Still plenty more news to come on NEWS CENTRAL. This just in. Prosecutors and Trump lawyers are now beginning the process of using their preemptive strikes on potential jurors. We're going to take you back live outside the courthouse for the latest.

[14:35:04]

We're also keeping an eye on Scranton, Pennsylvania. President Biden speaking there, making what his campaign is calling a major announcement about taxes. More straight ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: Breaking news into CNN. We are witnessing history on Capitol Hill. The House expected to send impeachment articles against Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas is literally happening as we speak.

There you have the Republican impeachment managers walking over to the Senate side to deliver these impeachment articles. This was actually supposed to happen on April 10t h but it was delayed, in part, because Senate Republicans hadn't actually figured out how they were going to handle receiving these articles of impeachment.

Remember, Democrats control a majority in the Senate so it is highly unlikely, essentially impossible, that the Homeland Security secretary would actually get impeached or, rather, convicted in his impeachment.

We want to go straight to CNN's Manu Raju who is covering this for us.

Manu, again, this is a largely symbolic gesture.

MANU RAJU, CNN CHIEF CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes, no question about it. Republicans are trying to make immigration, border security central to their efforts to keep the House, to win back the Senate, to take back the White House.

And they're gone after Alejandro Mayorkas and charged him with high crimes or misdemeanors. Even though Republicans -- there are some Republicans who agree with Democrats that this is simply a policy dispute, not something that would rise to the level of a high crime and misdemeanor and for removal from office.

That has been the fight that has unfolded over the last several months. But Republicans in the House, who have are narrow majority, tried twice on the House floor. Ultimately got the votes to impeach Alejandro Mayorkas on charges that his handling of the border amounted to a high crime or misdemeanor.

And now they are delivering those articles of impeachment to the Senate. They're walking across the capital, through that, from the House. The Senate is about a three-minute walk or so. Then they will actually deliver it.

They will stand inside the House chamber, deliver -- the Senate chamber, actually deliver the articles, read from the articles. And then they'll essentially be done with the business for the day on this trial.

Then tomorrow will actually be when this will -- some of the proceedings will take place.

The jurors, who are the Senators, will be sworn in by the president pro tem of the Senate. That's Senator Patty Murray of Washington State. And then there'll be votes.

Republicans are planning to push for some of their votes on the Senate floor. We'll what they ultimately decide to do.

Democrats are expected either to try to quickly kill these proceedings, essentially dismiss them all together. And they would need a simple majority of vote to do that.

And we do expect they would have a simple majority in the 51-49 Democratic-controlled Senate to simply dismiss this trial from even ever taking place.

Some Republicans may join them in that effort as well, the Republicans who don't believe there's any grounds for impeachment of the Homeland Security secretary.

But no question about it, despite the controversy and the politics at the center of all this, a historic move by the House Republicans to go after a cabinet secretary like this, trying to push him out of office.

It's only the second time in American history that we have seen has happen before to a cabinet secretary. But it's not going anywhere in the Democratic-led Senate -- Boris?

SANCHEZ: Yes, Mayorkas -- Mayorkas, the first cabinet secretary to be impeached in roughly 150 years. You'd have to go back to the Civil War to recall the last time that that happened.

Manu, let's take a step back and talk about the basis for why House Republicans ultimately impeached him. It -- you mentioned that it has to do with immigration policy. They made the argument that Mayorkas was ignoring immigration law.

The counter-argument to that, though, is that Mayorkas -- Mayorkas acts on behalf of President Biden, right?

RAJU: Yes. I mean, they're saying that he willfully allowed the border to get out of control, to allow for the influx of migrants at the southern border of Mexico.

And that is something that, of course, the Homeland Security Department strongly denies, the White House strongly denies.

The defenders of Mayorkas do contend that he's essentially following the law of the land, and that, ultimately, the policy is set by the White House, and he is carrying out the White House's policy.

Mayorkas was central also to negotiations in the Senate to change immigration law, to actually try to move ahead with a new border security measure, with border security package. But that plan the scuttled in the United States Senate by Republicans.

[14:40:00]

Mayorkas had argued he needed more tools and more different laws in order to do what Republicans in the House essentially had accused him of ignoring.

So that has been the essence of the dispute here as we're watching here right now, Boris, the Senate sergeant-at-arms called to order the business here in the United States Senate.

SANCHEZ: Let's take a moment and listen in.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Alejandro Nicholas Mayorkas, secretary of Homeland Security.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The managers, on the part of the House, will proceed.

REP. MARK GREEN (R-TN): Mr. President, the managers on the part of the House of Representatives are present and ready to present the articles of impeachment, which have been preferred by the House of Representatives against Alejandro Nicholas Mayorkas, secretary of the Department of Homeland Security.

The House adopted the following resolution, which will -- with permission of the Senate, I will read House Resolution 995.

Resolved that Mr. Green of Tennessee, Mr. McCaul, Mr. Biggs, Mr. Higgins of Louisiana, Mr. Klein, Mr. Guest, Mr. Garbarino, Ms. Greene of Georgia, Mr. Pfluger, Ms. Hagen, and Ms. Lee of Florida, are appointed managers to conduct the impeachment trial against Alejandro Nicholas Mayorkas, secretary of Homeland Security.

That a message be sent to the Senate to inform the Senate of these appointments, and that the managers, so appointed, may in connection with the preparation and the conduct of the trial exhibit the articles of impeachment to the Senate and take all necessary actions which may include the following.

One, employing legal, clerical and other necessary assistance, and incurring such other expenses as may be necessary to be paid from amounts available to the Committee on Homeland Security under applicable expense resolutions or for the applicable amounts of the House of Representatives.

Two, sending for persons and papers, and filing with the secretary of the Senate on the part of the House of Representatives any pleadings in conjunction with or subsequent to the exhibition of the articles of impeachment that the managers consider necessary.

With the permission of the Senate, I will now read the articles of impeachment, House Resolution 863.

Resolved that Alejandro Nicholas Mayorkas, secretary of Homeland Security, the United States of America, is impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors. And that the following articles of impeachment be exhibited to the United States Senate.

Articles of impeachment exhibited by the House of Representatives of the United States of America in the name of itself and the people of the United States of America against Alejandro N. Mayorkas, secretary of Homeland Security of the United States of America, in maintenance and support of its impeachment against him for high crimes and misdemeanors.

Article one, willful and systemic refusal to comply with the law. The Constitution provides that the House of Representatives, quote, "shall have the sole power of impeachment," end quote, and that civil officers of the United States, including the secretary of Homeland Security, quote, "shall be removed from office on impeachment for and conviction of treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors," end quote. In his conduct while secretary of Homeland Security, Alejandro N. Mayorkas, and violation of his oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic.

To bear true faith and allegiance to the same and to well and faithfully discharge the duties of his office, has willfully and systemically refused to comply with the federal immigration laws.

In that throughout his tenure as secretary of Homeland Security, Alejandro N. Mayorkas has repeatedly violated laws enacted by Congress regarding immigration and border security.

In large part, because it is unlawful conduct, millions of aliens have illegally entered the United States on an annual basis, with many unlawfully remaining in the United States.

His refusal to obey the law is not only an offense against the separation of powers in the Constitution of the United States. It also threatens our national security and has had a dire impact on communities across the country.

SANCHEZ: We have been listening to Congressman Mark Green of Tennessee, the chairman of the Homeland Security Committee, as he is announcing the articles of impeachment against Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas to the Senate.

Mayorkas is being accused by House Republicans of willfully and systemically refusing to comply with federal immigration law. It does not seem at all likely that the Senate is going to move forward with a conviction of the secretary, just based on basic math.

Of course, this is a historic moment, though. This is the first time that a sitting secretary in the cabinet has been impeached by Congress since 150 years ago, back during the Civil War era.

[14:45:11]

We're going to keep an eye on what is happening on Capitol Hill and bring you the latest as we get it.

For now, let's turn over to Jessica.

JESSICA DEAN, CNN HOST: All right, Boris, thanks so much.

It is day two of jury selection in former President Trump's hush money trial. It's back underway.

Let's get out to CNN's Laura Coates.

Because, Laura, I understand that the judge has now told Trump's attorney he needs to talk to his client because something -- as something that President Trump, the judge said, was doing toward one of the potential jurors?

LAURA COATES, CNN ANCHOR: Yes. There are fireworks beginning to happen in this particular courtroom.

Remember, there is a moment when you're able to ask questions of the different potential jurors, even at this juncture, to decide whether they actually should be on your jury.

What's at issue here is one juror's Facebook postings.

And we'll bring in Kara Scannell on this.

Because, Kara, the Facebook posting appeared to show some celebration happening in the year 2020. The prosecution wants heard that this juror not to be removed for cause. They say it's just a celebratory filming from a distance.

The defense thinks, though, this is actually biased against Trump. What's happening?

KARA SCANNELL, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Right. So there they brought this juror into the courtroom alone without the other jurors there so the judge could question her about what was actually depicted on this video. And the juror responded saying that it was a New York moment that she caught on camera.

COATES: The concern is what? That it's a video of a celebration around an election or what?

SCANNELL: So Trump's lawyers -- well, the question is, was this around Election Day or the day that Biden was declared the winner in 2020, which, you'll remember, was about a week later.

And so defense lawyers are saying this is clearly an anti-Trump event. She didn't say that she went to an anti-Trump rally. Though the juror is saying, no, this was a New York moment that she caught on camera.

So the judge, you know, questioned her. The defense team saying they thought that she needed to be go for bias. The judge said, the juror looked me in the eye and said that she could be impartial, so we refuse to excuse her for cause.

That still means Trump's lawyers could use one of their strikes if they want to on her, though they have not yet.

But that prompted this reaction in court from Trump, while, as the juror was leaving, he could be heard audibly saying something and gesturing in the direction of the juror leaving the room.

That prompted the judge to raise his voice. He is a soft-spoken judge, but firm. He raised his voice and said -- said to Trump's lawyer, "I can hear your client uttering" and warning him that he cannot do that, cannot disrupt this proceeding. And advising him to talk to his client.

COATES: And then went on to suggest that he won't have any jurors intimidated. It's a really important moment here.

We're not talking about a collective number of jurors in the room, Kara. We're talking about, if there is additional questioning for a juror, they are to be by themselves in that particular courtroom.

So you've got Secret Service. The former president United States' defense and prosecution, the judge, and the lone juror being questioned. And you've got uttering or some sort reprimand being done against Trump.

That's a really extraordinary moment. It tells you, we're how many days now, a day and a half into jury selection. It seemed as though his patients for being able to be quiet in that courtroom is waning thin.

SCANNELL: I mean, I was -- now this is the third trial I've covered with Donald Trump as the defendant. The other two were civil cases. Different situations, different things at stake there.

But you see Trump really not being able to not react in the moment at times. In the E. Jean Carroll case, when she was testifying, he audibly reacted, at first, again outside the presence of the jury, prompted a warning from that judge, telling him that he cannot disrupt these proceedings.

You know, it was not -- he was warned but Trump continued to do it again. You can clearly see that it is hard for him not to want to react and respond when he's hearing certain things.

And the judge admonished Trump at this moment, once the juror had left the room. But his whole -- the judge's explanation for why he's handling it this way, bringing this juror in for questioning is because he said, at the outset, he didn't want there to be any integer the mediation and that being intimidated from speaking among your peers and other jurors.

But now there's this new wrinkle of not wanting there to be insemination because of the defendant.

COATES: And what's so interesting here, Jessica, remember, is that we're talking about jurors' social media posts, Facebook posts at this point in time.

Now, we, in the media, have no idea who was in that jury pool. There is anonymity to be preserved for a very good reason.

But the attorneys in this room, they are aware of who they are. They're able to then search through their social media postings. And imagine what they are finding and what could be a potential treasure trove of information.

But at the end of the day, the judge wants to know, not just the existence of a post, but how it might demonstrate bias in a way that undermines the opportunity for the defendant to have a fair trial.

Again, they will have the final word in strikes. They only get 10 total. So there's going to be a lot at stake here.

DEAN: All right, certainly that is the case.

[14:50:00]

Laura Coates for us, with Kara Scannell, outside the courthouse, thanks so much.

And stay with us. We're going to stay on this breaking news but take a quick break. We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

DEAN: Welcome back. We are following the goings on, on Capitol Hill, specifically in the Senate chamber where the House impeachment managers for the impeachment of the Homeland Security secretary, Alejandro Mayorkas, has just walked over those articles of impeachment and presented them to the Senators who are sitting there.

Let's go out to our chief congressional correspondent, Manu Raju.

Manu, how are Senators kind of taking this in? And what's the general feeling? Also worth reminding everyone that Democrats control the Senate.

[14:55:00]

RAJU: Yes, no question about it. And they are sitting there, as they do in impeachment proceedings, listening.

There are some that are sitting, there are some that are perhaps zoning out, but they're sitting there as prospective jurors are supposed to be neutral, even though pretty much everybody has their minds made up on how they ultimately will vote.

The impeachment managers are reading the two articles of impeachment. One dealing with the contention that Alejandro Mayorkas willfully ignored the laws of the United States, and another one involving a so- called breach of public trust as outlined in the two articles of impeachment.

Once that is done, that'll essentially conclude the proceedings for the day. Then they'll walk over to the House. And the Senate will move on with it day and they'll reconvene tomorrow when those formal proceedings will actually take place, when they'll actually have a vote in the Senate, ultimately, to dismiss these charges here.

Now the question will be ultimately is where the votes ultimately come down. We do expect pretty much all Democrats to vote in unison to kill these proceedings outright.

Saying there's no grounds for impeachment, let alone removing someone from office on the charges of a high crime and misdemeanor over a dispute, a policy dispute at the southern border of Mexico.

But where will a handful of Republicans come down? I caught up with one Senator, Mitt Romney, the retiring Utah Republican Senator, who said that there's no grounds in his view for impeaching Mayorkas.

He has not said if he will ultimately vote to dismiss these proceedings. So there could be a bipartisan majority to essentially squash this from going forward.

But Republicans in the House have been trying all your long, to pin what is happening at the border on Alejandro Mayorkas. So this is their moment to make the case as Senators.

But this is probably the most they may say, Jessica. They won't be able to make their case in a formal trial-like setting because Democrats are prepared to dismiss this outright tomorrow.

DEAN: Yes. All right. Manu Raju, for us on Capitol Hill, thanks so much for that latest reporting.

SANCHEZ: Right now, there are new details on jurors being dismissed in the criminal trial of former President Donald Trump, including a warning from the judge to the former president. We'll take you live with the courthouse in just a moment.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)