Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Marianne Williamson Endorses Bernie Sanders for President; Fears Grow as Cases Spike Worldwide; Intelligence Officer Appears to Have Overstated Assessment of 2020 Russian Meddling. Aired 7-8p ET

Aired February 23, 2020 - 19:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.


[19:00:00]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. JIM CLYBURN (D-SC): So I came to the conclusion that I need to say to people immediately after this debate on Tuesday night who I think is the best choice. So at some time around 9:30 and 10:00 on Wednesday morning, I'm going to reveal exactly who I think is best, and why I think that person is best. And I hope that there would a majority of South Carolinians agreeing with me.

So I came to the conclusion that I need to say to people immediately after this debate on Tuesday night who I think is the best choice. So at some time around 9:30 and 10:00 on Wednesday morning, I'm going to reveal exactly who I think is best, and why I think that person is best. And I hope that there would be a majority of South Carolinians agreeing with me.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ALEX MARQUARDT, CNN HOST: You are live in the CNN NEWSROOM. I'm Alex Marquardt in today for Ana Cabrera. We are starting this hour with the race for the White House, and the candidate who has pulled far ahead for now from the rest of the Democratic pact.

We are of course talking about Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders. These are live pictures right now, rallying a large and energized crowd in this Super Tuesday state of Texas, one day after dominating really the Nevada Democratic caucuses.

Now those results are still coming in and quite slowly in fact. But CNN is projecting a comfortable win for Senator Sanders. His third straight strong showing in the first three early voting states. And just a few moments ago there was an unexpected but familiar face at the Sanders rally there in Austin, someone who's own candidacy for the Democratic nomination ended just last month.

And it is at that rally that we find our Athena Jones.

Athena, that person of course, Marianne Williamson, a former Democratic presidential candidate herself. And that appearance by Williamson was a bit of a surprise because she had initially supported a different Democrat for president. ATHENA JONES, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Hi, Alex. Well, you know,

she was supporting Andrew Yang now that she dropped out of the race it seems like forever ago but it was only towards the beginning of January and she wanted to see Andrew Yang do well in Iowa. And so she thought, you know, Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, they're going to make it far. They don't need my help. Maybe Andrew Yang could use it.

Well, today of course Andrew Yang is now out of the race, but today she had a surprise -- she was a surprise guest on the stage here giving her endorsement to Bernie Sanders. Marianne Williamson grew up in Houston and of course she's hoping that she can have whatever influence she has to help him. But as you mentioned, this is a candidate that has a lot of confidence right now. He's done very well on the first several contests. He's the undisputed frontrunner.

A new national poll by CBS News and Yuga shows him almost double digits ahead of the next person, nine points ahead of Elizabeth Warren in second place on that national poll. And they believe they have the resources, they have the engaged, energetic enthusiastic crowds, and they have the organization that can help them win in a state like Texas not only on Super Tuesday but going forward.

This is something that you hear Bernie Sanders stress a lot about this idea that he's going to bring out new voters, people who haven't been very engaged in the political process, people who have felt left behind, working-class voters. He talks about putting together a multiracial, multigenerational coalition. And you can see from the results in Nevada that he is making progress appealing to a large swathe of the electorate.

Bernie Sanders won women. He won men. He won Hispanics. He won almost every age group except for 65 and up. He won across educational levels, people with high school, people with post-graduate degrees. So he's showing the reach of his appeal.

Listen, though, here to what Marianne Williamson had to say when she took to the stage.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MARIANNE WILLIAMSON (D), FORMER PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Bernie Sanders has taken a stance and Bernie Sanders has been taking a stance for a very long time. He has been consistent. He has been convicted. He has been committed. And now it's time, I'm here and you're here, because it's time for us to take a stand with Bernie.

(CHEERS AND APPLAUSE)

(END VIDEO CLIP)

JONES: And then of course Sanders himself. He is taking note of the size of the crowds and also pointing to his own success, making the case that he is electable when put up against President Trump. Take a listen to some of what he had to say as his message here in Austin.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) SEN. BERNIE SANDERS (D-VT), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: And I've been hearing, you know, the establishment is getting a little bit nervous about our campaign.

(CHEERS)

SANDERS: And you know what? When they see if the cameras turn on this crowd, and our friends in Wall Street and the drug companies see this kind of crowd, you're going to really get them nervous.

(CHEERS)

(END VIDEO CLIP)

JONES: So there Sanders talking about his crowd size and about how he's making a lot of folks nervous. One more thing I want to point out about Sanders sort of expanding his coalition or the base of people who can support him. In the Nevada caucuses just like in the other contests we've seen so far, health care was a top issue on voters' minds. Some 44 percent said healthcare matters to them most. 38 percent of those folks voted for Bernie Sanders.

[19:05:05]

Another important point here, there's been all of this discussion in many of the Democratic debates about Medicare for All and whether it's too ambitious and whether it will scare off voters. Well, you know, 32 percent of folks who said they needed a candidate who agreed on the issues, they voted for Bernie Sanders. 66 percent thought the most important thing in a candidate is who can beat Trump. They also voted for Bernie Sanders. So he is showing that his base is expanding -- Alex.

MARQUARDT: And he is talking about crowd sizes and the cameras in the back row there just like his -- the man he hopes to challenge in the general election, Donald Trump.

Athena Jones there in Austin, Texas, at the Bernie Sanders rally. Thanks so much.

All right, there are three states down in this primary season, with 47 to go, not to mention Washington, D.C. and a number of territories. But Bernie Sanders is confidently predicting that he's going to go all the way to the White House.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SANDERS: In Nevada, we have just put together a multigenerational, multiracial coalition, which is going to not only win in Nevada. It's going to sweep this country.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MARQUARDT: So with this momentum, is Bernie Sanders the inevitable Democratic nominee? To answer that question and more, joining me are CNN senior political analyst Ron Brownstein as well as -- who is also a senior editor at the Atlantic, and we also have CNN political analyst Sarah Isgur, who is a staff writer at the "Dispatch. "

Thank you both for joining me tonight. Ron, I want to start with you. At a rally in Texas today where Sanders was, and he's going to go to South Carolina eventually, but he went straight to one of the biggest Super Tuesday states. He introduced his wife Jane as the next first lady of the United States. So he was clearly enjoying this moment, savoring this victory in Nevada. Of course he came out strong in Iowa and New Hampshire as well. So how confident do you think Sanders should be about clinching the Democratic nomination?

RON BROWNSTEIN, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: Well, there's a lot of steps between here and Milwaukee in July, much less the White House in January. But right now he's obviously in the strongest position. And what you saw in Nevada was that he was really the first time we had proof that he has added a significant new element to his coalition from 2016. In the first states he basically was strong in the same place as he was in 2016.

Young people, the most liberal, and though slightly lesser extent, blue-collar white voters. But in Nevada he showed that unlike 2016 when Hillary Clinton won most of the Latinos, he now is in a dominant position among Latinos, and that really changes I think the map in these next couple of weeks especially. So the question really becomes, is Nevada -- it was unquestionably a tour deforce.

But was it the anomaly where he moved up to 45 percent, you know, in the final delegate count? Or is it the beginning of a new pattern? Because in the first two states and in most polling, he's still stuck between 25 percent and 30 percent. That would leave him in a position to get a plurality but still an uphill climb to be a first ballot majority.

MARQUARDT: Well, let's game this out a little bit. If Sanders were to clinch this nomination, there is one fear among Democrats that it could impact other Democratic candidates on down ballot races, and we heard Congressman James Clyburn who of course is in the Democratic leadership talking about some of those concerns earlier today. Let's take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CLYBURN: I do believe it will be an extra burden for us to have to carry. This is South Carolina, and South Carolinians are pretty leery about that title, socialist. And so I think that that would be a real burden for us in these states or congressional districts that we have to do well in. If you look at how well we did the last time and look at the congressional districts, these were not liberal or what you might call progressive districts.

These are basically moderate and covenant conservatives districts that we did well in. And in those districts it's going to be tough to hold on to these jobs if you have to make the case for accepting a self- proclaimed Democratic socialist.

(END VIDEO CLIP) MARQUARDT: Sara, Clyburn there saying that South Carolinians are leery about that word socialist. He says that Sanders could be an extra burden on those down ballot races. Do you agree with his assessment?

SARAH ISGUR, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: I think picking Bernie Sanders makes this a base turnout election across the board. There were other candidates who are maybe they would be trying to hit persuasion voters and voters who are still undecided. But Bernie Sanders versus Donald Trump is one base versus the other. And that can really affect down- ballot races.

If Democrats want to take back the Senate, they need three seats plus the presidency. Alabama currently held by Doug Jones actually probably the pickup for Republicans in November. That means they need four seats plus the presidency. That's Arizona, Colorado, Maine and then they've got to pick up one of these other ones. North Carolina is a great opportunity.

[19:10:03]

Kansas is an open seat. And Michigan, where they currently have one of the seats, they can't lose. So when you're looking at a base election, it's not just can Bernie Sanders beat Donald Trump? If he then has a Republican Senate that's going to make some of these things really tough.

Now I think some of these electability polls on the other hand are being way overblown, where Bernie is strong or not. I think we've yet to see to exactly Ron's points, what's going to happen in South Carolina? Because Nevada with it being a caucus is kind of a weird state.

MARQUARDT: Right. Right. And on South Carolina, specifically, someone who's done well and has spent a ton of money is Tom Steyer. And in fact, Ron, you tweeted about Steyer earlier today. And I'm just going to read what you wrote.

"It goes without saying that Tom Steyer has no path to the Democratic nomination after the first three states. It's also clear his continued efforts with African-American voters in South Carolina could deliver the final knockout blow to Joe Biden and further raise odds of Sanders' nominations."

So are you calling on Steyer there to drop out and do you think anybody else should be?

BROWNSTEIN: No. Not my role. But I think the paradox here is that Tom Steyer, you know, kind of made -- entered the kind of national political arena putting money into the idea of Donald Trump's impeachment and supporting Trump impeachment. And whether Republicans are right or wrong, most Republicans would prefer Bernie Sanders over any other Democratic nominee as Donald Trump's opponent.

And by remaining in the race, the paradox here is that Donald Trump -- I'm sorry, Tom -- by remaining in the race, Tom Steyer is creating the biggest risk for Joe Biden in South Carolina because he put so much money to the African-American community and thus increasing the odds of kind of a knockout blow that would give Republicans what they want on Sanders. I think there are -- I mean, Sanders is in a very strong position obviously in the Democratic race.

But there are more acts in this play because we have gone through all of 2016 and the first stage of 2020 without any other Democrats except a little bit Pete Buttigieg, really beginning to prosecute all of the various issues that could be liabilities for Sanders, not only in the general election but even in a Democratic primary, starting with the report by my colleague in the Atlantic just last week on the details of how seriously he looked at challenging -- primary challenge to Barack Obama in 2012.

You've got to think that if Joe Biden is facing potentially the last week of his 50-year political career if he doesn't win in South Carolina, that he will feel that it's something he needs to remind the voters of South Carolina about.

MARQUARDT: Sarah, Bernie Sanders of course is much more of an insider than Donald Trump was in 2016. But what similarities do you see in terms of what Sanders is tapping into now in the Democratic Party compared to what Trump was tapping into with Republicans in 2016?

ISGUR: Yes, I mean, there is this anti-establishment which is so overused, but it is true. Anti-party, anti-these people are telling us what to do, who to vote for, and that everyone is in sort of in the cabal. And Bernie Sanders, to his credit, has never been in the cabal. He hasn't been a member of the Democratic party, the Democratic socialist, self-identified. Same with Donald Trump who had not been a member of the Republican Party until quite recently.

And those base voters for both people really like that about their candidates. They like that they're coming to Washington to shake things up and change what's going on. I think that -- and the last debate when talking about Bernie Sanders supporters online and that they had been too vitriolic, that sounded so much like 2016. But as Ron pointed, with that base expanding in Nevada, if we see that again in South Carolina, it's hard to imagine that it's either not Bernie Sanders or a contested convention at this point.

BROWNSTEIN: Yes.

MARQUARDT: Yes, and I want to actually ask Ron about that. Last question to you, Ron. Do you think that these fears of fractured party, brokered convention, is that -- are we talking about -- is that too early? Are these concerns premature?

BROWNSTEIN: Well, look, I mean, I think right now, I agree with Sarah. I mean, the two most likely prospects are that Sanders either gets a majority of the delegates which still seems to me a bit of a climb for him, or that he goes into the convention in July with a plurality but not a majority. And then the question becomes, can you deny him the nomination? The rules are that you need a majority and all of the other candidates except Sanders very pointedly after the debate this week said they believe that the rule should be followed. I mean, ultimately the nominee should be required to get a majority.

If he gets close, votes will drift toward him. If he -- the biggest question Democrats will face over the spring will be, how close is too close to deny him the nomination? Because I don't think the doubts about him as a general election candidate are going to go away even though he has a case to make, and I -- it's hard to imagine that opposition completely collapses towards his nomination no matter what happens in the next few weeks. If he stays short I think you're going to see at least some discussion of a contested convention.

MARQUARDT: All right, folks.

ISGUR: But like with Trump, I think you're also very likely to see Democrats come home to Bernie Sanders the way you saw Republicans go home to Donald Trump.

[19:15:04]

BROWNSTEIN: Yes.

MARQUARDT: All right. Terrific conversation. We got to leave it there.

Ron Brownstein, Sarah Isgur, thank you so much.

BROWNSTEIN: Thank you.

MARQUARDT: All right. Well, new infections of the deadly coronavirus are surging. Now Italy and South Korea are scrambling to contain outbreaks in those countries with South Korea reporting a doubling of new infections overnight. We're going to head to Seoul live with those new details next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

MARQUARDT: The deadly fast-moving coronavirus is now spreading worldwide. So far more than 2400 people have died from coronavirus. 23 of those deaths happened outside of mainland China. And more than 79,000 people around the world are infected with the virus. The biggest outbreak outside of Asia is in Italy where there have been confirmed cases that have risen from three to more than 100 this weekend.

[19:20:02]

CNN correspondent Paula Hancocks joins us now live in South Korea, another country that is struggling to keep the virus contained.

Paula, we've just learned that cases have surged past 600?

PAULA HANCOCKS, CNN CORRESPONDENT: That's right, Alex. Yes. And then just to put that into context, last Tuesday there were 31 cases here and it had stabilized, or at least that's what everyone believed. So we have seen a dramatic spike in cases here. There are now six deaths confirmed as well related to coronavirus.

Now the reason for this surge is because the majority of those confirmed cases are from one particular religious group. This is a group that has one of its bases in the southern city of Daegu, and more than 300 cases have been confirmed just from that group itself.

Now we understand that authorities are trying to impose a quarantine, a self-imposed quarantine on some 9,000 members now. They're trying to test as many as they can. They're doing about 5,000 to 6,000 tests a day. But clearly this group feels victimized. It's says that they are the true victims of this. But the critics of this group say that the secrecy within this religious group is one of the main reasons why it has happened so quickly.

Now just a mile down the road from the building where this outbreak happened within this group is a U.S. military base. We went down there a couple of days ago, spoke to the commander, and he said there are some pretty stringent restrictions being put on there of who can go in and off the base. They're trying to make sure soldiers are not leaving the base at all. All nonessential travel to that particular area is being canceled as well. So at this point, though, U.S. forces in Korea say they have zero cases -- Alex.

MARQUARDT: Yes. Really there are some stunning figures, though, and a shocking spread.

Paula Hancock, in Seoul, thanks so much.

Now amid growing controversy over Russia's plans to interfere in the 2020 elections, President Trump is claiming that Democrats are using Russia to stop Bernie Sanders even as his own administration is downplaying an intelligence report that suggests that Russia may want Donald Trump reelected. We'll have those details next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[19:26:38]

MARQUARDT: President Trump today, right there you can see him, leaving for India as there's a growing controversy back home over Russian plans to interfere in the 2020 election.

So let's bring in CNN White House correspondent Jeremy Diamond. He has new reporting on this story.

Jeremy, we need to be very specific about this because there is a lot of nuances, it's very complicated. We do know that the top intelligence official for election security, her name is Shelby Pierson, she told lawmakers on the House Intelligence Committee that Russia is interfering to get President Trump re-elected. Your sources are now saying it's not as simple as that. Explain.

JEREMY DIAMOND, CNN WHITE HOUSE REPORTER: That's right. Well, Pierson appears to have overstated the U.S. intelligence community's formal assessment of Russian interference in 2020 during that briefing with House Intelligence Committee lawmakers earlier this month. Three national security officials are telling me and my colleagues that Pierson omitted important nuance and that she -- when she said that Russia was interfering in the 2020 election to help President Trump win re-election.

Those three officials describe the intelligence this way. They say that on the one hand, Russia is indeed interfering in the 2020 election, and separately that Russia views Trump as a leader that they can work with. But at this point, the officials say that the U.S. does not yet have the evidence to conclude that Russia's interference is specifically aimed at helping President Trump win re-election in 2020. One intelligence official described Pierson's briefing as misleading, another one said that she lacked important nuance.

Look, we have to remember that after the 2016 election, Alex, the intelligence community concluded quite conclusively that president -- that the Russian government interfered in that election with the expressed goal of helping Trump win reelection -- win his election, forgive me, and hurting Hillary Clinton's campaign.

And given the president's foreign policy record so far, whether it's an abrupt withdrawal of U.S. troops in northern Syria, or sowing discord with U.S. allies, it's not inconceivable to see the Russian government once again interfering to help President Trump's re- election chances. But as of now, these officials are saying that the U.S. Intelligence Committee does not have the evidence to conclude that Russia's interference is tied to helping Trump win re-election -- Alex.

MARQUARDT: And in fact the most senior official at the White House is saying that it's not President Trump that the Russians want to help but in fact it's Bernie Sanders. What's he saying, Robert O'Brien?

DIAMOND: That's right. He's flatly denying that Russia is interfering to help President Trump, though he's not talking about Russia's actual interference regardless of who the candidate is. What he is willing to do, however, is to mischaracterize the reporting about Bernie Sanders and the U.S. intelligence community's assessment. Listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS, ABC NEWS ANCHOR: How is Russia interfering in the 2020 election?

ROBERT O'BRIEN, NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISER: Well, there are these reports that they want Bernie Sanders to get elected president. That's no surprise. He honeymooned in Moscow.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

DIAMOND: Now the U.S. intelligence community's assessment about this is not that Russia wants to help Bernie Sanders become president at this point but that he -- that they are helping Bernie Sanders in the Democratic primary. Those are two very different things. And the National Security adviser completely missing or perhaps woefully ignoring that nuance. The president for his part is also talking about this. Here's what he had to say this morning.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I read where Russia's helping Bernie Sanders. Nobody said it to me at all. Nobody briefed me about that at all. I think what it could be is you know the Democrats are treating Bernie Sanders very unfairly. [19:30:00]

And it sounds to me like a leak from Adam Schiff, because they don't want Bernie Sanders to represent them.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JEREMY DIAMOND, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Now, we should note that a White House official told us that the President was indeed briefed on that Intelligence report about Bernie Sanders, and that there's also no evidence to suggest that Adam Schiff, the Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, was responsible for leaking that information -- Alex.

ALEX MARQUARDT, CNN HOST: And of course, Jeremy, we have to note that these things are not mutually exclusive. You can see reasons for Russia supporting both Sanders and Trump in the 2020 race.

Jeremy Diamond at the White House. Thanks very much.

So it's been more than two weeks since the Senate acquitted President Trump and since then, a lot has happened.

I'm not going to read the entire list. But in the 18 days since the President was acquitted, he has vowed revenge on his perceived enemies. He has attacked senators who voted against him. He has fired witnesses who testified, interfered in the sentencing of Roger Stone, attacked jurors as well as a Federal judge.

He has continued to tax on justice matters despite threats from his own Attorney General. He has ousted a top Pentagon official and put a loyalist with no Intelligence experience at the top of the U.S. Intelligence Community.

So that brings us to your weekend presidential brief with CNN national security analyst, Sam Vinograd.

It's a segment that we bring to you every weekend with the most pressing national security issues that the President is going to be facing this week.

Now, Sam, we should note also helped prepare the daily presidential brief for President Obama.

Sam, let's start there. Quite new people at the top of the Intelligence Community this week. We have a man, Rick Grenell, the Ambassador to Germany who is coming in to be the acting Director of National Intelligence with essentially no intelligence experience.

SAMANTHA VINOGRAD, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: Alex, every national security meeting I was in started with Intel briefing that's because Obama considered Intelligence a core input to policymaking. President Trump, however, is trying to transform the Intelligence

Community into his personal PR machine. He wants to push out content that he views is politically helpful, and appointing Grenell is a strategic move in this regard.

He lacks the experience to do his statutorily defined duties, but he is well positioned to advance the President's pet projects.

Absent Intelligence experience, he's going to have a really tough time knowing how to integrate Intelligence from across the community. But he doesn't need Intel experience to, for example, walk and tackle content that the President doesn't want getting out, or to clean house of officials that he views is problematic in terms of their briefings.

This is a very dangerous description for Director of National Intelligence.

MARQUARDT: And the man that Rick Grenell is taking over for, Joseph MaGuire, the former Acting Director of National Intelligence, we have reporting that the President was irate with him because of this briefing that we were just talking about with Jeremy where Shelby Pierson, the top elections official in the Intelligence Community said that the Russians had a preference for Trump.

Now, as you just heard from Jeremy, we're being told by number of officials that she may have gotten ahead of her skis.

Is it possible, knowing what you do -- knowing what you do about how these briefings take place, is it possible that she overstated things?

VINOGRAD: It's possible, but it would be highly unlikely. These briefings don't just appear out of thin air. A sensitive briefing like this would go through multiple layers of clearance within the Intelligence Community, and every talking point would be reviewed to ensure that it was accurate.

Now remember, because the original assessment on 2016 noted that Russia preferred Trump as a candidate, any updated assessment would likely review that analysis and see whether it still stuck.

So it seems improbable that the briefing itself would have been divorced from what the actual Intelligence Community leadership says.

At the same time, I can't think of a single scenario where sensitive briefing would have gone to Congress without the National Security adviser reviewing it, it just doesn't happen.

So O'Brien is either grossly negligent and didn't read the Intelligence. He's lying about what it said, or a senior expert on election security made a gross overstatement.

And the key point here is, we're playing a guessing game. We don't need to be. The D.N.I. could reschedule their worldwide threat briefing and address this head on.

MARQUARDT: Right. And that's a very good point. We don't know if or when this usually annual worldwide threat briefing will actually take place.

We did hear from Bernie Sanders, just before the weekend started saying that he had been briefed by Intelligence officials that the Russians were also working to benefit his campaign.

He immediately came out and acknowledged that once the story broke, and said that he wouldn't tolerate it as President.

But we're not exactly hearing the same thing from President Trump, are we?

VINOGRAD: There's one word that Trump hasn't said on Russian attacks, which is stop. He's done exactly the opposite.

[15:35:05]

VINOGRAD: During an election year, there has to be a strategy in place, law enforcement, Intelligence Community, diplomatic corps to try to identify and mitigate Russian attacks with hacking and information warfare.

Any threat matrix at this point has to include President Trump. He is accelerating Russia's information warfare campaign against our country by spreading conspiracy theories about who is attacking whom, by falsely claiming that the election is going to be rigged.

And so at this point, while rank and file officials are likely working hard to keep us safe, President Trump is knowingly adding to the election attacks that President Putin is so focused on.

MARQUARDT: And we know that Russia is going to be doing something in the 2020 election and here we have the top two Intelligence officials losing their jobs, total upheaval at the top of the Intelligence Community.

Sam Vinograd --

VINOGRAD: It's not a good look in an election year.

MARQUARDT: It is not. Thank you so much.

So after the fallout of the Iowa Democratic Caucus debacle, many of voters may be wary of adding even more tech, but Microsoft says it has a solution to win back the trust of voters. That's coming up.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[19:40:12]

MARQUARDT: After the massive failure of an app during the Iowa Democratic Caucuses, there are many voters who are understandably wary of adding more technology to these elections.

But Microsoft is saying it has developed a solution that could protect every ballot and help win back the voters trust. Here is CNN's Rachel Crane. (BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We're right outside the Town Hall for the town of Fulton, Wisconsin. The grand vision of election guard is to make elections more safe, secure and trustworthy than they have ever been in the history of the United States.

RACHEL CRANE, CNN BUSINESS INNOVATION AND SPACE CORRESPONDENT: What inspired Microsoft to tackle the very hairy problem of voting in America?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It's very much a direct response to what we saw happened in 2016 with the efforts that were made by foreign adversaries to actually influence the voting process in the United States.

CRANE (voice over): Microsoft says ballots are encrypted electronically the moment they're cast and stay that way. The system can then tally those encrypted votes without ever deciphering them.

And even more importantly, it means hackers should have a harder time tampering with those votes.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We're building a world class vault that your vote goes into, and then we're wrapping it with tamper proof seal.

If somebody successfully hacked into the system, if they could break into that vault, the technology would then reveal that something had happened and then the election officials can make sure that the vote is accurate.

ElectionGuard will work with paper as a primary source, it will work as the backup, but we're also working at a system that has no paper ballot at all.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CRANE (voice over): And that's important. There are more than 10,000 election jurisdictions in the United States and no universal voting system.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It's absolutely core to our democracy that people know that when they vote, their vote counts.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CRANE (voice over): A recent Gallup poll found that 59 percent of America lack confidence in the honesty of U.S. elections.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MEAGAN WOLF, ADMINISTRATOR, WISCONSIN ELECTION COMMISSION: I think one of the largest challenges that's facing the election cycle this year is misinformation.

It doesn't take an actual breach or an actual hack of a system, it just takes a rumor to undermine someone's confidence.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CRANE (voice over): That's why a core feature of ElectionGuard is voter confirmation.

Fulton's official results came from a hand count of the paper duplicates --

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It also resulted in the exact same numbers from the tally from the machine.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CRANE (voice over): The encrypted tally from ElectionGuard matched. And for the first time, voters could use a unique code to verify that their vote was counted.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Your vote was counted.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

MARQUARDT: All right. Our thanks there to Rachel Crane.

Prince Harry and his wife, Meghan, will soon step down as senior members of the British Royal Family, but their plans to use a certain phrase may have been dealt a big blow. That's coming up.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[19:47:25]

MARQUARDT: Prince Harry and his wife, Meghan Markle are also known as the Duke and Duchess of Sussex and they're planning to step down soon as senior members of the British Royal Family.

Buckingham Palace this week dealt what could be a major blow to the couple's plans for their new lives, much of which will take place here in North America.

Now Harry and Meghan wanted to use the phrase, Sussex Royal for their new nonprofit organization and social media accounts, and apparently what Buckingham Palace said was no way. They rejected the couple's Sussex Royal branding idea.

Prince Harry and his wife this week dropped their trademark bids, citing U.K. government rules for the use of that word royal.

All of this comes as there's a new CNN original series that takes you behind the Buckingham Palace walls for a look at the world's most famous monarchy.

This week's episode of "The Windsors: Inside the Royal Dynasty" looks at King George VI's rise to the throne after the shocking abdication of his brother, Edward, and all of this happened in the shadow of World War II. Take a quick look.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SALLY BEDELL SMITH, BIOGRAPHER: Before he was king, George was living a relatively normal free under the radar life, happily married and as a younger member of the Royal Family, he does a few public duties and is contented with that life.

PROF. JANE RIDLEY, HISTORIAN: He was always known as Bertie in the family, but when he becomes King, his whole life has completely changed. He is intensely aware that he has been sort of tasked with this incredibly difficult job.

So one of the first things he does is change his name to George, stressing the continuity between his reign and that of his father, George V.

ED OWENS, HISTORIAN: The new King George VI is extremely worried on taking over the throne because the abdication looms large.

His brother Edward was the most popular man in the English speaking world, and now George has got to stand up to the plate.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MARQUARDT: CNN royal commentator, Victoria Arbiter joins me now. Victoria, thanks so much for joining me.

This episode of the family's history is fascinating and King George VI is better known I think for many now as Queen Elizabeth's father. He didn't want to take the throne, but his brother Edward VIII abdicated and now fast forward a couple of generations and we see the Duke of Sussex essentially giving up all rights to his family's as a senior Royal.

[19:50:09]

MARQUARDT: Why is it that people are so reluctant to be close to the throne, do you think?

VICTORIA ARBITER, CNN ROYAL COMMENTATOR: Well, I think just because as you'll see in this episode, there is so much tradition and duty wrapped up in the institution of monarchy. You can forget about privacy and particularly in this day and age of 24-hour news, online news, clickbait, they really don't stand a chance at any kind of private life and the scrutiny and the criticism is exhausting.

But what I love about this series is that it goes back to really show viewers today how what has happened before informs the decisions that are made today. So of course when Edward VIII abdicated, he was stripped of pretty

much everything. He was allowed to keep his HRH, but he was exiled to France, very limited finances.

He really had a very difficult time. He begged to come back, but the family wouldn't let him.

By comparison, Harry and Meghan, it is very different, but they are going off to start this new life in North America, and the Queen is trying really hard to work with them, to give them what it is they need to achieve financial independence, and to be able to create the global brands that they're so keen to do.

So I think we can watch this documentary and see how things have been done before and see how it's affected what's happening today.

MARQUARDT: And so Edward VIII of course, became the Duke of Windsor, once he abdicated.

There was a lot of controversy surrounding him in that lead up to World War II. There's a well-documented visit by he and his American wife to visit Germany. He accepted an invitation from Hitler, and they were treated very well in Germany. How accurate is the story that we know of that visit?

ARBITER: Well, this is again what I love about this series. Now full disclaimer, I'm not in it, so I can speak with it with total neutrality, but I really encourage anyone who has an interest in the Royal Family to watch this because there's been a lot of talk about how the Royal Family, of course, it has German origins.

Queen Victoria was married to Prince Albert who was German. But Edward was a well-known Nazi sympathizer and there's actual footage of him -- archive footage of him with Hitler.

And so then when we cut to the Royal Family in the U.K. where they're trying to grapple with World War II and the effects of World War II, it's why the King wouldn't -- he wouldn't go to Canada, the government was desperate for him to go to Canada with his family, but he said no, I'm staying.

When Buckingham Palace was bombed, the Queen Mother was able to say -- she was Queen at the time -- now, we can look the East End in the eye.

Prince Philip's sisters were all married to German noblemen who had Nazi ties.

So the Royal Family was really having to try and distance themselves from all of that. And so with Edward's actions, I think it was less about him wanting to be seen with Hitler and more about him wanting to put himself back on the global stage because he missed that notoriety. He missed that attention.

MARQUARDT: Right. So how did they get the British public to rally around them during World War II? ARBITER: I think it was because of the whole family's devotion to the

nation during World War II. Queen Elizabeth, our current Queen, of course, she was Princess Elizabeth at the time, she desperately campaigned to have some kind of role in uniform and her father finally relented and she joined the ATS. She worked on cars and she was under the hood of a car all the time.

The King and the Queen Mother went around and visited as many people as possible, who had been involved in bombings, who'd lost everything, who'd lost family members, whose children have been evacuated.

Queen Elizabeth as well, when she was 14, she gave her very first radio address when she addressed the children of the Commonwealth and said we are all in this together.

So I think really, it was their commitment to the nation that pulled them through.

MARQUARDT: All right, well, never ending drama in the British Royal Family.

ARBITER: There's always something to watch.

MARQUARDT: Victoria Arbiter, thank you so much for coming on.

ARBITER: Thank you.

MARQUARDT: All right, be sure to tune in tonight. There's an all new episode of the CNN original series, "The Windsors: Inside the Royal Dynasty" that is airing tonight at 10:00 pm, Eastern and Pacific, only here on CNN. And we'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[19:58:32]

MARQUARDT: The daredevil, Mad Mike Hughes has died after he attempted to launch a homemade rocket on Saturday.

(VIDEO CLIP PLAYS)

MARQUARDT: You can see it taking off there. Hughes was scheduled to launch the rocket for a Science Channel series called "Homemade Astronauts." Hughes and his partner had hoped to send the steam powered rocket 5,000 feet in the air. He eventually wanted to go into near orbit in his quest to prove that his theory, his theory that the earth is in fact flat.

Now, we saw an emotional moment on the campaign trail this weekend when a nine-year-old boy asked Democratic candidate, Pete Buttigieg to help him deliver a special message.

Nine-year-old Zachary Ro's question to Buttigieg went like this, "I want to be brave like you. Would you help me tell the world that I'm gay, too." Here's how Buttigieg, who is the first openly gay presidential candidate responded. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PETE BUTTIGIEG (D), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: I don't think you need a lot of advice from me on bravery. You seem pretty strong.

To see you -- it took me a long time to figure out how to tell even my best friend that I was gay, let alone to go out there and tell the world and to see you willing to come to terms with who you are in a room full of thousand people, thousands of people you've never met. That's really something.

I can't promise it'll always be easy. I can promise you that I'm going to be rooting for you.

[20:00:10]