Return to Transcripts main page


Billionaire Jeffrey Epstein Due In Court To Face Sex Charges; California Braces For "The Big One" After Earthquake; UK Probes Ambassador's Leaked Cables Insulting Trump; Starbucks Apologizes To Tempe Police. Aired 7:30-8a ET

Aired July 8, 2019 - 7:30   ET


CASEY FRANK, SENIOR EDITOR FOR INVESTIGATIONS, MIAMI HERALD: And we examined emails that went back and forth between the two sides and it's very clear that the attorneys for Mr. Epstein wanted not only for this deal to be engineered but they wanted it to be kept secret from the 36 victims that you previously referenced and that is exactly what occurred.

And so 10 years later, Julie Brown decided to dust off this old case, hold it up to the light and see what happened and the result was our investigation perversion of justice and I think the fruits of that investigation are occurring today in a New York City courtroom and we're very proud of it.

ALISYN CAMEROTA, CNN ANCHOR: Yes, I can understand why. Paul, explain how this is possible. Why would a U.S. Attorney, Alexander Acosta who is now the Labor Secretary ever agree to this? I mean there were 36 as I said underage victims, he agreed not to alert them to this plea deal and that he was able to avoid a federal trial. Why would any prosecutor agree to that?

PAUL CALLAN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: On the surface, this is such a shocking resolution of this case in Florida. The human trafficking charges are very serious. You can get a life in prison sentence federally for human trafficking and what they did in Florida and what Alexander Acosta the current Secretary of Labor negotiated was a deal where Epstein only took a single plea for solicitation of prostitution and they dropped all of the federal charges which had been outlined in a 53 page indictment.

The claim that was later made by the U.S. Attorney's Office down there was that the feds would have trouble establishing jurisdiction. Federal jurisdiction and they thought they would lose the case so they deferred to state prosecutors. But then they agreed to this sweetheart deal where the victims were not notified which they're required to be notified on the federal law and the sentence he got from a judge in Florida was a slap on the wrist, thirteen months in jail but much of the sentence was served by him being confined to his own office and going to work every day. So it was a slap on the wrist for Epstein.

CAMEROTA: One of the things, Casey, about this case is that it involves so many high-profile, very powerful people and not - I shouldn't say the case, I should say Jeffrey Epstein's history involves all sorts of powerful high-profile people. I mean here is what Donald Trump said about Jeffrey Epstein in 2002. This was to New York magazine.

"I've known Jeff for 15 years. Terrific guy. He's a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side. No doubt about it, Jeffery enjoys his social life."

Now, I mean, obviously in the light of day that looks horrible, but of course this was 2002, this was before he was arrested, this was before the investigation, still is it possible that because he was connected to all of these powerful men, that's why he got this sweetheart deal?

FRANK: Well, it's certainly possible maybe we'll find that out in the coming weeks. Mr. Epstein is facing some heavy charges. He also has some important information, useful information in his pocket should he care to use it. He had a number of enablers, many very high-profile friends. You just mentioned one of them, Mr. Trump, former President Bill Clinton is another.

And this was a very sophisticated operation he had handlers. He had schedulers. He had schedulers. He had pilots and it will be interesting going forward to see if he chooses to use that information to try to lighten the punishment that he might face should he be found guilty in federal court.

CAMEROTA: Paul, it's hard not to draw that conclusion. That somehow he is able to skirt the law because he has dirt on powerful people.

CALLAN: Well, he's gotten away with it once. The question is will he get away with it twice because in this case what will he have to trade, obviously, he has friends in high places. We've left out Prince Andrew was even one of the people who used to party with Epstein. Bill Clinton, of course, Donald Trump making that public statement. He's got a lot of friends in high places.

If he has information about somebody at a much higher level in government, yes, he still got the ability to bargain.

CAMEROTA: So what's going to happen this time, very quickly, Paul? What's going to happen to this now that he's been arrested this weekend?

[07:35:10] CALLAN: Well, I think give him a controversy that he's attached to the Florida case, you're going to look to a very, very tough prosecution in New York. This is being brought by Southern District prosecutors, same ones who went after Michael Cohen and I think you're going to see probably a very serious jail sentence of being sought by New York prosecutors.

CAMEROTA: Paul Callan, Casey Frank, thank you very much for sharing all of your papers. Excellent reporting with us this morning. Great to talk to you.

CALLAN: Thank you.


FRANK: Thank you.

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: All right. Two major earthquakes in two days and the question in California this morning, is the big one still to come? Look at these pictures. We'll ask the experts next.


[07:40:02] BRIGGS: This morning, the question in California, is the big one still to come? Two strong earthquakes in two days, the biggest measured 7.1, the other 6.4. You can see what happened in this pool and we see images like this all around California all the way from San Diego to Las Vegas in fact.

Joining us now to discuss Joann Stock Geology and Geophysics Professor at Cal Tech. Professor, thank you very much for being with us. So you have these two earthquakes in two days. People are so worried could another one be coming? Are those fears warranted?

JOANN STOCK, PROFESSOR, SEISMOLOGY LABORATORY AT CAL TECH: Well, yes, we always have the risk of a big earthquake on the San Andreas Fault and there are a lot of other faults as well in California. So the risk of having another one of this magnitude of 7.1 right in the same area that it happened near Ridgecrest has gone down a lot, like the probability now for the next week of having something bigger than a 7.1 is like 1%.

But they're still expecting hundreds of aftershocks of magnitude three and above. And so some of those aftershocks are likely going to be felt outside the local area.

BRIGGS: Yes, I learned a new term with this series of quake which was foreshock that after the 6.4 when we had the 7.1, it turned out that the 6.4 earthquake was a foreshock to the 7.1. So how do you know that the 7.1 earthquake isn't a foreshock to something else?

STOCK: We don't know that and there is 1 percent chance that in the next week there could be a bigger one there in which case we would have to reclassify it again as a foreshock. But the probabilities are dropping as time goes by and the aftershock sequence is getting much less vigorous than it was after the magnitude 6.4. So I think we're not as worried now. The probabilities are lower, considerably lower than they were after the magnitude 6.4.

BRIGGS: Well that's good news. You brought up the San Andreas Fault, which obviously I think in our culture holds almost mythic status. Any connection between these earthquakes centered in Ridgecrest and the San Andreas Fault?

STOCK: No, except for the fact that they're all part of the active plate boundary fault system. So we have faults extending all the way through the State of California, down into Mexico and those all generally and in over a wide zone too going into Nevada and the - an offshore to the west of California and so we do have earthquakes on those faults at different times and so the San Andreas is the one that's the most famous because it has like the biggest offset and it has had biggest historical earthquakes, but it's not the only one that has big earthquakes.

And so what we've seen recently is that, a lot of these big earthquakes have not been on the San Andreas Fault, but that doesn't reduce our risk of having a big San Andreas Fault events.

BRIGGS: So are we getting better at predicting earthquakes?

STOCK: We can't predict them, but we are getting better at doing early warning for people to be prepared when the shaking starts. If you're not too close to where it starts, you could get a warning with a few seconds, depending on how far away you are that the strong shaking is going to be coming and so you can take precautions to automatically do things like shut off gas lines, power lines, water aqueducts, slow down the trains, make the elevators all open there doors on floors where people can walk off instead of getting stuck in the middle or open all the doors on the fire stations.

BRIGGS: Now, you talk about what you can do once the quake starts.

STOCK: Those kinds of things. Yes, there's nothing you can do if you're right there where it starts, but if the strong shaking is going to take 10 seconds to get to where you are then there will be time for those automatic reactions.

BRIGGS: So how should people be prepared in the Northeast? I think we don't really pay as much attention to it, but people in California should they all have a go-bag ready? What should they do?

STOCK: Yes. They should have a supply of food and water, first aid kit, some water in their car if they drive as well as in their house and they should have a family communication plan for how to get in touch with people outside the area to let them know that they're okay. There's a lot of recommendations that have been coming through for people right now because of the recent earthquakes.

And so I think it's very valuable for everyone to realize that they can do a lot to prepare both in terms of things they have in their house and things they have in a go-bag, for example. But also in terms of just looking around in their house and making sure that they don't have heavy things that might fall on their head that are unsecured.

BRIGGS: I think this was a clear warning sign. People, if they weren't taking notice before ...


BRIGGS: They certainly are now. Professor Joann Stock, thank you so much for being with us this morning.

STOCK: Thank you.

BRIGGS: Alisyn. CAMEROTA: All right. John, there was an incredible display of mother

nature's power in Boston Harbor over the weekend. Take a look at this.


CAMEROTA: Okay, God was mad at that sailboat.

BRIGGS: What did that sailboat do?

[07:45:05] CAMEROTA: I don't know, but we're going to get to the bottom that no one was onboard this sailboat. We are happy to say when that lightning struck. The owner we're told is still assessing the damage.

BRIGGS: I can it's bad. I can assess it for him. It's bad.

CAMEROTA: I've never seen anything like that.

BRIGGS: Or was it we?

CAMEROTA: Mother nature was very angry.

BRIGGS: Or was it we]? It wasn't mother nature. I mean it must've been something else, but it wasn't mother nature. What's the?

CAMEROTA: Oh, my gosh. All right. Today, a tropical storm is developing. It could impact the Gulf Coast. Here's Meteorologist Chad Myers. Have you seen something like that, Chad?

CHAD MYERS, CNN METEOROLOGIST: I spent a lot of time on Lake Erie and I never saw a boat get hit. There's always that danger when you're out there, but yes I watched that video over and over and there's not a bit of electronics that are still going to work in that boat, that's for sure. Maybe even the seat cushions are gone as well. But luckily no one was on that thing. You could see the cockpit there light up in that fire.

So here we go, we will see some rain across parts of the Northeast especially for New York City for today. This weather is brought to you by Boost nutritional drink. Beat up for life.

How many times have you ever seen a tropical system develop over Georgia? Never. So watch this, there's the low and it heads up in the Gulf of Mexico and by the next five days we an 80% chance of a developing tropical system in the Gulf, most of the models now taking it somewhere over toward Houston which don't need anything like that, but we'll keep watching it for you because this could be a dud.

But right now NAC says 80 percent. So rain in the Northeast, cooler in the Northeast, because of the rainfall. Temperature is pretty decent out there for today. Guys, back to you.

BRIGGS: All right. Chad Myers, thank you very much. Something to watch for there.

MYERS: You're welcome.

BRIGGS: So huge controversy on both sides of the Atlantic leaked memos reveal what a top British diplomat really thinks of President Trump. It's not pretty. We have new reaction next.


[07:51:48] CAMEROTA: The U.K. is investigating a leak of emails written by the British Ambassador to the United States criticizing President Trump. In the cables, the ambassador calls the President, quote, inept and incompetent. CNN Anna Stewart is live in London with the latest, so what now?

ANNA STEWART, CNN REPORTER: Well, the Prime Minister Spokesperson has come out this morning saying that she has the full support, she fully supports this ambassador that echoes comments from the Foreign Secretary and essentially they're saying that this is what ambassadors need to do. Give full candid honest opinions on the government that they serve, also maybe the fact that it doesn't actually reflect what the ministers themselves think.

"Now, of course, these opinions are not supposed to be made public and these comments were fairly explosive, Alisyn. Check this one out. Ambassador write, "We really don't believe that this administration is going to become substantially more normal; less dysfunctional, less unpredictable, less faction-riven, less diplomatically clumsy and inept."

Another memo discusses the alleged links between the President and Russia. The British Ambassador to the U.S. says, "The worse cannot be ruled out." And said it could bring the presidency crashing and burning. Now, all of these memos were confirmed to be genuine by a source in the British government to CNN. Obviously, the President wasn't that pleased. Here's what he had to say.


DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: We're not big fans of that man and he has not served the U.K. well. So, I can understand it and I can say things about him but I won't bother.


STEWART: And that brings into question, what happens next. The U.K.'s foreign office is launching a formal investigation to see who leaked all of this, who's behind it, was it politically motivated, but also the big question is to whether our ambassador can stay in the U.S. in job. He's meant to be serving out to the end of the year. Of course, he lacks the support now of the U.S. President. He may have the support of the British government here but it's hard to see how he can be the top diplomat in United States since his very undiplomatic comments have been laid bare, Alisyn.

BRIGGS: Yes, I'll take it. Awkward to say the least to be sure. Thanks so much for that report. An apology this morning from Starbucks to six police officers who were asked to leave one of its stores in Tempe, Arizona. The officer say they were enjoying some coffee in July 4th when a barista approached and told them there was a customer who did not feel safe in their presence. They were asked to move out of the customer's line of sight or leave, so they left. Starbucks later released a statement calling the treatment of the officers completely unacceptable.

CAMEROTA: All right. Federal and mandated busing has not been in the news for years until that debate exchange between Kamala Harris and Joe Biden. So why is busing back and relevant today? John Avlon has our reality check. Hi, John.

JOHN AVLON: Hi, guys. So look, if you're a little confused about why Democrats are busy debating the 1970s school integration policy known as busing, you're not alone. In fact, according to a search of transcripts, the term has been used more on cable news in the past month than in the previous 10 years. But all of that changed with the first Democratic debate.


SEN. KAMALA HARRIS (D-CA), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: There was a little girl in California who was part of the second class to integrate her public schools and she was bused to school every day and that little girl was me.


[07:55:00] AVLON: Now, Joe Biden finally apologize for offending folks his defense of working notorious segregationists senators. But in an exclusive interview with our own Chris Cuomo, he tried to clarify his position on busing.


JOE BIDEN, FORMER UNITED STATES VICE PRESIDENT, PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Busing did not work. You had overwhelming response from the African-American community in my state. My state is the eighth largest black population in the country as a percent of population. They did not support it. They did not support it.


AVLON: So let's fact-check the frontrunner's claims and see where Senator Kamala Harris disagree on policy today. Busing was the federally mandated integration of public schools, but forcing the busing of kids in the different neighborhoods, putting white students in the black school districts and vice versa.

Now, in the rearview mirror, this looks like a principal attempt by the government to write historic wrong, but at the time it was deeply divisive. Now, some of the backlash was clearly rooted in racism. It was capture by this Pulitzer prize winning photo by Stanley Forman, taken in Boston, by the way, not Birmingham.

But not all opposition was racist. The policy was deeply unpopular in black and white households according to a 1973 Gallup poll. Its top line conclusions, "A majority of Americans continue to favor public integration, but few people - black or white - think that busing is the best way to achieve that goal.

Get this, only 9 percent of African-American surveyed and 4 percent of whites said that forced busing was their first solution to improve school integration. More popular alternatives included expanding school districts as well as building more low income housing in middle class communities.

When Gallup poll busing again 20 years ago, it found similar results, nearly six out of 10 believed that more should be done to integrate schools, but over 80 percent opposed busing is the best way to achieve it. Look, good people can disagree on specific solutions while agreeing on broad goals. And some will say that polling isn't the point, because civil rights shouldn't be subject to popularity contests, fair enough. But it's worth noting that busing is not anywhere near the top issues that Democrats want to hear from their candidates, there'd be health care, immigration, the economy and the climate crisis.

But we also need to confront this uncomfortable fact. By some measures, we have actually lost ground in recent decades in the effort to desegregate our public schools. Eight of the top 10 states with the most segregated schools, by the way, are outside the south. There are still a lot of work to do and we've learned that Biden-Harris don't actually disagree that much on the role that busing should play today.

But as we focus on the future, we should try to resist the temptations to impose current values on the past without understanding crucial context. We're always assuming the worst motives. We're looking at ourselves and that's your reality check.

BRIGGS: I think it will be very interesting to see if Senator Kamala Harris in the CNN debate three weeks from now presses the issue specifically of busing even more or whether she moves onto something else. I think that may prove your case there, John.

AVLON: It's going to be fascinating. We saw Bakari Sellers say, "Time to move on." He's a Harris reporter, but that debate is going to be fascinating and key to watch.

CAMEROTA: Thank you very much, John.

AVLON: Thanks, guys.

BRIGGS: Thank you to our international viewers for watch. For you CNN NEWSROOM with Max Foster is next. For our U.S. viewers, the U.S. soccer team after its big win on the field pressing its case off the field. We will tell you how. NEW DAY continues.


BIDEN: Was I wrong a few weeks ago? Yes, I was. I regret it.

HARRIS: I'm going to take him at his word, but again we cannot rewrite history.

MOLLY BALL, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: Biden may be the overwhelming frontrunner, but it is possible to score points on him if you're one of his opponents.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The president indicating that these detention centers are in such good shape, he's now willing to let the media in.

KEVIN MCALEENAN, HOMELAND SECURITY ACTING SECRETARY: I know what our standards are and I know they are being followed.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It's unacceptable what's happening and it's documented.



UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This is NEW DAY with Alisyn Camerota and John Berman.

BRIGGS: Good morning and welcome to our NEW DAY. It is Monday, July 8th. It's eight o'clock in the East. And this morning the U.S. team is on top of world unless the world include salaries. The U.S. team is bringing its battle for equal pay back to the United States. They are flying back to France as we speak.

Overnight House Speaker Nancy Pelosi invited the team to visit Capitol Hill, but there is genuine confusion this morning about whether they will be invited to the White House. Hours after the game, the President did tweet his congratulations but claimed he's not thought about a White House invitation.

Less than two weeks ago on Twitter, the President's official means of communication, the President did invite the team to the White House win or lose.

CAMEROTA: All right. We'll see what happens there. Also, this morning, former Vice President Joe Biden taking a new tact in his 2020 campaign. Biden is apologizing for his comments about his work with segregationist senators in the 1970s.


[07:59:51] BIDEN: Was I wrong a few weeks ago to somehow give the impression to people that I was praising, those men who I successfully opposed time and again? Yes, I was. I regret it. And I'm sorry for any of the pain or misconception they may have caused anybody.