Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Israel Struck Inside Iran Overnight; Capitol Chaos; Full Jury Panel Selected For Trump's Criminal Trial. Aired 3:30-4p ET

Aired April 19, 2024 - 15:30   ET

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

[15:30:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN HOST: Today we're hearing a global call for restraint after Israel reportedly followed through on its vow to retaliate against Iran overnight. Explosions were reported at a major Iranian air base just south of Tehran. These satellite images, obtained exclusively by CNN show no extensive damage at the site. An American official says the US wasn't involved in the attack and the White House says that de-escalation is now the focus so that a broader war in the region could be avoided.

Let's get some perspective on this latest back and forth between the adversaries. We're joined now by retired Navy officer Kirk Lippold. He's the former commander for the USS Cole. Sir, thank you so much for being with us.

Your reaction to this apparent Israeli strike? No noticeable major damage at this site. Did Israel, would you say, achieve its objective?

KIRK LIPPOLD, FORMER USS COLE COMMANDER: Good afternoon, Boris. Yes. I would say they did, simply because by launching this attack, they demonstrated to Iran and the world that they had the capability to actually strike Iranian territory, just as Iran tried to strike Israel in the attacks last week.

[15:35:07]

So clearly what Israel did in launching this attack is, number one, they learned from it. That's the most important thing. What defenses did they experience? Where were they located? How were they able to take out the drones that were apparently launched into the country itself and determine what kind of reaction was there by the Iranians, what command and control may have happened, what kind of early warning radars went up and were they able to detect where they were located, how they worked and how they detected it.

So this was very much a learning event for the Israelis that would help them in the future should additional strikes be required, depending on what Iran does.

SANCHEZ: To the question of what happens next, sources in the region have told CNN that they don't expect Tehran is going to answer this with another retaliatory strike. But I am curious about your perspective on how this changes the brewing conflict between Israel and Iran, because for years they've gone after each other, but typically through proxies. Now this is a direct attack, and it seems that it's shaping a precedent for the future.

LIPPOLD: Boris, that's a great point. Because what has happened is the veneer of a conflict between Israel and Iran has now been peeled away. And the blunt reality is, while proxies were used in the past, as many people have noted, now what you're seeing is direct conflict and essentially a state of war now exists, albeit undeclared, between Israel and Iran. And what it may end up signifying in the long run is Israel may make the policy decision that we don't care anymore if it's a proxy.

If these proxies, be it Hezbollah, Hamas, Palestinian Islamic jihad, attack Israel in any form or fashion, Israel now is going to green light attacks directly into Iran to hold them accountable, whether it is the facilities that have allowed these groups to be man trained and equipped, or whether it is after the government itself.

SANCHEZ: What do you think this means for US policy in the region?

LIPPOLD: I think one of the key points that US policy now has to consider is the larger context strategically that we're looking at. Iran has continued to move forward with their nuclear weapons program despite the veneer that we might have for the joint comprehensive plan of action or the Iran nuclear agreement. At the end of the day, the bottom line for the United States and the world is Iran cannot be allowed to acquire nuclear weapons.

The last thing we want to have is a nuclear arms race in the Middle East. Plus, Iran has shown that they still desire to destroy Israel. If they get a nuclear weapon that puts Israel in the awkward position where they now have an enemy sworn to their destruction, that has a unique capability that they've already demonstrated, they really don't care what the rest of the world thinks. They're going to continue to go after Israel and the United States. And consequently, you may in fact be igniting a larger war should nuclear weapons allowed to come to fruition with the Iranians.

SANCHEZ: Commander Kirk Lippold, we have to leave the conversation there. Appreciate your perspective.

LIPPOLD: Thank you, Boris.

SANCHEZ: Of course. So opening statements could begin Monday in the historic hush money case of former President Trump. What happens this afternoon after a full jury and alternates were selected? Stay with CNN News Central.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[15:42:17]

JESSICA DEAN, CNN HOST: Keeping a close eye on a Manhattan courtroom, court back in session for day four of former President Donald Trump's criminal hush money trial, a so called Sandoval hearing now underway. That is a routine hearing that will address Trump's criminal history and then assess how much prosecutors can ask him about it if he decides to testify.

Jury selection ended before the lunch break, that means a panel of twelve jurors and six alternates have been seated by Friday afternoon. Opening statements could begin Monday. At the same time, a hearing is also underway now on Donald Trump's request for a change of venue in the trial. We'll continue to monitor that as well. Boris?

SANCHEZ: We're also keeping track of drama on Capitol Hill. Speaker Mike Johnson is fighting to keep his speaker's gavel. The calls for his removal continue to grow louder, though. Today, Republican Congressman Paul Gosar joined his colleagues, Marjorie Taylor Greene and Thomas Massie, in the effort to boot Johnson from his job. They're fuming over Johnson's support for the foreign aid package that includes billions of dollars for Ukraine.

Greene has said that a "civil war has basically broken out in the House." Now, this morning, the House voted to advance the bill, setting up a final vote for tomorrow. And in a move that infuriated those Republicans, more Democrats supported the procedural measure than members of their own party.

So far, no steps have been taken to force a vote on a resolution to oust the speaker. And right now, the House is adjourned so at least for today, his job is safe. The earliest that could happen is tomorrow.

Let's discuss with Republican Congressman Tim Burchett of Tennessee. He serves on the Foreign Affairs Committee. Congressman, thank you so much for being with us.

Speaker Johnson says that this series of bills is a better outcome than having to, in his words, eat that previously passed Senate for an aid package. Just given the way that you voted on the rule today, I imagine that you disagree.

REP. TIM BURCHETT (R-TN): Yes, I do. I felt like we've given Ukraine enough money. As you know, I haven't voted for any of their money, Boris, and thank you again for having me on.

I don't like the way that the rule was cobbled together, and we should have had individuals votes for individual bills such as Israel funding, Ukraine funding and Taiwan funding. You know, this is -- there's all this rush to get this done. I'm not sure what the Indo Pacific money, Taiwan, and that's going against China. I wasn't sure the urgency there.

And again, you know, with the money that went to Ukraine, there was money in there for legal fees. There's basically a few million going to the World Bank. I wasn't sure what that was about. You know, they blocked my amendment that would have prevented the President from forgiving the loans because, you know, that was the beauty of this one, that was that it it was about.

[15:45:06]

We were going to give them the money, and it was as a loan. And yet now, the unit party has blocked my amendment to do just that it would be a loan.

So, you know, I've got a lot of problems with a lot of it. It's hard to cover it all right here, but it's a pretty in depth bill. It's a whole lot of spending. We add a trillion dollars to our debt every hundred days. You know, I'm a fiscal hawk on this type of thing and we're at $35 trillion now, and every hundred days another trillion. I'd just like to see some accountability. And we're borrowing money to give to other countries, I just don't see the sense in that.

SANCHEZ: I do want to get into those numbers with you in a moment, but there's some urgency behind the effort to oust Speaker Johnson from his job. I'm wondering if you support that effort where you stand in that question.

BURCHETT: No. As you know, the previous ouster I did support. I thought we had grounds for that and I thought it was justified. But I also knew 100 percent that we would put a Republican back in in that seat. I don't have those type of numbers on this one.

As a matter of fact, as you know, we have several members that, some out of New York, and they're in districts where Biden won by 15, I think one maybe even 16 points, so I'm pretty sure that we could lose a couple of votes there. And, of course, we're down to one person. We have a day that there's people that are out, that are sick.

Life happens as you know, weddings, things like that, deaths and families, illnesses, and we're out. And then we will actually hand the gavel over to Hakeem Jeffries. And when we do that, I feel like this administration has gone so far hard to the left that is where their base is. Every other demographic, they're -- you've seen the polling numbers, they're actually diminishing. And I'm afraid that they will try to appease their hard left, and they will go through our constitution like grant through Richmond.

SANCHEZ: So you would be supportive of ousting Speaker Johnson? It's just that the math doesn't add up and you're concerned that Hakeem Jeffries would wind up becoming speaker?

BURCHETT: No, I would not be at this point supportive of that. He's, you know, he -- when we elected Mike Johnson, you know, he was against FISA, he was against unauthorized searches of Americans using the disguise of an investigation into foreigners. He was against funding Ukraine. He was for Israel. But all those except Israel, he seems to have changed his position on. So -- but I still, I don't know that's a, that's a cause for ouster.

I think that we're going to have to -- we need to just -- we need to go out with him through the rest of this year, end of election cycle, and let's just see what happens.

SANCHEZ: I promised you a question on the Ukraine funding, and you cited some of your concerns there. But I wanted to sort of paint an overarching picture of what this money looks like, because I've heard some folks say that they're opposed to just writing a blank check to Ukraine, and that's not exactly what's happening.

There's $20 billion for the US to replenish its own stockpile of weapons. There's 11 billion that would help American operations in the region, some 14 billion that would buy weapons for Ukraine, most of which are made here in the US so the money would be spent here. And then that loan that you mentioned is roughly $10 billion.

You were obviously upset that there's a provision in there that you wanted to make it so that the President wouldn't be able to just make that -- cancel the debt, essentially. But there is $26 million that goes to oversight, to accounting for all the money that's being spent in Ukraine, which is something that folks that have opposed this aid before might want to see.

Is that not worth it, in your eyes, to keep Vladimir Putin in check without actually putting American troops at risk?

BURCHETT: We don't have any real clear path to victory. And of that money that you mentioned, the $23 million, I believe that's going to go -- $23 billion, excuse me, that's going to go to our war profiteers, you know, what Eisenhower called the military industrial complex is that, you know? And it's really a replenishing. I don't know about a replenishing. It's just going to give them more money to operate on.

So I don't buy all that. And, you know, we've been -- why isn't that all 60 billion of it alone, why are we just giving this money away? And always remember, though, Boris, I know you're doing your job but we are borrowing every cent of this money to give to Ukraine, every cent. So your great grandchildren, because I don't think your grandchildren could ever pay it back. Maybe your great grandchildren, when this bill comes due, are going to be paying for this.

[15:50:02]

And, yes, I think, Boris, I think Russia is basically run by a thug, and that's all there is to it. You and I know that, he's a murdering thug. But again, their GDP is somewhere between Canada and France, and I don't see them as the world threat that everybody tries to make him out to be. And also I wonder when China rolls on Taiwan, which we think they will under this week, presidents that we have in this country, are we -- are all these people that are rattling the sabers now, are they going to be out saying, let's go to war with China? I mean, what's going to be the difference?

BURCHETT: So I hope you -- we have this conversation again when they do that, because I would like to analyze what they're saying then as well.

SANCHEZ: Yes. You raised some really significant points, congressman, I think. We do have to go but I think generally some of the concern is that this money, even though it is borrowing against our future and adding to the debt, as you point out, actually saves money in the long term. And what could be a much broader conflict if Putin decides to get more aggressive and potentially encroach into a NATO country.

Congressman Tim Burchett, always appreciate having you on. Thanks for joining us.

BURCHETT: Thank you, Boris. It's always a pleasure, brother.

SANCHEZ: Of course. Take care, sir. Stay with CNN, we'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: We are following breaking news as we have been all afternoon out of Donald Trump's first criminal trial.

DEAN: CNN anchor and chief legal analyst Laura Coates is outside the New York courthouse where she's been all day. Laura, what's happening now as we head into the late afternoon?

[15:55:04]

LAURA COATES, CNN CHIEF LEGAL ANALYST: So a Sandoval hearing is essentially an opportunity to give a defense witness or the defendant himself the opportunity to know what might be coming if he were to take the stand. Now, every judge is going to weigh two different things. One is called probative evidence against prejudicial evidence. Probative meaning is it informative for the jury to make a decision. You weigh that against prejudicial decisions, essentially is it going to make me think that this person's probably prior bad conduct means that if they did it, then they did it now.

The judge wants to know in advance what will be presented before this jury. Now they're hashing it out right now for a number of things. The prosecution wants to bring up things like the prior civil fraud trial and conviction. They want to bring up the E. Jean Carroll defamation and sexual abuse case. They want to bring up any other instances of fraud as well. Why, to show some pattern or practice of behavior.

Not to show they committed this crime, but that there's informative for the jury and the probative value outweighs. But what's happening in the courtroom right now is the judge is saying, look, I'm not going to have a trial within a trial. They're meanwhile saying, if you want to bring up any of those civil things, just know the jury might be confused between a preponderance of evidence besides a beyond a reasonable doubt standard.

And interestingly enough, they brought up Michael Cohen and said, all right, if Trump's prior bad acts are fair game, why not Michael Cohen's? The judge shut that down and said, I'm not going to compare oranges to apples. It's well underway. It's getting heated.

DEAN: All right. Laura Coates for us in New York, thanks so much. And we'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: A historic day that we've been keeping track of. This afternoon, a full jury and alternates were empaneled in the historic case that former President Donald Trump is facing. He becomes the first former president to ever face a criminal trial. And right now, a Sandoval hearing is underway. It's a complex legal process, but ultimately, we are anticipating that opening arguments are set potentially for Monday.

DEAN: All right. A big day on Monday, there's also that appeals court about a change of venue hearing going on right now. We're keeping an eye on it. We'll be back with you on Monday or you guys will. Thanks for having me.

SANCHEZ: Yes, it was great to have you.

DEAN: Yes. "The Lead with Jake Tapper" starts right now.