Return to Transcripts main page

Early Start with Rahel Solomon

Defense Attorneys Grill Cassie Ventura About "Freak Offs"; Trump Teases New Tariff Plans In "Two To Three Weeks"; Top Court Considers Challenges To Trump's Birthright Policy. Aired 5:30-6a ET

Aired May 16, 2025 - 05:30   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL)

[05:31:15]

ERICA HILL, CNN ANCHOR: In just a few hours defense attorneys will resume their cross-examination of the former girlfriend of Sean "Diddy" Combs. This, of course, part of his racketeering and sex trafficking trial. The court adjusted its hours to make sure that key witness who is also very pregnant, singer Cassie Ventura, would conclude her testimony this week because she could go into labor at any moment.

Ventura facing tough questioning on cross Thursday about whether she was a willing participant in Combs' drug-fueled sex parties known as "freak offs."

Cole Higgins has more.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

COLE HIGGINS, CNN PRODUCER (voiceover): For the first time in the federal criminal trial of music mogul Sean "Diddy" Combs his attorneys getting to question the key witness Cassie Ventura, highlighting emails and text messages, many from the beginning of the former couple's 11-year relationship. Some of those messages between Combs and Ventura sexually explicit.

At one point defense attorney Anna Estevao asking Ventura, "And to make him happy, you told him that you wanted to do 'Freak Offs?'" Referring to the drug-fueled sex performances Combs allegedly arranged. Ventura answering, "There's a lot more to that."

DAVE ARONBERG, FORMER STATE ATTORNEY, PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIA: Jurors are going to come at this from their own life experiences with "freak offs" something foreign, unique, weird. And if they think that Cassie, at some point, was part of it willingly -- yeah, that's going to be really bad for the prosecution.

HIGGINS (voiceover): More messages about "freak offs" between Ventura and Combs were read and shown to the jury throughout the day, including one sent by Ventura saying, "I love our freak offs when we both want it." Ventura adding in court that those were "just words at that point." Ventura has testified that she did not always want to participate in the orchestrated sexual encounters but was fearful of Combs.

RICHARD GABRIEL, TRIAL CONSULTANT: Jurors are going to be fundamentally confronted with these two different versions -- these two different character portrayals of who Cassie Ventura is and ultimately decide what is the complication of the relationship is a key point for the defense.

HIGGINS (voiceover): I'm Cole Higgins reporting.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

HILL: And we'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL)

[05:38:00]

HILL: President Trump hinting at a new phase in his tariff plans a short time ago, suggesting his top trade negotiators will be reaching out to about 150 countries in the coming weeks as we approach his July deadline for deals. The message essentially will set the cost for doing business in the United States.

CNN senior White House reporter Betsy Klein joins me now from Abu Dhabi with more. So, Betsy, I would say this is a message that we have heard from the president as he has talked about these deals -- talked about negotiations. He said maybe I'll just set the price myself. I'll tell you what it will be for doing business.

It's also interesting that he seems to be acknowledging just how ambitious this idea of his was, saying that it's not possible to meet the number of people that want to see us.

I mean, if you're trying to redo a trade deal with every country that's a lot.

BETSY KLEIN, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE REPORTER: Exactly. And as you know, President Trump injected so much instability into the global economy, so much uncertainty into global markets when he imposed the tariffs across the globe on his so-called "Liberation Day" back in April. And after that he subsequently issued a pause.

That move ostensibly was aimed at giving negotiators time to negotiate bespoke trade deals. But anyone, as you know, who has negotiated these types of deals knows that they can take months or even years to get into place. So the president really acknowledging here that this is going to take more time than he expected, even when he imposed that July deadline. It's really much more complicated than getting this hammered out with all of these countries between now and July.

Since he imposed those tariffs, he has since negotiated an agreement in principle with the United Kingdom. He also announced that tentative deal with China on trade. But today, saying the Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, as well as

Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, his two top negotiators, are planning to send these letters.

Listen to what the president said just moment ago in Abu Dhabi.

[05:40:00]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, (R) PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: We have at the same time 150 countries that want to make a deal, but you're not able to see that many countries. So at a certain point over the next two to three weeks -- I think, Scott and Howard -- we'll be sending letters out essentially telling people it would be very fair, but we'll be telling people what they'll be paying to do business in the United States.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KLEIN: Now, the president went on to say that he could let countries appeal these letters -- the decision in these letters -- that tariff -- those tariff rates there, Erica. But he also said it's just not possible to meet with the number of countries that want to come and negotiate with the United States, really acknowledging that time crunch he has set up for himself here, Erica.

HILL: Betsy, appreciate it. Good to see you. Thank you.

The Supreme Court now mulling a historic ruling having to tackle whether a single district court has the power to block a policy nationwide. This, of course, related to the president's executive order looking to do away with birthright citizenship.

We'll dive in after the break.

(COMMERCIAL)

[05:45:35]

HILL: Welcome back to EARLY START. Forty-five minutes past the hour here. I'm Erica Hill in New York.

Here's a look at some of the stories we're watching on this Friday.

U.S. President Donald Trump wrapping up his tour of the Middle East, the first major overseas trip of his second term. On that trip, of course, the president meeting with business leaders on this final day of events in Abu Dhabi. He'll be making his way back to Washington later today bringing with him hundreds of billions of dollars in deals for investments in the U.S. economy and also questions about how he is potentially reshaping American foreign policy in the region.

Long-awaited talks between Russia and Ukraine set to begin right about now in Turkey. We have yet, though, to have confirmation that those meetings have, in fact, begun in Istanbul. There are not a lot of breakthroughs expected here and neither of the country's presidents is attending those talks.

Today is expected to be the final day of testimony for the former girlfriend of Sean "Diddy" Combs. Cassie Ventura will face more tough cross-examination from his defense attorneys on the stand. Combs has pleaded not guilty to charges of racketeering and sex trafficking.

The U.S. Supreme Court is considering lifting a series of nationwide judicial orders which are currently block President Trump's executive order that would end birthright citizenship. That order, which he signed on his first day in office, triggered protests and legal challenges with federal judges blocking enforcement of it almost immediately, ruling the order was unconstitutional. Well, on Thursday, Supreme Court justices suggested those courts may have overstepped their authority.

And while that was the case before the court it was really tough to ignore the underlying reason this question was before them which is, of course, the 14th Amendment which states that "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside."

This is what we talk about when you hear the words "birthright citizenship." And that, of course, is what the president's executive order seeks to end.

As for how the courts will rule here -- well, we could find out perhaps next month when they issue those rulings.

For a closer look at what we heard and what we may be able to read in the tea leaves of questioning, Misty Marris joins us now. She's a defense attorney here in New York.

So Misty, I was struck when we were listening to this yesterday at some of the questioning. And I just want to play for folks because, of course, we do have the audio feed that we could listen to. I want to play just an exchange with Justice Kavanaugh that is getting a lot of attention, and then I want to get your thoughts on that.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JUSTICE BRETT KAVANAUGH, U.S. SUPREME COURT: What do hospitals do with a newborn? What do states do with a newborn?

D. JOHN SAUER, U.S. SOLICITOR GENERAL: I don't think they do anything different. What the executive order says in Section 2 is that federal officials do not accept documents that have the wrong designation of citizenship from people who are subject to the executive order.

KAVANAUGH: How are they gonna know that?

SAUER: The federal officials will have to figure that out.

KAVANAUGH: How?

SAUER: So, you can imagine a number of ways that the federal officials could --

KAVANAUGH: Such as?

SAUER: Such as they could require a showing of, you know, documentation showing legal presence in the country.

KAVANAUGH: For all the newborns? Is that how it's going to work?

SAUER: Again, we don't know.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HILL: So Misty, I was really struck there because again, this is -- this is -- these oral arguments yesterday were not about birthright citizenship, but they are about birthright citizenship, right? It's tough to separate the two and just the very practical level of questioning that we heard from some of the justices if this became a piecemeal, state-by-state approach how would that work?

What does that tell you?

MISTY MARRIS, DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Yeah, absolutely, Erica. So I was listening to the -- to the arguments yesterday and what was interesting about how this was presented by the administration, to your point, is that it was about narrowing the orders of the lower court federal judges. It was about the nationwide injunction and seeking relief from the Supreme Court to say that these lower federal courts cannot do that on a nationwide basis. But it was not about the substantive issues.

So Kavanaugh is someone I was specifically listening to hear with respect to the questions he would ask of the administration because in prior decisions he has been very critical of nationwide injunctions generally. But his line of questioning opened up that door of what does this mean practically when we're talking about the administration seeks to actually enforce this?

[05:50:00]

He raised in that clip specifically what happens when a baby is born in a hospital?

And he also flagged that the executive order gave only 30 days for the administration to figure out process. Is that really enough time when it comes down to such an important issue that has an impact on so many people's lives from a practical standpoint.

And he wasn't the only one. Amy Coney Barrett also brought up why are we talking about the substantive component of this? Why are we only talking about the more procedural component?

So I read a lot of skepticism generally as to how this would actually be implemented if the executive order --

HILL: Um-hum. MARRIS: -- were to go into effect. But at the same time also skepticism on the part of many of the justices about the veracity of an actual nationwide injunction.

HILL: And so that's -- and that is the meat of the question, right? That's what they're dealing with and that's why this was why the administration wanted this before the Supreme Court because they wanted them to weigh in on these nationwide injunctions. This idea that a lower court ruling -- if they say hold on a minute -- you can't enforce this right now. We think it's unconstitutional. That then applies to the entire country.

We should point out this is not just something that bothers the Trump administration, right? Presidents of both parties have raised issues with this.

How likely, based on what we heard yesterday, is it that the Supreme Court will say yeah, this is an issue -- there is some overstep? And if so, what happens next?

MARRIS: From hearing the arguments yesterday, to me, I anticipate that there will be a determination that there's overstep.

And to your point, Erica, not the first time that this has come up. There's been criticism about the nationwide injunctions generally through both administrations -- the reason being it allows the administration to basically forum (PH) shop or for a party to forum shop and to say well, we want to stop an executive order so let's go to a jurisdiction -- a federal jurisdiction that's sympathetic to our cause and then it will apply nationwide.

So that's on one hand why there's a lot of criticism for nationwide injunctions.

On the other hand and what was raised in these arguments, is that if you -- if in this particular issue with birthright citizenship if there is not a nationwide ban you can end up with different rules respecting --

HILL: Um-hum.

MARRIS: -- with respect to citizenship in different jurisdictions. That's an idea of the patchwork.

What I read from the arguments -- and again, we never really know which was the Supreme Court will go -- that there are going to be some limitations to nationwide injunctions. But it seems that the justices were open to not allowing this executive order to go into effect at this moment or while these appeals are pending. And that maybe in this case an injunction is appropriate, which was the opposition's argument --

HILL: Yeah.

MARRIS: -- that the standard for an injunction generally, in any case, is irreparable harm and likelihood of success on the merits. Well, the administration didn't talk about the merits, right, because

we didn't get into the constitutionality.

HILL: Um-hum.

MARRIS: But when it comes to irreparable harm you're talking about just keeping status quo. What has been in place for over a century as the approach to birthright citizenship.

So really novel arguments, and we'll have to see. But I do think we're going to see some limits to the nationwide injunctions based on watching yesterday.

HILL: We'll be watching. Typically, the -- typically, of course, the Supreme Court releases its decisions by late June-early July, so I guess we'll be waiting and watching.

Misty, good to see you as always. Thank you.

MARRIS: Thanks, Erica.

HILL: Still ahead here, bracing for travel trouble as engineers at New Jersey Transit hit the picket line. This could impact thousands upon thousands of commuters in the New York metropolitan area. That's next.

(COMMERCIAL)

[05:58:17]

HILL: Here you see President Trump just moments ago in Abu Dhabi. He, of course, is wrapping up his tour of the Middle East, the first major overseas trip of his second term. This, his third country on that visit.

He will now be making his way back to Washington, D.C. bringing with him hundreds of billions of dollars in deals for investments in the U.S. economy and also a lot of questions about how this has changed American foreign policy in the region.

We'll certainly be seeing more of that in the coming days and months.

Back here in the United States, a lot of headache potentially on a Friday morning for commuters in the New York City and New Jersey area. Engineers at New Jersey Transit have just gone on strike. This brings trains in the nation's third-largest commuter rail service to a halt. Negotiations between the state-run agency and the labor union failed to reach a deal on wages.

The work stoppage itself poised to severely inconvenience the 100,000 daily rail customers and businesses across the New York metropolitan area. The service itself provides some one million weekday rides.

The chief executive of NJ Transit says the two sides are due to return to the negotiating table by Sunday morning or possibly earlier.

America's disaster relief agency is not ready for hurricane season. Now that's a problem because the storm season officially kicks off in just two weeks.

An internal review at FEMA, the Federal Emergency Management Agency, though has found it is simply not prepared. It found several issues, including a lack of coordination with states and other federal agencies, in addition to low morale and new red tape that is likely to slow response to disasters.

The Department of Homeland Security oversees FEMA. In a statement it called the story "grossly out of context."

We'll continue to watch it.

Thanks so much for joining me here on EARLY START. I'm Erica Hill in New York. Stayed tuned -- "CNN THIS MORNING" starts right now.