Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Soon: Mayorkas Impeachment Trial Begins In Senate; Now: AZ Lawmakers Push To Repeal State's Near-Total Abortion Ban; Hush Money Trial Adjourns Until Tomorrow After Seating 7 Jurors. Aired 1-1:30p ET

Aired April 17, 2024 - 13:00   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[13:00:29]

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN HOST: We are watching history unfold on Capitol Hill. The Senate taking up articles of impeachment against homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas. Democrats may look to dismiss the articles quickly, but will Republicans let them? We'll take you there in just moments.

Plus, House Speaker Mike Johnson trying to fend off threats by Republican hardliners, a standoff that could now jeopardize the much delayed push to pass aid for Israel and Ukraine.

JESSICA DEAN, CNN HOST: And in the Donald Trump criminal case in New York, nearly half of the jurors have now been chosen. What we know about them and how quickly the entire jury could be seated. We're following these major developing stories and many more, all coming in right here to CNN News Central.

SANCHEZ: Thanks so much for joining us this afternoon. In a matter of just moments, the historic and controversial Senate impeachment trial of homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas is set to begin. The Democratic majority in the Senate is looking to move quickly to acquit or to dismiss the case altogether just one day after House Republicans delivered the two articles of impeachment.

Now Republican lawmakers are accusing Mayorkas of abandoning his duties when it comes to the record migrant surge at the U.S.-Mexico border.

DEAN: They voted to impeach Mayorkas back in February, the first cabinet secretary impeachment in nearly 150 years. But constitutional experts say the evidence and the allegations here fall short of the high crimes and misdemeanors threshold. CNN's Lauren Fox is up on the Hill for us. And, Lauren, do we know yet how this might play out?

LAUREN FOX, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, we've gotten some early indications, Jessica, that this trial is not going to last long. We do expect the Democrats will likely bring a motion to dismiss or a motion to table to wrap things up relatively quickly. There had been some discussion about trying to get a time agreement to allow Republicans to have some amendments to have some discussion around this impeachment trial. But so far, I just talked to Josh Hawley as he was headed to the Senate floor. It doesn't appear that they've been able to clinch any agreement.

Democrats obviously have the majority in the United States Senate. And you've heard from the majority leader, Chuck Schumer, that this, in his mind, does not meet the threshold of taking up the kind of Senate floor time that is so valuable right now on Capitol Hill. He's argued that this is really a policy disagreement between Republicans and Democrats and that this does not raise to the level of high crimes and misdemeanors that you would typically have to see in this kind of trial.

Now, if they move quickly to dismiss this, a couple of things to keep an eye on. What do some of those Republicans who voted with Democrats in the past on impeachment matters, what do they do? People like Mitt Romney, people like Lisa Murkowski. The other big question, what do some of those Democrats who are running for reelection in red states like Montana or Ohio, what do they decide to do today?

I think those are a couple of things to keep an eye on, but it's important to point out that while they are having this discussion on the floor of the Senate, they cannot do any other business. Senators will be sworn in as jurors as we speak. Once that happens, then they will be in this proceeding until they vote not to be anymore. Jessica?

SANCHEZ: And Lauren, notably, this move to bring attention to the crisis at the border. The backdrop of this is that there's still talk on the Hill about the bipartisan border bill that Republicans killed earlier this year.

FOX: Well, that's certainly something the Democrats want to keep in the conversation as they are running for reelection. Someone like Senator Jon Tester in the red state of Montana, he is trying to remind voters that he is not just turning a blind eye to what's happening on the southern border. He's arguing Republicans are trying to make a political discussion about this while Democrats are trying to find some kind of solution.

That is what you've heard many Democrats say, and that is what Democrats, if they vote to dismiss this trial in short order, that's what many of them are going to argue. Bob Casey, a Democrat from Pennsylvania who's running for reelection, he said earlier, if you wanted to help at the southern border, you could have voted for that bipartisan, hard fought compromise that Senator James Langford and Kyrsten Sinema and Chris Murphy put together just a few months ago.

[13:05:01]

SANCHEZ: Yes. Meantime, there's a whole other fight over a border bill that's being added to foreign aid bills on the House side. A lot going on, to say the least, on Capitol Hill. Lauren Fox, thanks so much for the update.

DEAN: And let's discuss this now with two CNN senior political analysts, Gloria Borger and Ron Brownstein. And also with us, constitutional law professor at UNC Chapel Hill, Michael Gerhardt. He's the author of "The Law of Presidential Impeachment." It's great to have all of you. Michael, I want to start first with you, because constitutional experts have said, look, this does not reach high crimes and misdemeanors, which is the threshold in an impeachment. As someone who literally wrote the book on this, how did we end up here?

MICHAEL GERHARDT, CONSTITUTIONAL LAW PROFESSOR, UNC-CHAPEL HILL: Well, we ended up here for reasons that are probably clear to every American. And that is, this is a political stunt that Republicans want to put on a show about how bad President Biden's immigration policy has been. But impeachment was not designed to address policy differences. That's what we have elections for.

And that's also why we have a Congress that's empowered to pass legislation to try and address this. Keep in mind that if Secretary Mayorkas is convicted and there's no chance whatsoever that'll happen, then President Biden would just appoint somebody who would do exactly the same thing. So this is a process that's designed to waste resources and divert attention from the real work in the legislature and to embarrass the President. That's not what impeachment's for. That's why we are hearing that Senator Schumer is going to try and get rid of this as soon as possible.

SANCHEZ: Gloria, as Michael put it, this is largely for show, right?

GLORIA BORGER, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: Yes.

SANCHEZ: And ultimately, nobody believes that Mayorkas is going to get convicted. Yet, it could have some consequences electorally, the way that Lauren described in that certain Democrats in red states, depending on how they proceed, may be at risk based on their decision.

BORGER: Right. Look, as we're just saying, this is just performative today, but there's no doubt that immigration is a key issue in a lot of these battleground states. And that's why you're looking at a senator like Jon Tester in a red state who's up for reelection, and it could be an issue for him. Trump's Super PAC has just put out an ad on immigration.

And so, you know, rather than just looking at it through this little lens of what happens today on the Senate floor, if you widen the aperture, you have to say OK, this is about, do I agree with the way Joe Biden has handled immigration policy, or do I disagree with that? And if you're in a tough race, that might be a bit of a tough vote for you today.

DEAN: And, Ron, we go back to the fact that there was a comprehensive, bipartisan piece of legislation that was put on the floor at the Senate that was killed, in part mostly because the former President Donald Trump wanted to make it a key issue in this race. And yet here we are. This seemed like the thing that House Republicans could do to continue to keep this in the news is Americans are so frustrated with Congress generally. Is this just the next thing that frustrates them?

RON BROWNSTEIN, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: Yes, I think, you know, your phrasing is exactly right. I mean, it is a way to keep in the news the issue that is close to, if not the absolute weakest for Biden in polling. I mean, his ratings on immigration are as low as they are on anything, including inflation. So Republicans are trying to keep it in the news. I think their problem is that this vehicle for doing so is so transparently inappropriate, the idea that disagreeing with the policy is a basis for inflation, that I actually don't think it'll be that tough a vote for Democrats to not convict and to move on.

You know, the question, the real question will be how much of an electoral defense does the demise of that bipartisan bill provide to Democrats, including Biden? Certainly they think their situation is better after Republicans scuttle that deal than before. But I think it is still an open issue, and there is a lot of, I think, still discussion in Democratic ranks about whether Biden is going to need to do something unilaterally to tighten conditions at the border in the direction of the deal, if not going as far as the deal itself could have done by changing legislation.

So that's still up in the air. But I don't think this is a vehicle that most voters will see as legitimate for settling what is fundamentally a policy dispute.

SANCHEZ: So, Michael, shortly before we begin, we were trying to figure out -- before we began the show, we were trying to figure out exactly how this was going to work. There are some rules in place in terms of procedure. Walk us through what we're likely to see early on?

GERHARDT: Well, what's going to happen, I think, is that the presiding officer of the Senate, who will be the Senate pro tem, Senator Murray from Washington, is going to open the proceedings. The first person she will recognize is the majority leader. Now, the majority leader could have made a deal with the minority leader, Mitch McConnell, to provide some kind of show or devote more time to this. There is never going to be deal along those lines.

[13:10:19]

So instead, I think the majority leader from the get go is going to make a proposal or a motion that this matter be dismissed or tabled because there's no legitimate basis for it. This is just all about political theater. It's not about the immigration problem. Legislation would deal with that. Impeachment doesn't deal with that. So as soon as Senator Schumer does that, then there may be an attempt by the other side to raise what's called a point of order to try and slow it down. They might raise some procedural objections.

Keep in mind, any objections would then be put to the entire Senate, which would resolve them by majority vote, meaning the Democrats would vote against any such motions or points of order. And therefore the ball goes back in the Senate majority leader's court, so to speak. Senator Schumer to propose again a motion to dismiss that will come to a vote probably today, probably pretty soon. And I think we already know the outcome. The majority of the Senate is going to get rid of this.

DEAN: All right. So we are watching as this impeachment trial gets underway on the floor of the U.S. Senate. Gloria Borger, Ron Brownstein, Professor Michael Gerhardt, stay with us as we continue to monitor this. And we're going to get back into this trial as soon as things get started. Right now, I think they're doing just a roll call to make sure everyone's in their seats as they're supposed to. Sometimes it's hard to get all 100 senators seated where they're supposed to be on time.

SANCHEZ: We're also tracking some breaking news. Another big story we're following. Right now, lawmakers in Arizona are pushing to repeal the state's near total abortion ban just one week after the state Supreme Court there revived a law from the 1800s that bans the procedure in all cases except to save the mother's life.

DEAN: It is a ruling that has sparked outrage and could have far reaching consequences for the election in November. CNN's Natasha Chen is live in Phoenix with the latest developments. And Natasha, were just looking at some video there. Walk us through the process that House lawmakers now face today in getting this bill to the floor.

NATASHA CHEN, CNN U.S. NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, they just started the session, gave in about five minutes ago. This is going to require the House to bypass some procedural laws where they typically have to hear a bill and Committee before it goes to the full floor. But they could vote to bypass that and look at the repeal on the floor today.

Now, by looking at whether they bypass that procedure, you can kind of get a sense of whether there's enough interest and urgency to actually repeal this law that dates back to the 1860s. And as a reminder, this is a law that makes abortion nearly illegal, except in the case of saving the life of the mother. It comes with a two to five year prison sentence for providers who violate this law.

We did hear from a number of right to life people who filed into the house building today. They talked to us about some of the nuances here. They not all of them agreed on this prison time. And they said this conversation should keep happening between parties who disagree. Here they are.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PENNYLAINE BUGLEWICZ, ATTENDED "RIGHT TO LIFE" RALLY: I think that it's important that we talk about these things because I think when people who disagree stop talking, really bad things happen throughout history.

DENISE WELLS, PHOENIX RESIDENT: I'm a Catholic and I believe in life. And I would like to say in my consciousness, I think rape would be a very difficult decision, but I believe in life.

CHEN: So you believe that should not be an exception?

WELLS: I don't know about a law for that. I just -- I'm so confused about that. And it's probably not a good thing, but I pray on it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CHEN: She's referring to the fact that there is no exception in this 1860s law for rape or incest. And so you can have about 100 people gathered outside this building today, all saying they are pro-life, yet have very different, nuanced responses for what they actually would like to see. So we'll see what happens there on the House floor. Jessica and Boris?

DEAN: And Natasha, at the same time, Arizona Republicans are weighing their options to defeat a potential abortion rights ballot measure that could be on the ballot in November, which would enshrine the right to an abortion in Arizona. What more are you learning about that.

CHEN: Right. So the group trying to gather signatures for that say that they do have enough signatures far ahead of the July deadline for that ballot, for that initiative to make it on the November ballot. Of course, those signatures have to be verified. If it makes it to the November ballot, we are talking about that issue enshrining abortion rights in the states constitution alongside Arizonans voting for president, voting for a Senate seat. So this definitely could affect a lot of their local and state and federal elections here.

[13:15:15]

SANCHEZ: Natasha Chen from Phoenix, thank you so much.

We want to get back to the floor of the Senate, where we understand that senators were taking roll call trying to determine if they have a quorum to move forward with the potential impeachment trial of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas. Right now, the senator from Washington, Patty Murray, was going through that list of senators. Obviously, a tense moment on the Senate floor. There's uncertainty over how this is going to progress, and there could be some fireworks. Nevertheless, I think that the conclusion leads to the same result, which is that Mayorkas likely will not be convicted.

DEAN: Yes, it's one of those instances where there's many ways to get to your final destination, but we know likely what the final destination is, which is what this will be dismissed. However, we're going to watch and see how we get there and how it unfolds, and we're going to have some company doing that. Gloria Borger, Ron Brownstein and Michael Gerhardt, are all here with us.

And, Gloria, you're seated right here to my left watching this unfold. And were talking before the show, and were saying, you said, use the word performative.

BORGER: Yes.

DEAN: As we're watching this unfold out here, you know, on this -- on the floor. It is striking that something that even 10, 15 years ago, impeachment was such a heavy, somber thing that now here we are.

BORGER: Well, it's defining it downward, as I say. And I think that, you know, this is performative. But there are Republicans, including Republicans like Mitt Romney. Mitch McConnell saying, look, we ought to have a little debate on this before we table it. And Mitt Romney effectively said, look, I'll be happy to get rid of this and dismiss it, but we have to give it a little bit of a hearing rather than just saying no because the House voted for it.

Now, if you'll recall, the House didn't have an easy time passing this. It tried once and it failed, and then it tried again and it passed narrowly. So, you know, it wasn't exactly popular in the House either. So I think they're going to have to, Chuck Schumer's going to have to find a way to kind of let some people speak their piece and then dispose of it as quickly as he can.

SANCHEZ: Ron, based on the way that Gloria outlined the effort to get their two sense in into this potential debate, what do you think the incentive would be for Chuck Schumer to let Republicans go ahead and speak and essentially say their piece about the secretary?

BROWNSTEIN: Yes, I think to a point, obviously, you know, the capacity for really any senator, but certainly an entire caucus of senators, to gum up the works in the Senate is enormous, not only on this issue, you know, the kind of response could spill over beyond it. So it's kind of hard to see simply ignore or silence the minority party in the Senate.

And I suspect he will have to make some accommodation while keeping in mind his overall desire to move past this very quickly. And, you know, Gloria brought up the House vote, which is a reminder. I mean, Democrats did not feel much constraint or hesitation about voting against this in the House. And I don't think they will feel much more inhibition about opposing it in the Senate. Immigration, as we said, is an issue where Republicans now have a significant advantage.

I mean, a lot of the Trump policies that were very controversial when he was president have actually been gaining support in polls in a kind of hydraulic fashion as people have been disillusioned with Biden's approach. But this, I think, is not something that most voters are going to see as a legitimate use of impeachment. It is really more a reflection of what you were talking about before, about how in Washington, any tool that can be used against the other party now has to be used legislatively. And this is just kind of the latest example and escalation of that.

SANCHEZ: Ron, Gloria, Michael, please stand by. We're going to continue to watch the Senate floor with the Senate impeachment trial of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas could begin at any moment soon. We're expecting that Senator Murray of Washington will administer the oath to all senators in the chamber. We're standing by for that.

And also ahead, seven jurors have been seated in the state of New York versus Donald Trump. What we know about those jurors.

DEAN: And as the world waits to see how Israel will respond to the massive, weekend attack from Iran here, why Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's predecessor is warning him against using the military to retaliate.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[13:24:19] SANCHEZ: We are closely watching the proceedings on the floor of the U.S. Senate where the Mayorkas impeachment trial is set to begin at any moment. Again, a reminder, House Republicans impeached the sitting secretary of the Department of Homeland Security and now the Senate is potentially going to take that up for a trial.

However, there are steps in place that could gum that up. We are closely watching as the process unfolds there. We'll bring you the latest developments as we get them.

In the meantime, jury selection and former President Donald Trump's Manhattan hush money trial is set to resume tomorrow. And by all accounts, things are moving fairly swiftly. More than half of the jury was seated on Tuesday. Seven jurors were selected, just five more needed. But then, of course, remember, six alternate jurors will need to be picked as well.

[13:25:08]

And if they keep this pace, the judge says that opening arguments could begin on Monday. Not everybody is happy about the selection process, though. The former president jumped on social media to complain, arguing that 10 peremptory strikes per side to disqualify potential jurors each side doesn't like isn't enough.

Let's discuss this with CNN senior legal analyst and former federal prosecutor Elie Honig. Elie, great to see you, as always. Now, both prosecutors and Trump's defense team have four peremptory juror strikes remaining. They've already used six of them. What's the strategy now heading into tomorrow? And is there a way to get more strikes?

ELIE HONIG, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: So, Boris, first of all, yes. Let's clear up some confusion, maybe caused by the former president's social media post. There is an unlimited number of what we call for cause strikes, meaning somebody who is just so biased that they can't possibly serve as an impartial juror. The judge can remove as many of those people as necessary. There's no limit on that.

But then you get into what you're calling correctly, peremptory strikes, where each side in the New York state system gets 10. And that's where you can use these strikes strategically. So first of all, I think both sides are holding onto those four remaining strikes and they're looking to eliminate worst case scenarios. They're looking to eliminate outliers. As to whether you can get more peremptory challenges. You can ask as a lawyer, but it's very unlikely a judge is going to give you more. So I think they understand they have four left each.

SANCHEZ: Yes. Yesterday I was saying preemptive strikes. I wasn't reading it correctly. It's peremptory. Learn something new every day. Elie, who are some of the common jurors --

HONIG: Common mistake.

SANCHEZ: Yes. Who are some of the jurors that have been picked so far that you find interesting and why?

HONIG: So there are two lawyers who are on this jury, which really goes against this sort of traditional playbook. Conventional wisdom, especially among prosecutors, is that you don't want a lawyer on the jury because lawyers may think they know the law better than the judge. They may take over the jury. They may feel like they can stand on their own if they know something more than the D.A. or the defense lawyers do know. So that's really sort of unusual to have a lawyer on the jury.

Now, this one that you've just pulled up, juror number three says that he reads the Wall Street Journal. That jumps out at me because, on the one hand, the Wall Street Journal has been quite critical of this prosecution. They've argued that it's unnecessary and an overreach.

On the other hand, the journal has been quite critical of Donald Trump as a politician and a candidate, and in some instances, first, personal conduct. So, as with many of these jurors, something to like, something to dislike for each side.

SANCHEZ: And how about juror number four? He's got kind of an interesting background.

HONIG: So I'm going to play a little armchair quarterback here. This is the one that stands out to me, that I'm surprised the D.A. did not strike, because, as the board says there, this juror did say that he finds Donald Trump fascinating and mysterious. But it's also important to understand the context around that, because he preceded that by saying, well, Donald Trump has this way of walking into a room and setting people off.

So that's a sort of ambivalent phrasing of this person's perspective. But that would worry me as the D.A., as the prosecution here. I don't want someone who's enamored with or fascinated with Donald Trump in any way.

SANCHEZ: Fascinating and mysterious. That can mean a lot of things to a lot of different people. I'm also curious, Elie, how would you be feeling so far about the seven jurors if you were a lawyer on either side of the case? You mentioned juror for potentially being a concern for the D.A. What about the others?

HONIG: Yes, I think overall, Boris, here for either side, I would be satisfied with what we have. I wouldn't be rejoicing. I wouldn't be popping the cork on the champagne. It's way too early for that. But overall, the process so far has been smooth and fair. And the jurors who've been seated, none of them jump out to me as, oh, my gosh, that person's going to be an enormous problem for one side or the other. And really, not to be sort of overly rosy about it, but this is how our system is supposed to work. And I think thus far, based on what we know and can see, it's yielding a fair result.

SANCHEZ: Yes. Elie Honig, appreciate the perspective, as always. We want to get you straight to the floor of the U.S. Senate. Here's Senator Patty Murray of Washington in the impeachment trial of the secretary of the Department of Homeland Security. Let's listen. SEN. PATTY MURRAY (D-WA): Majority leader is recognized.

SEN. CHUCK SCHUMER (D-NY): At this time, pursuant to rule three of the Senate rules on impeachment in the United States Constitution. The president pro tem emeritus, the senator from Iowa, will now administer the oath to the president pro tem, Patty Murray.

[13:30:02]

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Do you solemnly swear that in all things appertaining to the trial of impeachment of --