Return to Transcripts main page
Dem Candidates Defend Kamala Harris After Don Jr.'s Racist Attack; Trump Tweets Invitation To Meet Kim Jong-un At The DMZ; Border Crisis: What's It Going To Take?; Closing Argument Soon For Accused Navy SEAL; Swalwell Faces Accusations Of Ageism; Supreme Court Allows Partisan Gerrymandering To Continue; Apollo 11: The First Lunar Landing As Never Before Seen Footage. Aired 8-9p ET
Aired June 29, 2019 - 20:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[20:00:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)
ANA CABRERA, CNN ANCHOR: Quick programming note for you. The CNN film "Apollo 11" takes you inside humanity's greatest feat with newly discovered incredible footage, tonight at 9:00 here on CNN.
You're live in the CNN NEWSROOM. I'm Ana Cabrera in New York. New tonight, the Democratic candidates for President are coming to the defense of Senator Kamala Harris after a racist attack by the President's son Don Jr.
Earlier, he retweeted and then deleted a racist tweet suggesting that Kamala Harris is not a black American and thus should not be an authority on issues of race. Here was the reaction from her fellow 2020 Democrats.
From Joe Biden, "The same forces of hatred rooted in 'birtherism' that questioned Barack Obama's American citizenship and even his racial identity are now being used against Senator Kamala Harris. It's disgusting and we have to call it out when we see it. Racism has no place in America".
From Amy Klobuchar, "These troll-fueled racist attacks on Senator Kamala Harris are not acceptable. We are better than this Russia is not (ph) and stand united against this type of vile behavior". From Bernie Sanders, "Donald Trump Jr. is a racist, too. Shocker".
Joining me now CNN Political Commentator, Scott Jennings, he is a former Special assistant to President George W. Bush, and A. Scott Bolden, a former D.C. Democratic Party Chair. Scott Bolden first your reaction.
A. SCOTT BOLDEN, FORMER D. C. DEMOCRATIC PARTY CHAIRMAN: This is just more of the same. The Republicans in this White House and the family of Trump don't want or hate to be considered racists, and yet they seem to involve to have involved themselves, whether it's ignorance or otherwise, in regards to what is racially offensive and it's so unnecessary.
So Kamala Harris has a Jamaican born parents, but she grew up in America and she is a - an African-American woman, she's a Jamaican- American woman and she was bussed. Why is that such a source of topic and hatred and divisiveness that is supported by Donald Trump Jr. by retweeting this.
He's retweeted other racist things from the Ku Klux Klan before in in 2016. And so this is a pattern and practice of those who sympathize with the racists. And these are - pattern and practice that they don't seem to be able to get over. It's just really offensive that has no place in our daily politic.
CABRERA: Scott Jennings, is there any other explanation other than this is a racist attack by Donald Trump Jr.
SCOTT JENNINGS, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Looks extremely irresponsible. I didn't condone the birtherism attacks on Barack Obama as much as I disagree with his policies. I thought those attacks on him were reprehensible and I think this kind of stuff, dabbling in it, tweeting it, whatever you're doing with it, just stop.
It's irresponsible, it's not necessary. My presumption is it's going to backfire, because all the people coming to Kamala Harris's defense, who by the way are a 100 percent correct in doing so, are going to elevate her on the national political stage. And she's going to withstand this attack and she's going to come out on the other side of it much stronger for it.
So my strong advice to Republicans who want to dabble in this conversation, just stop, it's irresponsible, you're not doing anything for the Republican Party.
BOLDEN: And you know, it's coming off a very strong performance by her in the Democratic debate. So it's really going to backfire, I think.
CABRERA: Both of please stand by, because meantime, President Trump is overseas where he called a truce today - in his trade war with China, but that moment and many others from the G20 are being eclipsed by a tweet that appeared in his Twitter feed this morning.
It's an invitation to North Korean dictator Kim Jong-un, an offered to meet up at the DMZ - the Demilitarized Zone, shake hands and say hello. Here's how the President later described this possibility to reporters.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: He follows my Twitter.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: He does?
TRUMP: And it's very hard - yes--
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: He follows your work?
TRUMP: --I guess so, because we got a call very quickly. A lot of people follow it. But you know they've contacted us, and that they'd like to see if they could do so. And we're not talking about for you know extended - just a quick hello. We won't call it a summit. We'll call it a handshake if it does happen. I don't know that it will, but it could happen.
I know, I think he'd like to do it and I wouldn't mind doing it at all. I'm going to be - I am literally visiting the DMZ.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CABRERA: CNN's Jim Acosta is traveling with the President in Seoul, South Korea. Jim the DMZ visit has been in the planning stages we know for a while, but we've heard some key officials didn't know about the Kim Jong-un invitation until they saw the President's tweet?
JIM ACOSTA, CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: That's right, and that's not a new experience for people who work for President Trump. He does this from time to time and this is just another example of that.
Now, we should point out that President was teasing this idea of meeting with Kim Jong-un in the DMZ earlier in the week when he talked with "The Hill" newspaper and mentioned this and then the White House asked "The Hill" not to publish it for security reasons.
[20:05:00] And then the President, I think dropped, this on everybody at the G20 Summit, essentially to tease his upcoming trip to South Korea, where he's at right now. He's going to meet with the South Korean President, President Moon later on today. And then he's going to head out to the DMZ, meet with U.S. soldiers, meet with South Korean soldiers.
And the question is whether or not the President meets with Kim Jong- un, the ball is essentially in the court of the North Koreans as to whether or not they are going to accept this invitation.
But, Ana, as we going to see later on this afternoon, President is either going - it's almost like an episode of "The Bachelorette" or something, the President is going to exchange a rose, so to speak, with Kim Jong-un at the DMZ or he's not.
And this sets up the possibility that the President will have yet one more exchange, one more encounter with the North Korean dictator that doesn't really result in very much in terms of denuclearization here on the Korean Peninsula. And the question is going to be hanging out there whether or not this kind of diplomacy works for this President.
But, of course, we can't raise too many questions about how this is all going to play out until it ultimately happens. But it is sort of teeing up another reality TV style encounter between the President and Kim Jong-un.
CABRERA: All right, Jim Acosta in Seoul, South Korea, for us. Thank you. My panel is back with us now to talk more. Scott Jennings, the President, continues to court Kim even as he's ripping up the nuclear with Iran. How does he get North Korea to the table to talk about denuclearization?
JENNINGS: Well, I guess, Kim and Trump sliding into each other's DMs are better than them sliding nuclear missiles at each other. So I think, as long as they are having conversations, it's better than we were at a couple of summers ago when everybody thought we are on the brink of nuclear war.
I've always been dubious that the North Koreans were going to give up their nuclear weapons. I do think the President deserves credit for trying to ratchet down tensions on the peninsula.
Look, he's trying something new, out of the box, whatever you want to call it. It may or may not work. But I know that saber talking - rather than saber-rattling when you've got two people with nuclear weapons is better. And so I hope that President is successful, but I don't have a lot of confidence that the North Koreans are ever going to give up their nuclear weapons so easily.
CABRERA: But if this isn't anything more than a photo-op, Scott Jennings, what's the point?
JENNINGS: Well the point is to keep talking. And I think most of us would agree that if you have two countries talking rather than preparing for war, that's a good thing. I don't want war with North Korea. I have low confidence in the regime, and I think a lot of the things they do are reprehensible. But I certainly would prefer diplomatic solutions to war.
So we'll see if the President can pull a rabbit out of a hat. Again, I think all this has a low probability of success. But he's doing something different. His predecessors of both parties never could solve this. He's trying something different. I think, we should all as Americans, hope that he succeeds.
CABRERA: And Scott Bolden he can say he's gotten them to the table, tensions seem to have eased, is the President wrong on that?
BOLDEN: I think the President is wrong on that for sure, because he's got a - I don't know if he's going to pull a rabbit out of his hat, Scott, but he's going to pull a rose out and offer it to the North Korean leader and do a handshake and a photo-op. And he gives the North Korean leader another spot on the world stage, which is political capital that this President continues to use.
And let's not forget, just earlier this month or last month, they were shooting rockets and missiles out into the on into the sea and threatening and attacking our allies in and around North Korea. We have to put this in perspective. This is serious stuff. This isn't a photo-op right?
And so the North Koreans have no incentive whatsoever, economic or otherwise, to give up their nuclear arsenal, and until we have substantive talks and the President get serious about these talks about the denuclearization, then we're going to continue to give the North Korea the leader a place on the world stage and we get nothing out of it.
Scott, you're right, the prior Presidents weren't able to make this work, but Donald Trump's not making it work either other than the photo-ops and these summit's that really aren't getting us anywhere.
TRUMP: President Trump was asked what if Kim Jong-un doesn't show up and here's what he said.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You made this very public invitation to Kim Jong- un.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Won't be a bad sign if he doesn't show up?
TRUMP: No. Of course, I thought of that, because I know if he didn't everybody's going to say, "Oh, he was stood up by Chairman Kim". No, I understood that. It's very hard to - he follows my Twitter--
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: He does?
TRUMP: And it's very hard - yes--
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: He follows your work?
TRUMP: --I guess so, because we got a call very quickly. A lot of people follow it. But you know they've contacted us, and that they'd like to see if they could do so. And we're not talking about for you know extended - just a quick hello. And then we get along.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
[20:10:00] CABRERA: Scott Jennings, how do you do you think it will look if Kim doesn't show up after the President has put this out there?
JENNINGS: I mean, look - we're no worse off for the invitation, whether he shows up or whether he doesn't, I don't know that much is going to change. Look the North Koreans, as was pointed out by my sparring partner tonight, the other Scott - are still bad actors. They're still shooting missiles off. They've done things that we don't want them to do.
So whether he shows or he doesn't, we still have the problem of a regime that commits horrific human rights abuses. They've been bad actors they've been operating in bad faith. I don't think they have any intention of giving up their nuclear weapons.
The President's mission here is to keep them at bay in the hopes that they eventually get to a place where they can denuclearize. I think we have to be realistic that it's a low probability chance that it happens in the short term.
So my preference is - look if you don't want the United States involved in wars, particularly with nuclear powers, them talking is better than not. But I think we just have to have some realism here about we're dealing with people that, frankly, don't value human life all that much as evidenced by the atrocities they commit and therefore are prone to making bad decisions that we find abhorrent here in the United States. BOLDEN: Yes. Yes, I don't disagree with Scott, Ana. But I would like to - if we're going to have those discussions, it was going to keep them at bay, if we're going to keep everyone at the table then let's do it with some depth, some substance and progress.
We can't continue to have these photo-ops and these meetings - these high profile meetings and there's just no progress being made. And remember, every time we have these meetings, North Korea gets a lot more out of it than the U.S. I mean, sure, I don't think the Democrats or the Republicans want war. This is an American issue. It's not a political issue.
At the same time, though, I wonder how long we can continue doing photo-ops and keep them talking in the mutual admiration between these two leaders. I mean most political hawks and our secured - National Security hawks would say we shouldn't be meeting with them at all, because this is a rogue regime and it's a regime that has a awful human rights record.
BOLDEN: And so this is really risky business.
CABRERA: It gives the regime legitimacy is what you care as far as why--
CABRERA: --it doesn't make as much--
CABRERA: --President to go out there that that is a benefit to Kim Jong-un. A. Scott Bolden, Scott Jennings, appreciate both of you--
BOLDEN: Thank you.
CABRERA: --for being here. Thank you. Coming up, the haunting photo that's graphic, but more important not to turn away from, a farther and daughter who in the most tragic way possible put a human face on the border crisis. Will this finally be the catalyst for change?
[20:15:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)
CABRERA: I can't stop thinking about this picture. And if you're a parent or frankly, if you have a heart, chances are you've been thinking about it too. Little girl, her father, that murky water where they came to rest in the weeds, next to old beer cans. Long and desperate journey toward to a better life, cut short in the Rio Grande, right at the America's edge.
I can't stop thinking about this picture. And whether it will finally be the catalyst for change, and then think about everything we knew before and how things still didn't change. I think about the children who did survived the journey only to wind up in facilities that are so overcrowded with conditions you'd never wish for anyone, especially a child.
I think about the border station in Clint, Texas and the description from a researcher with human rights watch who went to visit about the children who were covered in filthy clothes, some without socks or shoes.
Her remarks haunting to read. The kids had colds and were sick and said they didn't have access to soap to wash their hands. Some kids who were detained for two to three weeks had only one or two opportunities to shower. Many are sleeping on the floor, some with mattresses, some without. They're left to fend for themselves. Older kids are taking care of the babies.
Another observer put it this way.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ELORA MUKHERJEE, WITNESSED FILTHY CONDITIONS AT TEXAS DETENTION CENTER: What I saw last week at Clint. What I smelled, what I heard left me shocked and appalled that this is what our government is doing in our name with our taxpayer dollars. And these are the most degrading and inhumane conditions that I have ever seen for children in federal immigration custody.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CABRERA: Think about that. And think about the other images we've seen along the way of families behind chain linked fences or detained under a bridge in El Paso, or of the kids crying at the border, or even that sound of what it was like when they were taken from their parents and guardians.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BORDER PATROL AGENT: Where are you from?
CHILD: El Salvador.
BORDER PATROL AGENT: And you?
BORDER PATROL AGENT: Don't cry.
CHILD: I want to go with my aunt.
BORDER PATROL AGENT: You're going to get there. Look, she will explain it and help you.
CHILD: At least can I go with my aunt? I want her to come - I want my aunt to come so she can take me to her house.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CABRERA: So here we are again, a new story but the same old question. When will things change? And when will we stop seeing images like this one, of Oscar Martinez and his 23-month-old daughter Angie Valeria who will never know the life they dreamed of in the United States.
I want to bring in Ana Maria Salazar. She is the Former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense. She was also a policy adviser for President Clinton's special envoy for the Americas.
Ana Maria, I talked to a journalist earlier who has toured the Matamoros Camp where Oscar and Angie Valeria were staying. She said asylum seekers are really becoming desperate because of President Trump's metering policy which limits the number of people who are allowed to apply for asylum. They've been there - had been there for a couple of months.
Thousands more are still waiting. Listen to what she told me.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ALICE DRIVER, FREELANCE JOURNALIST WHO COVER BORDER CRISIS: When I met people living in tents under the bridge, families from Venezuela, families from Cuba, they had mostly been there for two to three months.
[20:20:00] And they had pieces of paper with numbers on them and they said they waited until the time which U.S. Customs and Border Protection would say we'll take two pregnant women today. But they said that there were weeks when no asylum seekers were allowed to request asylum.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CABRERA: Ana Maria as long as this metering policy exists, do you think we're going to see more deaths at the border?
ANA MARIA SALAZAR, FORMER DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE: Oh, I'm sure we're going to see more deaths at the border. In fact, this issue of migrants dying as they're trying to cross into the United States has been going on for years now. We have never really seen pictures of these - of dead migrants or dead children in the way we saw at this last week and - which is shocking everybody.
But we have to remind your audience that crossing through the desert - the Arizona desert through Sonora in Arizona, every year there's hundreds of migrants that die because of the heat. There's hundreds of migrants dying as they are crossing the rivers.
I mean, this is not new, Ana, what is now the realization while we have these pictures and these audios. And two, the cruelty in which are they being treated in the United States, that's what I think is new.
CABRERA: But the metering policy is somewhat new, right. And I have to wonder is it necessary given the number of people trying to make asylum claims right now, we know detention facilities are already at capacity. The government is struggling to take care of migrants there as it is. SALAZAR: It's a very good question, because there is a need to have a way of controlling migrants as they are trying to cross into the United States. I think nobody would question that. I think the way it is being done, what is resulting is more migrants becoming more desperate. And the rules that base - that were used or at least the rules, the way everybody understood, are no longer at pole (ph).
So you can have somebody for example, from Honduras crossing through Guatemala, up through Mexico very - still very, very dangerous road to cross. And get - you assume that if you can get to the border, that there is going to be certain rules that will apply to you as you enter into United States.
So I mean - I'm struggling with this issue mainly because, I understand the arguments that you have to figure out a way where you can have more control of the flow. What I don't accept is the cruelty in which you're using in order to create incentives for people - they think they're creating incentives for people not to cross into the United States, you know what I mean?
CABRERA: Right, you think that they're trying to disincentivize them from coming in between--
SALAZAR: Being cruel.
CABRERA: --the border crossings.
SALAZAR: Being very cruel. Being very, very--
CABRERA: President Trump does say Mexico has stepped up its efforts to stem the flow of migrants. He touts this deal he made a few weeks ago after he threatened the tariffs. Have you seen any tangible actions or improvements from Mexico?
SALAZAR: There has been tangible actions. We're still struggling in trying to understand the numbers. We know that the United States in the last government - U.S. officials have recognized that there has been, at least from the U.S. perspective, a reduction, at in least 30 percent of the migrants that have been crossing into the United States. These are numbers coming from the U.S. government.
And we have seen an enormous increase of presence of what is now going to be called the National Guard. It's basically the army - army police, and navy police, and some federal police that have now new uniforms. And there are more guards - more of them up in the northern border and the southern border.
Clearly, the Mexican government is using their resources also to provide them humanitarian aid and to provide them help aid. But it's not enough. And it's going to be even a bigger crisis when you consider that there's still people trying to come in. Mexican government is struggling, trying to figure out how they return them back to Central America.
So they are using their resources. I mean, I have to say this is the first time since I've worked on migration issues and security issues in Mexico and in Central America, where I've seen Mexico really go out and use their resources to try to control the flow.
But it is creating enormous problems in the border with the United States. And clearly it is creating a crisis in the southern border.
CABRERA: Right. Ana Maria Salazar, thank you very much for your insight. Good to have you with us.
SALAZAR: Thank you so much. Yes, have a good weekend.
CABRERA: Thank you, you too.
A decorated Navy SEAL on trial for murdering an ISIS soldier, closing arguments begin Monday after a shocking week of testimony. A full report just ahead.
[20:25:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)
CABRERA: A Navy SEAL accused of murdering an Iraqi prisoner could soon learn his fate, as closing arguments are set to begin on Monday for Special Operations Chief Eddie Gallagher. Prosecutors say Gallagher stabbed a wounded ISIS prisoner to death. But his defense says that's not what happened.
CNN's Dan Simon is following this story closely as closing arguments are set to begin.
DAN SIMON, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, a decorated Navy SEAL, selfless war hero and family man, that's the image the defense would like the jury to have as is it will soon begin deliberating the fate of Platoon Chief Eddie Gallagher.
Closing arguments are slated to begin on Monday in a case that pit the 40-year-old against several of his young subordinates, the most serious allegation that Gallagher's stabbed an ISIS prisoner to death while deployed to Iraq in 2017.
The jury heard dramatic accounts from both sides. At least two SEALs say they witnessed the attack, but one of them Navy SEAL Medic Corey Scott stunned the courtroom when he testified under immunity that he asphyxiated the ISIS detainee and that Gallagher was ultimately not responsible for the death.
[20:30:00] Well, the prosecution says he's lying and Scott could now face a perjury charge. But the bottom line is Gallagher's defense says these are all cooked up charges by disgruntled underlings who had an axe to grind over aggressive Gallagher's leadership style.
They said this is not about murder but mutiny. The defense had this to say after resting their case.
TIM PARLATORE, EDDIE GALLAGHER ATTORNEY: No matter how much preparation the government have put in to this case, the one thing that they can't get over is the fact that Eddie Gallagher is not guilty. So now that all the evidence is in, we're going to take the weekend to prepare for closings, and Monday morning, after closing arguments, the jury will get this case, and then we'll wait for the verdict.
SIMON: The jury of seven military men will decide Gallagher's fate. Unlike civilian trials, it does not have to be a unanimous verdict. It requires a two-thirds vote or five of the seven are needed to convict. But whatever the jury decides, all of this has been unwelcome drama for one of America's most storied and respected military units.
Dan Simon, CNN, San Diego.
CABRERA: A racist retweet by Donald Trump Jr. is now uniting the Democratic presidential field behind Senator Kamala Harris. Hear how they're reacting, next.
CABRERA: This week, 33 million viewers tuned in over two nights to watch the Democratic candidates for president square off in the first debates for the ultimate chance to face off against President Trump in 2020.
[20:35:06] Today, I went one on one with a number of the candidates who appeared on that stage, beginning with California Congressman, Eric Swalwell, whom I asked about one of the more memorable moments from Thursday night's debate.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. ERIC SWALWELL (D-CA) PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: I was six years old when a presidential candidate came to the California Democratic convention and said it's time to pass the torch to a new generation of Americans. That candidate was then-senator Joe Biden.
Joe Biden was right when he said it was time to pass the torch to a new generation of Americans 32 years ago. He's still right today.
SEN. BERNIE SANDERS (D-VT) PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: I think if, one, if I were to say to a younger person, you know, you're not qualified, because you're only 35 or 36 or something like that, you don't have the experience, that's not right. I don't think so. Judge people on the totality of who they are, what their ideas are, what their experience is, what their record is.
CABRERA: Congressman, to Bernie Sanders you say what?
SWALWELL: It's not ageism. It's an urgency on these issues. And I appreciate Senator Sanders has spent a lot of time recently working on canceling student loan debt. As somebody who has $100,000 in student loan debt and as a part of this generation, 40 million of us who have student loan debt, we just wish that when Senator Sanders and others went into government back in the '80s, they would have prevented this from becoming a problem in the first place. (END VIDEO CLIP)
CABRERA: And with foreign policy a hot topic at this week's debates, I also got Congressman Tim Ryan of Ohio to weigh in on the news that President Trump had invited North Korean leader, Kim Jong-un to shake his hand at the DMZ.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CABRERA: Would you shake hands with Kim Jong-un at the DMZ?
REP. TIM RYAN (D-OH): I would not. Not until we had some deal or were at least very, very close to having some deal. I mean, what's the deal? Like where are we? Does anyone have any clue what we're even talking about now? You know, we've got so many positions in the State Department that need filled, so many positions throughout our government that need filled, ambassadorships that need filled. We've got a migration crisis coming from Central America.
If he wants to go anywhere, he should go down there. But he does everything based on T.V. ratings, what is scintillating, and the border crisis is scintillating, him going to the DMZ is scintillating. That's all he does. But we're not getting anywhere, that's the problem.
Every time he does, it's distracting from the real problem in the united states which is how are we going to get this economy going for the 75 percent of the American people that are living paycheck to paycheck?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CABRERA: And right before my interview with Washington governor, Jay Inslee, news broke that a number of the Democratic candidates were coming to the defense of Senator Kamala Harris, after a racist attack by the president's son, Don Junior.
Earlier, he retweeted and then deleted a racist tweet suggesting that Harris is not a black American and thus should not be an authority on issues of race.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GOV. JAY INSLEE (D-WA), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Unfortunately, it appears that the rotten apple doesn't fall too far from the rotten tree. And what comes to mind is the question to the whole Trump family, at last, have you no decency, sirs.
The fact that Donald Trump, Sr.'s entire political existence is built on a foundation of racist attacks on Barack Obama, to now not learn from that experience, to perpetuate it, is unacceptable in America. And I think everyone ought to make a really fundamental decisions right now. They got to get a new -- we've got to get a new president.
(END VIDEO CLIP) CABRERA: You'll be hearing a lot more from the candidates soon enough. We'll have John Hickenlooper on with us tomorrow night. CNN will also be bringing you two nights of Democratic presidential debates live from Detroit, July 30th and 31st.
The Supreme Court this week issued a major ruling on gerrymandering. How this decision could affect you, next.
[20:40:53] CABRERA: The Supreme Court this week handing down two major rulings with wide-reaching impact. First up, gerrymandering. Justices ruling five-four. That federal courts must stay out of disputes over whether politicians go too far in drawing district lines to ensure that their party wins. The ruling could fundamentally affect the balance of power in Congress and state legislatures.
With us now, CNN Senior Political Writer and Analyst, Harry Enten and CNN Supreme Court analyst, Joan Biskupic, author of the book "The Chief: The Life and Turbulent Times of Chief Justice John Roberts." "
Joan, to you first, give us some insight into why the Justice has ruled that courts cannot tear apart as in gerrymandering.
JOAN BISKUPIC, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL WRITER: Thanks, Ana. This was a long time effort by Chief Justice John Roberts. For many years, he had been trying to get federal judges out of this business of reviewing extreme partisan gerrymanders.
His argument is that when judges look at these, they're essentially getting involved in politics. So he batted back claims that these violate voters' equality rights, voters' first amendment rights of who they would associate with, and said, OK. Perhaps these kinds of districts do look unfair and unjust, but this is not the business of federal judges, it's a political question, not a legal question.
And from the bench last week, Ana, he went on about the various tests that had been proposed by the challengers. And he just batted them back one after another, saying, they're impossible for judges to administer.
But then, dissenting Justice Elena Kagan said, lower court judges have indeed been using these tests and they've been able to assess very extreme gerrymanders that essentially rig elections. So there was a real fundamental difference in what lower courts were able to do here. And it was a very sad, almost mournful dissent from Justice Kagan saying, now when people go to the ballot box on Election Day, they won't be choosing their representatives as much as representatives in a statehouse have already chosen them by virtue of how the lines had been drawn.
[20:45:09] CABRERA: So the sort of the representatives, those who are seeking votes are now choosing their voters. Harry, explain now what the impact will look like when it comes to the political landscape.
HARRY ENTEN, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL WRITER AND ANALYST: Yes, I think that there are a few different points I'd point out. Number one, there's no doubt, if in fact you had say fairer rules, let's say the number of votes you had in a state matched up with the number of seats that each party was going to win, Democrats would have benefited, let's say, there were fair lines that were put into place. I think that's one thing.
Now, what -- how many number -- how many seats that would exactly be is a little bit unclear. Let's say back in 2016 have changed control of Congress, when republicans controlled it, if the Democrats controlling it. But it could have been, say, a dozen seats.
The second thing I'll point out is the state legislative elections going into 2020 now take on a much more of an added importance. So Democrats are going to want to win more of those state legislative seats, because, of course, we have the census that will be coming up in 2020 and the lines will be redrawn in 2022 -- and 2021 and 2022.
And the other thing I'll point out, is that this may move more states towards independent redistricting commissions. You may get it on the ballot and more states. We've seen a number of states adopt that. And could, in fact, help even out the playing field.
CABRERA: And so you mentioned the 2020 census. Joan, this week, the Supreme Court ruled the Trump administration cannot add a citizenship question to the 2020 census, at least not yet. So, where does it go from here?
BISKUPIC: Right. That's right, Ana. And that caveat you added at the end is crucial, because the chief, again writing for the majority, a different five-justice majority, said that under the constitution, the president -- the administration has the right to add the question under the administrative procedures act, it can add it.
But in this particular case, the reason that the commerce secretary, Wilbur Ross, gave, the sole reason he gave that it was being added was to protect voting rights. The chief said that was contrived and essentially said, go back and justify on other grounds.
Now, the key question is, because the chief wrote a very narrow opinion here that gives the administration some leeway, it's going to be what can a lower court hearing go on and the administration make its case quickly in time to try to get it, the citizenship question, onto the census.
CABRERA: OK. So this story is not over yet. Harry, I really wanted to ask you a question on this, but we ran out of time today on this segment today.
ENTEN: I got in one though.
CABRERA: So we'll leave it hanging for the next times because this is going to come back up.
Joan Biskupic, Harry Enten, thank you both. We'll be right back.
ENTEN: Thank you. (COMMERCIAL BREAK
[20:50:18] CABRERA: It has been 50 years since astronauts, Neil Armstrong, Buzz Aldrin, and Michael Collins, took a giant leap for mankind on the moon.
CNN's newest original film, "Apollo 11" takes you inside that amazing mission to the moon with never before seen footage and pristine audio recordings. Here's a preview.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Neil and Buzz, the president of the United States is in his office now and would like to say a few words to you. Over.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It would be an honor. Go ahead, Mr. President. This is Houston, out.
RICHARD NIXON, 37TH U.S. PRESIDENT: Hello, Neil and Buzz, I'm talking to you by telephone from the oval room at the White House. And this certainly has to be the most historic telephone call ever made from the White House. I just can't tell you how proud we all are of what you have done. For every American, this has to be the proudest day of our lives. And for people all over the world, because of what you have done, the heavens have become a part of man's world.
And as you talk to us from the sea of tranquility, it inspires us to re-double our efforts to bring peace and tranquility to earth.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CABRERA: I recently sat down with the director of "Apollo 11" to discuss the making of the film. Here's our conversation.
CABRERA: One of the things that makes it so spectacular is all the footage that you were able to uncover. How did you find it?
TODD MILLER, DIRECTOR, APOLLO 11: Well, initially we just started with simple research project. So we were engaged with NASA and the National Archives, which is the repository for a lot of government records, film in this case, video, audio, stills, everything, it all ends up there.
And several months into that research project, they discovered this cache of large format film reels that had been basically kept in cold storage for the better of 50 years. So it's just a real testament to archive preservation that it worked waiting for someone like our team to come along and utilize it.
And when you found it, were you like, this is gold this, this is money?
MILLER: Yes, it was -- some of the reels had Apollo 11 on them. Some of them, if you were lucky, had the date in and around the launch. And if you were really lucky, they had some shot list on it. But it wasn't until we actually got them heard in New York and tested them and the first reel I'll never forget it. The quality was just stunning and we all just sat there in stunned silence not really believing what we were seeing.
CABRERA: The iconic images and moments that we see in the film from the Saturn 5 rocket, mission control, the eagle landing, those first steps on the moon, obviously those are really important. But then there's also the audio, 11,000 hours of audio from these moments. It really do offer new perspectives on what the crew and mission control were experiencing in real time. Let's listen.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: How far my feet from the --
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: OK. You're right at the edge of the porch.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: OK. Now, I want to back up and partially close the hatch. Making sure not to lock it on my way out.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Good thought.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: That's our home for the next couple hours. We want to take good care of it.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You've got three more steps and then a long one.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Beautiful.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Beautiful.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Magnificent sight down here.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Magnificent.
CABRERA: Todd, what did you learn about this mission you didn't already know?
MILLER: A ton of stuff. You know, everyone on the team, we did our own research. So just hearing interviews, reading the astronauts' autobiographies, books on the subject, there was a lot of things that either fiction or nonfiction films hadn't told.
[20:55:09] So some of it was technical orientation of the spacecraft, exactly what they were doing. We worked very closely with NASA's chief historian, Bill Barry and his department to try to get all that stuff right.
And then there was just the kind of human moments, because we had so much footage and so much audio that no one had ever heard. Our project really became part of the -- of contributing to the historical record. So working with historians, and researchers, and the astronauts themselves, and the families to try to get it as accurate as possible was paramount from the get go.
CABRERA: Is there one piece of footage or one moment that you may have come across in which you just said, wow? MILLER: Yes. The most stunning footage for me -- and I go to every single screening we have. I'll be watching it, you know, tonight. It is -- it's the suiting up shots of the three astronauts. Neil Armstrong, Buzz Aldrin, and Michael Collins being suited up the day of the launch.
And I really didn't --it's stunning to see. But juxtapose that with a few days later we had some imagery from a test run that they did. And they're kind of joking around in the room. They do the exact same thing, they did the day of the launch. They get suited up. They drive out to the astro vans and a pad. They go up the elevator. They sit on top of the rocket, but then they just went home.
On the day of the launch, completely different mood shift. You could just see that they were -- they had kind of this meditative state they were going in. You see it reflected in the film. And it just gets me every time I see it.
CABRERA: And CNN's film "Apollo 11" coming up next right here on CNN.
That does it for me. I'm Ana Cabrera. I'll be back at 5:00 p.m. Eastern tomorrow here in the CNN NEWSROOM. Have a good night.