Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Newsroom
Deplorable Conditions Found Inside 4 ICE Migrant Facilities; "Best Friend" Bromance Between Putin & China's President Xi Could Mean Trouble for Trump & U.S.; Colorado School District Mulls Tearing Down Columbine; Severe Flooding, Trade War with China Worry U.S. Farmers. Aired 1-2p ET
Aired June 08, 2019 - 13:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[13:00:00] ALEX MARQUARDT, CNN ANCHOR: And this monster field of candidates is out on the campaign trail this weekend, with the bulk of them descending on the first-in-the-nation voting state of Iowa.
Nearly a dozen of those chasing the Democratic nomination are in Des Moines today with many of them attending PRIDE Fest, which is the state's largest LGBTQ event.
Now, even though the Iowa caucuses are eight months away, the candidates are using this time to attack President Trump on his immigration policies.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
PETE BUTTIGIEG, (D), SOUTH BEND MAYOR & PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Look, there are things we need to do to manage the flow of migrants. Much of which has to do with making sure conditions are more stable in the countries they're fleeing.
You know, this idea has emerged that we have to punish these Central American countries for sending us people. They don't want to send us people. They want to be more stable.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MARQUARDT: CNN's Leyla Santiago is there in Des Moines.
Leyla, you've been talking to voters. What else is at the tops of their minds?
LEYLA SANTIAGO, CNN CORRESPONDENT: They've been talking about, and no surprise here, the rights of the LGBTQ community, about abortion.
And as we start to see the activity pick up here, a lot of folks kind of showing up here, we're also not just seeing participants that are celebrating PRIDE, but we're also seeing how PRIDE and politics come together.
The campaigns, already we've seen Williamson's campaign out here, Bernie Sanders' campaign, really trying to engage with, tell them a little bit about their platforms. And pointing to the event that starts in about an hour and a half,
where the candidates will have 10 minutes each to make that pitch to engage with voters and try to get some key support in a key state. We'll have eight candidates showing up today at the PRIDE Fest here in Des Moines.
Then tomorrow, Alex, a very, very big event, where you'll see the Hall of Fame Dinner. We expect to see 19 of the 23 candidates, where we expect them to once again talk about the priorities that are important to them, be it the economy or President Trump or abortion.
From Beto O'Rourke, we saw him running the 5K with his wife. Here's what he said about immigration, talking to Iowa voters.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BETO O'ROURKE, (D), FORMER CONGRESSMAN & PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: The Trump administration has openly attacked immigrants. The language they've used, the cages in which they've placed children, the conditions in which they hold detainees, the internal ICE enforcement operations, the raids that are tearing apart families and entire communities. But we also know much of this persisted before the Trump administration.
And so I think it's just really important that we meet this opportunity, this next election, with urgency on this issue that it demands or a fear that we will have some other version of this going forward.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SANTIAGO: And interesting to see that O'Rourke and other candidates are trying to establish how different they are from Trump, because I've actually spoken to two voters who kind of took different sides here.
I heard one man here today tell me, look, I want to see who has the claws to go up against Trump, who can bring him down.
Another man within the same hour told me, this is not about Trump, this is about us and our vision for the future.
So we'll have to wait and see what the candidates will say when this forum begins. But take note of the timing here. We're just a few weeks ahead of the very first primary that will be in Miami at the end of the month -- Alex?
MARQUARDT: Lots of different parties for all these voters.
Leyla Santiago, in Des Moines, thank you.
One of the priorities, which Leyla just mentioned, is abortion. And where the 2020 candidates stand on the issue of abortion has been a key point on the campaign trail.
A new CNN poll may explain why. Take a look at this. It shows three in 10 Americans would only vote for a candidate for major office who shares their views on abortion. That's the highest percentage in any poll since 1996.
CNN's Natasha Chen is following where the candidates stand on abortion.
Natasha, this poll means that what they say about abortion really is critical to voters in 2020, isn't it?
NATASHA CHEN, CNN: Absolutely, Alex, especially when you look at the respondents, who are women identifying as Independent of any political party, as well as nonwhite women. These groups are much more likely compared to men to say abortion is a critical issue for their vote.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
CHEN (voice-over): With several states banning abortions at much earlier stages of pregnancy than established by Roe v. Wade, 2020 Democratic candidates are coming forward in defense of abortion rights.
SEN. ELIZABETH WARREN (D-MA): People who are frightened are the ones who don't get access. And that's just not right.
CHEN: Elizabeth Warren, Amy Klobuchar, and Kirsten Gillibrand, have called for Roe v. Wade to be codified into federal law.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I think Kamala Harris had a good idea the other day.
CHEN: Harris is proposing the Department of Justice block what she calls dangerous abortion restrictions in states pushing unconstitutional anti-choice legislation before they go into effect.
[13:05:00] Harris is also among a host of Democratic candidates who tweeted in support of repealing the Hyde Amendment, which bans federal dollars from being used for abortions, except in cases of rape, incest, or where the mother's life is in danger. 15 states offer their own funding for a wider range of abortion services to Medicaid recipients.
The Kaiser Family Foundation reports more than half the women of childbearing age on Medicaid do not qualify for most abortion services.
SEN. CORY BOOKER (D-NY): This assault on women's reproductive rights is an assault on women but it's a particular assault on African- American women.
CHEN: Joe Biden was the only candidate in the Democratic field who supported the Hyde Amendment, until he changed his mind this week.
JOE BIDEN, (D), FORMER VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES & DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATE: If I believe health care is a right, as I do, I can no longer support an amendment that makes that right dependent on someone's zip code. CHEN: On the Republican side of the race, President Donald Trump was
for abortion rights in the '90s but is now against them. His administration imposed new restrictions Wednesday on the use of fetal tissue in scientific research.
His own primary challenger, former Massachusetts Governor Bill Weld, penned an op-ed defending a woman's right to choose.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
CHEN: That leaves President Trump as the only 2020 candidate opposed to abortion rights. A few weeks ago, he tweeted that he's strongly pro-life but with favoring three exceptions for abortion, that is rape, incest, and protecting the life of the mother -- Alex?
MARQUARDT: Natasha Chen, in Washington, thank you.
As Natasha mentioned, Joe Biden is playing cleanup this week following a backlash after his initial support of the Hyde Amendment.
One Biden's senior campaign advisers appeared on CNN to explain the reasons behind this flip-flop.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
(CROSSTALK)
BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN HOST: He has not explained the reason --
(CROSSTALK)
KEILAR: This is a -- this is a serious issue. He has not explained his evolution other than to say that he has changed his mind.
KATE BEDINGFIELD, DEPUTY CAMPAIGN MANAGER & COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR, JOE BIDEN PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN: He explained -- he explained exactly why. He said, because of the issues that we're facing now and as he's thinking about access to health care, in his health care plan. He said both of those things last night.
(CROSSTALK)
BEDINGFIELD: He's somebody who will always say what he thinks and what he believes. That's exactly what he did last night.
I don't think any voter what's question about Joe Biden's authenticity. I think people know him, they know who he is, they know his values. And they know that when he's facing a tough decision, when he's tackling a tough personal decision, he's going to speak candidly about how he's thinking about it.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MARQUARDT: Let's dive a little deeper. With me now is Brendan Buck, former top aide to former Republican House speaker, Paul Ryan, and Jess McIntosh, former director of communications for outreach in the Hillary Clinton campaign.
Thank you both for joining me.
JESS MCINTOSH, FORMER DIRECTOR OF COMMUNICATIONS FOR OUTREACH, HILLARY CLINTON PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN: Thanks.
MARQUARDT: Jess, first, to you.
This was a rough week, for starters, for Joe Biden, in large part, because of this major course reversal. Do you think that his evolving, let's call it, views on the Hyde Amendment, is what he really believes, or is it politically expedient in a field that is tacking much farther to the left in this election?
MCINTOSH: I think it was shocking, first, this week to learn that Joe Biden continued to support the Hyde Amendment. That puts him out of step with the majority of Americans, the majority of Democrats, and every single person in the Democratic field. So that was quite a shock to folks who had been watching this race. I'm glad that he reversed himself.
But I think Brianna Keilar was entirely correct. The explanation for the reversal doesn't make sense. The Hyde Amendment was always a discriminatory bill that restricted access to abortion, which is a right, to poor women who couldn't afford to pay out of pocket for it or get private health insurance.
The idea that that would suddenly become untenable now that we are facing even more abortion restrictions simply doesn't make sense.
I would love to hear from Joe why he evolved on this issue but I haven't heard it yet.
MARQUARDT: Right, and politicians do constantly evolve.
But, Brendan, this is the third time that former Vice President Joe Biden has run for office, for president. How do you think this was handled by him and his campaign?
BRENDAN BUCK, FORMER TOP AIDE TO FORMER HOUSE SPEAKER PAUL RYAN: Well, obviously, not very well. It was stunning that they went on TV and didn't have a better answer at how they landed here.
The Hyde Amendment's been around since 1976. Joe Biden's been in the Senate, got to the Senate in 1973. This is hardly a new issue for him.
Going forward, I don't know how much this issue is going to be debated. But for me, what this says is that he's running from a position of weakness at this point.
You know, one of the things that -- I was really high on Joe Biden's chances for a long time, because while every other Democrat was trying to outflank each other to the left and be the most progressive candidate, Joe Biden said, that's fine, I'm not going to do that, I'm just here to beat Donald Trump and I'm not going to play that game. But now he's playing that game. And he's telling everyone that's going to try to play catch-up with all of these progressives.
And if he wants to catch up with them, we could be doing this once a week for the next year. I'm sure Jessica could name six things off the top of her head where she doesn't think he's progressive enough. So at some point, he needs to decide what kind of candidate he wants to be.
[13:10:02] MARQUARDT: Right. What was impressive was, when he launched his campaign, he really came out essentially talking about how -- basically, made it seem like he was already in the general election, and not the primary. Now he's very much being dragged into a very, very competitive primary in this Democratic field.
Jess, when you look at the missteps that Biden has struggled with so far, and he came surging out of the gate, he really had almost two months essentially of a very clean rollout, everything was going well, and then, this week, he just really got caught up in a number of issues.
When you look at all of these different snags, each of them individually isn't necessarily fatal or all that damaging. But when Democrats look at all of them taken together, what do you think, how do you think they're going to reimbursement?
MCINTOSH: I mean, I think it's odd that we have decided that the candidate in the race who has run and lost twice before is somehow the safe electable choice. I want to see a lot more from Joe Biden before I'm super comfortable with him and the idea of him as a nominee.
When he came out, it was a stumble. He stumbled over the non-apology apology to Anita Hill and his handling of that. He then went away for a couple of weeks before reemerging on the Hyde stumble.
So at this point, I'm not feeling super confident about his ability to appeal to the progressive base, understand what we're talking about, understand where we want to go, then actually get us there.
There are a lot of incredible choices in the field right now. And I wish they were getting some of the airtime that he was right now, because there are some really, really excellent policy proposals being put out there.
MARQUARDT: A number of those choices, eight of them are in Iowa this weekend at PRIDE Fest. Biden is not among them.
Brendan, do you think that matters, that he skips this Iowa stop this early on, eight months from the caucuses?
BUCK: I think he has a good family excuse of why he's not there. I'll give him a pass on that.
You have to talk about the question of the type of campaign he's been running so far. He's out there much less than the rest of the candidates. You get the sense that he's almost playing not to lose rather than to win. And in a field with 23 candidates, I don't think you can do that. You
need to provide somebody with a rationale for why you should be president. He's playing it very safe. And I think that's going to end up antagonizing a lot of the base.
Just the points that Jess was making, you need to explain to people what the rationale is for your campaign and show that you have the energy for it.
It's an interesting question because Joe Biden is an energetic person. If you're around him, he always is beaming with enthusiasm for things, but he hasn't shown that on the campaign. It's been hard to keep up with him.
MARQUARDT: Yes.
Jess, I want to switch gears a little bit to another branch of government, the Supreme Court. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg has warned that the court may be sharply divided over some of its big remaining cases in the coming weeks. Do you think this is raising an alarm with voters on both sides going into 2020?
MCINTOSH: Oh, for sure. And I think for a long time the Republicans, frankly, ate Democrats' lunch when it came to the courts. They did a very good job of explaining to their voting base why the courts matter so much for their ideology to be imposed on the country.
Democrats didn't pay a ton of attention to the courts. We certainly are now. But now, as Justice Bader Ginsburg pointed out, we're in a position where the court is dominated by an extreme minority of a minority. They're way out of step with the rest of the country when it comes to abortion, when it comes to gun rights, when it comes to issues of equality and immigration.
We're in a really dangerous territory right now where we're about to have laws created and codified by people who simply don't represent the country at all anymore.
MARQUARDT: Brendan, how much do you think that will play into the debates on the campaign trail?
BUCK: I think jess is right. This has always been something that animated Republicans a lot and Democrats have been playing catch-up for a long time. The president would love to have a debate about the courts. He's done an incredible job of getting people on the bench. And it's one of the things he talks about as one of his biggest achievements. So I think that's a debate they actually welcome.
MARQUARDT: All right, we have to leave it there.
Brendan Buck, Jess McIntosh, thank you very much for the great discussion.
[13:14:05] Deal reached. Crisis averted. President Trump's tactics lead to a compromise between the U.S. and Mexico. So what's in it for the United States? We will be live from the White House, next. (COMMERCIAL BREAK)
MARQUARDT: Welcome back.
We continue to follow a crisis now averted. The tariffs that President Trump threatened to levy against Mexico last week have been called off, but that's just for now.
The president tweeted last night, "I am pleased to inform you that the United States of America has reached a signed agreement with Mexico."
According to the president, Mexico is ready to crack down on migrants passing through their country to the U.S. And the U.S. is going to work to speed up the processing of asylum claims.
The president tweeting today, quote, "Mexico will try very hard. And if they do that, this will be a very successful agreement for both the United States and Mexico."
With me now to discuss these developments are Sarah Westwood at the White House, and our CNN senior diplomatic correspondent, Michelle Kosinski.
Sarah, let me start with you.
What do we know about what was agreed to in this deal and what was left out?
SARAH WESTWOOD, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Alex, we know Mexico agreed to take some steps to limit the number of migrants coming into the United States in exchange for President Trump dropping the threat to impose a 5 percent tariff on all goods coming from Mexico by Monday.
Mexican officials say they have agreed to deploy thousands of troops throughout their country, including its southern border to deal with the Central American migrants who are coming through Mexico to get to the U.S.
They've agreed to take decisive actions to disrupt human smuggling organizations.
And they said migrants caught crossing the border illegally could be sent back to Mexico where they would be permitted to wait while their asylum claims could be adjudicated. For its part, the U.S. agreed to accelerate the asylum process.
President Trump this morning obviously taking a victory lap over the signing of this deal.
But we should note that his demands to Mexico had always been vague. He really never specified what Mexico had to do to avoid facing these tariffs so left himself the flexibility to accept just about any offer of cooperation from Mexico as meeting this unspecified threshold for dropping the tariff threat. The White House was facing opposition for this tariff proposal. Some
Republicans advocated for delaying the implementation of the tariffs. There were worries it could affect the president's renegotiated version of NAFTA and a whole host of other problems.
That situation, for the moment, Alex, seems to be averted now with President Trump dropping the tariffs in exchange for an immigration deal.
[13:20:10] MARQUARDT: Right.
And, Michelle, the ambassador to the U.S. tweeted last night that the Mexican agreement had agreed to, quote, "strengthen measures for the application of its immigration law."
In particular, she said Mexico would provide health, education, and employment opportunities to those migrants who are waiting in Mexico while they seek asylum in the United States.
Michelle, how do you think this is actually going to help this crisis on the border?
MICHELLE KOSINSKI, CNN SENIOR DIPLOMATIC CCORRESPONDENT: It is completely unclear, Alex. As are many things in agreements like this. You don't really know what the outcome is going to be on a couple of levels.
First of all, thousands of National Guard troops in Mexico, they're spread throughout the country. OK, how much is that going to drop the numbers, which are more than 140,000 people at the U.S. border per month? Unclear.
How much are these new policies going to be a deterrent for people to get to the U.S. border? Unclear.
So asylum is the big thing here. Mexico, I should say, today is also doing something of a victory lap, because the U.S. wanted the ultimate, they wanted Mexico to be declared legally and to agree to this, what is known as a third safe country, so that people leaving their countries, the first safe country they hit, that's where they're supposed to apply for asylum.
If Mexico was that, that would mean all Guatemalans or passing through Mexico first would have to apply for asylum there. Mexico has pushed back on this before and did not cave on this last night.
Now the most they will do on the asylum issue, which is something, is to take everybody awaiting asylum proceedings in the United States. That's many thousands of people per month. And they're going to take care of them there. They say they'll provide health care, job permits, education. So that is a very nice thing to do.
But it's not necessarily preventing people from trying to get to the U.S. border. It is a huge question mark, how much we will see those numbers drop. When we get to another month, we can measure, you know, to the size of the load on the U.S. border that we've seen in the past month.
We should also say, we talk a lot about these numbers, the rising numbers of asylum claims, the enormous numbers of people at the border itself. Whether you think that these people should be given a shot at a new life in the United States or not, it's important to remember that they are human beings.
And if you didn't see Gary Tuchman's piece the other night, which was powerful, you should take a look at that.
MARQUARDT: Highly agree. It was fantastic.
That is a point and a feeling so often lost in this discussion, because it is often so much about political terms.
Sarah, we have seen the speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, respond today. What do you see -- how do you see this playing out politically now that this deal has been reached?
WESTWOOD: Speaker Pelosi is conveying what a lot of Democrats are feeling, that President Trump solved a problem that he created and so, therefore, he shouldn't be able to tout it as some sort of political victory.
President Trump has been stymied in his efforts to do something on the border, in Congress, when he's trying to do executive actions to change immigration policies. He's been stymied by the courts. So this has been an opportunity for President Trump to do something unilaterally using a tactic that even many in his own party oppose, threatening tariffs.
He had threatened to slap tariffs on automobiles, to take drastic action against Mexico for months if they didn't do more to cooperate. This was the president finally backing that up with a more concrete threat, although it never went into effect.
President Trump knows the border immigration will be a foundation of his reelection bid. So he does have to do something to show that he's at least making an effort with his attempts to build a wall, to change immigration policies. So far, not being all that successful -- Alex?
MARQUARDT: Right. It will be a huge point in 2020.
Sarah Westwood, Michelle Kosinski, in Washington, thank you very much.
[13:24:18] Next, a military vet dies in police custody and returned to his family with several organs missing, including his brain. What happened? We're live, next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
MARQUARDT: Now to a CNN exclusive. A new inspector general's report reveals shocking conditions inside four separate ICE facilities. These findings come as the crisis along the U.S./Mexico border has been deepening with an increasing number of migrants crossing illegally. CNN's Jessica Schneider has those exclusive details.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
JESSICA SCHNEIDER, CNN JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Improperly packaged raw and leaky meat, overflowing toilets and moldy shower stalls, and braided bedsheets referred to as nooses that have been used for attempted suicides.
The Department of Homeland Security's inspector general says these are some of the immediate risks and egregious violations found at multiple ICE detention facilities in unannounced visits over six months late last year, the worst in New Jersey and California.
The inspector general's investigation began after a tip about terrible conditions on its hotline. The I.G. made unannounced visits to four facilities in California, Louisiana, New Jersey, and Colorado.
Immigration and Customs Enforcement responded to the violations and said in an addendum to the report that it "has completed significant corrective actions to address identified issues." ICE even attached pictures of improved bathroom and shower conditions at its California location.
But the conditions were dangerous and unsanitary for the nearly 5,000 detainees held in total at the four facilities. The I.G. stressing, "All ICE detainees are held in civil, not criminal custody, which is not supposed to be punitive."
Nevertheless, the inspector general found detainees at the New Jersey and Colorado facilities essentially trapped inside. Detainees were not allowed proper access to outdoor recreation and forced to make do with the so-called recreation yard that had a partial covered roof or mesh cages on the glass enclosures.
The I.G. also found the food handling situation so bad in the New Jersey detention center that the kitchen manager was replaced during the inspection. They saw open packages of raw chicken leaking blood, slimy foul-smelling lunch meat and moldy bread.
[13:30:05]
But the problems could get worse given the record number of migrants now in government custody.
ICE's new acting director, Mark Morgan, said Monday that there are currently around 52,000 single adults in ICE custody. That's an all- time high and exceeds funding levels yet again.
And the numbers across immigration facilities are expected to grow as more and more migrants cross the border. Last month, more than 144,000 migrants were apprehended or encountered at the southern border, the highest monthly total in 13 years.
(on camera): Now these violations were found over a seven-month period. ICE has reported many fixes to the inspector general. But the I.G. is still insisting on even more documentation that confirms that follow-up inspections and other corrective actions have been completed.
But since these facilities are at risk of getting overwhelmed with that recent influx of migrants, it's possible that these problems could potentially flare up again.
Jessica Schneider, CNN, Washington.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
ALEX MARDQUARDT, CNN ANCHOR: Our thanks to Jessica Schneider.
There will be much more news coming up after the break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
MARQUARDT: Russian President Vladimir Putin is lashing out at U.S. trade policies, saying they're now endangering the global economy. He was speaking at the St. Petersburg Economic Forum, saying that he regrets that the U.S. is trying to expand their jurisdiction over the world.
This week, Putin met with Chinese President Xi Jinping. Their cozy relationship, which Putin called unprecedented, coming at odds with U.S. interests.
CNN's Brian Todd has more.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
(MUSIC)
[13:35:10] BRIAN TODD, CNN INVESTIGATIVE CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): It was a split screen tailor-made by Russian President Vladimir Putin. Just as President Trump was meeting with America's most important allies in Europe, two of America's biggest adversaries were holding court in Moscow. In a summit that analysts say was timed to send a message, Putin hosted Chinese President Xi Jinping.
KEN COYDEN (ph), PROFESSOR, AMERICAN UNIVERSITY: I think this is clearly Russia's response to what they perceive as an American threat. And it's a way of saying we don't need the West.
TODD: The two strongmen have been getting closer every year. This time, Xi calling Putin his, quote, "best and bosom friend," saying he cherished their deep friendship.
XI JINPING, CHINESE PRESIDENT (through translation): Our bilateral relations have not reached the maximum and can become even better.
TODD: The comments almost a direct echo of Trump's own description of his relationships with the two men.
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: The relationship I have with President Xi is extraordinary. It's really very good. I think I could have a very good relationship with President Putin.
TODD: During their summit, Putin and Xi showed off their friendship with a visit to the Moscow zoo where they welcomed two new Chinese pandas, a gift from Xi to Russia. They went to the theater, reviewed soldiers, and looked at Chinese cars.
But beyond the pageantry and the pandas, analysts say America should be very wary of this growing partnership.
UNIDENTIFIED ANALYST: They are working together, coordinating more than we've seen in the past, to really accelerate the decline of U.S. influence globally.
TODD: Putin, experts say, is being classic Putin, manipulating his way onto the world stage, trying to insert himself as an indispensable player.
COYDEN (ph): He would like Russia to have that role in international conflicts, that Russia should have to be consulted, called, be a port of call for any major leader.
TODD: In April, Putin met with Kim Jong-Un in the wake of the North Korean dictator's failed summit with President Trump.
Putin even offered to be an intermediary between Kim and Trump, which experts say was a typical Putin move to peel the U.S. away from countries it's doing business with, even as he suggests he's trying to help.
Experts say Trump will have to brush aside what they call his naivete regarding Putin and Xi and deal with the real threats the two leaders present to American security.
They say Russia and China can coordinate cyberattacks and military moves that can knock U.S. forces off balance.
UNIDENTIFIED ANALYST: It's not hard to imagine a scenario where Russia and China make moves into countries on their periphery, so China in the South China See and Russia into Ukraine, for example. And that kind of coordination would severely strain the United States' ability to respond.
TODD: Brian Todd, CNN, Washington.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
MARQUARDT: Our thanks to Brian Todd.
Still ahead, a morbid fascination. That's what school officials in Colorado are saying has become of Columbine High School. They're considering tearing it down. Is that the right thing to do? I'll ask a Columbine shooting survivor, next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK) [13:41:59] MARQUARDT: School district officials are concerned about what they're calling morbid fascination with Columbine High School. They're now considering tearing it down. This was the school where the mass shooting in 1999 left 12 students and one teacher dead.
Twenty years later, instead of interest fading, school district officials are becoming alarmed by the growing obsession with Columbine. The district says a record number of individuals have tried to enter the school illegally or trespass on the property. That's this year.
In a letter to the community, the district superintendent says, quote, "The tragedy at Columbine High School in 1999 serves as a point of origin for this contagion of school shootings. School shooters refer to and study the Columbine shooting as a macabre source of inspiration and motivation."
Andrew Robinson is a survivor of the Columbine shooting and a writer and director who made the 2009 movie, "April Showers," based on the Columbine shooting.
Here is a quick look at that film.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED ACTOR: OK, grab your stuff. Let's go.
(SCREAMING)
(SIREN)
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MARQUARDT: Andrew, thank you so much for joining me today.
I want to, first, get your reaction --
ANDREW ROBINSON, WRITER/DIRECTOR & COLUMBINE SURVIVOR: Thanks for having me.
MARQUARDT: I want to get your reaction as a survivor of this horrific shooting to the plan considering tearing down the school. What do you think?
ROBINSON: I know that there's precedent for this in other instances in school shootings. I know those locations have been torn down or drastically altered.
My personal opinion on the matter, though, with it being 20 years later, it is perhaps maybe not the right call. But I understand that this is a very nuanced discussion and one that likely can't be summed up very easily or simply.
But I think it's -- I don't know if by changing the building you make the problem or the fascination go away. And so I would rather see the building be made into something very positive as opposed to tearing it down.
Because, like people in my situation, a singular event should not define us or define a building. And there are a lot of really good memories and history from that school. I have memories and history from that school.
So tearing it down, in my humble opinion, kind of distills the memory of that building down to a single event.
MARQUARDT: You did hear, in that statement that I read from the superintendent, that he believes that the 1999 shooting was part of a contagion or led to or was inspiration for many of the school shootings that followed.
And the main thrust of their argument now, to take it down, to demolish it, is that this large number of people who are showing up, trying to get onto the school property, and they're saying it's a morbid way to connect, to reconnect with these murders. Do you agree?
[13:45:17] ROBINSON: Well, I think that's going to maybe exist whether or not the building is there or not. If they tear it down or leave it standing, I think there will always be that fascination.
And I think that while it may seem like a large number of people are morbidly fascinated, as you say, there are still probably hundreds if not thousands of more individuals that have either lived through that experience or lived in that community that don't share that view. So it is tricky, because, do you make a drastic change because of a minority opinion, or do you seek out what's best for a larger group. And I, unfortunately, don't have those answers.
But like I said, it's a very nuanced discussion at the very least. And I do think that while the numbers may be growing for that fascination, I have to imagine that there are a larger number of people that don't have those views and feel very strongly about maybe the opposite.
MARQUARDT: The proposal that they're looking at now, after demolishing it, would be to replace it with fields. They wouldn't build anything on that site. Instead, a school would be built nearby. But the name would be kept, the mascot would be kept, the school colors would be kept.
So you're saying that, in terms of these obsessives, these people fascinated and perhaps inspired by that shooting, you don't think it would change anything for them?
ROBINSON: Well, no, because you're not going to erase what happened. Columbine is not suddenly going to go away whether the building is there or not.
And so, yes, the building, for some, may be a monument of something very, very horrible. But, you know, for others it is something completely different that just happened to also include something bad that happened. But turning it into a field and building a new building, you know,
several yards back or a hundred yards back while still keeping other portions of the building, as I understand it, it seems like a Band-Aid to me personally.
MARQUARDT: We have seen some schools do this. Sandy Hook I believe was torn down. Parkland, I don't believe anything has changed there.
Much of your movie that, as we noted, came out in 2009, focused on the aftermath of shootings and the impact on the survivors, on those victims' families.
It's been 20 years since Columbine. What do you want people to know about the lasting trauma of events like Parkland, like Sandy Hook, like Columbine?
ROBINSON: I mean, it's something that doesn't go away. And it's something that we belong to a growing, a shockingly growing group of people, men, women, children, teachers, law enforcement officers, that now kind of share this weird distinction. And it's a distinction that no one should have.
And every time it occurs, not only do we add to this growing contingent of people, but we reopen old wounds for individuals that otherwise would like to heal. And it becomes very difficult.
And we need to start acting much more like a connected group, not just the people that have gone through this being connected, but all of us that sit here and watch it on the news and are impacted by it. We need to stop reacting as individuals and realizing that we're now all involved in this. And it's going to take a very nuanced approach, a simultaneous approach to try and curb and fix this problem. And it starts with understanding that it's going to take everyone.
And the more that these things continue to occur, unfortunately, the sensationalism is what we get lost in.
And I can say 20 years later, I am not a cured man. I'm not 100 percent. I have really, really good days. But I do have moments. And I consider myself very, very lucky and very, very fortunate because, by the grace of whatever you choose to believe in, the way in which I deal with trauma is different and mild compared to what other people face.
And we have to make room for all of those people. And we have to make room for conversation, be it about school safety, gun control, and all of these things. It all has to happen simultaneously. It can't just be one thing. This is not a Band-Aid one-size-fits-all situation.
[13:50:18] MARQUARDT: All right, well, of course, time does not heal all wounds. People are still dealing with that trauma for many years and decades after it took place.
Andrew Robinson, thank you very much for your thoughts this afternoon.
ROBINSON: Thank you. MARQUARDT: We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
MARQUARDT: As flood waters in St. Louis County, Missouri, reach near historic levels, farmers are worried they won't be able to make ends meet.
CNN's Dan Simon spoke to one farmer who has been affected by the flooding.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
DAN SIMON, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Where are we at this exact moment?
ADAM JONES, FARMER: We are directly over my field, which I was going to plant soybeans in this year.
SIMON (voice-over): Adam Jones is a fourth-generation family farmer. His fields, which would normally be sprouting corn and soybeans, have turned into lakes.
(on camera): It is pretty amazing, to think you might be in a tractor and today you're in a boat.
JONES: Yes. And in four feet of water. So halfway up the grill of the tractor.
SIMON: Yes, pretty surreal.
(voice-over): And the latest round of flooding, Jones says, has diminished any hope of a viable crop for hundreds of farmers, many who have already been reeling from President Trump's trade war with China.
[13:55:04] JONES: We're not going to make any money this year.
SIMON: Located in small town of Old Monroe, north of St. Louis, Jones says the tariffs had already cut into his bottom line, with China slashing its purchase of American soybeans. Though, farmers have been promised government assistance. He doesn't know how much he might receive, and the notion of a bailout wears on his pride.
JONES: Farmers don't want a bailout. We don't want government money. We just want a free market. Most farmers are still supporting President Trump, but I think it is wearing out.
The flooding is obviously more difficult. The tariffs might be more frustrating, because somebody has control over the tariffs.
SIMON: For now, his immediate concern is trying to save the house built by his grandparents. These pumps and a homemade flood wall have mainly kept it dry.
He says the water won't fully recede until July. Too late, he says, for any planting. JONES: You don't get your food from the grocery store. I mean, you
get it from the grocery store, but we're out here working our tails off to grow it for you. And we're having a pretty tough time.
SIMON: Yet, he says most farmers wouldn't have it any other way.
JONES: Farming is a passion. It's what I love. We don't farm for money. It is what I love. I mean, my dad does it, he did it, my grandpa did it, my great grandpa did it, right here on this land. I'm fourth generation on this farm. And I take pride in that. And I just have a passion for agriculture. Unfortunately.
SIMON: Dan Simon, CNN, Old Monroe, Missouri.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
MARQUARDT: Our thanks to Dan Simon.
Coming up in the next hour of NEWSROOM, an Army veteran dies in police custody. But his family wants to know why some of his organs were removed. I'll be speaking with the family's attorney. That's coming up.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
