Return to Transcripts main page


Derek Chauvin's Attorney Files Motion for New Trial; Judge: Barr Misled on His Decision Not to Charge Trump; Feds Request "Special Master" to Review Giuliani Evidence; Biden Delivers Remarks on "American Rescue Plan," Aid Plan for Restaurants Hurt by Pandemic. Aired 2:30-3p ET

Aired May 5, 2021 - 14:30   ET



ALISYN CAMEROTA, CNN HOST: Michael, I want you to know that Victor and I have new schedules.


CAMEROTA: He and I are now on from 2:00 to 4:00 p.m. east coast time, Monday through Friday.

As a memory jog for our viewers, and, frankly, ourselves -- because who knew what time he and I would show up if we didn't do this -- we started two to four things where we tackle two to four topics in the news with a smart guest. And you are our inaugural smart guest.

So --


MICHAEL MOORE, FORMER U.S. ATTORNEY, MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA: Congratulations on the new show to both of you.


CAMEROTA: Thank you, Michael. Really appreciate it.

OK. Let's start with the Chauvin conviction. Does he deserve a new trial?

MOORE: You know, I'm not surprised to see the motion for new trial filed. It's sort of a standard motion any defense attorney would file. And it protects the defendant's right to appeal.

What's interesting is some of the allegations that are raised and some of what's not in there.

I think that there's a reasonable argument that the jury should have been sequestered, especially when you have this $27 million civil settlement resolved openly. Just like a $27 million admission of guilty during the trial.

And you can tell jurors not to watch the news, not to read the newspaper, but that's a tough thing to overcome. That's one concern I would have.

The other may be whether or not this new juror, who has come out and said, look, I went to a march and I wore this shirt that said, "Take your knee off our necks," that's a tough one, too.

If he did not disclose that, that may give some ammunition to the defense in the case.

And whether or not the judge told the jury about one issue, how to consider Mr. Chauvin's silence, and what that indicates, his Fifth Amendment right. That will be state law. That will be well settled.

If he went outside of the jury instructions on that issue, that may give them some grounds, too.

Look, the case is horrendous. It should make everybody sick to their stomach to watch the tape.

This is simply, at this point, about the procedural issues and the protections that are afforded any defendant under the Constitution.

So like it or not, these are things that a defendant's lawyer is certainly going to raise.

VICTOR BLACKWELL, CNN HOST: So let's move now to the Barr memo, the secret memo that was heavily redacted.

Federal Judge Amy Berman Jackson says it was strategic planning, not legal reasoning, and believes that Barr and his advisers decided already that they would not charge the former president with a crime and that this memo can be released.

Do you expect that it will be? I expect the first decision will be if there's an appeal from the DOJ under new leadership.

MOORE: She gave the department a chance to appeal the decision. I don't know that we'll see an appeal.

Just reading -- and we're having to read basically public accounting of it. But reading what she said, it looks like the memo was written essentially written as a strategic discussion as opposed to a deliberated discussion you might think of as attorney-client privilege.

For instance, if a lawyer writes to a client and says, you know, this is my advice about how to proceed with your case and these things, that's clearly protected.

But if a lawyer writing and says, you know something, we have a tough time with this case, let's figure out how to bury the body, that's another matter. That's not a legal advice. That's strategy and illegal. So it's a bad day for the attorney general, former attorney general

when you have a federal judge calling your integrity into question. He seems to have a knock for being in that boat.

We'll see. But I think we're going to see the memo.

CAMEROTA: OK. And just so I'm clear, because we all remember when Bill Barr gave that misleading statement, what he summarized allegedly, the Mueller investigation.

So you're saying, in this secret memo, we could some of his strategery about how we're going to protect the president? I mean, could --


CAMEROTA: -- we see something like that?

MOORE: I think there's some reference to this being more strategic memo than a deliberative memo. So we may very well see how internally they decided to explain not charging as opposed to how they reach the decision to not make the charge on the obstruction case.

That may shed some light on what I really thought was a circus surrounding his efforts to make the former president appear to be vindicated after the Mueller investigation.

So much so that you saw Bob Mueller come out, and it was not his custom to do this. He felt the need to come out and clarify the record.

So there's something in there. And what you find with the past administration, certainly people who tried to hide the ball to pass, where there's some smoke, we'll probably find some fire at the end of the day.

BLACKWELL: All right, let's go now to Rudy Giuliani. Federal prosecutors are asking for a special master to review the evidence.

This is what we saw in the Cohen case as well. So the significance of this and this is what you would expect to happen?

MOORE: It is. There's nothing particularly unusual about a case where a lawyer is the target of an investigation or a search warrant has been executed on his or her office, to have the department come in and say, look, we need to protect the attorney-client privilege, especially for those matters that aren't related to this case.


We see the computer. We see his files. We need somebody to make sure that we're not getting information that we shouldn't be looking at, that is legitimately covered under the attorney-client privilege.

They'll likely get a former judge. We've seen that in the past.

The department is used to doing this. Typically, on a less high- profile case, let's say, they may call in team.

That is essentially a team of lawyers that will review documents that may, in fact, be privileged to make sure the investigative team doesn't gain access to information that might help the investigation to which they shouldn't have been allowed to look.

So there's nothing particularly nefarious here. There's nothing that ought to draw anybody's -- any particular conclusion.

I think it's a smart move by the department to go ahead and do this. It's an expected move.

At the end of the day, the winner are the clients. If, in fact, Mr. Giuliani has some legitimate clients who may have private information that was located in his computer system or in his files, those people and those businesses will be protected.

It's not a way that we're trying to hide information that the department shouldn't be able to look ought. It's a way to protect people who might have legitimately privileged information in his files.

CAMEROTA: Michael Moore, very helpful. Thank you for helping us get through the four things.

MOORE: It's great to be with you. Congratulations again.

BLACKWELL: Thanks so much.

CAMEROTA: Thanks so much.

OK, continued questions about the CDC's guidance now for summer camps.

BLACKWELL: Even Dr. Fauci says the guidance should be -- the guidance is a bit strict.



BLACKWELL: We're expecting to see and hear from President Biden in just a few moments.

Here he is walking into the dining room there at the White House, to speak on restaurant revitalization and COVID rescue.

Let's listen in.

JOE BIDEN, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Earlier today, I visited a restaurant here in town -- I'm going to mispronounce it -- Las Familia (ph), which is a pilot program for restaurant revitalization and an important piece of the American Rescue Plan.

One of my goals in the American Rescue Plan is to make sure we get this law's benefits quickly and directly to the American people. So before I say a bit more about what we're doing to support our nation's restaurants, let me provide an update on what is happening through the American Rescue Plan right now, as I speak.

First, it's providing checks in pockets and shots in arms. More than 163 million rescue payments have already gone out.

These are checks, direct payments up to $1,400 that, for a typically family of four making about $110,000, means a $5,600 check.

By the time all the money is distributed, more than 85 percent of the households will have received the check.

The rescue plan is also funding vaccine administration and distribution. It's a big reason why we able to administer over 200 million shots in my first is 100 days.

A pace unmatched by any nation in the world or in prior mass vaccinations in all of American history.

It's helping schools open safely. It's helping childcare centers stay in business. It's helping families pay for childcare.

The rescue plan is delivering food and nutrition assistance to millions of Americans facing hunger. And hunger is already sharply down in the United States.

It's also providing rental assistance to keep people from being evicted from their homes. It's making healthcare more affordable. It's cutting child poverty in this country in half.

The list goes on. The message is clear. Help is here.

The bottom line is this, the American Rescue Plan is working. America is getting vaccinated. Job creation is soaring. The economy is growing. And our country is on the move again.

But some of the parts of our economy still need help. At the top of the list is our nation's restaurants.

When the COVID-19 pandemic struck, our nation's restaurants were some of the first hit and the worst hit. In 2020, more than 2.3 million restaurants jobs disappeared, 2.3 million restaurant jobs disappeared.

Restaurants are more than a major part of our country. They're woven into the fabric of our communities.

So for many families, restaurants are the gateway to opportunity, a key part of the American story.

There are families of all races, all ethnic backgrounds, all nationalities in this country who have built their American dream around a family-owned restaurant.

And for more workers, their even story of economic progress starts in a restaurant. In the restaurant I just visited, and Rojilio (ph) Martinez, who

immigrated to this country 17 years ago, started working as a meat packer. Now he's the restaurant's lead butcher and one of its owners.

For nearly one in three Americans -- it's hard to believe. For one in three Americans, a restaurant provided their first job. More than half of all Americans have worked in a restaurant at some point in their lives.

Before the pandemic, restaurants and bars employed 12 percent, 12 percent of all the workers in our country.


This is an industry that provided more opportunity for minority managers than any other industry in America. This is an industry where the staff feels like family and often is family.

When the pandemic hit, restaurant owners and operators were resilient, creative and generous. Almost overnight, restaurants put in place safety measures to protect their employees and to protect us.

They stepped up to feed our frontline workers. They changed their menus. They transitioned to takeout and delivery, so they could be serving people who depended on them.

But even with the changes, many had to furlough or lay off workers or close entirely.

The restaurant I visited today went from 55 employees to just seven, before they started to bounce back. Now as we vaccinate Americans, customers are coming back.

And our vaccination progress and economic recovery is going hand in hand.

As that happens, we want to make sure that our restaurants, bars and other dining establishments can staff back up, and they can come back as well.

Right now, only about a quarter of the restaurant owners expect to return to normal operations in the next six months. We can do much better than that with the American Rescue Plan.

The Restaurant Revitalization Fund - that's why it's called, Revitalization Fund -- will provide direct relief to restaurants and the hard-hit food establishments, bars, bakeries, food stands, food trucks and caterers.

Businesses that get grants can use it to cover payroll, rent, utilities, supplies, everything they need to stay open and to reopen.

We are -- we're opening the doors of this program so that restaurants all over the country can open their doors again.

We started accepting application on Monday. Today is Wednesday. We made it quick and easy to apply. Within the first two days, there were 186,200 applications from all 50 states for help. That's a staggering number.

And 97,600 of those applications came from businesses owned by women, veterans and socioeconomically disadvantaged individuals.

Now the applications have been processed. Right now, it looks like we'll be able to provide help to about 100,000 restaurants and other eligible businesses.

We passed the American Rescue Plan. We did that. Some people said it wasn't needed. This response proves them wrong. It's badly needed.

About a year ago, when the first round of the Paycheck Protection Program opened up, a lot of the smallest firms saw the doors shut in their face.

The law was written so that, as we process these applications, the new one, we focused first on those who were left behind by the other relief programs.

And to make sure the relief is distributed fairly, we also set aside funds for the smallest restaurants, bars, food trucks, many family- owned restaurants that haven't gotten any help to date. And they need it.

That way, they don't have to compete above their weight class for these grants.

And 61,000 -- sorry for all the numbers, but they're important -- 61,700 applications have come from the smaller bars and restaurants already.

I want to thank the Small Business Administrator, Isabel Guzman, for the work her and her team are doing to make sure we get help quickly and fairly to the businesses that need it most.

As I said, I've spoken to dozens of restaurant owners about the challenges they face. But I've also have received letters from people who want to tell me about the restaurant owners in their communities.

I received one letter from a man who asked me to look out for a pair of local restaurant owners, who he described as, quote, "the hardest working people I've ever met," end quote.

Another letter was from a woman who wanted to tell me about how important the couple was that ran the restaurant in her town near her was. She said they are, quote, "the strong, consistent foundation of our community," end of quote.

Whether it's our economy or our sense of community, we're relying on restaurants to play a big role in our recovery.

We want our economy to recover in a way that deals everyone in, that our restaurants need a seat at the table, no pun intended. That's what we're giving them. That's what this program is about, a seat at the table.


This is another example of how we're putting the American Rescue Plan to work quickly and effectively and showing the American people that their government can deliver, can deliver for them again, and do it without waste.

That we can vaccinate this nation, that we can get our kids safely back in school, that we can get our economy back on track by helping hundreds of thousands of small businesses reopen and stay open.

That we can give the people of this nation a fighting chance again. That's what's this is all about.

God bless you all. And may God protect our troops. Thank you.


UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: (INAUDIBLE) -- At the WTO, are you going to back that? Is the U.S. government going to back --


BIDEN: Yes, I'll be talking about that later today, yes.

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: President Biden, you said earlier you don't understand Republicans. What does it say about them if they oust Liz Cheney from leadership for telling the truth about the election?

BIDEN: Look, it seems as though the Republican Party is trying to identify what it stands for. And they're in the midst of significant sort of mini revolution going on in the Republican Party.

I've been a Democrat for a long time. We've gone through periods where we've had internal fights and disagreements. I don't ever remember any like this.

And so as one of you said -- and I'm not embarrassed by identifying them. As one of you said on national television last night, we badly need a Republican Party. We need a two-party system. It's not healthy to have a one-party system.

And I think the Republicans are further away from trying to figure out who they are and what they stand for than I thought they would be at this point.


UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: (INAUDIBLE). Do you still think you can work with him when he says things like that?

BIDEN: Look, he said that in our last administration. Barack, you're going to stop everything. And I was able to get a lot done with him.

Again, look, everything I'm proposing that be done to generate economic growth, employment, and put us in a position where we can outcompete any other country in the world with research and development and moving ahead, I pay for.

We talk about -- I love we talk about how this is going to cost so much money. I'm not paying for it.

The bottom line is this. My Republican friends had no problem voting to pass a tax proposal that expires in 2025, that cost $2 trillion. None of it paid for. Increased the deficit by $2 trillion.

Gave the overwhelming percentage of those tax breaks to people who didn't need it. The top one-tenth of 1 percent. It didn't need it.

And it was argued that what it would do is generate this great economic surge and growth. It would increase productivity. It would pay for itself. It would generate a support of growth in America we hadn't seen ever before.

Everyone from the Heritage Foundation, on, has pointed out it hadn't done that, hadn't done that.

I come along and the proposals that I'm suggesting are tried and true things, like when you rebuild bridges, things get better. When you rebuild highways, when you don't have to -- you know, airports, ports, it all matters. It increases productivity.

And the programs that relate to people, are programs that are the things that also generate economic growth.

And I view them as -- for example, tax cuts for middle class, upper- middle class, and working-class people. And so you eliminate a few of the -- just have the super wealthy begin to pay their fair share.


For example, you have -- you know, you have -- I think it's 35 or 30 corporations didn't pay a single, solitary penny last year and they're Fortune 500 companies. They made $400 billion. They paid no taxes.

How can that make any sense? Especially since these corporations -- and I come from the corporate capital of the world. More corporations are incorporated in my state than all the rest of the country combined.

If you notice, corporations aren't investing any money in research and development.

Somewhere -- what's most of it going to? Buying back their own stock? Stock dividends, which makes sense. Even by some studies, less than 10 percent for research, development, pay raises, et cetera.

It used to be that not too long ago, for example, during the Bush administration, the tax rate for the very wealthy making well over millions of dollars was 39.6 percent. It's now 37 percent.

If you just raised it back to what it was before, it raises enough money from that savings to put every single person in community college that wants to go.

What's going to grow America more? What's going to help you and your security more? The super wealthy having to pay 3.9 percent less tax or have an entire generation of Americans having associate degrees?

That's why all the economists, even Wall Street are pointing out, guess what, close the economy, benefits everybody, hurts nobody.

But now "The Wall Street Journal" talked about a welfare program. It's about growth.

And so, you know, the idea that that -- it's just amazing. I mean, corporate taxes, they were 36 percent. Our administration, last administration said, we should lower it. We suggested it be lowered to 28 percent.

Well, it's got lowered to 28 percent or 21 percent. Show me something that's benefitted. What's happened? Show me where the growth is? What's it being invested in?



UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: On the corporate tax rate, have you talked to CEOs about that and have you --


UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: -- are you open to say 25 percent?

BIDEN: I'm open to compromising, yes. It doesn't have to be exactly what I say. But to suggest that, which some of the folks are suggesting -- and I'm going to meet with Republicans next week when they come back, and seriously meet with them, I'm willing to compromise.

But I'm not willing to not pay for what we're talking about. I'm not willing to deficit spend. They already have us $2 trillion in the hole.

By the way, you saw, you know, the last -- the Fed coming out and saying, what did they say? They said, Biden's plan is going to grow the economy.

You have Moody's talking about increasing up to -- I don't know the recent new one -- 16 million new jobs. It's about growth. Not stunting growth.

Like I said, not too long ago, I guess it was back in -- in the 2000 range, I don't know the exact year. I'll have my staff come back to the exact date.

The average CEO of the Fortune 500 companies made like 36 times what the average employee of that corporation made. It's over 450 times as much now. As my mother would say, who died and left them boss? No, seriously,

what rationale? Tell me what benefit flows from that?

We're not going to deprive these executives their second or third home, travel privately by jet. It's not going to affect their standard of living at all. Not a little tiny bit.

But I can affect the standard of living that people I grew up with, if they have a job.


I can affect -- make sure the standard of living of people I grew up with, if they have childcare, can afford it so 20 million women can be back in workforce.

This is just not -- it makes no sense to me.