Return to Transcripts main page

Anderson Cooper 360 Degrees

New Evidence In Special Counsel Probe May Undercut Trump's Claim Documents He Took Were Automatically Declassified; Prince Harry And Meghan Allege Near Catastrophic Car Chase In NYC; Fight Over Busing Migrants Expand To NYC's Suburbs; House Republican Refers Santos' Expulsion To Ethics Committee; Grand Jury Indicts Suspect In Quadruple Killings At The University Of Idaho On Murder And Burglary Charges; "The Daddy Diaries: The Year I Grew Up" By Andy Cohen. Aired 8-9p ET

Aired May 17, 2023 - 20:00   ET


JEFF ZELENY, CNN CHIEF NATIONAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: Just a few minutes ago, Erin, Pence urged Republican voters to choose a new nominee, who he says can lead the party to victory, a not so subtle point he believes, a rerun of the 2020 campaign is not in the party's best interest. Of course, an open question if he would be that nominee.

His campaign, I'm told will make a decision next month -- Erin.

ERIN BURNETT, CNN HOST: We're going to really know what the field is then.

Thank you so much, Jeff.

And thanks so much to all of you for being with me. Anderson starts now.



We begin tonight with exclusive new CNN reporting that goes straight to the question: Did the former president willfully disregard what he knew to be clearly established procedures involving classified documents? In other words, did he know the right and wrong way of handling those items when he took them from the White House to Mar-a- Lago?

Tonight, CNN has learned that the National Archives is ready to hand over records to Special Counsel Jack Smith, showing that the former president and his top advisers certainly did know.

CNN special correspondent, Jamie Gangel joins us now. Just walk us through your reporting -- Jamie.

JAMIE GANGEL, CNN SPECIAL CORRESPONDENT: Anderson, CNN has obtained this letter that was sent by the National Archives as you said informing former President Trump that it is set to hand over these 16 presidential records, they are from his administration, which show that Trump and his top advisers were aware of the proper declassification process when he was president.

Our understanding is that the special counsel wants these records for the grand jury because they may provide critical evidence that despite Trump's claims that he automatically declassified all documents that he took, he was in fact aware that there was a correct process to safeguard classified material, and it didn't just happen with a wave of a hand.

In the letter, acting archivist, Wall, writes to Trump: "The 16 records in question all reflect communications involving close presidential advisers, some of them are directed to you personally, concerning whether why and how you should declassify certain classified records."

So, Anderson, while we don't know exactly what's in these 16 records yet, it certainly suggests that they provide evidence that Trump had firsthand knowledge that you don't just go declassify material without a thorough and rigorous process -- Anderson.

COOPER: So the former president, has he said anything that he took -- I mean, he has said anything he took was automatically declassified. Can you just remind people what his argument is and how that squares with reality?

GANGEL: I'm not sure what his argument is for saying that, Anderson. It just seems to be Trump claiming something that there is frankly no evidence for. So as far as we know, there is no basis in reality.

Just as a reminder, here is what he said to our colleague, Kaitlin Collins, at the CNN Townhall last week. Take a listen.


KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN ANCHOR: Why don't you take those documents with you when you left the White House?

DONALD TRUMP, FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I had every right to under the Presidential Records Act. You have the Presidential Records Act. I was there and I took what I took and it gets declassified.

COLLINS: Do you still have any classified documents in your possession?

TRUMP: Are you ready?

COLLINS: Do you?

TRUMP: No, I don't have anything. I have no classified documents and by the way, they become automatically declassified when I took them.


GANGEL: Anderson for the record, Trump did not have the right under the Presidential Records Act to take those documents, that is false. Those documents belong to the government under the custody of the Archives.

And while all presidents do have broad authority, ultimate authority to declassify, there is no evidence that he "automatically declassified" anything.

Again, there is a serious process that is followed, national security agencies are brought in. As one official said to me: "There has to be an order. Show me the order."

COOPER: In terms of the special counsel's investigation, what are your sources saying about how these records could potentially reveal the former president's intent?

GANGEL: It could be critical. The records could provide insight into not only Trump's intent, whether he willfully disregarded what he knew to be established protocols, and also it may speak to obviously that he may have mishandled what he knew were highly classified documents.

COOPER: So what happens next? Can the Trump legal team try to provide these records getting handed over the special counsel?

GANGEL: Right. Technically, the Trump team has a week to go to court to try to stop the handover. However, the letter from the archivist makes clear the special counsel feels it has sufficient evidence why these records would be important to the grand jury's evidence, and they are also prepared to go to court to fight.

COOPER: All right, Jamie Gangel, appreciate it.

I want to -- we want to look at the legal implications in how this new information may fit into a larger pattern of statements and actions by the former president.

CNN legal analyst, Carrie Cordero is here. She is a former -- excuse me, a former counsel to the assistant attorney general for national security; also CNN contributor, John Dean who served as Richard Nixon's White House counsel during Watergate.

So, Carrie, you heard Jamie's reporting about how these records could speak to the former president's intent. I mean, what do you make of it? How significant is this? What could it mean for the former president legally?

CARRIE CORDERO, CNN LEGAL AND NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: Well, so let's level set on the law, Anderson. So on one hand, there is the classified documents issue, which that the -- any president does have extremely broad authority and final authority to declassify documents and that is the constitutional provision, that's under the Article II Commander-in-Chief Authorities.

So that is -- that does govern any president's ability to declassify. Then there is separate issue of the Presidential Records Act, which talks about any kinds of documents.

So I think in some of the former president's public statements, he tries to combine those two issues together, but Presidential Records Act applied to any records. And the minute he was no longer president, any documents that he had belonged to the United States.

So the question then with respect to the classified documents becomes did he actually ever declassify them? And although on this point, there are executive orders, there are processes, a president could make a decision that is outside the scope of that process. What's missing here, as far as we have learned publicly so far, is that there is no indication or evidence that he ever actually made that decision.

COOPER: So that's -- I mean, it's a very -- it is an important point and a fine one. Let's just be clear. So there's a process for declassifying material. The president has broad authority on this to perhaps go outside that process, but it is not clear that even if he did that --

CORDERO: That he ever actually --

COOPER: That he actually did that.

CORDERO: That he ever actually did that. So, there is zero evidence that we have ever seen.

COOPER: There is a -- are you saying there is a way to go outside that process, that there would be some sort of trail of?

CORDERO: Well, it would be his inherent constitutional authority -- a president's inherent constitutional authority to do it. But as a practical matter, and this is why most observers are saying there is a process that would be documented. Yes, that's the way normally a president would operate.

So let's just say, Anderson that somebody, a president misspoke and revealed in the course of speaking verbally, they revealed classified information, and they didn't mean to, then they could go back and either they would say, no, the information is still classified or they could potentially say no, I think the actual information should be declassified, and then that would be documented through a follow-on process. That's not ideal, but that, theoretically could happen.

COOPER: So when the former president says, well, you know, I can just say, you know, I can just declassify by saying it is declassified.

If he had done that, there would still be some sort of trace of people saying, okay, the then-president declassified this document. Please notify such and such.

CORDERO: Yes. There would have had to have been some sort of actual demonstration that that decision ever was made.

COOPER: Got it.

So John, according to CNN's reporting, this National Archives letter comes amid a flurry of activity by Special Counsel Jack Smith's team, including grand jury appearances by former national security officials who testified that they told Donald Trump there was a process for a president to declassify material. Do you think that testimony could put the foreign president and potentially others in legal Jeopardy? JOHN DEAN, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: It's a tough question when you get to the real ultimate thing, it is can he do what he wants to as he is saying? And that's never been tested in the court. No president has ever tried to do what he is doing.

The norm is, as Carrie explained, when there's a process, you're supposed to follow the process. We've never had a president who's just sort of ignored that process and claimed he can get around it. Theoretically, he might have that power, and I think he's going to try to push it that far to see what that power is.

COOPER: John, the letter from the National Archives states that the records will be handed over to the special counsel a week from today, "unless prohibited by an intervening court order." Do you think the Trump legal team would fight this?

DEAN: Well, if past is prologue, he will do anything he can to slow the process down. This could do that. There is probably, in my mind, an 80 percent chance that his lawyers can find it legitimate enough to test this. So, I think there's a high probability he will appeal or try to block.

COOPER: John Dean, Carrie Cordero, appreciate it. Thank you.

On top of all of this, one of the former president's attorneys in the documents case, Timothy Parlatore is leaving the legal team. That's what two sources familiar with matter tells CNN, what our next guest reports as well, CNN political analyst and "New York Times" senior political correspondent, Maggie Haberman, author of "Confidence Man: The Making of Donald Trump and the Breaking of America."


So Maggie, if the National Archives' are right, if they have proof that he was informed of the correct procedure, what does that say about his exposure?

MAGGIE HABERMAN, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: If there is documentation showing that Trump was aware and the Trump aides were aware of what actual declassification processes were, that completely undercuts what their claim has been, which is that he had a standing order to automatically declassify all documents when they left the Oval Office and went up to the White House residence.

Now, I don't think that he's going to back away from that. We do know, the special counsel's office has been drilling down very, very hard on exactly what the process is where they have interviewed a ton of people who worked in the White House, and would know, but I think this is the first thing that I've heard of this actual documentation showing what was what.

COOPER: Because he keeps saying it was a negotiation, and that's what is expected -- that it's expected to be negotiated.

HABERMAN: Which isn't true, and in fact, he said that under the Presidential Records Act, it says that it's a negotiation. That's just not what the Presidential Records Act says.

Now, that is a separate issue than the classification issue. The classification issue is very specific to intelligence material, and he has made all kinds of claims that also have been debunked by former officials working for him, but in both cases, officials disagree with him.

COOPER: Is it clear to you how concerned he is about this and how concerned the people around him are?

HABERMAN: This is just another brick in what Jack Smith is looking for that has made them anxious overall about this case. They are worried about the documents case. They believe that Jack Smith is drilling down on this in a way that is discomforting for Trump, discomforting for a lot of people around him and this is just another piece.

COOPER: What about the attorney who left? Who was he? How important was he?

HABERMAN: So Tim Parlatore was an attorney who had actually been pretty central in the effort to look for additional documents around Trump's various properties. He found himself having to speak to the grand jury as the custodian of the records at that point.

He also made a lot of statements in public that were controversial about the documents, including saying, I think it was on CNN that, you know, Trump had had a classified folder on a bedside table in his residence.

The judge in the case, I think, took note of those comments, and it does raise questions about how if there was literally a classified document in Trump's bedroom that he was unaware of that he still had material.

COOPER: Do you think -- I mean, obviously, the former president's supporters rallied around him after the Stormy Daniels' hush money case. Is there any concern in Trump world that the reaction to this might be different?

HABERMAN: There is not that much concern expressed by Trump folks that people around him and his base will see it differently. That is the hope of some of his critics and opponents, which is that there will just be such a fact said around this, that it will be distinct enough to make the case that this is different.

But no, they think they're going to be able to paint this and a potential indictment out of Georgia in connection with his efforts to remain in power in 2021. That this is all going to be part of, you know what he calls the witch hunt and that his voters won't see it differently.

COOPER: How organized is his campaign structure at this point, do you know?

HABERMAN: It's pretty organized, actually. I mean, there is a clear team of people. They have their assigned roles. It doesn't mean that they are going to be flawless, but this is actually the most organized one of his campaigns, in my memory has been, at least in this way at this stage.

In 2020, it was well-organized in various ways at various points, but this early, this is more organized, than I remember it being.

COOPER: Maggie Haberman, thanks.

HABERMAN: Thank you.

COOPER: Next for us tonight, what exactly happened here in New York City last night with Prince Harry Meghan Markle and the paparazzi. Their spokesman called it near-catastrophic. Our John Miller has talked to a number of sources, we've got the latest on where the truth may actually lie.

Also tonight, lawmakers take up the question of whether to expel their serial lying, resume fabricating, alleged dogs swindling, 13-time indicted colleague, Congressman George Santos. See how they voted.



COOPER: New reporting tonight on what happened in Midtown Manhattan last night to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle.

They left an award ceremony along with Markle's mom in black car. They ended up at their destination, but only by way of a police precinct, a yellow cab and apparently, a traumatic experience for them.

The question is what actually happened and how dangerous was it to them and the public? Were they involved in what their spokesman calls a "near catastrophic chase" with paparazzi or was it something else?

Given the chase and crash that killed Prince Harry's mother, obviously this incident is getting a lot of attention.

With me here, CNN chief law enforcement intelligence analyst, John Miller, who we should mention is also a former deputy commissioner in the New York Police Department. And joining us from London, CNN Royal correspondent, Max Foster.

So John, the statement from the NYPD -- and I just want to read this from my notes -- it says that: "There were numerous photographers that made their transport challenging. The Duke and Duchess of Sussex arrived at their destination and there were no reported collisions, summonses, injuries or arrests in regard."

Harry and Meghan spokesman called it a near catastrophic car chase lasting over two hours. What have you learned?

JOHN MILLER, CNN CHIEF LAW ENFORCEMENT AND INTELLIGENCE ANALYST: So it wasn't a high speed chase, at least on the part of you know, Harry and Meghan's vehicles. They were instructed to obey the traffic rules, stop at the red lights and so on. But there were times -- this is a four-car motorcade -- where cars in the back would slow down to --

COOPER: Four-car motorcade of paparazzi?

MILLER: Oh, no, it is four-car motorcade, it is the car that they're in. There's a lead car. There's a staff car and an NYPD car with two detectives from their Dignitary Protection Section.

And as they're moving, there are 10 vehicles, scooters, motorcycles, a black car with blacked out windows, spotters and communicators who are surrounding their cars, slowing them down in traffic.

This is according to Tommy Buda, who is a retired NYPD detective from the Terrorist Taskforce, who runs one of the security companies that was handling the motorcade part of this who said they were over the top dangerous.

You had the black car mounting the sidewalk and going across, striking some item on the sidewalk, pedestrians scattered to make a right turn to catch up to this motorcade when it got some distance.

You had cars -- cars and scooters riding into traffic the wrong way on a two-way street to catch up to where the car was meant to --

COOPER: So why were there no summonses?


MILLER: Well, you've got the two detectives and their job is to get them from point A and point B. Interestingly, when they saw a marked police car that was doing a traffic stop, they stopped and said, you know, this car is chasing us and when the police officer went to approach that car, because now they would be pulling over two cars, the car just yelled something about Meghan Markle, backed up, went around the cop and kept going.

So if this happens, again, there's likely to be an added element of traffic enforcement that has to become part of this package.

COOPER: Max, you've talked with Chris Sanchez, who was a part of the couple's security detail last night. What is he telling you?

MAX FOSTER, CNN ROYAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, he says he was in the Secret Service for more than 10 years, more than a decade, I think, about 16 years and he says, he hasn't seen anything like this. The scooters, about a dozen vehicles, he was talking about -- cars, scooters, motorbikes surrounding the vehicle.

Again, not suggesting this was a high-speed chase, trying to stick, John was saying to the road rules, to stick to the speed restrictions. They changed cars a couple of times. So there are different scenarios and different legs of this journey that were clearly very different.

But describing how, you know, there was concern for fatalities, frankly, amongst the public as the paparazzi were jumping red lights, jumping onto the curb, not concerned about Harry and Meghan and Meghan's mother's safety necessarily, but the people around and in several situations, they could see potentially people dying. That's what they were concerned about and it went on for more than two hours.

COOPER: At one point, they were put into a taxi cab, which I didn't quite understand, but the taxi driver spoke about having Harry and Meghan in his vehicle. Let's listen.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We were just making left turns and right turns and that's it. They were not being that aggressive while they were driving behind us.


COOPER: So what do you make of that?

MILLER: So they finally went to the 19th Police Precinct and said, let's regroup for a moment because we can't shake these people and this is getting dangerous to others. And they came up with a dodge, which is we'll keep the limo here where they're focused on that, we will slip them into a taxi.

But the paparazzi spotters caught that and then the scooters caught that taxi. And so essentially the cab driver basically just went around the block, you know, three left turns, dropped them back at the precinct.

How did they get away? Midnight came. The midnight to eight shift of the police department came out of the precinct, all got into their cars and then you had the block basically clogged with cops and police cars, but the limos were at the far end.

So they use this kind of police gridlock to take off, get to the place they were going, which is where they were staying, a private residence, but the scooters and cars were not going to fly down the sidewalk in a sea of policemen.

COOPER: And their concern was to not have the residence where they were located by these photographers. It wasn't so much, I mean, clearly photographer were taking pictures of them, I guess --

MILLER: That was it. They were staying with a friend just a couple of blocks away and they weren't able to get there without bringing this parade of paparazzi with them and they didn't want to inflict that on the person who was they were a guest of.

COOPER: Max, when I talked to Harry earlier this year for his book, he talked with me about his mom's death at the car crash. I just want to play that.


COOPER: You're right, I hadn't been aware before this moment talking about looking at the pictures of the crash scene that the last thing mummy saw on this earth was a flashbulb.

PRINCE HARRY, DUKE OF SUSSEX: Yes. COOPER: That's what you saw in the pictures.

PRINCE HARRY: Yes. While they were -- the pictures showed the reflection of a group of photographers taking photographs through the window and the reflection on the window was them.

COOPER (voice over): He only saw some of the crash photos. His private secretary and adviser dissuaded him from looking at the rest.

PRINCE HARRY: All I saw was the back of my mum's head, slumped on the backseat. There were other more gruesome photographs, but I will be eternally grateful to him for denying me the ability to inflict pain on myself by saying that, because that's the kind of stuff that sticks in your mind forever.


COOPER: That was from an interview I did with him on "60 Minutes." I mean, obviously the death of his mother in that tunnel in Paris was probably the defining event of his young life without a doubt.

How do you think that influences his reaction to what happened last night and their decision to go public with it?

FOSTER: Well, he has always talked about how flashbulbs and the sound of cameras going off triggers him and takes him back to that moment. He blames the paparazzi for his mother's death and the news desk editors who were providing a market for those paparazzi.

So undoubtedly, this absolutely goes back to his childhood and crucially, he wanted to protect Meghan from a similar fate. He has talked about that before and that is the reason he moved to North America. He wanted to get away from those risks and it is happening there in New York.

So I think it triggered all sorts of feelings within him and a reaction which, you know, would be not necessarily a reaction we'd all feel, but with that sort of trauma, what he went through last night I think really hit him hard.

COOPER: Max Foster and John Miller, appreciate it. Thank you.

Coming up next, a new political fight over migrants being bused from the border to New York and where to house them.

And later, it is not New Year's Eve, but Andy Cohen joins me to talk about kids and, frankly, who knows what else he's going to talk about, ahead.



COOPER: The legal fight over where to house migrants arriving along the southern US border area has expanded to the suburbs of New York City. A federal lawsuit expanded to class action status this week by the New York Civil Liberties Union, it is the latest in a series of lawsuits that began after New York City mayor, Eric Adams announced almost two weeks ago that he would send some of the migrants arriving into the city by bus from the southern border to hotels outside the city.

Executive in two counties, Rockland and Orange immediately filed suit. There's been a bitter war of words between the city's mayor and the head of Rockland County, both former NYPD cops. CNN's Miguel Marquez has the latest.


MIGUEL MARQUEZ, CNN SENIOR NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice over): As New York City scrambles to manage successive waves of migrants from the US southern border --

MAYOR ERIC ADAMS (D), NEW YORK CITY: Probably one of the largest crisis of -- humanitarian crisis the city has ever experienced.

MARQUEZ (voice over): The fight over what to do with them becoming increasingly heated. The city now sending some migrants to the suburbs.

STEVE NEUHAUS (R), ORANGE COUNTY EXECUTIVE: This is not the way to do things, not the way to treat people.

They just randomly booking hotel rooms where they can get bulk rooms for at least 30 days and with the option to go longer.

MARQUEZ (voice over): When the city tried a similar move in Rockland County just north of the city, the county blocked access to its hotels and the fight got personal.

ADAMS: When you look at the county exec, Day, I mean, this guy has a record of being anti-Semitic, you know, racist comments -- you know his thoughts in how he responded to this. Really, it shows the lack of leadership.


MARQUEZ (voiceover): Those remarks directed at Rockland County Executive Ed Day. Both Day and Adams have known and worked with each other for decades. Both former NYPD cops, both now public servants running the city in a nearby wealthy suburb.

Adams a Democrat, Day a Republican. Local politicians now caught up in the turmoil of national immigration politics. Day says, it is Mayor Adams who is using migrants as pawns and putting the blame on everyone else.

ED DAY, (R) ROCKLAND COUNTY EXECUTIVE: So, we got the race card again. Just like the mayor has been talking about how Republican -- white Republican people have been picking on him because it's a black city. I think anybody who throws that card out that quickly has his own set of problems, including being a racist himself. The mayor is engaged in human trafficking of the worst kind. MARQUEZ (voiceover): Orange and Rockland counties now have temporary restraining orders barring New York City from sending migrants their way in the town of Riverhead on Long Island has pre-emptively declared a state of emergency to block the city sending migrants there too. New York's mayor insists with this latest wave, more than 4,200 arriving last week alone, there is no room left in the city. And it's covering the cost of hotel rooms and care for the migrants. It just needs more space to temporarily house them.

ADAMS: New York City is the economic engine of this state. And if we have been there for the state, the state needs to be there for us. And those who are in other parts of the state that are saying, we're going to take you to court, we're going to do these emergency orders. We need to stop. We're in this together.

CROWD: We want our gym back.

MARQUEZ (voiceover): New York City even using some school gyms, not physically connected to the schools themselves, as places to temporarily house migrants. The backlash from some parents, teachers, and students has been fierce.

YOLANDA AYALA, NYC SCHOOL PARENT: I don't have nothing against immigrants. They're welcome here or whatever, and that's all. But why in schools?


COOPER: Miguel Marquez joins us now. What is the latest on these migrants being housed in the schools, in the gyms?

MARQUEZ (on camera): Well, the city has had to reverse itself at this point. I want to show you. So, this is one of the gyms, it's a modular gym. It's one of few that exist in the city. And it is separate from the school itself. But even at that, because it's on the same property at the school, the reaction to it was just so angry and vociferous. The city has reversed itself after only a few days says -- but says that if the situation gets worse, it will return migrants to gyms like this in the city.

COOPER: All right. Miguel Marquez, appreciate it. Thanks.

For more on what voters think of the issue, I want to turn to our Senior Data Reporter Harry Enten. So, what do voters say about the southern border -- about migrants at the southern border?

HARRY ENTEN, CNN SENIOR DATE REPORTER: Yes. So, 58 percent of Americans support making it harder to seek asylum, right? And I think this is why this has been such a dangerous political situation for the Biden administration and why they've tried so hard over the last few days as the title, sort of, retired, to ensure that the flow of migrants across the border was not as bad as a lot of people thought it was. And that does, in fact, seem to be the case.

COOPER: What about the border wall, how is that there? ENTEN: Yes, remember how politically divisive that was during the Trump administration? Voters were clearly against -- majority of voters were against it back in 2018. But what a difference five years makes because now support, basically, matches opposition to in fact build a border wall, which I think gives you an indication that voters have very much been moving to the right on this issue, perhaps because of what they've been seeing in terms of migrants crossing the border.

COOPER: What about voters in New York City? What did they think about the migrant situation?

ENTEN: Yes, you know, New York is a very Democratic city, right? So, you might expect that voters here might be more sympathetic to the migrants but, in fact, 70 percent of New York City voters call it a crisis. 65 percent support sending some of the migrants upstate.

And get this, 63 percent of New York City voters say that the city cannot accommodate them all. So, in New York City, a very blue city, in fact, there has been a turning of the tide against migrants.

COOPER: Harry Enten, appreciate it. Thank you.

ENTEN: Thank you.

COOPER: Just ahead, Congressman George Santos face an expulsion measure today. But would House Republicans actually save him? We'll tell you how it played out in the chaotic scene that happened afterwards in the Capital steps.

Also later, my good friend Andy Cohen is here, and he's got a lot to share, as he usually does.



COOPER: This evening, shortly after House Republicans voted a direct vote on whether to expel George Santos and potentially decrease their already narrow majority, tensions spilled out onto the Capitol Hill steps, as a defiant Santos spoke to reporters and was later heckled by a House Democrat who then engaged with Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene.


REP. GEORGE SANTOS (R-NY): I was elected by them to come represent them. I will continue to do that. I have not done my job since I've gotten here.


SANTOS: Yes, sir?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Did you talk to Speaker McCarthy regarding the votes?

BOWMA: Resign.

SANTOS: No, I did not. I allowed the --

BOWMAN: Get him out.

SANTOS: -- I allowed the process to play itself out.

BOWMAN: Get him out. He got to go.

The party has to kick him out. He's embarrassing you all. He's embarrassing you all.

MARJORIE TAYLOR GREENE (R-GA): Biden is the criminal.

BOWMAN: He's invited for what? You got to get him out.

GREENE: Oh, Biden is embarrassing.

BOWMAN: It's all him. You got to save the party.

GREENE: Not him.

BOWMAN: The party is hanging by a thread.

GREENE: No, we've got to get rid of Biden.

BOWMAN: The party is hanging --

GREENE: Save the country.

BOWMAN: -- the party is hanging by a thread.

GREENE: Just save the country. Impeach Biden.

BOWMAN: You got to save the party.

GREENE: Impeach Biden. Impeach Biden.

BOWMAN: Listen, no more QAnon.

GREENE: Impeach Biden.


COOPER: That was Democratic New York Congressman Jamaal Bowman and Republican Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene. You saw the end there.

That scene, again, came moments after House Republicans voted to refer Democrats effort on Santos fated House Ethics Committee. Democrats forced the question a week after the New York congressman pled not guilty to 13 federal charges, including fraud and money laundering.

And after countless stories emerged involving lies, he has told pretty much everything. His wealth, his resume, his background.

Jessica Dean joins us from Capitol Hill with the latest. So, what more can you tell us?

JESSICA DEAN, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, you set the scene perfectly, Anderson. It was pretty much chaos outside of the House chamber as that was all going on. And of course, all the reporters huddled around George Santos while all the yelling was going on.

But if you zoom out and talk about what this means politically, this allowed Republicans to really side step this key issue of having to vote yes or no directly on expelling George Santos.


So, what this did was instead refer him to the Ethics Committee. And you'll remember that they have had an investigation into Congressman Santos for several months now since the New York Democratic members referred it to the Ethics Committee.

For his part, House Speaker Kevin McCarthy said that he hopes the Ethics Committee will move quickly and rapidly and figure out what to do moving forward. But this is a good scenario for Republicans who, remember, have just a four-seat margin in the House. And there are concerns that if George Santos is expelled and they have a special election in his district, that Republicans may not be able to hold that seat.

So, politically for them, this was a bit perilous, and this was the best outcome for the House GOP to be able to kick this over to House Ethics and let it remain there. And we heard Santos there on the steps saying he will not resign. He's going to continue moving forward.

COOPER: How did Democrats react to the Republican efforts to side step this?

DEAN: Well, I think we can all imagine, and what you're imagining is true. They were not pleased about this, some more vocal about it than others. Obviously, we saw Congressman Jamaal Bowman there who was very vocal about it. But we also heard from the congressman that brought this forward in the first place, Congressman Garcia. Listen.


REP. ROBERT GARCIA (D-CA): First, this has been in -- already at the Ethics Committee for the last three months, and there's been no action. And Kevin McCarthy has not taken action. And so, this is really cop out of there by the speaker to try to give cover to -- particularly the New York Republicans. But they know very well that he should not be there. They've called for his resignation.


DEAN: Again, calling it a cop out there. And, Anderson, it kind of goes without saying that for Democrats, if they could get Republicans on the record having to vote up or down on whether to expel Santos, that that was something that, of course, they would probably take into the next election cycle. But again, they didn't get that because it was moved to be referred to the Ethics Committee.

COOPER: All right. Jessica Dean, appreciate it.

Now, to a new development in the murders last year of four University of Idaho students. The suspect in those four murders was indicted today. Veronica Miracle joins us now with the latest. So, breakdown what's in this indictment and what this means for the accused killer.

VERONICA MIRACLE, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Anderson, there's not a lot of information in this indictment. We just know that Kohberger has been charged with four counts of first-degree murder and one count of burglary. But exactly what is in -- what exactly happened behind the closed doors of this secret grand jury indictment, that remains sealed.

So, we don't know the names of the witnesses who came before the grand jury. We also don't know exactly why this happened since -- because there was already a preliminary hearing that was scheduled for the end of June.

So, the vail of secrecy around this case remains in place. First it was because of the gag order that was put in place by the judge, which essentially said any attorneys representing people in this case, the police, the prosecution, they could not publicly comment. They still cannot.

And then further now because this happened behind closed doors, all of this information we would have seen in the preliminary hearing. We would have heard from the witnesses. Also, the information that -- and the evidence that the prosecution has would have been made public. Now, all of this is going to remain closed until we see it at trial. Anderson.

COOPER: He's -- now that he's been indicted, what is next in the case? What happens next?

MIRACLE: Well, we understand that there is a hearing on Monday. We expect that he will enter a plea and then we will also expect that some kind of motion will be put into place so that a trial can be put in place. Also, on Monday separately, there is a hearing around a gag order.

You know, one of the victims' families and a media coalition, they have joined together, and they want the gag order amended. They want information to be made public. And so, that's going to be happening on Monday, and we expect a lot more information to be released next week. Anderson.

COOPER: Veronica Miracle, appreciate it. Thank you.

Coming up, my New Year's Eve sidekick and actually friend, Andy Cohen, is here. Find out why, next.

ANDY COHEN, CNN HOST: Actual friend.



COOPER: So, we celebrate New Year's Eve together. We're friends. We're both dads. Tonight, Andy Cohen is here to talk about fatherhood and more with me. His new book is "The Daddy Diaries: The Year I Grew Up", it is just out. It is already number three on "The New York Times" best-seller list. Congratulations, Andy Cohen.

A. COHEN: Thank you, Anderson Cooper. It's great to be here.

COOPER: Thank you.

A. COHEN: My feet are dangling off chair like a little kid. It's kind of funny.

COOPER: Yes, it's very distracting for me.

A. COHEN: I know. Look at that under banner.

COOPER: I kind of see it --

A. COHEN: Yes, funny.

COOPER: You can just latch them onto the thing.

A. COHEN: I know.

COOPER: So, your book which I've actually -- I'm probably one of the few people interviewing you who's actually read your book, by the way. Have you found that --

A. COHEN: I did do a rant on the radio today. It is amazing how many -- even producers who don't read the book

COOPER: Even producers.

A. COHEN: Yes, yes, yes. But thank you for reading my book.

COOPER: Yes, so --

A. COHEN: And I know how much you loved it.

COOPER: I did.

A. COHEN: Yes.

COOPER: It's really funny. But your book begins and ends -- I really just read from the parts of where I'm in it. It begins --

A. COHEN: You're in it a lot.

COOPER: -- with us in New Year's Eve and it ends with us in New Year's Eve this year. I just want to replay for our viewers --

A. COHEN: Who may have forgotten --

COOPER: -- who may have forgotten how you ended -- how your 2022 --

A. COHEN: Began.

COOPER: -- began.

A. COHEN: Yes.

COOPER: So, it was 2022 --

A. COHEN: January 1, 2022, it was about five minutes into the New Year.

COOPER: And -- right. And this was your rant about Mayor de Blasio at the time.

A. COHEN: Yes.

COOPER: And in the book, you write about how it, sort of, ended up in a spiral of, like, self-doubt for the next week.

A. COHEN: Yes.

COOPER: But let's just play this moment.


A. COHEN: Let me tell you something.

COOPER: Oh, please. Tell us something, Andy.

A. COHEN: Watching Mayor de Blasio --

COOPER: Don't go on a rant.

A. COHEN: -- do his --

COOPER: Don't go on a rant.

A. COHEN: -- victory lap dance after four years of the first crappiest --

COOPER: It's the first -- this is how you want to start the New Year?

A. COHEN: -- charm as the mayor of New York.

COOPER: That's how you want to start the New Year?

A. COHEN: The only thing that Democrats and Republicans can agree on --

COOPER: That's how you want -- I mean, this is how --

A. COHEN: -- is what a horrible mayor he's been.

COOPER: This is how he -- Wow.

A. COHEN: So, sayonara sucka --

COOPER: Oh, wow.

A. COHEN: 2022.

COOPER: I mean --

A. COHEN: It's a new year, because guess what? I have a feeling --

COOPER: Speaking of which --

A. COHEN: -- I'm going to be standing right here next year. And you know who I'm not going to be looking at dancing as the city comes apart. You.



A. COHEN: How about that, I had no voice.

COOPER: I know. I love that your voice cracks.

A. COHEN: From the tequila.

COOPER: Your voice cracks.

A. COHEN: I mean, I am like an angry cab driver in a bar.

COOPER: It's a -- I'm stunned that they didn't -- at the end of the year.

A. COHEN: Yes, I know. A decision --

COOPER: But it's interesting in your book to read how -- I mean, that was sort of the, you know, the beginning of that year. And it did start this short of shame, like you -- the -- you thought it --

A. COHEN: I did get it --

COOPER: -- you thought it was great at first.

A. COHEN: Yes.

COOPER: And then the next morning, like, a friend of yours reaches out and he's like --

A. COHEN: An old friend.

COOPER: -- hey, everything OK?

A. COHEN: Right.

COOPER: And that was your first inkling, maybe it didn't place (ph) on you?

A. COHEN: Why wouldn't everything be, OK? But then I left my house and I was getting pounded out or -- you know, like this, you know.

COOPER: Fist bumps.

A. COHEN: Yes, fist bumps --

COOPER: That's what it is.

A. COHEN: -- by --

COOPER: It's what people call them.

A. COHEN: Right, yes. All over the city.

COOPER: Right.

A. COHEN: And I was like, oh, I have done something good. This was wonderful. So, I do. But that was -- the book is a year in my life. And it begins then.

COOPER: Right.

A. COHEN: And ends with us. And you see that our --

COOPER: Sober on New Year's even as actually symbolic of where you actually are now?

COOPER: I do, because, you know, in the middle of the year, I had a second child. I welcomed a second child, Lucy, and I -- things got really serious. When you have -- didn't things get exponentially more serious in your house -- COOPER: Yes, yes, yes.

A. COHEN: -- when you welcomed --

COOPER: Yes, it's a lot more.

A. COHEN: -- Sebastian? Absolutely. And I just kind of got my act together. So, then at the end of the year, there we were --

COOPER: But you've always had -- you were the most, like, driven. You work more than anybody I know in television.

A. COHEN: You work pretty hard, too.


A. COHEN: Yes.

COOPER: But you have like a -- I mean, you have a legit, like, empire. You have a book in print. You have -- you know, how many of hours of radio do you do?

A. COHEN: Thank you. Four. COOPER: Multiple hours.

A. COHEN: I have two channels on Sirius.

COOPER: Right.

A. COHEN: Yes.

COOPER: You got the nighttime show.

A. COHEN: Right. So, I had -- no. So, my act was cleaned up. But I just -- it was kind of a metaphor that at the end of the year we couldn't drink on CNN and I had kind of reined in my partying as the year went on.

COOPER: Did you ever think when you were a young gay kid growing up in Clayton, Missouri, in St. Louis, that you would be able to actually have this kind of a life?

A. COHEN: Definitely not.

COOPER: I mean, children. A job where you could be openly gay on television?

A. COHEN: No. I remember when I came out, and I am sure you had a similar experience, that -- I remember my mom saying she needed a minute or more to mourn the loss of the life that I was not going to have.

COOPER: Right.

A. COHEN: Which in our minds and her mind at the time included me having children or having a family.

COOPER: Well, I remember you writing about going to an Eddie Murphy concert when you were probably in your early 20s.

A. COHEN: Right.

COOPER: And that was at the -- you know, early '80s, I guess, Eddie Murphy, I think it was and --

A. COHEN: Yes, I was in high school at that time

COOPER: Right. It was very, like, homophobic.

A. COHEN: Yes.

COOPER: And --

A. COHEN: Right, right.

COOPER: And it really, like, stunned -- it really hurt you?

A. COHEN: It did hurt me. I was also on mushrooms that night.


A. COHEN: But --

COOPER: I don't recall that part of your book.

A. COHEN: I know, sorry, about that. That kind of -- yes. But anyway --

COOPER: Mushrooms.

A. COHEN: I -- it did hurt me. And it was magnified by the psychedelics, but also it really made me feel like, this is the world that I live in.

COOPER: Right.

A. COHEN: And it was, by the way, the world that we lived in then. But it's incredible now, as I sit with you now and we broadcast New Year's Eve, which is such fun to do with you, an old friend, and we now have kids. It is a world that I never thought would exist for us.

And writing the book, I think I -- it's amazing. I've heard from so many parents about how relatable it is. Hearing about the travails of toddlers. It doesn't matter who you are. Raising your kids, the stories are very universal.

COOPER: We have this have a of you discussing something with Ben and your Instagram is, obviously, very funny over your conduct. I just want to play this.


A. COHEN: So, you are crying because I gave you a cookie? Is that why you are crying?


A. COHEN: Why?

B. COHEN: Because you took a part for Lucy.

A. COHEN: Because I ripped a little piece off for Lucy --

B. COHEN: Yes.

A. COHEN: -- so that you would share with her?

B. COHEN: Yes.

A. COHEN: Well, I think it's nice for you to share. The piece that I took for Lucy is so --

B. COHEN: It's not fair.

A. COHEN: You know what, maybe when Lucy --


COOPER: All right. So, these are the joys of parenting.

A. COHEN: Yes, exactly.

COOPER: These are some of the joyous moments.

A. COHEN: You know what, the highs and the lows.

COOPER: It's high, highs, low, lows.

A. COHEN: They're all there. Also, I think that on Instagram, people usually only share the perfect moments.


A. COHEN: So, I do -- I like to share what's real and what's really happening.

COOPER: One of the things we will neglected to cover in the program tonight, it should have probably been the breaking news, is the "Scandoval".

A. COHEN: Yes.

COOPER: I don't understand but this is a big night in your world?

A. COHEN: It is a big night in the world --

COOPER: In the world, OK.

A. COHEN: -- and in the world of pop culture.

COOPER: Right, this is --

A. COHEN: It's the finale of "Vanderpump Rules". And this "Scandoval", as it's known, has really taken over pop culture.

COOPER: I read about in "The New York Times".

A. COHEN: Yes.

COOPER: I read about in "Washington Post."

A. COHEN: CNN had it on the ticker, by the way.



A. COHEN: They did. They had a "Scandoval" section on for real. It -- to make an analogy, because I know you don't understand it.


A. COHEN: On the show "Friends", it's as if Chandler was cheating on Monica with Rachel for seven months and Joey knew all along.

COOPER: Uh-huh. OK.

A. COHEN: Did you get that?

COOPER: Vaguely, I --

A. COHEN: Do you know the show "Friends"?

COOPER: Yes, I'm --

A. COHEN: Are you in there? OK. Yes. OK.

COOPER: But so, this -- and so viewers have watched this season --

A. COHEN: They --

COOPER: -- in horror because they now know what was going on?

A. COHEN: Yes, it's -- yes.

COOPER: And all be revealed tonight?

A. COHEN: Yes.

COOPER: I see. Wow.

A. COHEN: It's incredible. And I've got the first interview with Ariana tonight.


A. COHEN: I'm running to go do it.

COOPER: I was in a hot competition for that one, too.

A. COHEN: Yes, I know.

COOPER: But you beat me.

A. COHEN: And Christiane Amanpour made a good run for it, as well, to be honest with you. Good going, Christiane. Yes.

COOPER: Andy, congratulations, number three, "New York Times" best- seller. It's awesome.

A. COHEN: Thank you, Anderson.

COOPER: "Daddy Diaries: The Year I Grew Up."

Up next, the most famous shipwreck, the Titanic like you have never seen it before. Incredible images, next.


COOPER: So, tonight, we've getting a never-before-seen look at the Titanic wreckage deep in the Atlantic Ocean. It's the first full sized-digital scan of, perhaps, the history's most famous shipwreck. A team of scientist carried out what they called the largest underwater scanning project in history. This is -- it's incredible to see it like this.