tv Don Lemon Tonight CNN November 11, 2021 7:00pm-8:00pm PST
thank you very much for watching. it's time for the big show. don lemon. >> we have a lot of news. >> you have all of the aspects of the rittenhouse trial. the judge wouldn't -- >> can we talk about the judge? >> sure. longest sitting judge on the wisconsin bench. >> watching as a lay person, watching this. i think the legal analysts
because they want to keep their composure and they pay deference to the judge. he's ridiculous. his antics are ridiculous. today, chris, saying that someone who writes for a biased publication who has been favorable to kyle writt rittenhouse, for me -- i don't think it works that way lowlo way legally -- that's cause for mistrial. his demeanor, the way he speaks to the prosecution, the way he speaks to kyle rittenhouse like
he's his grandson. i hear pundits make him out like a hero. he is a kid, maybe misguided, but to go across state lines with an illegal ar-15 weapon and insert himself into a situation that has nothing to do with him and you are going to make him a hero, that's outside the courtroom. but in the courtroom how can anybody say the judge is not biased and leaning in a certain direction. >> he has a reputation for being a tough guy. >> there is a difference -- >> in terms of a mistrial. if he is right on the matters of law, i think only the one with the witness and his background, that could be problematic in
terms of an appeal, but i don't think it will rise to that level. and for the judge's demeanor, it has to rise to such a level to be egregious. what i didn't like was pick your spots. everything you mentioned is legitimate ground to be upset for what we are seeing. how the guy talked about the lunch order -- >> the asian joke? >> i don't know he made an asian joke. i know i am not allowed to judge it because i'm not asian. it sounded to me like i don't know how long it will take for lunch. i hope it is on the boat on the
supply chain. now asian groups are upset. >> if there are asian -- >> they are allowed to say whether or not something is offensive to him. i didn't see it as his intent much but now it is part of the analysis. >> maybe he doesn't know. that ignorance -- you can be biased and bigot -- isn't that what bigotry is? >> it can be. >> i am not an asian american, but if someone who is asian says it is offensive, then it is. >> i know. >> perhaps as the longest serving judge, you would think he would be educated on the
matter. if you were deciding life and death cases, if they were going to jail, if you are deciding people's freedom or not, shouldn't you be educated on these matters? shouldn't you be aware the cameras are out there? >> he is aware of the cameras are there. >> god bless the usa ring tone which is the trump rally -- >> he is aware of the cameras. all i am saying is you have a lot of strong points to make about how the judge is conducting himself in the trial. and now it is all about what he said about lunch and asian food. i think it gives leverage to the people who are going to defend him. >> that was the least -- look -- >> today it has been all over the place. i felt like oh, no. that erased the good points.
>> the thing today all over the place was the witness. >> it should be. he said i don't know how you could isolate how the guy's politics would affect how they process the evidence. >> seriously? >> if i like don, and what he did, whatever it is, i would say it a certain way because i like don. >> if you put a mom on the stand, you don't tell the jury it is the mom. it makes no sense. >> number one, he's old. two -- age matters. at 75 years of age, that's not 55 years of age, not 35 years of age. i think age matters because he said two things that didn't make sense.
that didn't make sense. and when the prosecutor said if i have to follow your rulings, so does your defense. the judge says, hey, i was talking about the constitution, that's 50 years old. that's not what the prosecutor was talking about. he was talking about prior inconsistent statements. he wasn't talking about the same thing. that could be age and therefore not being as sharp on the bench as you should be. >> i don't know. i don't want to be an ageist because i know lots of sharp older people, but, houston, we have a problem, and i think everybody can see it. people are afraid to say it. we are also seeing it in georgia as well. we don't want the black folks in the room. there is a problem. >> that's a wild. >> i have to run.
this judge, there is an issue, people, say it, speak out. >> there are multiple issues. >> the good thing is we are bringing light to it. people can see what happens in the legal system, the court system and perhaps there will be more energy and vigor for change when it comes to the criminal justice system. >> if there is a hung jury, you will hear about it more. >> got to let you go. >> love you! >> this is don lemon. i have been holding this for a while. okay, okay, okay, on the legal matters, it is this, this, this. we live in the real world. imagine if it was reversed, a black kid with a gun.
i have some huge news to tell you about between a sitting president and former president. this is about protecting our democracy. late today a federal appeals granted the former president's last-ditch effort to stop them from seeing documents from the white house. a win, but a temporary one. pressure is building on mark meadows to cooperate, demanding he appear for a deposition and turn over documents tomorrow morning. we have more to come on all of this. back to what i was talking about. kenosha. defense resting their case in the trial of kyle rittenhouse. he killed two and injured one
with an ar-15. crossed state lines and too young to carry that weapon because he said he thought it looked cool. today there were no tears. the judge asked the jury to leave the room twice for the second day in a row while he got into it with the prosecutor. >> it was my impression that we were talking about video of the entire episode. and not that -- certainly in my mind it was not limited to the specific numbers on this observation point list you are talking about. i am a little challenged when you say -- is there something i am saying that draws the face you are making? go ahead, say what you want to say. >> yesterday i was the target of
your ire for disregarding your orders. today the defense is disregarding your order. yesterday, as i said i was under the court's ire. >> i don't want to talk about -- >> the fundamental fairness issue. >> say what you want. >> if i am having to obey the court's order, then the defense should be held to that, too. >> i am going to interrupt you. i was talking yesterday about the constitution of the united states and how the supreme court has interpreted it for 50 years. that's not what we are talking about here today. >> this is the second day of this. and then there was this moment. arguing over a witness's
possible bias in painting a rosy picture of kyle rittenhouse. does real america have any political bias or agenda? >> what does this is go to? >> the bias. >> in what respect. this is not a political trial. i don't know how you would isolate a person's particular politics and determine that person is going to evaluate the evidence one way or another. >> has he not done any background or research on this whole thing? it is not a political trial. maybe in one sense.
some of this is on the prosecutor, too. i don't know what kind of pressure they are under. maybe the prosecutor should have been stronger and tried to make his case, but if you put a witness on the stand that has said several things about the defendant and biased things about the people he is accused of injuring or killing, the dead people can't tell their story. let's remember this is a judge who told prosecutors before the trial began that he wouldn't allow them to call the people rittenhouse shot victims but he would allow them to call them arsonists and looters. >> let the evidence show what it shows. but if the evidence shows any
one of these people were engaged in arson, rioting or looting, i am not going to tell the defense they can't call them that. victim is loaded. >> rioter is not loaded? looter is not loaded? what about the dead people who can't speak for themselves? during eight days of testimony jurors heard from 31 different witnesses. the judge told jurors that closing arguments and instructions are expected monday. each will have 2 1/2 hours for closing arguments. >> we are in the final stretch,
enjoy the weekend. >> with that closing arguments are set for monday. testimony ended in the trial of kyle rittenhouse, eight days of testimony with 31 witnesses, the last day ending the way much of it did, leaning on video from that night. rosenbaum is in the red t-shirt. he was in kenosha. days and nights of unrest after police shot jacob blake. this video was taken by drew hernandez who described rosenbaum this way. >> he was charging writtenhouse from behind. and he is lunging towards him and rittenhouse fires.
>> this moment his lawyers hope make him real life. but the man who was shot by rittenhouse said he didn't see real life. >> he was caught doing something he shouldn't have done, the numerous lives he affected for what he had done. >> it was wrought with tension. the judge lashed out yesterday -- >> don't get brazen with me. >> another testy exchange. >> yesterday, as i said, i was under the court's ire --
>> i don't want to talk about -- >> i think it is a fundamental fairness issue. >> say what you want. >> if i have to -- >> yesterday i was talking about the constitution of the united states and how the supreme court has interpreted it for 50 years. >> but the trial is most noteworthy for being a flashpoint in a battle far beyond kenosha. this is an arizona based commentator who works at real america voice. >> black lives matter is a marxist organization. >> have you ever posted anything on social media in support of
kyle rittenhouse? >> yes. >> that was my colleague reporting. and she made this comment. listen to what the judge said as they prepared for lunch break -- >> let's hope for 1:00. let's hope the asian food isn't coming from one of the boats along long beach harbor. >> he appeared to be referring to the congestion of supply chains. some perceived it as placing blame on asian people. cnn was told, and i quote -- it was only last week that a jor in the same case was dismissed
for a joke over the police shooting of jacob blake. case in point, jokes aren't meant to be around the courtroom. if he's saying the trial is not about politics, why is he bringing politics into it by talking about the supply chain? people are not stupid. closing arguments coming up monday. then 12 of the 18 jurors will be picked to deliberate. i have two lawyers who have tried cases in this part of the country. they will tell me what they think is ahead after this. me? one for me? you mean us? what about me? and me? how about us? yeah, how about us? great question. wait, can i get one in green? got one for me?! what about us? is there an ev for me? ev for me? us? what about me? me?
introducing the ultium ev platform by general motors. everybody in. (dog whimpers) this is the planning effect. as carla thinks about retirement, she'll wonder, "what if i could retire sooner?" and so she'll get some advice from fidelity, and fidelity will help her explore some different scenarios, like saving more every month. ♪ and that has carla feeling so confident that she can enjoy her dream... right now. that's the planning effect, from fidelity. with framebridge... make what matters to you last. halloween, '72. jojo's adoption day. asher's art phase. whatever you treasure, make it last. framebridge. you could wait... all night... for an email response from steve, who will sign back in at 9 am tomorrow morning.
orrrr... you could find the answer right now in slack. and give steve a break. slack. where the future works. (tiger) this is the dimension of imagination. ♪ ♪ do i need to pretreat my laundry? nope! with tide pods, you don't need to worry. the pre-treaters are built in. tide pods dissolve even when the water is freezing. nice! if it's got to be clean, it's got to be tide.
knows everything about that area. he is a former district attorney. we could talk about the questions of bias swirling around. one of the witnesses testified he was in antifa to track black lives matter when the shootings happened. that is political. the judge said he is trying to keep politics out of the case. you know the judge. what do you think of his decision or comments? >> don, thanks for letting me join you tonight. as far as politics are concerned, what i am focused on as a trial lawyer okay this is the potential political orientation of each of the
jurors will be. you have 18 jurors that will be narrowed down to 12. kenosha county is diverse, but it's pretty easy to identify what people's political orientation is. the west end of kenosha county votes the same as utah does and the east end votes the way chicago does, blue, democrat. you have ten females. s statistically females lean towards being democrats. statistically men lean towards being republican. once they spin people out, that will identify which political parties the jurors are oriented
toward. >> so as it relates to today then, when he is saying this is not political and there is a witness who clearly works for a political organization who is there to track a group that has been part of political discussions. so what does that -- square that circle for me. >> from my perspective, this is about what the jurors heard. there has been a lot of focus on things that occurred outside the presence of the jury. the jury didn't hear any of the harsh tones towards the prosecutor. as far as the bias of the news organization this gentleman was from, he let the prosecutor get to the bias in a different way
by allowing him to ask whether this person had posted things that were pro-rittenhouse. i think he allowed for the prosecutor to get to that issue without identifying which party the witness is oriented towards. generally the judges don't want politics to be part of the case. they want them to listen to the facts of the case and apply the law. >> he is asking if you have written things or posted things favorable to kyle rittenhouse and are not favorable to another group. he didn't say republican, independent, democrat. the judge stopped him. i don't understand that. paul, you understand there has been a lot of back and forth.
watch this today where the judge brings up a face he says the prosecutor was making when they got into it yesterday. >> i am a little bit challenged when you say -- is there something that i am saying that draws the face you are making? go ahead, say what you want to say. >> yesterday, your honor, i was the target of your honor for disregarding your orders. today the defense is disregarding your order. yesterday i was under the court's ire. >> i don't want to talk about -- >> i think it's a fundamental fairness issue, your honor. >> say what you want to say. >> if i am held to that, i think the defense should be, too. >> i am going to interrupt you. yesterday i was talking about the constitution of the united states and how the supreme court has interpreted it for 50 years.
>> paul, what is going on here? maybe we don't see that much what is happening in the courtroom because there is cameras there, but it seems like the judge should insert himself a lot. >> he should. that's his role. when i was in waukesha i was dressed down many times. i think they tried to do an end around. yesterday he was trying to bring in other bad acts that kyle rittenhouse had done. it's pretty clear that this prosecutor -- and i don't know the gentleman personally, but he's not hearing what the judge is saying. or he's ignoring it. he is just pounding away. i don't know if he's just
tempting judge schroeder or not. the judge is tired. i know this judge. i practiced in front of him. he is not racist or bias. i didn't quite get the humor in the asian thing. i don't know what he meant. i don't think he meant anything mean, but just didn't get it. >> go ahead. >> the prosecutor needs to read the tea leaves -- i don't mean to be racist -- but just listen to the judge and approach the case differently which he has not done. >> the prosecutor, do you think there is a method to this? is he poking him or going for something by trying to get under
the judge's skin possibly? >> that was suggested by one individual, that they were trying to throw the case, but i don't think that's the situation. they could have easily have done that. i don't feel like he's listening. i would have come back yesterday and apologized to the jury. not in front of the jury. the judge is the judge and the one who runs the courtroom. i don't see the zeal in the prosecutor's approach to the case. i think he is not hearing the judge is not happy. you need to adjust. i am sure patrick has done it. when you see this isn't working very well, i better try another tact. >> i want to play kyle rittenhouse's mother on another
network. let's watch this. >> the judge is very fair. people i talked to who have lived in kenosha all their lives, they told me that judge schroeder is a fair judge and doesn't allow nonsense in his courtroom. patrick, your response? >> i have tried cases in front of judge schroeder. he is a no-nonsense judge. he keeps control over his courtroom and rightfully. when he has lawyers undermining his rulings, he reacts swiftly and is not shy about letting people know when he is upset with them. he has done that in this case. the public has reacted dramatically to those rulings, but the jury hasn't heard those
things. i don't think a lot of the things we are focused on now will make a difference to the jury because they won't know about them. >> apparently it was so loud that reporters were near the jury room and said they could hear the interaction between the judge and jury. >> having tried multiple cases there, i can tell you it is a strange jury room. it is on another floor, one floor up from the courtroom. so it's unlikely they heard what the judge was saying. >> they were in the library. >> if they were in the library, that's closer. the jury room is further away. >> thank you both. we will see you tomorrow and next week as this continues on. >> next, call log, speech, memo and notes.
looks like the january 6 committee on the insurrection won't be getting the documents tomorrow. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ now, get new lower auto rates with allstate. because better protection costs a whole lot less. you're in good hands with allstate. click or call for a lower auto rate today. >> man: what's my safelite story? my truck...is my livelihood. so when my windshield cracked... the experts at safelite autoglass came right to me... with service i could trust. right, girl? >> singers: ♪ safelite repair, safelite replace. ♪ ordinary tissues burn when theo blows. so dad bought puffs plus lotion, and rescued his nose. with up to 50% more lotion puffs bring soothing softness and relief. a nose in need deserves puffs indeed.
(announcer) carvana's had a lot of firsts. 100% online car buying. car vending machines. and now, putting you in control of your financing. at carvana, get personalized terms, browse for cars that fit your budget, then customize your down payment and monthly payment. and these aren't made-up numbers. it's what you'll really pay, right down to the penny. whether you're shopping or just looking. it only takes a few seconds, and it won't affect your credit score. finally! a totally different way to finance your ride. only from carvana. the new way to buy a car.
so get the flexibility of the new mobile service designed for your small business. introducing comcast business mobile. you get the most reliable network with nationwide 5g included. and you can get unlimited data for just $30 per line per month when you get four lines or mix and match data options. available now for comcast business internet customers with no line-activation fees or term contract required. see if you can save by switching today. comcast business. powering possibilities. so late today a federal appeals court granted the former president's last-ditch effort to
stop the panel from seeing documents. evan perez, good evening. deadlines, lawyers, appeals courts. mark meadows, the january 6 committee has lost patience with him. >> deadlines are for regular people. mark meadows says you are going to have to get a judge to make me come in to provide testimony they want. they gave him an ultimatum. show up friday at 10:00 a.m. or we are going to begin contempt proceedings. the committee is not going to get the answers or testimony they want because meadows says he's being ordered by the former president not to provide testimony because it's executive
privilege which the courts haven't ruled if that's a thing or not. >> so the d.c. court of appeals hit pause on turning over the white house documents to the committee. what is the timeline? friday they were already in the process. when will we know? >> we are looking now at possibly december before this court rules. i will show you the briefing schedule which begins november 22 is the first brief from the trump team. the committee is on the 22nd and then the 30th is oral arguments. we assume whoever loses will go to the supreme court to get them to weigh in. for this committee, the clock is
ticking. they want to see the 700 documents or so that they say is key to this investigation and they want to see it soon. democrats know they are looking at possibly losing the house and then this investigation would probably not continue. >> what a mess. thank you very much. the former president getting the delay he wanted, but it is a temporary victory. so now what? o protect the environment. in partnership with the national forest foundation, subaru and our retailers are proud to help replant 1 million trees to help restore our forests. subaru. more than a car company.
the constitution and why. good evening to both of you. the three-judge panel in this executive privilege case, they won't hear oral arguments until november 30th. for now trump is getting what he wants, delay, delay, delay. can it go to a d.c. circuit court before the court of appeals? >> i think trump will lose this given the panel and weakness of his case. he is saying his view overrides a sitting president's view as to what to do about presidential records. i think they will have for rehearing enbanc. that requires a motion to get rehearing en banc. that requires another group of motions.
if he loses there, it will go to the supreme court. this could drag on even though i think his case is weak. >> this is why i didn't go to law school. so his lawyers are saying without intervention it will be irreparable harm. what about democracy's irreparable harm. >> that was one of the arguments the judge blew away. he couldn't say it could send my client to jail or ruin his reputation. he couldn't come up with good explanation why there was harm. so the only harm is to the system and investigation in getting this information out. >> i need to take a quick break. can you guys stick around.
we will be back on the other side. no mess. just the soothing vicks' vapor for the whole family. introducing new vicks vapostick. retirement income is complicated. as your broker, i've solved it. that's great, carl. but we need something better. that's easily adjustable has no penalties or advisory fee. and we can monitor to see that we're on track. like schwab intelligent income. schwab! introducing schwab intelligent income. a simple, modern way to pay yourself from your portfolio. oh, that's cool... i mean, we don't have that. schwab. a modern approach to wealth management.
what about us? is there an ev for me? ev for me? us? what about me? me? introducing the ultium ev platform by general motors. everybody in. (dog whimpers) john and kim are back. thanks for sticking around. what do you know about the three judges, two obama appointees and a biden appointee. >> it looks like all three based on their histories either have experience as a public defender or in the, one in the united states justice department civil division. one was a federal judge at a lower court and ruled against donald trump. these are not -- i want to be careful not to suggest these are
idealogues. this is a duel between a sitting president and former president over official public records. it is not private records. i think the judges are not going to be persuaded by politics and will rule against donald trump given their sort of very solid government service records. >> we still have to go through the lengthy legal process as we pointed out in the segment before. the january 6 committee is demanding the former white house chief of staff mark meadows appear for a deposition tomorrow or face contempt of congress. does that even have any teeth without a ruling from merrick garland on steve bannon's contempt charge? >> it makes it difficult to have teeth when it looks like a pass at the committee is a pass. i think garland at some point will take action on bannon. they may be considering civil remedies as well as the criminal referral they've got. but i just don't think they can let it pass.
the other thing, i'm not terribly concerned about this delay. there are a massive amount of materials not even transferred to the archives that's very relevant to this inquiry. there are a hundred million e-mails that are still in the executive office building that belong to the trump team and those are being sent over in tronches to the archives. they have to be sorted and examined. that is a lot of e-mail, a hundred million. that process is going to go forward during this down time while this is proceeding in court trump is going to lose. >> your testimony in the watergate hearings brought down president nixon when he revealed that he kmou about the cover-up, right? so when you look at mark meadows, if he is compelled to testify under oath, what are the chances trump tries to throw him under the bus first? >> well, that goes with the territory if you testify against a president.
there was an unrelenting effort to discredit me before i testified. there has been an unrelenting historically by nixon apologists to discount my testimony or to point false fingers at the witness and try to undo the damage i've done to that presidency by just telling the truth. so mark meadows, he knows what he is up against. he still has political ambition i believe. this is why he is obviously not going to waltz in there and easily divulge anything he doesn't have to >> i appreciate it so much. thank you i'll see you soon. testimony in the rittenhouse trial wrapping up today with questions of bias and reprimands from the judge. we have the details after this.
tonight the testimony phase of kyle rittenhouse's trial is over the defense wrapping up its case. up next closing arguments and the judge's instructions to the jury before deliberations begin. also tonight a shocking request by one of the defense attorneys in the trial of three white men charged with murdering ahmaud arbery. no more black pastors in the courtroom. you'll hear for yourself just ahead. and the january 6th committee turning up the heat on trump's former chief of staff mark meadows threatening to pursue criminal contempt charges if he refuses to appear before the committee tomorrow as required by the subpoena. we'll start now with the rittenhouse trial and cnn's omar jimenez. >> this is not a political trial. >> reporter: but politics and questions of bias emerged from the back drop of the trial, from the defense's tenth witness drew hernandez. the self-described commentator