Return to Transcripts main page


Trump Admin Reverses Course On Census Citizenship Question After Trump Contradicted Officials On The Issue; Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-AZ) Discuss The Trump Administration On Citizenship Question; Trump Admin Reverses Course On Census, Citing Trump Tweet; Trump Admin Reverses Course On Census Citizenship Question In Bid To Appease Trump; Trump Defends Plan To Show Off Military At July 4th Event; Trump Misleads On The Cost Of July 4th Event; Sources Say Military Chiefs Fear It Will Be Politicized; Biden, Harris hold Dueling Events In Iowa As New Poll Shows Them Virtually Tied; Sen. Kamala Harris: "I Know Predators, And We Have A Predator Living In The White House"; Biden Raises $21.5 Million In Second Quarter, But Source Says Campaign Blindsided By Buttigieg's $24.8 Million Haul; Source: Biden Blindsided By Buttigieg's Fundraising Haul; Biden, Harris Hold Dueling Events In Iowa; Women Candidates Surge In Polls As They Confront Relentless Questions Over Electability; Women Candidates Confront Relentless Questions On Electability; Elizabeth Warren Tries to Win Over Voters Hit By Housing Crisis; Trump: Detained Migrants Living in "Far Better" Conditions Now As Children Held at Border are Drawing Themselves in Cages. Aired on 7-8p ET

Aired July 3, 2019 - 19:00   ET


WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: Our deepest, deepest condolences to his family and to his friends. Thanks very much for watching. I'm Wolf Blitzer in THE SITUATION ROOM. Erin Burnett OUTFRONT starts right now.

KATE BOLDUAN, CNN ANCHOR: OUTFRONT next, breaking news, a major reversal. The Justice Department ordered by the President to reexamine putting the controversial citizenship question back in the 2020 census and it's all because of a tweet. Plus, the President defending his July 4th extravaganza as the backlash and the price tags continue to grow. One lawmaker now suggesting the payment plan is illegal. He's my guest. And Biden blindsided, the former vice president raising $21 million but it wasn't enough to beat one unexpected candidate. Let's go out front.

OUTFRONT tonight, good evening, everyone. I'm Kate Bolduan in for Erin Burnett. We have breaking news, census chaos. The Justice Department reversing course after the just reversed course on the 2020 census. Just a short time ago, the Justice Department told a judge that they're now looking for a way to include the controversial citizenship question, just after they decided yesterday to start printing the questionnaire without the question. Are you following me? Is your head spinning? It should be at this point.

It is all because of this tweet from the President today. He tweeted the following, "The News Reports about the Department of Commerce dropping its quest to put the Citizenship Question on the Census is incorrect or to state it differently." The President says, "FAKE. We are absolutely moving forward as we must because of the importance of the answer to the question."

Only thing, there is nothing fake about the reports. The Justice Department even admitted it to the federal judge today saying, quote, the tweet this morning was the first I had heard of the President's position on this issue. One attorney said, "Just like the plaintiffs and Your Honor." This justice attorney went on to say, "I do not have a deeper understanding of what that means at this juncture other than what the President has tweeted."

According to The Washington Post, the President hated the idea that it appeared he had thrown in the towel on the fight over the citizenship question, caved on any issue, especially one that he has been railing against for months.


DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I think it's very important to find out if somebody is a citizen as opposed to an illegal.

They're not allowed to ask whether or not somebody's a citizen of the United States. How horrible and ridiculous is that?

Can you imagine you send out a census and you're not allowed to say whether or not a person is an American citizen.


BOLDUAN: Pamela Brown is out front live outside the White House for us tonight. Pamela, what more are you learning about this sudden reversal from the administration and please remind folks why this is so controversial. So Kate, this is a truly stunning course reversal. The President's tweet today clearly caught a lot of people off guard, including officials of its own administration.

It cause chaos as officials tried to grapple with how to square what the government told the court just yesterday that the census will not include the citizenship question. And then what the President tweeted today that his administration hasn't given up the quest to include that question.

Now, Maryland federal judge convened in the hearing today after seeing the President's tweet that contradicted the government's position and gave the DOJ lawyers a whip lashing. One of the lawyers, DOJ lawyer, said that the President's tweet was the first he had heard of the President's position and that he was trying to get his arms around this fluid situation.

Nonetheless, Kate, the judge reprimanded the DOJ lawyers for the sudden shift and suggested they don't speak for the client. The President, of course, is unclear what exactly prompted the President's tweet but a White House official says there have been discussions about a path forward. What that path is though is unclear after the Supreme Court hold on the question for now and the census printing has already begun. Kate.

BOLDUAN: Absolutely. And all of this comes down to critics of this question being put on and say it's directly targeting minority communities, immigrant communities and trying to suppress the representation in the census which equals millions of dollars, redistricting and the balance of power panel. Pamela, thank you so much.

Out front with me now Democratic Congressman Raul Grijalva of Arizona. Congressman, thanks for being here.

REP. RAUL GRIJALVA (D-AZ): Thank you so much.

BOLDUAN: I was looking, of course, on Twitter. At 11:15 this morning, Congressman, I saw you were celebrating on Twitter the fact that the administration had dropped the fight for the citizenship question and was moving on, at least it appeared. That was this morning. What do you say now?

GRIJALVA: Well, I thought that the lead counsel, the Senior Counsel for Mexican American Legal Defense Fund, Mr. Saenz said it best, the administration is now doubling down on stupid.

[19:05:01] And I think the plaintiffs are in a strong position, the fact that the opinion from Supreme Court in holding and leaving the question out of citizenship, said that the rationale that the administration had seemed contrived. After the Secretary Ross lied to Congress as to the motivation behind it. I think the strength is still there and the federal judge, this is going to proceed forward.

The President has obviously embarrassed by the fact that he couldn't get his way. This is the Supreme Court and contempt of not following an order has consequences. And the consequences are that to continue to play this, to continue to try to milk as much political capital as you can out of this question is a big mistake. The Supreme Court has held it. It shouldn't appear in there and at the end of the day, that's what's going to happen.

But this whole drama that he's created, this uncertainty he's created even within his own ranks at the Justice Department, I think is another sad chapter of dysfunctional. One hand doesn't know what's going on, but it's it's already been clearly decided. I'm very confident that this whole exercise by Trump is going to go nowhere.

BOLDUAN: The President on Monday was asked why it was so important to him to include the citizenship question. I want to remind viewers what he said.


TRUMP: I think it's very important to find out if somebody is a citizen as opposed to an illegal.

They're not allowed to ask whether or not somebody is a citizen of the United States. How horrible and ridiculous is that?

Can you imagine you send out a census and you're not allowed to say whether or not a person is an American citizen?


BOLDUAN: I'm not sure what the President says. I mean what he was talking about is it's important to find out if someone is a citizen as opposed to illegal and he talks about Democrats in some of his remarks about this. I'm not sure he's making any different case than the one that the Supreme Court actually just shut down.

But we do know that the President supporters are in lockstep with him on this. How do you convince them otherwise, Congressman?

GRIJALVA: This nation and the census which is part of the counting of the people of this nation has been going on and it's been going on to count every resident in this nation without prejudice and with confidentiality. That's been the story. I think the motivation behind it is pretty simple, is to isolate groups to diminish their importance, politically and otherwise. And I think the President, this is to me has always been a voter suppression issue. It's always been an issue that's xenophobic from the beginning as to who's been targeted. The sense about all residents and that's the way it should be.

My father was a green card holder for much of his life and he lived in this country and work. He was counted and he should be counted. He's a taxpayer. He's helping raise a family in this country, a family of citizens and a family unit. Why should they be left out and why should any resident of this country be left out? It's way the President is trying to intimidate, suppress the count and in suppressing the count, he also affects political representation in this country.

BOLDUAN: We're now hearing, at least one Justice Department attorney was saying to the federal judge in this, I mean saying that the tweet was the first time they'd heard about the President's position and also even acknowledging - this attorney says, "I'm doing my absolute best to figure out what is going on." I mean, it really sounds like chaos surrounding, as you point out, one of the most important national surveys taken and taken only every 10 years. Is there anything Congress can do about this?

GRIJALVA: Well, the litigation was that point and the Congress says, at least the House reaffirmed through our action that everybody should be counted and that the citizenship question was going to suppressed the account, and it was going to intimidate and try to marginalize people in this country, period and we've affirmed that.

BOLDUAN: Do you think just the President --

GRIJALVA: Mr. McConnell doesn't want to deal with those questions.

BOLDUAN: Do you think, Congressman ...

GRIJALVA: Yes, please.

BOLDUAN: ... that even if the Supreme Court is the highest court in the land, this is now - nobody knows what is going to happen now. This is all just happening today. The fight though dragging out this fight, it could very well threaten the deadlines that the administration is up against in terms of printing and beginning the count. What could that mean?

GRIJALVA: Well, I hope that this particular political tantrum fit that the President is having doesn't do what you just asked. Jeopardize account that is vital to representation. It's vital to resource distribution. It's vital to local communities to be able to know how to plan and how to accommodate the residents that they have. Why deny that to people and why deny that to our country in and of itself.

So this tantrum is jeopardizing a real accurate and necessary count that is historically been essential for the governance of this country.

[19:10:10] BOLDUAN: I also want to ask you about the President's Fourth of July event, his plan on the National Mall tomorrow. You're the chair of the committee that has oversight of the country's national parks and the Interior Department. You sent a letter to the Interior Secretary today asking for an accounting really of the $2.5 million dollars that we now know is going to be diverted to help pay for the event from the Interior Department. You call it a legal, why?

GRIJALVA: Yes, I really do. I think the recreation fee, the parks asked in charge of visitors is used specifically to support of those parks and those public lands that we visit and that we recreated. And diverting money during the shutdown, painful. But this one, $2.5 million directly out of that fund that all Americans paid to maintain their parks and to divert it on a use that is not prescribed for that fund for what essentially is a self-aggrandization event that Trump is having for himself we believe is illegal and we're asking Secretary Bernhardt to provide us the details, the cost, the rationale, legal and otherwise for that transfer of which I believe strongly does not exist.

And just to say we're going to do it when there's a law that specifically says these funds must be used in these parks. And the reason for the letter otherwise, the whole event is - some major self- gratulatoryevent for Trump more political than the patriotic in the sense that the VIP seats go to high-end donors for the Republican Party. The event itself is about military power as opposed to talking about the values and the importance of the 4th of July, our independence, who we are as a nation, a unifying time for our country. That's not happening at this event.

BOLDUAN: Let us see what the President says in that speech tomorrow night. Congressman, thanks for coming in.

GRIJALVA: Thank you for the invitation. I appreciate it.

BOLDUAN: Thank you so much. Out front for us next, Joe Biden, Kamala Harris going head-to-head this hour, holding rallies in the crucial state of Iowa. Can Biden continue to hold off Harris? Plus, it is the question, one of many, that is the question, the women running for President hearing, is the country ready to elect a female president. Why is it still being asked? Plus, pictures drawn by children detained at the border depicting themselves in cages. The doctor who received those pictures is out front. What did she see in those facilities?


[19:16:29] BOLDUAN: Tonight, the fight for 2020, we're going to show a live look at dueling events. Kamala Harris, Joe Biden both taking the stage this hour in Iowa, both campaign is also shifting strategy as a new poll shows them in a virtual dead heat. Kyung Lah is out front in Des Moines for us this evening. Kyung, this is Kamala's first trip to Iowa since her breakout debate performance and she seems to have a new line of attack she's trying out.

KYUNG LAH, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: She's sharpening an attack. That might be the best way to put it. She was using the words of her time when she was a prosecutor, San Francisco's District Attorney, California's Attorney General, and then used that to launch an attack against the President.


SEN. KAMALA HARRIS (D-CA), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: And I prosecuted the big banks when they preyed on homeowners. I've prosecuted the pharmaceutical companies when they preyed on seniors. I have prosecuted transnational criminal organizations when they preyed on women and children. I know predators and we have a predator living in the White House.


LAH: You can hear the applause there and you can see how packed this room is. This is her first trip since the debate and I talked to a number of people who say because of her debate performance they now back Senator Harris. But I also did speak to a couple of Iowans who say - she hasn't spent a lot of time in Iowa, she's been here five times.

Elizabeth Warren, by contrast, has been here 10 times. But you can definitely sense, Kate, the energy. One other thing, you can't quite tell in the picture but in this packed room, this is an impromptu area. This was supposed to be held outside. It got rained out. People stood in the rain, a lot of the people behind me are soaking wet because they refused to leave until they found a different location, Kate.

BOLDUAN: Soaking wet, now inside still fired up. All right. Kyung, thank you so much. I really appreciate it. All right. Out front now former Democratic Governor of Pennsylvania Ed Rendell. He supports Joe Biden. Keith Boykin is also here. He served as a Clinton White House aide. It's great to see you both.

Governor, Biden's campaign announced today that it raised $21.5 million in the second quarter. They say they hit their goal. It's less though than Mayor Pete Buttigieg who was a virtual unknown six months ago, of course. One source told CNN, my colleague Jeff Zeleny, that the campaign was blindsided by how much Buttigieg was able to raise. Well, it's great news, 21.5, is it bad news for Biden?

FORMER GOV. ED RENDELL (D-PA): No, actually, remember he got into the quarter 66 days ago. Mayor Buttigieg and the other candidates have had 90 plus days to raise money. He's raised the most money in this quarter per day, number one.

But number two, look, Kate, this race is not going to be decided by money. Pete Buttigieg and the big four; Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, Kamala Harris and Joe Biden they're all going to have plenty of money to prosecute this campaign. Money is not going to decide the race.

BOLDUAN: That's a good point and I do like that moniker, the big four. I'm going to steal that, Governor. Keith, this is money when you look at that, Bernie Sanders, Pete Buttigieg and Joe Biden. This is money other candidates would kill to have. Let's be honest.


BOLDUAN: But the fact that Biden's campaign is admitting those close to Biden's campaign are admitting that they were caught off-guard by how much other campaigns were able to raise. Whose fault is that?

BOYKIN: I don't know that there's anybody really to blame for this.


[19:20:02] BOYKIN: I don't think that this is something to be ashamed of, to raise $21 million in a quarter is an impressive haul. I don't think that you're going to win or lose based on whether you get $2 million or $3 million more than another candidate. Once you're in that top tier, that upper echelon, there's diminishing marginal returns to an extra dollar or two here or there.

BOLDUAN: A million in this case.

BOYKIN: Well, yes, I mean a million or two. But it helps in terms of your ability to attract attention and to continue you to pay your staff and everything. But the reality is when you're somebody - when you're the Vice President of the United States, you're going to have access, a former vice president, you're going to have access to money. So I'm not worried about Joe Biden in having money in the campaign.

BOLDUAN: That's a good point. I mean, Governor, it does seem that Biden is attempting a reset after his debate performance. I mean he's kicking off the longest stretch on the campaign trail so far. Tomorrow, he's going to be sitting down with CNN for a rare TV interview.

I was struck by - you told the L.A. Times after the debate that Biden is rusty as a candidate. Is this how you kick off the rust?

RENDELL: Sure. You kick off the rust by doing things. If you're rusty, you get in the batting cage and you swing a lot of balls. No, I think the Vice President is going to be fine. Remember, we're sitting here seven months to the day before the first vote is cast. There's plenty of time.

I know we, the chattering class, the people who make their livings out of politics, the media, we take it really seriously a year and a half out. The public will start looking at this as we go into it. But just take a look at the polls after the debate. Kamala Harris soared up in one poll, the CNN poll was only two points behind Joe Biden. But today's Washington Post-ABC poll which was the best in 2016, the most reliable, none of them were great but had Biden at 30 points and Kamala Harris at 13 points and Bernie Sanders at 19 points.

So it seems like if there was a tightening, it snaps back a little bit. So I wouldn't go crazy over the polls. It's a long way to go.


BOYKIN: Well, there's a lot to unpack but ...

BOLDUAN: Get going.

BOYKIN: ... the polls don't really mean that much at this point. You have to look at the aggregate of all of the different polls that are out there, not just one particular poll.

RENDELL: I agree with you.

BOYKIN: Yes, The Washington Post polls post a little better for Biden than the Quinnipiac poll and the CNN poll. But the average of all of the polls show the same thing that Kamala Harris, Elizabeth Warren are improving and Joe Biden is not improving.

We also see that Kamala Harris won the debate according to all of the polls that have been taken that I've seen since the debate last week. And but Biden's got to do is he's got to stop this rose garden strategy. I'm glad he's finally doing it now after the debate has ended. He's got to realize he can't stay in his ivory tower and campaign. He's got to go out there and do retail politics in Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina just like everybody else.

He's got to be on the ground. He's got to show people not only what he was about in the vice presidency for Barack Obama, but what he will plan to do for the future. People want to know what's going to happen from 2021 to 2025 not what he did from 2009 to 2017.

BOLDUAN: Well, there's a bit - adding to that, Governor, actually we have been wondering, do you think that Biden needs to take the gloves off when it comes to the primary like Kamala Harris did in the debate? I mean or do you think that he should keep running what has been to this point - it's a general election strategy where the only person that he's really attacking and taking on was Donald Trump.

RENDELL: Well, first of all, I agree with everything he just said. He's right on about all of that stuff. But secondly to answer your question, yes, our voters want to see someone tough enough, strong enough to take on Donald Trump. If you listen to the sound bite you just ran about Kamala Harris, who was she taking on, not Joe Biden, not Bernie Sanders, not Elizabeth Warren she was taking on Donald Trump.

And there's a danger when you attack Democrats. I thought it was a little ironic, Kamala Harris got a ton of praise with her first sound bite saying, "This is not a food fight. The voters don't want a food fight." Then, she took a whole tray of mashed potatoes and threw it at Vice President Biden.

But I think what people are looking for is somebody to take on Donald Trump. That's what Democratic voters talk to me about.

BOLDUAN: They don't want a food fight. They just want a one-on-one. I'll throw something at you, you throw back at me.


BOLDUAN: Just not an entire chaotic lunchroom fight, I have taken that analogy. It's gone way too far.

RENDELL: Against the villain. Against the villain.

BOLDUAN: Great to see you, guys. Thank you so much. I really appreciate it, Keith. Governor, thanks so much. And please don't miss programming up for all of you. Please don't miss CNN's exclusive interview with Joe Biden, that will be airing Friday morning 6:00 and 8:00 am Eastern.

Out front for us next, women, deliver the House to the Democrats in 2018, so does that mean that the country is ready to elect a female president. The question still lingers. Plus, the Trump campaign getting called out for using paid actors to give the President glowing endorsement.


STACEY, FLORIDA: President Trump is doing a great job. I could not ask for a better President of the United States.



[19:29:04] BOLDUAN: Tonight, the fight for 2020. As some of the women running for president are surging in recent polls, The New York Times is out today with a story headline this, "It's a Question No One Says They Want to Ask. But the Women Running for President Keep Hearing It." Like question, of course, being, "Do you really think a woman could be elected president?"

With a historic field that includes six female candidates, could one become the first female president? Out front now Amy Chozick of the New York Times who is out with a big profile of the women running in Vogue right now. April Ryan is White House Correspondent for American Urban Radio Networks. And Alexandra Rojas, Executive Director of Justice Democrats.

Amy, I'm not sure whether to laugh or cry when I see this, if we talk about this one more time. But you have been writing about this for a very long time. Why are folks still asking this question?

[19:29:55] AMY CHOZICK, WRITER AT LARGE, THE NEW YORK TIMES: Well, it's understandable since we've never had a female president that people would ask that question. The concern is that it can become a self-fulfilling prophecy. Every time you ask is the country ready to elect a woman, there's a chance that people will say, "Oh, maybe the answer is no."



And it's interesting, I sort of thought when I went into reporting this piece that it was just something you and I discuss on cable. But actually all of the candidates have heard this on the rope line. Heard donors ask this. I mean, this is a concern that has seeped into the electorate and people are have to wonder about.

But the flipside is that as Kirsten Gillibrand told me in the "Vogue" piece, a woman did win. I think Hillary Clinton complicates things she won three million more votes what does that say whether the country is ready. Maybe they need a better strategic campaign and the country is ready.

KATE BOLDUAN, CNN HOST: The question is, can a female win the Electoral College?

Maybe you need to get more specific.

April, to Amy's point, the fact the question is being asked doesn't mean the answer is no?

APRIL RYAN, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: Women are now leading in the board room. They're leading Fortune 500 companies, international companies. They are leading in the home.

In the black community alone, we have more women now who are head of household. That number is rising. So, women are equipped. The issue is the mindset.

There is still a certain I guess genderism against women. And we have to get past that as we are leading in every place but in the White House.

BOLDUAN: Yes, Alexandra, women Democrats helped -- they were the reason the Democrats were able to deliver the House majority back to the Democrats in the mid-terms. To me, that's evidence that the country is ready or is there something different about the presidency?

ALEXANDRA ROJAS, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, JUSTICE DEMOCRATS: No, I think that electability, that term, right, is used to marginalize and keep people out, especially women. We can see that borne out throughout the history of U.S. politics.

But I think like you just pointed to what's so exciting about the moment is that the most exciting I think new sort of generation of leadership in the Democratic Party is by diverse progressive women like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, like Ilhan Omar, Rashid Tlaib. And you are totally right as well that we are seeing a historic amount of women dominate the presidential field as well, and you see candidates like Kamala Harris and Elizabeth Warren surging in the polls.

But I also feel like we also have to point out, it's deeper than just the gender problem, right? It's about we have not provided solutions as a Democratic Party or as a country, we have not provided solutions that are matching the scale, scope and urgency to the problems that we're facing right now. And I think voters are really concerned about our -- are concerned about that as well.

BOLDUAN: Amy, in your piece, in speaking with the women running for president in "Vogue", many quotes stick out but here is one bit you wrote. The candidates I speak to agree that to 2020 is less about the symbolism of a woman president though that would be nice than it is about substance. How her life experience would influence policy and decision making?

And I hear you, sister. I hear you but, again, the flipside Donald Trump did not win talking about any policy. Donald Trump won because of a brand. What is it -- how do you square those two things?

CHOZICK: I disagree. Donald Trump did win on policies. His policies were build a wall, ban the Muslims. Mexicans are rapists. These were so-called policies fitting on a bumper sticker.

BOLDUAN: It wasn't a white paper.

CHOZICK: Build the wall and ban Muslims are the policies.

I think Elizabeth Warren has done a good job of creating policy that can go on a bumper sticker free college, you know? That's a very evocative thing. I think it's about communicating policies in a way that is evocative to voters.

But I love singled in on the line, because I think it's a real difference. If you think about someone in the top office of the presidency who has been pregnant or pregnant and not wanted to be pregnant or struggled with child care, they're going to come to all these issues with a different set of life experiences. The set of life experiences that more than half the country has.

And so I think these women you see it in a lot of Elizabeth Warren's policies in particular, their world view is very much shaped even though they're not talking about shattering the glass ceiling at every top. The world view is shaped by being women and you can't change it.

BOLDUAN: So interesting.

April, if you do allow the thought that in 2016 the country wasn't ready for a would woman to be president and that was part of why Donald Trump won, what has changed in four years that will make Donald Trump less successful, using what we can assume will be the same playbook?

RYAN: What has changed? We had Hillary Clinton run. And we in Donald Trump become president who, you know, people still remember the moment on that debate stage that Hillary Clinton had to actually restrain herself from going to Donald Trump saying please don't stalk me. She had to grin and bear it and keep going.

We have seen how the nation and even the world has come to terms with some of the things this president said about women.

[19:35:04] You know, we have seen presidents have meetings on health care without women at the table. And they're talking about issues of women. And not only that, I want to go back a couple of administrations ago to the Bush administration, George W. Bush administration and to the Obama administration. Women are in the forefront.

When you talk about the diplomacy at times of tension and peril with other nations, women have been there -- Madeline Albright, Condoleezza Rice, Hillary Clinton. Those women were walking into places that were not necessarily woman-friendly or looked at women as subservient.

So, it is now time for women to be at the table. And I'm going to say this to you, Kate. I've been at the White House 22 years, and I'll be happy to say, ask a question to begin with, madam president.

BOLDUAN: Amy, we had Democratic candidate Marianne Williamson she was not included in the photo spread for "Vogue". She is upset about it. And let me play you for the viewers what she said.


MARIANNE WILLIAMSON (D), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: The framers of the constitution were very career about whose is qualified to run for president and did not make any media certainly not "Vogue" magazine the gatekeeper here. The framers of the Constitution said that in order to run for president, in order to be qualified to be president you have to have been born here. You had to have lived here 14 years and you have to be 35 years or older.

Now, if they had wanted to say you had to have been an elected official, they would have.


BOLDUAN: "Vogue" put out a statement responding to it saying that it was not intended as a snub, that she was not in the photo shoot, that they wanted to highlight the five elected women who are running for president.

Does -- do you think Williamson has a reason to be upset?

CHOZICK: Of course. And her criticism -- the criticism of her supporters is also legitimate. I mean, absolutely in no way did "Vogue" intend this to diminish her career or her candidacy. You know, the magazine stories have a long lead time. I think she started discussing the photo in March and they took it in April. At that time the field is so big that we -- they decided that we should focus on the women in elected office.

I, of course, mentioned Williamson in the piece.

BOLDUAN: You do.

CHOZICK: Right. But I think especially since talking about women running and all of these women have 40 years combined experience in Congress. So, they've almost all of them won elections in in which they were told there was no way to a women with would many do win the election. So, they came with the experiences that we were focusing on, but absolutely it was not a way to diminish Williamson and I do sympathize with her supporters and her complaints about this.

BOLDUAN: Thank you for being here. It's great to see you. Thank you for the piece.

Alexandra, April, thanks, guys.

ROJAS: Thank you.

BOLDUAN: OUTFRONT next, Elizabeth Warren taking the message that helped launch her political career to the epicenter of the housing crisis.


ELIZABETH WARREN (D-MA), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: We all know what happened. We sure know it who here in Las Vegas, right?


BOLDUAN: But is her message resonating?

Plus, children held at the border drawing themselves in cages. The doctor who received the photos and visited two detention centers is OUTFRONT next.


[19:41:53] BOLDUAN: Tonight, 2020 candidate Elizabeth Warren is campaigning in Nevada. Warren is touting her handling of the housing crisis and the state hit obviously hard by it. But will her message win over voters there?



WARREN: Hello, east Las Vegas!

MJ LEE, CNN NATIONAL POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Elizabeth Warren taking her populist message west. WARREN: We need big, systemic change in this country. Big change!

LEE: The presidential candidate on a two-day swing through Nevada, a critical early 2020 caucus state.

WARREN: This is our time!

LEE: The state, ground zero of the 2008 housing crisis that had one of the highest foreclosure rates in the country.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It was just dead, dead, dead, dead, all the way down, at least ten houses down. Every other home was just gone, empty.

LEE: Nevada is also home to former Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. More than a decade after the crisis, the emotions are still raw.

FORMER SEN. HARRY REID (D-NV): We felt more than just the housing crisis. It was up and down the strip, all of our businesses were in trouble. It was scary.

LEE: In 2008, Reid turned to Warren for help, appointing her to oversee the government program that injected hundreds of billions of dollars into the economy.

REID: I just told her that I wanted her to be a member of the TARP commission. She didn't know what I was talking about. But she would do it.

LEE: The committee's first hearing convening in Las Vegas.

WARREN: We are here to ask the questions that we believe all Americans have a right to ask, who got the money, what have they done with it.

LEE: The public exposure transferring Warren from little-known Harvard law professor to a national figure.

JON STEWART, COMEDY CENTRAL: That was like financial chicken soup for me. That was -- thank you.

LEE: Back in Nevada this week, Warren revisiting the crisis.

WARREN: We all know what happened. We sure know it here in Las Vegas, right?

LEE: Calling out the government for siding with the big banks while Americans were losing their homes.

WARREN: What did our federal government do? Covered its ears, covered its eyes. It did nothing on whose behalf? The people. And instead were there for the big banks.


LEE: And, Kate, number of the voters we spoke to this week in Nevada actually said they feel like the economy is doing pretty well and attribute that progress to President Trump and it is one of the reasons they feel like they probably will support him in 2020.

So, I asked Senator Warren, how do you win those folks over? And she said, look, she is glad that the economy appears to be doing better but simply does not believe that this is an economy working for everybody. Clearly, this is a populist message that she hopes will set her apart going forward, Kate.

BOLDUAN: Absolutely. Great reporting, MJ. Thank you.

OUTFRONT next, we have seen the images dangerous overcrowding at detention centers. One doctor Indian the facilities is OUTFRONT with what she witnessed.

Plus, the so-called supporters in Trump's new campaign ad turns out they're not who they appear to be.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: President Trump and his family and the administration are in our prayers for strength and wisdom from God Almighty.



[19:48:58] BOLDUAN: Tonight, the president is defending the conditions migrants are facing at the border. Trump tweeting this. That many, he says, are living far better now than they were -- than where they came from and in far safer conditions. That from the president of the United States.

Keep that in mind when you look at this -- at these. These are pictures drawn by children recently released from being held at the border facilities. You can see from their drawings how it looked from their perspective in there. More importantly, from these drawings, you can get a sense of how it felt for them in there. They were put out -- these images by the American Academy of Pediatrics.

And OUTFRONT now is Dr. Sara Goza, who received those drawings. Those images. She is the incoming president of the American Academy of Pediatrics.

Doctor, thank you for being here.


BOLDUAN: You toured facilities at the border last week. The president is defending the conditions inside these facilities. What do you say to that, doctor?

[19:50:00] GOZA: So, as a pediatrician, first and foremost, I know the Customs and Border Protection facilities are no place for any child. We need changes, and we need them quickly, to make sure that we treat immigrant children in a different way as they arrive on our borders. And we need to have pediatricians in those facilities wherever there are children to take care of them.

BOLDUAN: I have -- I have many a question on that, that specifically. When he says that they're in far safer conditions and living far better than where they came from, what did you see when you toured the centers?

GOZA: So, I'm going to just break it down into smell, sight, and sounds.

So, when we first walked in, the first thing that hit us was the smell, the smell of urine and sweat kind of mixed together, the sound of Mylar blankets crinkling, and then the vision was of faces that really were very flat. There was no affect in the faces and eyes. Their eyes were bloodshot from being tired and bulging from just not knowing (AUDIO GAP) and that was in the children and the families.

BOLDUAN: And that leads me to the drawings. About those drawings that you released, it's really struck me seeing this from the hands of children. These pictures show how these children viewed their situation.

What do these pictures tell you?

GOZA: So, those pictures tell us that detention in these border facilities and processing centers are not good for children. It causes them to have stress and to have fear, which can have lifelong complications for children. That much stress, if it's at a high level for a long time, can cause something called toxic stress, which contains the architecture of children's brains.

And we really, truly believe that children should be in those border facilities for as little as possible, for as short of a time as possible, and that we need pediatric providers there to make sure that they're taken care of.

BOLDUAN: The president sent out another message today that was quite a bit on it, and I'm so thankful, because I really want your take. He wrote: Our Border Patrol people are not hospital workers, doctors, or nurses.

What he's saying is it's not their job to care for these migrants. So, the --

GOZA: So, the Border Patrol are not medical providers.


GOZA: They don't know that much about children. They're law enforcement.

So it really behooves us to have pediatricians at the border, where they are, to help take care of these children. BOLDUAN: Doctor, I have heard that from other pediatricians as well,

because children are special. The signs of stress, the signs of illness show themselves differently in children than they do in adults. If they would allow you in right now to help and make changes, what would you do first?

GOZA: So, the first thing we would do would be to have pediatricians there to look at these children and to help make sure what's in the best interests of the children is happening, but we also have a bill -- Congressman Ruiz has a bill that's in the house right now for humanitarian care of these children, which would allow pediatricians unfettered access to these centers, and it would also help make sure that they have the basic necessities that they need.

So, the American Academy of Pediatrics is very strong in supporting this bill and hope that it passes soon.

BOLDUAN: Doctor, thank you so much for coming in.

GOZA: Thank you.

BOLDUAN: I'd really like to have you back to continue having this conversation again, get the message out there. Thank you so much.

GOZA: Any time. Thank you so much.

BOLDUAN: OUTFRONT for us next -- they have nothing but praise for the president, but as Jeanne Moos found out, there is much more to this story.


[19:57:45] BOLDUAN: Tonight, people featured in some Donald Trump ads aren't who you think they are.

Here's Jeanne Moos.


JEANNE MOOS, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): This Trump ad features Tracey from Florida, walking the beach, praising the president --

TRACEY FROM FLORIDA: I could not ask for a better president of the United States of America.

MOOS: And he couldn't ask for a better testimonial, unless it was from a real supporter, because Tracey from Florida is just a model from istockphoto.

But surely, Thomas from Washington, offering Trump religious support, is the real thing.


MOOS: Nope, not a prayer that he's real, just a bearded and tattooed hipster type from istock.

And A.J. from Texas?

A.J. FROM TEXAS: President Trump, although I am a lifelong Democrat --

MOOS: He's others in model from istockphoto, available for a modest licensing fee of 170 bucks. All this was first reported by the Website Popular Info.

What's an ad guy who spent 17 years making Democratic spots think of this?

J.J. BALABAN, DEMOCRATIC ADMAKER: If I did anything remotely like this for any one of my clients, I'd be fired.


MOOS: Actually, no word of firings from a Trump Make America Great Again Committee that made these Facebook ads.

(on camera): Now, there is an itty-bitty disclaimer that pops up on the ads for maybe two seconds, but you'd better have your trusty magnifying glass handy.

(voice-over): Don't blink, it's coming. What you missed says "actual testimonial actor portrayal." Why would someone do this when they could just grab a real Trump supporter?

BALABAN: Sloppiness and laziness.

MOOS: Sloppiness is nothing new. There was that Marco Rubio screw-up --


AD NARRATOR: It's morning again in America.

FALLON: Stop, stop, stop the clip there. That's Vancouver, Canada.

MOOS: Someone on Twitter defended the Trump committee's use of stock images, because the unhinged jack asses on the left would go to no ends to make some Trump supporter's life a living hell.

But they didn't just borrow the people, they lifted the storefront. It's in Tokyo. Note the Japanese sign. And the beach that Tracey from Florida is walking on is actually the Mediterranean Sea. Better check Tracey's birth certificate.

Jeanne Moos, CNN, New York.


BOLDUAN: Just wait for all of the ads, everyone. That's all this is telling me right now.

Thanks so much for joining me.

"AC360" starts now.