Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Online Rhetoric Against Women Surging Following Election; Trump Choosing Loyalists to Fill Posts; Judge Blocks Louisiana Ten Commandments Law; Decision on Trump Hush Money Conviction Delayed. Aired 11-11:30a ET

Aired November 12, 2024 - 11:00   ET

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

[11:00:00]

JIM ACOSTA, CNN HOST: Extend this courtesy to him when Trump lost the presidency to Joe Biden. I was there -- there in 2017 when President Obama, Mrs. Obama welcomed the Trumps to the White House.

And it is one of those customs and traditions that I think reassures Americans that, yes, we do have a peaceful transfer of power and you can have these political battles, but people can be courteous to one another. It's been a little bit of a rocky ride on that front in recent years, but hopefully we're going to see some of that being put back together tomorrow.

PAMELA BROWN, CNN HOST: Yes, it is clear that President Biden is set on showing the American people that peaceful transitions of power can happen, and this is another example of that tomorrow, even though he wasn't afforded, as you noted, the same courtesy in 2020.

ACOSTA: Yes.

BROWN: All right Jim, thanks so much. I will take it from here.

ACOSTA: We will be watching. You got it.

BROWN: And good morning to you. You are live in the CNN NEWSROOM. I'm Pamela Brown in Washington.

And we begin this hour with breaking news. A New York judge has delayed the deadlines in Donald Trump's criminal hush money trial because of his election win.

I want to bring in CNN's Paula Reid and Kara Scannell.

Paula, the ripple effect continues. Walk us through this.

PAULA REID, CNN CHIEF LEGAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: It really does. Today, we were expecting Judge Juan Merchan, the judge who oversaw Trump's hush money trial, to decide if Trump's conviction 34 counts of falsifying business records should be tossed because of the Supreme Court's decision immunity a few months ago, where they ruled that presidents cannot be prosecuted for official acts and also that official acts cannot be used as evidence. Because Trump's lawyers have argued that some of the evidence that was introduced in the New York trial could constitute an official act, for example, conversations that he had with Hope Hicks. But prosecutors have said, well, that was just a little tiny portion of the evidence that was introduced. He was convicted on evidence that was -- quote -- "overwhelming," this should not be tossed.

But we broke the story last week that Trump's lawyers are actually pivoting away from this to new arguments, actually trying to argue that because Trump is president-elect that if the conviction is not tossed based on the immunity ruling that he shouldn't be sentenced.

They're going to argue that, as president-elect, he has constitutional protections, meaning he cannot be sentenced. So what happened here is even though we were expecting this decision today, both sides have agreed to take another week to give the Trump lawyers time to make these new arguments and give prosecutors time to respond.

So, right now, the judge has a couple questions that are likely going to be on his desk. First, does this conviction get tossed because of SCOTUS immunity? Or do you have to cancel the sentencing because Trump is now president-elect?

There's also an appeal hanging out there still. So that's also another opportunity to delay the sentencing. But, at this point, Pamela, they don't want to delay. They want the sentence and canceled or, the best- case scenario, even though it's a long shot, toss the conviction.

BROWN: Yes, I mean, these are some novel questions they're having to look at here.

Kara, what are your sources saying?

KARA SCANNELL, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yes, Pam, I mean, this is going to be the big decision here. What does the DA's office come back with next week, and what do they propose moving forward what should happen with this case?

I mean, on the one hand, they could move to have the judge still issue his ruling on immunity, saying that that could still happen before Trump goes into office, or they could decide that they want the conviction to stand as it is unchallenged in this case so far and not have the judge issue a ruling.

And either way, the question will be, does Donald Trump ultimately get sentenced in this case before he moves into office? And with the calendar as it is, that seems unlikely. So it seems that if he is ever sentenced in this case, if it does move forward, not being overturned, that would not happen until he's out of office, but a lot for the DA's office to consider.

They note in this letter that this is unprecedented, that there are issues that they need to weigh between both the jury's verdict, which is something that is very sacred in legal circles, and also Trump's new status as the president-elect. And that is certainly one of the biggest things that was overshadowing

this case as the sentencing became delayed twice now, potentially a third time, this question of what would the impact of Trump -- of a potential Trump win on the election be on this case.

And it seems that as many of the lawyers have suspected, that it could mean that this case goes away like what is expected with so many of these other criminal cases, Pam.

BROWN: All right, Kara Scannell, Paula Reid, thank you so much.

And we have some more breaking news for you, including this from the U.S. Supreme Court this morning. Justices have rejected legal attempts by Mark Meadows, of course, Donald Trump's former chief of staff, to move his election subversion case from Georgia to a federal court.

Meadows had hoped to raise immunity claims in federal courts, so the Supreme Court decision effectively kills that attempt. Meadows was indicted last year on charges tied to phone calls and meetings where Trump pressured Georgia officials to change the outcome of the 2020 election in that state.

And we just learned that president-elect Donald Trump will meet with GOP leaders tomorrow. House Speaker Mike Johnson made the announcement just moments ago. Trump will be in Washington to meet with President Joe Biden. So tomorrow is going to be a very busy day on this show.

[11:05:02]

Just in, also, Louisiana's controversial Ten Commandments law has been temporarily blocked by a federal judge, who called the law unconstitutional. The law would make all Louisiana public classrooms display the Commandments by January 1.

Let's bring in CNN's Isabel Rosales, who is following the story.

So what is the judge saying here?

ISABEL ROSALES, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Right, Pamela. Hello.

This was passed by the state's GOP-dominated legislature and signed into law on Juneteenth, and it would have required the Ten Commandments to be displayed on all public classrooms, as you mentioned, by January 1.

But now this federal judge has put out a ruling temporarily blocking this law by granting a preliminary injunction, and he has ruled that the law is -- quote -- "unconstitutional" on its face and that opponents of the law are likely to win their case, plaintiffs are likely to win their case because it violates the First Amendment.

Now, this marks a victory for opponents, who have argued it is unconstitutional to display the Ten Commandments in classrooms because it is promoting one religion, which is against the Establishment Clause of the Constitution that says Congress can make no law respecting an establishment of religion. Now, supporters have argued that displaying the Ten Commandments goes beyond religion, that the document is historical, it has historical and educational value. The author of the bill also mentioning that it is important to return to a moral code, to bring a moral code back to the classrooms.

Now, the language of the law it would have required a version of the Ten Commandments to be displayed in all public classrooms in large, easily readable font. And we heard the governor, Jeff Landry, calling it one of his favorites out of the many education bills that he signed into law.

And we have seen similar pieces of legislation attempts undergoing in states like Texas, Oklahoma and Utah, but none of these have actually succeeded in becoming a law because of legal challenges.

And I spoke with the ACLU, Pam, of Louisiana, one of the four civil liberties groups that sued in this case, and the executive director calling this a joyous moment, saying that they are elated by this response from the federal judge.

BROWN: So what are the next steps here?

ROSALES: Right.

Well, Alanah Odoms, that executive director, says that they don't think this is the end of the line. They are anticipating that they could see an appeal here, that they could see this move to the Fifth Circuit or even the Supreme Court, but also telling me that they are ready for any response.

BROWN: All right, Isabel Rosales, thank you for bringing us the latest on that.

And any minute now, President Biden will meet with Israel's president at the White House. It is happening on a crucial day, the deadline for the Israeli government to show that it has improved humanitarian conditions in Gaza. We will bring you those remarks live when they happen.

You are live in the scene in the CNN NEWSROOM.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[11:12:36]

BROWN: President-elect Trump is sticking with his loyalists as he rounds out his future administration.

Florida Congressman and former Green Beret Mike Waltz is expected to be named national security adviser. Senator Marco Rubio is set to be tapped as secretary of state. South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem is expected to be asked to run Homeland Security. And former New York Congressman Lee Zeldin says he has accepted the role of EPA administrator. Machalagh Carr joins us now. She was the chief of staff to former

House Speaker Kevin McCarthy and can give us some unique insight into what to expect.

I know, Machalagh, you know a lot of these people as well. I want to start by asking you about the expected choice of Marco Rubio as secretary of state. This is obviously a far cry from the days, as we remember, of little Marco.

But when you get down to the nuts and bolts of this job, what does this pick signal to you?

MACHALAGH CARR, FORMER CHIEF OF STAFF OF KEVIN MCCARTHY: Senator Rubio has a really excellent track record of understanding geopolitical forces, understanding national security and understanding kind of our -- America's leadership in this nation.

He's also been very, very strong identifying and speaking to the threat that China poses. He was, of course, the initial sponsor or co- sponsor of the TikTok bill that called for divestment from China of the ByteDance-owned TikTok app that really was a national security threat to America.

And so I think having Senator Rubio there really is a great sign of strength for America.

BROWN: Let's talk about Congressman Mike Waltz. He is picked as national security adviser. Does that signal Trump will keep his hard line with European allies paying more for NATO and the U.S. taking a less active role in European defense? What do you think?

CARR: You know, he's a great choice, Green Beret, of course. We're fans of Senator Rubio, but the rest of these nominees all have one thing in common. They have House backgrounds. And as an Article 1 junkie myself, I think that's really fun to see.

Congressman Waltz has a tremendous track record. And one thing that I think is important to look at is he wants America to maintain its strength when we're talking about geopolitical forces. And he doesn't want there to be blank checks going out.

When we're looking at a country that has significant problems with our economic structure right now, significant problems with our economy and our immigration, to be just writing blank checks is something that I think we will see this new administration put a stop to and have there be true accountability for any funds that are going outside of the borders.

[11:15:11]

BROWN: All right, I want to talk about Kristi Noem, because she is expected to be the head of Homeland Security. This is a role that will have tremendous scrutiny, I imagine, in a second Trump term, given his vow on mass deportation.

Of course, she's going to be overseeing DHS. She will be the face of it, but you have Trump loyalist and immigration hard-liners Stephen Miller and Tom Homan who are going to be overseeing the immigration and deportations. What do you think about that?

CARR: She's proven to be a really hard worker. She's another person who has deep roots in the House. She was on the Ways and Means Committee before she ran for governor.

And she's proven herself to be a really strong leader and someone who's, frankly, willing to take the fight. And she also does the work. When you see this position, this is someone who likely will be called up before Congress to answer questions, and she will make sure that she has done the work to be able to answer those questions.

I think that she also has been someone who's willing to prove that she's willing to take the tough positions and I think someone who's in charge of protecting homeland, protecting the border. She will work very well with Homan. And I think it's a really strong pick. I'm happy to see her in that role and see another strong woman at his side.

BROWN: All right, so let's talk about the fight going on for the Senate majority leader.

If you believe ardent Trump supporters online, it should be Senator Rick Scott, who might otherwise be seen as an underdog against John Thune, who is minority whip, and John Cornyn of Texas. I think a lot of us still think he is the underdog. How is it being seen inside the party? Bring us in.

CARR: I'm not sure that anyone really likes being told who to vote for or how to vote, but I think that maxim really definitely applies to senators in a special way.

The Senate is a different beast, and there is a reason that the Senate majority vote happens as a secret ballot in a closed room behind doors. And they're not going to have to be in a position where they're answering for who they vote for. They're going to vote for the person that they think is best positioned to lead the party, lead the majority, and really take advantage of everything that we have to get that.

You remember, we only have about 18 months before it's another election season,and so really putting someone there who the senators trust and they think they can build the coalition to really keep everybody rowing in the right direction. And I think that that will happen.

And I don't know that outside influences will really have a huge impact on that.

BROWN: All right, Machalagh Carr, thank you for sharing your perspective. And stick around, because you're going to be part of another discussion the show about women and what's happening after the election, as some women fear what a second Trump presidency could mean for their rights.

There's this new study out. Have you heard about this? This study revealing an uptick in disturbing rhetoric on sites like Reddit and X, one of them, "Your body, my choice."

Don't miss this important conversation ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[11:22:55]

BROWN: A new and disturbing analysis shows attacks against women have surged on social media in the days following Donald Trump's election win.

Hateful and sexist phrases like "Your body, my choice" and "Get back to the kitchen" are getting millions of clicks online. White nationalist and Holocaust denier Nick Fuentes posted "Your body, my choice forever" on election night. It's been viewed more than 90 million times.

So does this abuse amount to right-wingers just indulging in online trolling? Or is it a glimpse into a deeper sexism in this country?

Let's discuss with my panel, social entrepreneur and women's lifestyle advocate Nadya Okamoto, CNN political commentator Margaret Hoover, and welcoming back Machalagh Carr, GOP strategist.

Ladies, it's great to have you on. I'm really looking forward to hearing your thoughts on this.

Nadya, I want to start with you. This phrase "Your body, my choice" is rewording and degrading a rallying cry used by women in support of reproductive rights. Have you or your online community experienced any of these attacks since the election?

NADYA OKAMOTO, SOCIAL ENTREPRENEUR: I mean, I think that it has not just been since the election. I think it's been over the last, let's say, eight years since we first saw Donald Trump really come onto the national political scene.

And I think that it's because some of this rhetoric has not only been normalized. It's also been celebrated. And so I think that it's something that I have experienced as a content creator who talks a lot about women's health and reproductive freedoms. I have about six million followers across socials.

And so it's been in my comments. And I think that there -- since the election is definitely, I think, an affirmation of confidence from some of those commenters as well.

BROWN: So, Margaret, what is your take on this? Why do you think these far right trolls and extremists now feel more and bold into hurl these sexist attacks?

MARGARET HOOVER, CNN POLITICAL CONTRIBUTOR: Look, certainly there has been, Pam, a degrading of the rhetoric and the respectfulness with which we engage with one another. And tone does come from the top. So we do see that from the crassness and the rude language and rhetoric from our politicians, particularly from Donald Trump and how women are treated.

[11:25:09]

However, I think we also need to be really thoughtful and realistic about the spread of this online and recognize that there is an online ecosystem that ratchets up and divides Americans using incidences and, frankly, embedded biases, divisions between the genders.

It is intended specifically to tear Americans apart. Oftentimes, this is happening by influencing factors beyond our borders. We saw this in 2016 when there was a concerted effort by Russian trolls to take advantage of the division after the George Floyd murder to tear Americans apart.

And so when Nick Fuentes, an extremist who represents no part of the majority of Americans, sees that -- has a social media post that then gets -- is seen by 90 million people, it just -- it doesn't mean to me immediately that, yes, we have so much more misogyny than we thought.

Certainly, there is more misogyny than we thought, but is it 90 million impressions or are there outside influences like the CCP on TikTok, like Russian Internet trolls, like many other nefarious factors who would prefer to see America tear itself apart from the inside influencing those impressions?

BROWN: I think those are the right questions to be asking, right? And I think that's really important.

But it also raises the question, as we were discussing, Machalagh, you do have people like Nick Fuentes putting this out there. Are they emboldened? Is this just the winning side taking it too far? Or is it a real glimpse into deeper, widespread sexism throughout this country on the far right? What do you say?

CARR: And I think Margaret made some really good points.

First of all, I don't think that that person should be platformed in any way, certainly not on corporate media, certainly not on media that is watched by reasonable, sensible, thoughtful people trying to understand the world.

I don't think that that is helpful to the dialogue. And I think that now the image that you're talking about or the post that you're talking about will probably be viewed more times since we are now discussing it amongst polite company.

I don't think that it's even a sign of him being emboldened because he doesn't have, like, feelings or emotions. I would also say he didn't want Trump to win because Trump was not racist for him. So I don't think this is even a sign of the winning side kind of gloating. I just think this is somebody trying to make money off people's naivete and we should kind of maybe take a step back and get off social media.

BROWN: So I just want to push back a little bit, Machalagh, because, I mean, we're also citing actual data. And I know -- I see your point about platforming someone like him. We're not platforming him. We're talking about something that's actually happened reflected by the data.

And what is driving that? We don't know how much foreign influence is behind that or anything like that. But we heard Nadya speak about her actual experience and what she has gone through over the last several years and also just after the election.

But, Nadya, to bring you back into this conversation in your view, you believe it goes to the top, but the exit polls in "The New York Times" shows that 45 percent of women voted for Trump. So what do you say to that?

OKAMOTO: Yes, absolutely.

And, again, I think that a specific call-out too is that sexism in this country isn't a new thing. This has been deeply embedded into society and societies around the world since the beginning of time.

But I would say that I think that what the Trump campaign did really strategically actually is really make hazy where what Trump's stance was when it came to reproductive rights, abortion, when it came to even the side of respecting women.

And I think that was very strategic on Trump's part. And I would say that I think that led to, in many ways, women, depending on how -- what their impression was, feeling very much in support of him as well, right?

And so I think that, again, sexism isn't only on one side. It isn't only in this current time. I think that it has shown itself more and more throughout history. I think that when I kind of bring it back to Trump, I would say that some of his language which is derogatory or disrespectful towards women or just in regards to gender equality has become quite normalized, right?

From when we first saw him running for president and he said things that many Americans said, oh, if he says that and it's publicized, he will never be elected, to him being faced with allegations of sexual assault and some of those being proven, and then him continuing to be able to be our president as well.

[11:30:00]