Return to Transcripts main page
Trump: A.G. Sessions Should Investigate Anonymous Op-Ed Writer; Obama Hits Campaign Trial after Fiery Trump Speech; Sessions Prepared for Any Outcome Including Being Fired; Obama & Trump Face Off on Campaign Trail as Midterms Loom; Government Photographer Cropped Inauguration Photos After White House Calls; Homeless Veterans Sues Couple Over Go Fund Me Money; Dallas Police Officer Charged with Manslaughter; Songwriter Discusses Anthem Song for "RBG". Aired 1-2p ET
Aired September 8, 2018 - 13:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[13:00:00] FREDRICKA WHITFIELD, CNN ANCHOR: And, in just a few hours, Obama will take center stage for round two, this time, at a rally in California.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: The claim that everything will turn out OK because there are people inside the White House who secretly aren't following the president's orders -
OBAMA: -- that is not a check. I'm being serious here. That's not how our democracy's supposed to work.
OBAMA: These people aren't elected.
OBAMA: They're not accountable.
They're not doing us a service by actively promoting 90 percent of the crazy stuff that's coming out of this White House. And then saying don't worry, we're preventing the other 10 percent. That's not how things are supposed to work.
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I watched it but I fell asleep.
I found he's very good, very good for sleeping.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
WHITFIELD: CNN's Ryan Nobles join us now from the White House.
So Trump says, you know, the speech put him to sleep but we know there have been sleepless nights at the White House as a result of that "New York Times" op-ed. So how is the White House going about trying to find out who penned it?
RYAN NOBLES, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Fred, they haven't gotten every staffer at the White House yet and put them all in a room and have them all say not it yet. It hasn't gotten that bad yet for the White House. They certainly are very concerned about finding who is the author of this op-ed. As you mentioned, the president is described as being obsessed with the search, trying to identify who this individual is.
We understand they have whittled down the list to a very few number of individuals. Now, we don't know exactly who those individuals are. But we may have got some clues from the president's senior counselor, Kellyanne Conway. Listen to what she told our Christiane Amanpour.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR, CNN CHIEF INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Do you think this person is inside the White House?
KELLYANNE CONWAY, SENIOR ADVISOR TO PRESIDENT TRUMP: Most of us don't think that. The president just today said he believes it's somebody in national security. But what I do believe is that who has said that ought to come forward and say it, or ought to resign because the loyalty is not to the president only. It's loyalty to the presidency. It's loyalty to the Constitution.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
NOBLES: Those are two big clues. One, it's someone that comes from the national security apparatus, and the other is they believe it's not someone who actually who works every single day in the White House. They may have that list down to a narrow group of people. That certainly opens it up to a white range of individuals for those of us on the outside looking in, trying to figure this out, as most people in Washington are.
We do know, Fred, some 25 different senior administration officials have put out statements where they've declared definitively they're not the authors of this op-ed. But that's not stopping the president from amping up the pressure. He's asking the Attorney General Jeff Sessions to specifically investigate this and investigate the "New York Times" in particular and try and force them to reveal who the author is. "The Times" hit back forcefully, saying they're not going to participate in an investigation of that sort. They wrote, quote, "We're confident the Department of Justice understands the First Amendment provides all American citizens, and that it would not -- or protects all American citizens, I should say, and it will not participate in such a blatant abuse of government power."
As for the Justice Department themselves, a spokesperson for Attorney General Jeff Sessions says they're not going to comment. Fred, the intrigue continues.
WHITFIELD: It does, indeed.
Ryan Nobles, thank you so much.
Let's talk more about this intrigue. Joining me right now, Daniel Lippman, a reporter for "Politico" and the co-author of "The Politico Playbook." And Josh Rogin, a CNN political analyst and a columnist for the "Washington Post."
Good to see you both.
WHITFIELD: Josh, the president wants to get to the bottom of this, but is who the messenger is far upstaging the actual message?
JOSH ROGIN, COLUMNIST, WASHINGTON POST: Well, yes. First of all, I don't think the president knows squat about who wrote this op-ed. I don't think the White House knows. I don't think you have to --
WHITFIELD: You don't believe this whole whittling down the list?
ROGIN: No, because it's not based on any actual evidence. Just to say to someone in national security, well, the whole thing is about foreign policy and national security. You don't have to be clairvoyant or the head of the FBI to guess it's someone who works in national security. The bottom line is that all of those denials don't mean squat either. Mark Phelps denied being Deep Throat for 40 years. Of course, people are going to deny it. In the end, the person will be revealed if they want to be revealed. That's something that frustrates the president. I'm sure it makes him crazy. But, you know, that's not something that he can do anything about. It's definitely not something he can order the FBI to do something about. Leaking is not a crime. Senior administration officials leak all day every day.
Let's talk about the substance. The substance is someone who works for the president believes that he's immoral and unfit for office. Guess what, people inside the White House and in the administration say that to reporters all day, every day. Right? And so for someone like Kellyanne Conway --
WHITFIELD: Why does this touch a nerve?
ROGIN: Well, because it's designed to be so trolling for the president. In that sense, it's a great success, right? It's meant to make him crazy. Sure enough --
[13:05:17] WHITFIELD: It's working.
ROGIN: Yes. So, you know, people are, oh, the leaker doesn't get what he wanted. We don't know what the leaker wanted. If the leaker wanted to make the president crazy and troll him epically, well then it's a huge success. If they wanted to point out a lot of people inside the administration think the president is immoral and unfit for office, well, we already knew that. Because there's 400 pages in the Woodward book, 400 pages in "Fire and Fury," and every other book or every other article that's been written about what these people think about their leader suggesting these exact same things.
WHITFIELD: Daniel, why does the president and, you know, people in the White House or around him kind of play to that? Why -- why allow everyone to see that it is driving you crazy and you want to throw all these resources into finding out who it is so publicly as opposed to, you know, there's a way to do that I guess privately if the president really wants to get to the bottom of who done it.
DANIEL LIPPMAN, REPORTER, POLITICO & CO-AUTHOR, "THE POLITICO PLAYBOOK": They make this mistake every time because they just play into the media narratives. They talk about what Democrats want to talk about because what Trump likes is a good fight. And he likes internal intrigue. So he used to pit members of his own staff and he still does against each other. And when you do that, this is a natural result. The ironic thing is President Trump, he used to be one of those anonymous sources. I think he probably still is for some journalists.
LIPPMAN: He used to call the "New York Post" and page six and say, you know, I'm a source close to Trump and, you know, he's -- Trump's dating life is going really well.
WHITFIELD: I mean, Barron was a name he kind of used.
WHITFIELD: The ambassador to the U.N., Nikki Haley, in her statement, you know, would say, you know -- I'm paraphrasing and then quoting -- she said, you know, by stopping, asking those to stop throwing gas on fire of endless distraction. And it's interesting, her word choice, because throwing the gas, get that part where everybody is kind of descended on it, but what she said, throwing gas on the fire of endless distraction, is she talking about, you know, the president being part of that endless distraction?
LIPPMAN: I think she's admitting that tacitly. I have no evidence to this but it would be ironic if in a couple years Nikki Haley writes another op-ed and says, well, she wrote two op-eds in that same week. So it's pretty funny that the only person who wrote a named op-ed is Nikki Haley. It's kind of a -- I don't know, mind games that she's playing with us.
And so, Josh, you know, this does have the White House kind of thrown into disarray. Everyone trying to figure it out. The president is only starting a new problem by saying I'm going to sick the U.S. attorney general on this task. When there doesn't seem -- everyone has collectively said, meaning legal analysts, there's no crime here, and you can't really use the DOJ or the attorney general, you know, for your own personal gain, which is what the president would be doing.
ROGIN: Yes. No, it's ridiculous and horrendous thing to suggest, first of all, there's no crime. Second of all, you know, he's free to start a leak investigation if he wants to do that. They do that all the time. I've been doing this for a long time. There's plenty of leak investigations that have been started after I wrote something based on anonymous sourcing. They never found the guy, ever, OK. It doesn't work. The "New York Times" is going to protect its source. The president is going to continue to erode what -- the faith that America has in the separation of politics and law enforcement in this country. And in a sense, what he's doing is reinforcing the accusations that the anonymous official made in the op-ed, which is that he doesn't understand how the government works, and how it's worked for hundreds of years, and what his responsibilities are to maintain those norms and values and practices that 44 presidents before him have abided by, you know. And this, again, I think if you want to go back to the Obama speech, this is providing fuel for those people like Obama who want to make sure that voters heading into the November elections see this president as out of the norm, unusual, threatening the kind of, you know, traditions that -- values that this country's long been based on.
ROGIN: And he's leaning into the punch, right? And he's definitely, you know, harming the -- his ability to project himself and his supporters as people who are running a stable and competent government. If anything, he's proving it is an anonymous op-ed writer correct.
[13:09:55] WHITFIELD: Yes.
So, Daniel, you have to wonder if the White House is speaking about the potential consequence. If you finally get to the bottom of, the big reveal of who penned the op-ed, but then what, what do you do? What does the White House do with that? Or is it just being able to say, you know, we found that person out. But then what?
LIPPMAN: Yes, then what - "Washitonia" (ph) had a great story, that person could get a $10 million book advance. He would be the biggest star of the resistance everywhere. So probably not wise to really reveal that person's name. That would just be the best career boost ever. And so, you know, you're kind of stuck in a catch-22 if you're the White House and you find this guy, which they're likely not to the find.
WHITFIELD: All right.
ROGIN: Or girl.
WHITFIELD: Or girl. That's right. Man or woman.
All right, Daniel Lippman, Josh Rogin, thanks so much.
ROGIN: Thank you.
LIPPMAN: Thank you.
WHITFIELD: Still ahead, he was the first Republican Senator to support Candidate Trump and he is beloved by his colleagues. But now sources tell CNN Attorney General Jeff Sessions is preparing for any outcome that awaits him, including being fired. Will his GOP allies step in?
And nearly two years after President Trump's inauguration, a government photographer is coming forward, claiming he intentionally edited a picture to make the crowd at that event look larger than it actually was. Who asked him to do it? Next.
[13:15:32] WHITFIELD: All right. Welcome back. CNN is learning Attorney General Jeff Sessions is coming to terms with the fact his relationship with President Trump is doomed and is prepared for whatever outcome awaits him, even being fired. That's according to sources familiar with Sessions thinking. President Trump has been publicly berating Sessions almost since day one. Now other Republicans, including Senator Lindsey Graham, are suggesting publicly he could be gone once the midterm elections are over. But will the president even wait that long?
Charlie Dent is a CNN political commentator and a former Republican congressman from Pennsylvania, and he joins us now.
Good to see you.
So, President Trump says he wants Sessions to investigate this anonymous "New York Times" op-ed author. If he doesn't, could that push the president to fire Sessions sooner rather than later, if at all?
CHARLIE DENT, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well, Fredricka --
WHITFIELD: It's all out there.
DENT: I suspect that Attorney General Sessions has a lot more important things to do than that. It would be a waste of his time. It would be absurd for the president to ask him to investigate. What's the crime here? There wasn't a leak of classified material. So of course, the attorney general Sessions should not investigate. That's not going to stop the president.
WHITFIELD: Yes. You heard Lindsey Graham who says, you know, the president feels betrayed, you know, I don't blame him, but, like you said, as far as we all know, there's no crime. That can't be enough, right, to push your attorney general or the Department of Justice to open up an investigation, to look for someone who exercised their freedom of speech?
DENT: Well, what's even more troubling about all this is the president of the United States should really not be intervening at all in terms of trying to encourage or discourage prosecutions of American citizens. We saw the other day he tweeted about two Republican Congressman who were indicted and more or less suggested the attorney general should go easy on them. And he's talked about using the Justice Department to prosecute his enemies. This is completely out of bounds for a president of the United States. The less the president says about prosecutions, the better off he will be and the country will be. So it's really -- this is -- we're just in uncharted territory. I still can't get over the fact that the president seems to intervene on these prosecutorial matters.
WHITFIELD: And perhaps close to uncharted territory to get the former president, Barack Obama, who is now speaking rather precipitously, whether it be the op-ed, where he says it's not the way it should work. It's not the way it's supposed to work, you know. These are extraordinary times and dangerous times. But he also says there's a semblance of ways in which you could express, you know, how disheartened you might be about a sitting president. This is more of what he said.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
OBAMA: They're undermining our alliances, cozying up to Russia. What happened to the Republican Party? Its central organizing principle in foreign policy was the fight against Communism and now they're cozying up to the former head of the KGB, actively blocking legislation that would defend our elections from Russian attack. What happened?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
WHITFIELD: So he issued a challenge not just to those working in the administration but to Republicans as a whole when it comes to checks and balances. He also challenged American voters to say it really is up to you and you've got to begin with voting. So what do you see you know in the road ahead, particularly as we head towards midterm elections, to have, you know, the power of the presidency used in different ways, the power of the sitting president and the power of the former president?
[13:19:39] DENT: Well, Fredricka, you know, when I just heard President Obama talk about Russia and, you know, if you read excerpts of the Woodward book, there was something that really struck me in all of this. It was a conversation between Gary Cohn and Jim Mattis. It's what they refer to as "the big problem." I'm going to quickly just read it. It says, "The president does not understand the importance of allies overseas, the value of diplomacy, or the relationship between the military economy and intelligence partnerships with foreign governments."
When you get beyond the daily drama, the anarchy, the chaos, the tweets and all the erratic behavior, this is a very serious substantive issue that I think President Obama more or less addressed in that clip you just showed. But also what came out of the White House from -- or from the administration from the top economic guy, Gary Cohn, and the top national security man, James Mattis, this is, I think, fundamentally the substantive issue we have to come to grips with as Republicans. We're always the party that stood up to Soviet and Russian aggression. We valued our international alliances and believed in the international order that our country created. And we felt it was -- the role of the president was to defend that order and speak for American virtues and values, all the things --
WHITFIELD: That same question of Obama yesterday, then, what happened, what's happening, that there aren't more Republicans --
DENT: Well, what's happening --
WHITFIELD: -- particularly who are speaking out, such as yourself. Jeff Flake has been very outspoken on his way out. But you're not hearing as much from those who are sitting in power right now in elected office.
DENT: What has happened is the Republican Party used to be much more about various, you know, principles and ideals. And now it's really about loyalty to a man. That's what I guess is troubling to me. That this is really about the litmus test for the Republican Party these days is loyalty to the president. It's not about any set of issues or ideals. And that's what has changed. Now, we're going to have to -- we the Republican Party are going to have to recalibrate at some point. This is not a sustainable way to manage a political party for the long term. Maybe short term in some primaries, in some parts of the country, this is good politics. But I think this is disastrous politics going into a midterm in a general election. And we're going to find that out in November whether or not this has been a smart political play.
WHITFIELD: All right, we'll leave it there for now.
Charlie Dent, good to see you. Thanks so much.
DENT: Thanks, Fredricka.
WHITFIELD: All right, still ahead, the president's inauguration is back in the headlines. This, after the National Park Service says it intentionally edited photos to make the audience look bigger than it was. A live report, next.
[13:25:00] WHITFIELD: Former President Barack Obama and President Donald Trump are battling it out on the campaign trail as the midterm elections loom. Obama will speak at a California rally in about an hour from now.
CNN's Dan Merica is at today's campaign rally in Anaheim, California.
What is the expectation? The crowd is filling up here.
DAN MERICA, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yes, it's filling up here, getting a little bit louder. What Obama aides tell me is yesterday was the more professorial speech. It ran about 65 minutes. Today will be the distilled version where President Obama come out and give the highlights of his speech, which was a condemnation of President Donald Trump. President Obama had avoided giving that speech for months now, avoiding the campaign trail, much to the dismay of some Democrats who think he is sitting out on the sidelines of what they call a generational fight against President Trump.
Take a listen to what he said directly about the president yesterday.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
OBAMA: It shouldn't be Democrat or Republican to say we don't target certain groups of people based on what they look like or how they pray. We are Americans. We're supposed to stand up to bullies.
OBAMA: Not follow them.
OBAMA: We're supposed to stand up to discrimination. And we're sure as heck supposed to stand up clearly and unequivocally to Nazi sympathizers.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MERICA: So you'll hear some of that again today here in Anaheim when the president comes out and stumps for seven Democratic House candidates who are in districts that Hillary Clinton won in 2016 but are currently represented by Republicans in the House. These are really the front line of candidates the Democrats think can swing the House from red to blue in November.
I spoke to one of these candidates. Because there's an open question whether this will rally Republicans or Democrats more. T.J. Cox, one of the Democrats running in the central valley of California, says he believes it will rally his base more. Because, in fact, his opponent has been forced to take a number of tough votes under President Donald Trump and that Democrats will be more excited to come out and support President Obama, much like you see behind me. If you look closely, the podium back there says "Take it back." That's an obvious reference to Democrat's hope in taking back the House in November. And really much of that, they say, starts here in California -- Fred?
WHITFIELD: Dan Merica, thanks so much, in Anaheim.
We're learning new information about one of the first controversies of the Trump administration. And it didn't involve immigration or the economy. But, rather, these shots on Inauguration Day. We now know those photos taken by the National Park Service were cropped intentionally. In newly released documents, a government photographer tells investigators he cropped the images to make the audience look larger after getting multiple calls from the White House.
For more, let's bring in CNN correspondent, Polo Sandoval.
Polo, this whole crowd-size thing is never ending. So tell us more about these new details.
[13:30:14] POLO SANDOVAL, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yes, Fred. It seems like January 2017 was decades ago. This back and forth, again, in the news, especially after the publication of an article by "The Guardian." They received some documents by the U.S. inspector general in response to a Freedom of Information Request that state the then- head of the National Park Service received a call from President Trump immediately following his inauguration, requesting more photographs. And also other high-ranking White House officials were making that request. This request appears to have trickled down to other members of the Park Service who, according to this article, made an assumption that that meant that they needed to crop those photographs so that they would focus on the areas of the National Mall that were crowded that day or at least that had groups of people. The official, though, is acknowledging that at no point did the White House or President Trump make a direct order to crop the photos. Just that that is what they believed would likely satisfy President Trump and other officials.
So what this does, Fred, it really does paint a picture of that scramble that was happening behind the scenes only a day into the first day of the Trump administration while the rest of the country saw that very bizarre press conference that was hosted by then-White House press secretary, Sean Spicer.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEAN SPICER, FORMER WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: Photographs of the inaugural proceedings were intentionally framed in a way in one particular tweet to minimize the enormous support that it gathered on the National Mall. This was the largest audience to ever witness an inauguration, period, both in person and around the globe.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SANDOVAL: A point that, of course, we all know was false.
Two key things to mention, Fred, it is still unclear exactly what photographs were edited and if those were the ones that were actually put out there for the public. CNN has reached out to the White House for comment. We are still waiting to hear back -- Fred?
WHITFIELD: All right, Polo Sandoval, thank you.
Next, a homeless veteran is demanding to get the money that a couple raised for him. He never got most of it. Now a legal battle is brewing.
[13:36:47] WHITFIELD: All right, welcome back. A homeless veteran still hasn't received the $400,000 a couple supposedly raised for him. And now he's demanding it in court. The couple who started a Go Fund Me account and who had control of the funds is now explaining why they haven't handed over all of the money. In an interview with the "Philadelphia Enquirer," Kate McClure and Mark D'Amico say they have given the homeless vet, Johnny Bobbitt Jr, more than half of the money but are withholding the rest until he gets a job and is drug free.
Bobbitt's attorney disputes that, saying his client has only gotten $75,000 so far, less than a quarter of the money raised. He also says he learned in court that the remainder of the money is gone. So the couple, Kate McClure and Mark D'Amico, are now facing a deposition next week on the whereabouts of the cash.
In the meantime, the Go Fund Me organization is making a promise to Bobbitt, saying this, quote, "We'll continue to assist with the ongoing law enforcement investigation. As we've said, our platform is backed by the Go Fund Me guarantee, which means that in the rare case that Go Fund Me, law enforcement or a user finds campaigns are misused, donors and beneficiaries are protected. We're fulfilling that commitment today and we will continue to work with Johnny's team to make sure he's receiving all donated amounts."
All right, let's bring in our legal eagles here, Avery Friedman, a civil rights attorney and law professor in Cleveland, and criminal defense attorney, Richard Herman, joining us from Las Vegas.
All right, good to see you both.
RICHARD HERMAN, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY & LAW PROFESSOR: Good to see you.
WHITFIELD: Whoo, wow, this is quite the case.
OK, so, Avery, you first.
So you see that Mr. Bobbitt has, you know, challenged and he's heard from the Go Fund Me, you know, company who says he is going to get his money, but let's get down to, you know, Kate McClure, you know, who actually crossed paths with Bobbitt way back when and made a promise. Is that what is going to ultimately help him retrieve the money, make his case? Because she made a commitment, you know, that she's going to help raise money for him when he was down on his luck?
AVERY FRIEDMAN, CIVIL RIGHTS ATTORNEY & LAW PROFESSOR: Well, this case is -- you couldn't hire scene writers to come up with this, Fredricka. The amazing story of Johnny Bobbitt, who was a drug-addled ex-Marine, a veteran, who's homeless, and Kate is stuck, she has no gas, and Johnny takes his last $20, puts gas in her car. Isn't that amazing?
WHITFIELD: Yes. FRIEDMAN: So what Kate and her boyfriend, Mark, decide to do is go to
Go Fund Me, never dreaming that 14,000 people would jump into this, and they raised over $400,000 for Johnny so he can get his trailer and go live on with his life. Well, in fact, Johnny even moved in with them. So at the end of the day, the question that the case presents is both civil and criminal. Is there a civil responsibility for Kate and Mark in paying the rest of the balance? After all, they're not guardians. And criminal implications, whether or not they stole the money. And that's going to be the face-off this coming week..
[13:40:13] WHITIFIELD: Right.
FRIEDMAN: Civil and criminal.
WHITFIELD: WHITFIELD: So, Richard, their defense is, you know, we're the keepers of this money, because we don't think he's responsible enough. However, we've given him what we think, you know, he can handle right now. But then, you know, he, Bobbitt, is able to challenge them on what they've done with the money period. They may have spent it all on themselves. That they're not saving it for him.
HERMAN: Yes, Fred, it's -- you know, my gut tells me, and we don't know here, but these people were very nice in trying to do this Go Fund Me for him because they were impressed with him and it was ludicrous to think they would ever raise $400,000. They probably figured a couple grand.
FRIEDMAN: That's right.
HERMAN: They got the money. You know, it's like Gordon Gekko and Wall Street, greed is good. No, it's not good. And $400,000, Fred, temptation, you know. Cats don't chase dogs, Fred. It's pretty simple what happened here.
HERMAN: There's a forensic accounting due on Monday. You can't hide from the numbers, Fred. They don't have the money. They spent that money. This is a ruse that we're not --
FRIEDMAN: You don't know that.
HERMAN: -- because he's a drug addict? They spent it.
FRIEDMAN: You don't know that.
HERMAN: They were court ordered to pay him and they defied the court order, Fred. It's not good. They're in big trouble.
HERMAN: They better make a deal now.
WHITFIELD: So this is what was said on "Megyn Kelly Today." (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MARK D'AMICO, STARTED GO FUND ME FOR VETERAN: During the course of us getting all his proper documents and everything, the red flags were popping up. And right after Christmas, we were going to my bank and we deposited $25,000 in his account.
MEGYN KELLY, HOST, MEGYN KELLY TODAY: So you did create an account but you didn't feel comfortable giving the entire $400 --
D'AMICO: Yes, because we saw the pattern that was developing.
KELLY: That suggested what to you?
D'AMICO: That he was going to do something foolish and end up right back where he was.
KELLY: What specifically?
D'AMICO: The drug use. And every dollar he ever touched was used for drugs.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
WHITFIELD: All right, so, Avery, they're looking out for his best interest.
FRIEDMAN: Yes, I mean, I think it's cynical to assume that these people broke the law.
HERMAN: Well --
FRIEDMAN: They seem to be the kind of people that would do the right thing. In fact, that's the whole idea of what's coming up next week. Prosecutor's office looking into it. If they stole money. At the end of the day, it needs to be sorted out.
The problem here is we have three elements. We have technology, Go Fund Me. We have the law, which requires civil compliance and compliance with the law. And then we have media. So we don't know. We can't assume that anything has been stolen. And it will be sorted out. The question is, in a deposition, which -- in a deposition, which has been ordered --
HERMAN: There's not going to be a deposition --
FRIEDMAN: -- a Fifth Amendment right to block any --
WHITFIELD: Richard, I'll say it again, but this time with more of a question mark. So they're looking out for his best interest? Question mark.
HERMAN: Come on. Come on, Fred. That's B.S. They spent the money. It's gone. The money's gone. They're taking the Fifth. There's a criminal investigation. There's a forensic audit taking place. They're going to get busted here. They better make a deal fast. This judge in the civil case is not having it. She's directed them to appear in court. Not allowing the lawyer to take the Fifth for them and appear alone. They were directed to turn over the money to him. This thing about he's doing drugs, we don't want to give it to him. Come on, that's ridiculous. They blew the money. It was just too much to deal with. And $400,000, Fred. They never thought in their wildest dreams they'd ever raise that much. But what about Go Fund Me? How beautiful are they to say, look, if the money was stolen, we'll make it up and give it to him.
FRIEDMAN: They guarantee it, that's right.
HERMAN: That's amazing in this day and age, Fred.
WHITFIELD: We'll leave it there for now.
All right, Avery, Richard --
FRIEDMAN: Have faith in humanity, Fredricka. Have faith in humanity.
WHITFIELD: I always have faith.
FRIEDMAN: I know you do.
[13:44:05] WHITFIELD: All right, good to see you, guys. Thank you so much.
All right, still to come, a Dallas police officer shoots and kills her neighbor inside his apartment, allegedly mistaking it for her own apartment?
Plus, we're watching for President Obama, who will be speaking soon in Orange County, California, to rally democratic voters ahead of the midterms. We'll bring that to you live when it starts.
We're back in a moment.
WHITFIELD: A Dallas police officer will be charged with manslaughter after she fatally shot her neighbor in his apartment, allegedly mistaking it as her own home. The victim is identified as a 26-year- old man.
Here is Dallas Mayor Mike Rawlings paying tribute to him today.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MIKE RAWLINGS, (D), DALLAS MAYOR: Let's just start with the belief that has become apparent to us all that Botham Jean was exactly the sort of citizen we want to have in the city of Dallas.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
WHITFIELD: And here with more on this very bizarre case, CNN's Kaylee Hartung.
KAYLEE HARTUNG, CNN CORRESPONDENT: After a police officer, off duty, but still in uniform, shot and killed her 26-year-old neighbor on Thursday night, the Dallas Police Department opened up an investigation and began following protocol for an officer-involved shooting. But now the Dallas police chief is saying, as this investigation has continued, she learned this is a much different and very unique situation than it initially appeared. She is vowing full transparency.
[13:50:05] RENEE HALL, CHIEF, DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT: Right now, there are more are questions than we have answers. We understand the concerns of this community and that is why we are working as vigorously and as meticulously as we can to ensure the integrity of this case, and that the integrity of the department is upheld. In doing so, we hope to bring understanding and clarity to the family.
HARTUNG: A blood sample was taken from the officer to test for drugs and alcohol in her system.
And the Texas Rangers have been called in to operate a parallel and independent criminal investigation here.
The Dallas Police Department says they have ordered a warrant for this officer's arrest on the charge of manslaughter.
Kaylee Hartung, CNN, Atlanta.
WHITFIELD: Still ahead, a self-proclaimed flaming feminist litigator who would become the second woman on the U.S. Supreme Court. We take an intimate look at the career of the notorious "RBG," next.
[13:55:31] WHITFIELD: All right, welcome back. You're looking live pictures at Anaheim, California where, at any moment, we're expecting former President Barack Obama to speak at a Democratic rally ahead of the midterms. You heard him yesterday challenging voters and challenging the Trump White House. Today, it is day two of that, this time from Anaheim, California. And of course, we'll carry it for you live when it happens.
Professor, litigator, role model, dissenter, Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg has earned countless titles and accolades during her legal career. And now the new CNN original film, "RBG," takes an intimate look at the personal and professional life of Justice Ginsburg who has developed a breathtaking legal legacy while becoming an unexpected pop culture icon.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GINSBURG: When I graduated from Columbia Law School in 1959, not a law firm in the entire city of New York would employ me.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: She captured for the male members of the court what it was like to be a second-class citizen.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Ruth knew what she was doing in laying the foundation.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: So help me, God.
GINSBURG: So help me, God.
Real change, enduring change, happens one step at a time.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
WHITFIELD: Joining me right now, Diane Warren, the award-winning songwriter who wrote "I'll Fight," the anthem for the "RBG" film being performed by Jennifer Hudson. Very distinctive sound.
Good to see you, Diane.
DIANE WARREN, SONGWRITER: Good to see you.
WHITFIELD: So how meaningful is this for you to, A, be engaged, be part of this, and to see, you know, this rollout of "RBG" and how it really does paint the picture of kind of the tapestry of her life?
WARREN: I mean, I'm so honored to be a part of this. Especially in the times we're in now. But to have written a song that is her anthem, what an amazing woman. She speaks softly and she is not very tall, but she speaks louder than anybody and stands taller than anybody.
WHITFIELD: So what did you have any mind as you were penning this?
WARREN: I wanted something to really, you know, represent her. She fights for us, you know. That has been her life's mission, hasn't it?
WARREN: And so I guess I have this thing for Supreme Court judges. Last year I wrote the song about Thurgood Marshall and now this year it is "I'll fight".
WHITFIELD: You have written a lot of iconic theme songs for major films, Hollywood blockbusters, like for Thurgood Marshall. The process of trying to write something, envision, you know, the audience for whom you are writing, the characters for whom you are writing. How do you put that together? What is the imagery that you have when you try to do that?
WHITFIELD: Particularly for Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
WARREN: I wanted to capture who she was. You know, same thing with a movie, whether it was like capturing Thurgood Marshall or Ruth Bader Ginsburg, you know. The thing about Ruth Bader Ginsburg, she is a fighter. So it was -- I kind of tapped into that. It's hard to explain the process. Just get inspired.
WHITFIELD: Yes. Sorry for the delay.
And so now what does it feel like that it has come to fruition? It is on the screen. Already people have been talking about their impressions from seeing it for the first time last weekend. And highly anticipated it for tomorrow. Personally what has it been like for you?
WARREN: Again, it is such an honor and really humbling to be a part of this. And I think when people see this movie, like I think I've seen it six times now. And every time I see it, I see something different. There's a beautiful love story with her and Marty.
WARREN: I don't want to give anything away, but there's moments that just make you cry. And you are proud. And I don't know, I'm proud to be a part of this. My little part, I'm just proud and proud of the song. I know Jennifer Hudson, who recorded it, is really proud.
WHITFIELD: It is a big part. It is very significant. Congratulations --
WARREN: Thank you so much.
WHITFIELD: -- for that achievement and that accomplishment.
Diane Warren, appreciate your time.
WARREN: Thank you.
WHITFIELD: Thank you so much.
WARREN: Thank you. Appreciate it.
[14:00:05] WHITFIELD: And of course, everybody, you've got to watch "RBG" tomorrow night, 8:00 Eastern, right here on CNN.