Return to Transcripts main page

Anderson Cooper 360 Degrees

Trump Has Until Monday To Secure $464M Bond In Civil Fraud Case; Biden Seeks To Reinvigorate Diverse Coalition In Critical 2024 Campaign Swing Out West; GOP Nominee To Run NC Public Schools Called For Violence Against Democrats, Including Executing Obama & Biden; North Carolina GOP Nominates Extreme Candidates; Battle Over Texas Immigration Law, Awaiting Appeals Court Decision On Texas Immigration Law After Whiplash Rulings; Staffer At The London Clinic Allegedly Tried To Access Princess Kate's Medical Records. Aired 8-9p ET

Aired March 20, 2024 - 20:00   ET



OPRAH WINFREY, HOST, THE OPRAH WINFREY SHOW: I really admire people who really believe that. And I also feel like if you think if you can work out and work out - and I'm like you Charles, I couldn't work out anymore. I mean, like I can't climb any faster or run any faster. I can't - I'm eating - I was down to eating one meal a day. I can't, there's nothing else I can do.


ERIN BURNETT, CNN HOST: Well, you can watch the entire conversation with Gayle, Charles and Oprah on King Charles at 10 o'clock. Thanks for joining us, Anderson starts now.

ANDERSON COOPER, CNN HOST: Tonight on 360, the former president said to be in panic mode with his half billion dollar civil fraud deadline just five days away and no sign yet he can find anyone to foot the bill.

Also tonight, catching up with the Republican nominee to run North Carolina's public school system whose tweets have called for the killing of President Biden and former President Obama.

Plus, a sinister new twist in the Princess of Wales' medical saga, the possibility that hospital staff tried to snoop on her records while she was a surgical patient.

COOPER: Good evening. We begin tonight, keeping them honest, with just five days and counting until the former president's $464 million New York civil fraud bill comes due. The one he's told the court he cannot secure a bond for despite prior claims like these by his attorney.


ALINA HABBA, TRUMP LAWYER: They know by looking at the statements of financial condition that this guy is worth a lot of money, billions and billions of billions of dollars. And that didn't even include his brand, Martha. Unfortunately, they picked the wrong guy to pick on in my opinion, because he's strong, he's resilient and he happens to have a lot of cash.

This guy is worth a lot of money, billions and billions of billions of dollars. He happens to have a lot of cash.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Of course he has money. He's a billionaire, we know that. There will be a bond and there will be no issues with that.


COOPER: Except he has had issues, apparently. And according to his attorney, he still has issues finding any insurance company willing to underwrite the bond. Not even Chubb, which underwrote the $91 million E. Jean Carroll bond. That's according to THE SOURCE's Kaitlan Collins, who joins us shortly.

Multiple sources telling her, as we mentioned at the top that he's in panic mode, even though he said under oath not so long ago, he's got liquidity to spare.


DONALD TRUMP, FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: We have a lot of cash, I believe we have substantially in excess of 400 million cash, which is a lot for a developer. Developers usually don't have cash. They have assets, not cash. But we have, I believe 400 plus and going up very substantially every month.


COOPER: Apparently not or not enough to back the bond, which is what underwriters are now demanding, according to his lawyers. Something the New York Attorney General's Office underscored in its filing today, responding to the former president's request for a stay.

Quoting now, "As far as the Court can infer, sureties may have refused to accept defendants' specific holdings as collateral because using Mr. Trump's real estate will generally need 'a property appraisal' and his holdings are not nearly as valuable as defendants claim."

Trump attorney, Chris Kise, many times says in a statement that the attorney general "demonstrate her continued willingness to misrepresent the facts and misconstrue applicable law in her political crusade against President Trump." So the back and forth continues as the clock ticks on.

Joining me now, former federal prosecutor, Jessica Roth, Temidayo Aganga-Williams who served as senior investigative counsel on the House January 6th Committee and Kaitlan Collins.

So what more can you tell us about the president's attempts to secure this?

KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN ANCHOR: They had kind of been under this impression that because Chubb, this other insurance giant, underwrote his last bond that he had to pay in part, which was the one for E. Jean Carroll, about $90 million, that they would also do this one.

So they had this 30-day grace period that they got because the attorney general could have started collecting on this when the judge ruled. They've had this 30-day grace period. That ends on Monday. They kind of had been under this assumption that they would be able to find someone. And what they went to the courts with this week is saying, no, we so far have gone to 30 places. We haven't been able to find anything.

The AG's office is objecting to that today, saying they really are casting doubt on it and don't believe that they actually tried their best efforts to try it. And where it puts Trump and his legal team now is they're kind of scrambling to figure out what they are going to do before Monday. Because when it comes to - he could wait and count on this appeal, wait to see if they're going to lower what he has to pay for the bond to maybe $100 million. But they're also looking at wealthy supporters, seeing if they could help him here. They're looking at his properties, what they could potentially sell and quickly.

But all of that is really complicated. And so really, the reality is he could find himself in a real financial bind come Monday.

COOPER: Jessica, I want to put this graphic up on the screen that shows some of Trump's New York properties that I guess could be relevant to all of this. What do you think of the New York Attorney General's basically calling BS on Trump's claims?


JESSICA ROTH, FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR, SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK: Yes. I mean, the puzzle here is why is it so hard for him to come up the money to secure the bond. Between his claims about how much cash he has and the value he's asserted with respect to these properties, why is he having such a difficult time getting anybody to write the bond for him.

Those properties, I mean, as the Attorney General points out, I mean, Trump claims that there - these insurance companies won't write the bond and to have real estate - real property as collateral. And she says that's simply not true as a hard matter of law. And if they have limits on how much they'll write the bond for, which he also claims, why wouldn't you pool some of the different companies and bonds to put together the full amount that you owe. Or, she also says, you could actually just transfer ownership temporarily to the court and they would hold these properties as the collateral for the bond.

And so there's - there is - there are these properties. The question is, what are they worth, why is he having trouble getting anybody else to accept them as collateral and why, as a fallback, doesn't he just transfer them to the court?

COOPER: Well, also, Jessica, why is he waiting for the last couple of days? ROTH: That's really a question. His attorneys had to know that this was a real risk. They couldn't have been reasonably counting on Chubb underwriting a bond in this amount. And so it's a real question of, were they actually taken by surprise by Chubb or have they been working behind the scenes on these other avenues or have they just not been trying very hard and they were counting on some savior coming along and giving the money. It's really not clear why they're in the bind that they're in, but they are down to the wire.

COOPER: Temidayo, I want to read something that the Attorney General's Office said in their brief. They said, "Defendants supply no documentary evidence that demonstrates precisely what real property they offered to sureties, on what terms that property was offered, or precisely why the sureties were unwilling to accept the assets."

I mean, how can it be that they wouldn't provide - I mean, do they not have to provide evidence of this?

TEMIDAYO AGANGA-WILLIAMS, FORMER SENIOR INVESTIGATIVE COUNSEL, JAN. 6TH COMMITTEE: Well, I think what the attorney general is suggesting is that they're not being honest here. And I think it's not surprising where the very reason why the former president is where he is now is because he's had a pattern of fraudulent dealings when it comes to his finances. So I think what's really important here is that these folks that would underwrite a bond here, these are rational business entities. If there's money to be made here, they would do so.

And frankly, I think the fact that he spent, I think he noted countless hours negotiating a bond here, suggests that there is a deal to be made here. That this is not some unprecedented amount that insurance companies wouldn't support here, so I think what the AG is saying is that put up or shut up.

COOPER: You think there's a deal to be made if Trump was really willing to make a deal? I mean, if he was willing to accept terms that he didn't like.

AGANGA-WILLIAMS: Exactly. And if he has assets that are going to back this up. If he's truly worth the billions and billions of dollars that he says he is, that he would be able to either, as Jessica noted, transfer these assets, use them as collateral. There are lots of avenues here the sophisticated parties can arrive at. But I think it suggests here without any evidence that he is not quite as willing to make a deal as you suggest.

COOPER: And ...

COLLINS: And that kind of gets to the heart of what all this is about and what the AG's office is saying here is that all along they said he overinflated the value of his properties, that he inflated them. And they're saying that whatever he's taking to use as potential collateral here, they don't actually know what the true value of it is because he has a history of inflating it.

And so, also he's someone who - he's talked in depositions about how much cash he has, but he's asset rich and cash poor. He is much more in assets and that has always been the case. And it's not so clean cut that he could just put something up for sale because then it triggers all of these other factors.

And so that's why he's in the position that he's in and why there is kind of this panic of what he's going to do here and the anger that you see. And on the AG's office, I'll say there's a lot of mistrust in their claim that they just can't find anyone to underwrite it, because it was the 11th hour that they got Chubb to underwrite the bond for E. Jean Carroll.

COOPER: So Jessica, talk about the process here if the appeals court - they could grant the former president a reduction in the amount, right?

ROTH: They could. They have that authority to do so.

COOPER: So that they could do in the next couple of days.

ROTH: They could. And one hopes that they will at least rule before Monday (inaudible) ...

COOPER: And if they don't grant a reduction ...

ROTH: He can appeal - he can try to appeal up to the New York Court of Appeals, the highest court, so he has one more avenue of appeal.

COOPER: Is that - has to be done before Monday?

ROTH: He would have to do that, I think, if he's going to try to, again, avoid the consequences on Monday, he'd have to try one more time to get an appellate court to stay the judgment.

COOPER: And then what would the process look like of the attorney general starting to collect the judgment amount?

ROTH: Yes, so that's really interesting. It's not going to happen overnight. I mean, with respect to the cash and things that are in bank accounts, that process is more straightforward in terms of ability to actually send an order that effectively freezes those assets. The real estate properties are much more complicated. I mean, that's not self-executing at all. And so that's a process that would play out in court in terms of actually getting a judgment against those particular properties. He could contest that as well. There are mortgages on many of those properties, right? So that's not something that's going to happen overnight.

It would shock me that he would want to lose control to that extent, that she would actually be initiating judgment and then sale of those properties. So the whole purpose of the bond is to maintain the status quo as the appellate process works out.


And so one certainly hopes that they'll reach some sort of accommodation. He'll come up with some package. Maybe the AG would agree to something lesser to maintain the status quo and to avoid that prolonged litigation while the appeal is pending out.

COOPER: Temidayo, how do you see this playing out?

AGANGA-WILLIAMS: I think one thing that could be interesting here is going to be the former president's cash flow. I mean, one thing she can do quickly is freeze his accounts and I think that's going to be very interesting because the assets are illiquid so that's not going to impact his day-to-day ability to live his life. But if she's freezing his accounts, that's going to do that.

She also has the ability to go to individuals who owe him money and basically give them restraining notices that they're no longer going to give him that money. So she could make his life quite difficult from a cash flow perspective in the short-term. And from what we can see, he does have an expensive lifestyle. So I think that's where you might see the crunch. And it make him - it may make him make a deal quickly, negotiate with her so she's not going as hard as she could.

COOPER: There is this, like, a former judge who's been appointed to oversee the company. Would that judge have - be privy to what negotiations were like between Trump and these possible companies?

ROTH: I don't think she would necessarily be privy to the negotiations between Trump and the attorney general. But with respect to any transaction that would result in a sale of the properties, she would have to approve it before it goes forward.

COLLINS: And that's - the Trump legal team argument is that there is this monitor that was put in place because of this, so they would have to approve anything, so they see - they could basically keep an eye on everything as this appeal is playing out.

But for Letitia James, the attorney general here, obviously there is no love lost between her and Donald Trump. And she's made clear since the last month of what properties she's had her eyes on and she has said that she would start to seize them. She has not really been shy at all or any kind of shrinking violet on this.

COOPER: Yes. Kaitlan, thank you. We'll see Kaitlan at the top of the hour for THE SOURCE.

Now the politics of this, campaign politics, joining us as he does most Wednesdays, Democratic strategist, James Carville.

James, from a strategic standpoint, do you expect the Biden campaign to take on Trump's civil legal troubles and his failures thus far to produce this bond?

JAMES CARVILLE, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: Well, it's evident that he can't pay attention. And not only does he not have this money (inaudible) the Republican Party is not raising any money to speak of, and they're funneling it all through Donald Trump. The state parties, you look at around the country, these Republican, Michigan being a prime example, these state parties are falling apart. And what Biden can do is he can see he has sufficient resources, superior resources right now. He needs to seize the moment and just go after Trump with both hands and both feet, because they - there is an advantage here.

When you get an advantage in politics or business or entertainment or sports, you press your advantage as hard as you possibly can.

COOPER: So you think the President of the United States should be talking about Trump's civil issues, his business problems?

CARVILLE: I think that they should - I think surrogates should talk about him all the time. I think they can run ads that - but I'm not sure that his legal problems are the best avenue. Steve Bannon said, as he would take an office in 2017, we're just going to flood the zone with spit. Well, he didn't say spit, but there's a (inaudible) show. And we'll flood - they flooded it and the problem with Trump is there's so many things you got to pick one or two and go after it, not - I hope that the White House takes advantage of this leverage that they have right now, this financial leverage that they have.

COOPER: President Biden condemned former President Trump's rhetoric about migrants at an event in Arizona yesterday. I just want to play part of that.


JOE BIDEN, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: This is a guy who - whose - the way he talks about the Latino community is - well, in 2016, he called Latinos "criminal, drug dealers and rapists" when he came down that escalator. Now he says immigrants are "poisoning the blood of our country." What the hell is he talking about?


COOPER: You are a proponent of the President and all his spokespeople in the campaign doing that more and more.

CARVILLE: Yes, not so much him. I mean, be candid, Anderson, President Biden is not the best attack politician I've ever seen in my life and I'll leave it at that. But there are a lot of people to do what I call "the wet work." And I think he needs to stay ...

COOPER: It sounds like a mop head.

CARVILLE: ... sort of a - in that case, well, it's kind of, but it's a paid TV and stuff like that. But yes, that's CIA term. You take a guy out. But he doesn't need to do the wet work. People like me and other groups in the party need to do that. He's not very good at it. I don't think people want to hear from that. And then he can cruise along here at a better altitude. But this has got to be done and they got a precious advantage right now and they have it.


COOPER: I've heard you say that this is the first presidential race in your lifetime that's not about the future. What do you mean by that?

CARVILLE: Well, it mean exactly what it is. We - do we want today or do we want four years ago? I mean, I don't know of any proposals, I mean, other than Trump saying he's going to cut Social Security or get rid of Obamacare. I have no idea what direction forward he wants to take the country. I don't have much of a sense that President Biden's articulated a potential second term plan or something like that. And it's just today or yesterday, that's your choice. Tomorrow is not part of this equation, which is unusual in American presidential politics.

COOPER: James Carville, thanks very much. Appreciate it.

CARVILLE: Thank you, Anderson. You bet, good night.

COOPER: Coming up next, CNN's Shimon Prokupecz catches up to the candidate running to oversee North Carolina's public school system, who's been avoiding our questions about her extremist online postings, including QAnon slogans, conspiracy theories, and calls for the execution as traitors of President Biden and former President Obama. She wants to run the schools.

Later, CNN's Gayle King and Charles Barkley just finished a conversation with Oprah Winfrey about her decades-long weight loss journey in the blockbuster drug Ozempic and others. Part of that conversation, Dr. Sanjay Gupta joined us for his reaction. We'll be right back.



COOPER: The woman you're about to hear from might never have found herself in the national spotlight. Michele Morrow is her name. She wasn't expected to win her Republican primary race to be North Carolina's top public school official.

Then last week, in an upset, she did win. And when she did, her extreme and controversial comments began getting attention. Last Friday, CNN's KFILE reported that she has, for example, tweeted under her now dormant personal account about wanting to see former President Obama put in front of a firing squad on pay-per-view, saying, "We could make some money back from televising his death."

That's just one of a string of social media postings between 2019 and 2021, in which Ms. Morrow made suggestions about executing Obama and other prominent Democrats for treason, including Congresswoman Ilhan Omar, North Carolina governor, Roy Cooper, former New York governor, Andrew Cuomo, Hillary Clinton, Sen. Chuck Schumer and then President- elect Biden.

In the Biden tweet, here's how she answered the question, "Will you follow Joe Biden's advice and wear a mask for a hundred days?" "Never," she replies. "We need to follow the Constitution's advice and KILL all TRAITORS."

Ms. Morrow has also promoted QAnon, tweeting the QAnon slogan, where we go one, we go all, multiple times.

She also tweeted that the actor Jim Carrey was "likely searching for adrenochrome, which is a reference to a QAnon conspiracy theory, which claims that celebrities harvest the blood and drink the blood of children to prolong their own lives." That's what they believe.

In addition to all that, Ms. Morrow, who again is the candidate to be North Carolina's top public school official, has called public schools socialism centers and indoctrination centers. Now, as part of that KFILE report, CNN reached out to Morrow and her campaign multiple times to get her side of the story, but received no response.

So after publication of the KFILE story, Morrow tweeted the following: "According to @KFILE and @CNN and @CNNPolitics, Obama's drone attacks on hundreds of innocent Muslims in Yemen are not treasonous. The insanity of the media demonstrates the need to teach K-12 students real history and critical thinking skills," which, of course, doesn't directly address the multiple social media postings we just listed.

So with that in mind, CNN's Shimon Prokupecz went to North Carolina to try and speak with her in person. It took him several days. They finally caught up to her outside a Wake County Republican Party event in Raleigh. Shimon joins us now.

So what did she have to say?

SHIMON PROKUPECZ, CNN SENIOR CRIME AND JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: Yes, Anderson. So she went to this GOP convention. It's a local GOP convention in Wake County. There were other elected officials there, including the Lieutenant Governor Mark Robinson, who himself has had some controversy and has had some controversial statements. And we finally got to speak to her as she was leaving. Take a look at that exchange.


PROKUPECZ: Hi, Ms. Morrow. How are you?


PROKUPECZ: All right. How did it go in there?

MORROW: Hey, it went great.


MORROW: It went great.

PROKUPECZ: You feeling good?

MORROW: Who are you guys with?

PROKUPECZ: I'm Shimon Prokopez. I'm with CNN.

MORROW: Oh, have you been parked in my neighborhood by any chance?

PROKUPECZ: We've been trying to talk to you, yes.

MORROW: Okay. Well, you can go through my campaign. Thanks.

PROKUPECZ: I understand, but I have you now, so why don't we talk now?

MORROW: No, no need.

PROKUPECZ: Why not? Well, I want to ask you, do you still stand ...

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Because it's late and we're ...

PROKUPECZ: I'm not talking to you, ma'am. Do you still stand by your comments about former President Barack Obama and that he should be executed, calling for the death of other presidents, do you stand by that?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: We're doing one more ...

PROKUPECZ: Do you stand by those comments?

MORROW: Have a good night.

PROKUPECZ: Do you stand by what you've said about the public education system and that it needs to be destroyed?

MORROW: No comment.

PROKUPECZ: Do you stand by that?


MORROW: No comment.

PROKUPECZ: Do you understand the concern that people have ...

MORROW: No comment.

PROKUPECZ: ... with this nomination that you now have?

MORROW: Hey, I have a question. Do you vote in North Carolina? Then, keep your eyes on your own paper.

PROKUPECZ: Well, let me ask you ...

MORROW: Keep your eyes on your own paper.

PROKUPECZ: ... I've read papers here, too ...

MORROW: Keep your eyes on your own paper.

PROKUPECZ: ... and the concerns that people have with your nomination and the things that you have said.

MORROW: People in New York have concern over my nomination in North Carolina?

PROKUPECZ: People all across the country.

MORROW: All - really?


MORROW: Why are they concerned about North Carolina? Do you know that education is a problem in this entire country? So maybe they need to focus on what's going on in your state of New York, which, by the way, is where I grew up. Maybe they need to focus on what's going on in California, where children are not getting the education that they need. Maybe they need to focus on what they're doing in Michigan.

Because right now in North Carolina, I'm focused on helping the families of North Carolina for their children to get quality education, for them to be safe, and for us to be sure that our money is going into the classroom rather than bureaucracies. That's what I've been focusing on. That's what I've been fighting for, for the last five years, going to the General Assembly and dealing with those issues.

PROKUPECZ: Right, but ...

MORROW: So that is why I'm running.

PROKUPECZ: I understand that, but you have said such hurtful things, too, in terms of the education system ...

MORROW: I have to tell you ...

PROKUPECZ: ... about transgenders too.

MORROW: ... everyone is so done with the gotcha moments.

PROKUPECZ: This is not a gotcha.


MORROW: It is.

PROKUPECZ: These are your own words, ma'am.

MORROW: This is ...

PROKUPECZ: These are your own words.

MORROW: ... this has nothing to do with education.

PROKUPECZ: You have said that the former president ...

MORROW: How do you know those are my words?

PROKUPECZ: ... because you tweeted. Are those not your tweets?

MORROW: You don't have ...

PROKUPECZ: Do you deny saying that? You have an opportunity now.

MORROW: I am telling you.

PROKUPECZ: Do you deny saying that? MORROW: I am telling you ...

PROKUPECZ: Do you - are you denying that you said that in those tweets?

MORROW: I am telling you ...

PROKUPECZ: Have you ...

MORROW: ... that I'm going to discuss education.

PROKUPECZ: ... have you talked about the indoctrination of children by teachers?

MORROW: I am telling you ...

PROKUPECZ: Have you talked about that? Have you said that about students?

MORROW: Have you seen any of me going to the school board for the last five years, because you will have my answer.


COOPER: So, Shimon, clearly she didn't answer your questions. She didn't want to talk about the tweets about executing President Obama or Biden. Has Ms. Morrow ever explained her tweets calling for the execution - these executions?

PROKUPECZ: Well, no, not exactly. She's deflected a lot. She's tried to suggest, and perhaps like she did to me, that maybe it wasn't even written by her, how do I know she said to me at one point that it was something that she posted.

So she's deflected. She's, of course, defying it (inaudible) ...

COOPER: I mean, she could clear it up very simply just by answering the question.

PROKUPECZ: Yes. I mean, it's not that difficult to do, but you can see there that when I wanted to talk about some of those things that she has said, and they're very hurtful. I mean, there are people in this state who are very concerned about what she has said and just her lack of empathy and understanding in the different issues that affect students and children.

And yes, when you look back at everything she has said, it is very troubling and she could clear so much of this up. But the bottom line is she's now in a position to get elected to a position where she will be running a school system with a million and a half students and a massive budget. And then she would just have this - she would have the podium. She would have a place to speak and to say what it is that she is feeling more widely and that is certainly very concerning to people here, Anderson.

COOPER: Shimon Prokupecz, thanks very much. Joining us now is Republican strategist and North Carolinian, Doug Heye, who recently tweeted, "North Carolina Republicans dump this lunatic."

Doug, what does this say about the Republican Party in North Carolina? To an extent, the Republican Party nationwide, that this person is the GOP nominee for such an important job. And do you think voters realized these tweets that she had sent out, the support of QAnon?

DOUG HEYE, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: No, absolutely not. Look, this was a down-ballot race. It wasn't one of the top-tier races. Obviously, you had Trump running for president, Mark Robinson running for governor, which are the two marquee races. This is down-ballot. It gets fewer votes. It was a low-turnout year, about 25 percent of eligible voters voted in this primary.

So I don't think they knew exactly everything that she said. A lot of this has come out since the election. But I see so much of this in every direction, Anderson. This is bad. These are not just appalling statements. These are the worst of the worst statements, calling to assassinate political opponents and so forth. As a former campaign hack myself, having spent a lot of time in Wake County, in Raleigh, that's not the state party headquarters on Hillsborough Street.

But what I see is bad staffing, allowing your candidate to walk that far with Shimon being able to get every question in that he could. You want to have a car there so you can get your candidate out immediately because you know, and this is problem number three, you don't have good answers to these questions unless you can just simply say that either you didn't do them, which clearly she did or what I said was wrong and apologized for it.

Unfortunately, in American politics, these days we don't really reward people for standing up and saying that they made a mistake. We don't reward the apologies. That's one of the lessons that Donald Trump sort of taught us in 2016. I was in Wake County, in Raleigh, the day after the Access Hollywood tape came out, and I would have told you that day, Anderson, that there's no way Donald Trump could win. The reality is he did.

Now, North Carolina has a lot of close races. This may be one of them. We go back and forth with our politics as far as ...


HEYE: ... senators and governors.

So she could still win, but we've learned the lesson, and I think this is what she's learning. It's a bad lesson that maybe if you don't apologize, you can get away with it.

COOPER: I mean, she also - the whole trafficking in QAnon, talking about adrenochrome, all that is based on anti-Jewish - horrible anti- Jewish tropes which were used by the Nazis about Jews drinking the blood of children. I mean, the idea that this person could be head of the school system in North Carolina is - it's quite extraordinary. HEYE: It's extraordinary. And look, it would be extraordinary if she were also the insurance commissioner candidate or a state senator or basically anybody running for governor. Unfortunately, though, Anderson, in our politics right now, we are so stratified, and we've seen the parties go so tribal, it's not even so much red versus blue anymore. It's almost shirts versus skins, that everything that we do in our politics comes down to that sort of existential level.

COOPER: Right.

HEYE: And so I'm not surprised openly.

COOPER: But I mean, if calling for the executions of a former president and a president elect is not disqualifying for an elected official. In America, we are running a school system who is talking about teaching the real history. I mean, is there anything that's disqualifying?


HEYE: Well, I mean, this should be it. And obviously, again, I don't think that the voters, Republican primary voters in that case knew.


HEYE: But this should be a good example for we have a new state, we have a new RNC Chair, Michael Whatley. He's also the state party chair in -- of North Carolina. I've known him for 20 years. Michael, this is the time to stand up and show leadership. This has to be a line that we don't cross because we've seen political violence against Republican members of Congress, against Democratic Congressman or Congresswoman, obviously with Gabby Giffords. We know that this could happen again. This is a time for leadership to stand up and say no.

COOPER: Doug Heye, appreciate your time tonight. Thank you.

HEYE: Thank you.

COOPER: Coming up another, in a series of conflicting court decisions over a Texas immigration law that could come at any moment, our Ed Lavandera join us next on what's been a very confusing and a lot of skepticism greeting this law, even from the law enforcement agency charged now with enforcing it. Also tonight, Oprah Winfrey on CNN about her recent special on weight loss drugs like Ozempic, what she's learned in her own struggles with weight loss and our Dr. Sanjay Gupta joins us for the science on Ozempic and other popular drugs



COOPER: We are awaiting a federal appeals court decision that could come at any moment. It would be the latest in a series of rulings, many of them confusing about whether a Texas border security law may be enforced while its constitutionality is being debated. Just last night, conservatives on the Supreme Court said the Texas law could be enforced. Hours later, the appeals court placed a new hold on enforcement of the law, which is aimed at arresting and deporting migrants, and quickly scheduled a hearing earlier today.

Again, it's been a confusing several days. Ed Lavandera joins us now with a view from law enforcement.


ED LAVANDERA, CNN SENIOR NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): On El Paso's downtown streets, newly arrived migrants blend in, police on patrol. The future of the controversial Texas immigration law looms over these daily street scenes. Some residents like Elizabeth Ponce Deleon shrug off the concern about being asked to prove she's a U.S. citizen.

ELIZABETH PONCE DELEON, EL PASO RESIDENT: If they stand me, if they ask me where you are from, I don't care, doesn't bother me because I know I am legal and I am not doing anything wrong.

DIEGO CARLOS, EL PASO RESIDENT: I am just on edge more.

LAVANDERA (voice-over): 28 year-old El Paso resident, Diego Carlos fears the new law will mean he and his family will be open to constant questions and harassment.

CARLOS: I am like, all the time, I am like looking over my shoulder. But the DPS officers, those are the ones like you know, my hair stands up on the back of my neck whenever I see those black and white trucks.

LAVANDERA (voice-over): The fate of the Texas immigration law known as Senate Bill 4 or SB 4 is being hashed out in federal court. During oral arguments in the Fifth Circuit Court of appeals today, Texas officials argued the law should go into effect while the legal challenge plays out in federal court.

AARON NIELSON, SOLICITOR GENERAL, TEXAS: Texas has decided that we are at the epicenter of this crisis, we are on the frontline and we are going to do something about it.

LAVANDERA (voice-over): This law would give local law enforcement officers the ability to arrest migrants suspected of entering Texas illegally and allows state judges to deport migrants to Mexico. But one of the judges voiced confusion over how the law would work, confusion partially echoed by the attorney representing Texas.

PRISCILLA RICHMAN, CIRCUIT JUDGE, TEXAS: I was just trying to envision how this law plays out. A couple other things, just because I am not sure I understand the law totally. So what if someone enters in, let's say, from Mexico into Arizona and lives there for five years, then moves to Texas. Are they covered?

NIELSON: I don't know the answer

LAVANDERA (voice-over): That confusion and skepticism is a common theme expressed by law enforcement agencies across the state. The Laredo police chief says his officers will not focus on arresting undocumented migrants.

CHIEF MIGUEL RODRIGUEZ JR., LAREDO POLICE: He can be just by seeing somebody and thinking -- the officer thinking that he's not from here and then asking for documents, it doesn't work that.

LAVANDERA (voice-over): The sheriff in San Antonio says he would require deputies to file a report explaining the circumstances of an undocumented migrants' arrest.

SHERIFF JAVIER SALAZAR, BEXAR COUNTY, TEXAS: We don't want a deputy that thinks that they have authorities that actually don't exist, crossing the line over into racial profiling and getting themselves and the agency in a whole lot of trouble for, again, a misdemeanor.

LAVANDERA (voice-over): In El Paso, sheriff's officials say they don't have the manpower and don't want their deputies thrust into a fight between Texas Republican leaders and the Biden Administration.

COMMANDER RYAN URRUTIA, EL PASO COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE: This issue could quickly exhaust those resources for our community and cause extended response times, absences in patrol areas.


COOPER: And Ed Lavandera joins us from El Paso, Texas. Ed, what have officials in Mexico said about this?

LAVANDERA (on camera): Well, that's the next level of all this, Anderson. Not only is it chaotic and confusing for local law enforcement officials here in Texas, but part of this law says that judges can deport migrants to Mexico. But Mexican officials are saying and have been saying for some time that they will not accept migrants that Texas sends back. Remember, it's not all just migrants from Mexico that come here. Mexico is essentially saying, we don't accept Chinese migrants or Venezuelan or Cuban or Haitian migrants as well. So, that's another layer that really kind of clouding (inaudible) makes it very chaotic and even more confusing situation.

COOPER: Yeah. Ed Lavandera, thanks very much. Our Senior Data Reporter Harry Enten joins us now. Let's talk about voters and immigration, where does that stand in terms of importance?

HARRY ENTEN, CNN SENIOR DATA REPORTER: It's number one basically, and the trend line has been absolutely tremendous. I've watched it over the last six months. If you go back to the end of summer last year, less than 10 percent of Americans said that the top problem in this country, the nation's top problem, was immigration. And we've seen that rise steadily to now, where last month it was 28 percent of Americans. And if you go back in Gallup polling, over the last 40 years, at no point did more Americans say that immigration was the top issue than are at this particular point.


ENTEN: And it makes sense given the border crossings being at an all- time high by the end of last year, that Americans seem to be responding in a way that they simply put, never had before, Anderson.

COOPER: And who does get more credit for the job they would do on immigration?

ENTEN: Yes. So obviously, we have a presidential race coming up and this has obviously become a political football, right? And this is one of the trend lines that I think really tells the story that is the difference between this election and the 2020 election. So if you ask voters, who do you think would do a better job handling border security and immigration, what do we see? We see that back in 2020, it was basically a dead even split, right? Joe Biden was slightly favored, but not overwhelmingly. And of course, he has slightly won the election, not overwhelmingly so.

Look at where we are today, in a Marquette University Law School poll that was put out last month, look at that advantage that Joe Biden has on -- excuse me, that Donald Trump has on immigration and border security. It's near 30 points. This is a tremendous change that's going on and it is no wonder that Donald Trump is running on immigration. And he's not just running on it in the Republican primary, he's running on it in the general election. And I also think that's why there hasn't been quite the backlash that you might expect over Trump's comments, some of which I, of course, wouldn't make and it is because that voters at this particular point are quite concerned about immigration and they trust Donald Trump on this particular issue.

COOPER: And President Biden has been courting Latino voters in the southwest, where does he stand?

ENTEN: Yes. So you know, might think that Hispanic voters might be the types of folks who would have a backlash against Donald Trump's remarks, right? Ain't the case. If you ask Hispanic voters, who do they trust more on border security and immigration? Overwhelmingly, they trust Donald Trump more, by a tremendous margin. Look at that, 49 percent to 24 percent and that is in line with what we are seeing in the polls in general amongst Hispanics, right?

Joe Biden won them overwhelmingly back in 2021 and by over 20 percentage points. Democrats normally carry them overwhelmingly. If you look at the polling right now, on an average of polling amongst Hispanic voters, who did they choose in the ballot test, it's barely Biden about -- Biden by about two points. It would be the smallest margin for any Democratic candidate among Hispanic voters, basically, throughout history since we started polling the gosh darn thing. So, the fact is, at this point, there is no backlash. And at this point, I don't see one coming.

COOPER: Gosh darn, Harry Enten, thank you very much.

ENTEN: You know, sometimes.

COOPER: Coming up, Oprah Winfrey lends her star power and her own personal story in the ongoing conversation about weight loss drugs and a new interview on CNN tonight, details next.



COOPER: At 10 p.m. tonight, my CNN colleague Charles Barkley and Gayle King aired their interview with Oprah Winfrey. Oprah talks about her recent special on weight loss as well as her own experiences with drugs that are run enormously popular, like Ozempic. That also comes with concerns about possible side effects and a high price tag. Here is some of what Oprah said.


OPRAH WINFREY, AMERICAN HOST AND TELEVISION PRODUCER: The benefit of people finally recognizing that obesity is a disease far outweigh to me any criticism that I would receive for doing it. And also, people no longer blaming themselves for something that you cannot control in your brain. When the doctor said on that show that it is like holding your breath underwater and trying not to rise, to me, that is the greatest metaphor because all these years, I realized that's what I've been doing. You go on the diet, you're trying not to rise, and then you rise again and you can't even understand why. And before you know it, you're 10 pounds, 20 pounds, 30 pounds, and all of us have done this, who have this issue.

GAYLE KING, CNN HOST OF "KING CHARLES": Yeah, I've done this very often (ph), yes.

WINFREY: You have your limit. Yeah. Yeah. I have my limit, I am not going to go over a certain number. Then you go over that number, then you say I am not going to go over five pounds over that. And to know that you always going to go back --


WINFREY: -- because if you have the propensity for it, if you can carry the marker for it, that's what is going to happen in your body. In somebody else's body, it may be different.

KING: Oprah, that's the thing

BARKLEY: The one thing I wanted people to understand --

KING: -- that's what I think is so important, that I think for a lot of people, they didn't realize that it is a thing with the brain. I heard -- I have pulled some of the comments.


KING: I am a smart person, why can't I figure this out somebody said. We've been blamed this whole time --


KING: -- for being lazy, gluttonous, and undisciplined. It wasn't our stomach, it was our brain. I got the wake-up call I needed.



COOPER: Joined now by our Chief Medical Correspondent Dr. Sanjay Gupta. He is also the host of the podcast "Chasing Life." Hey, Sanjay, so Oprah talked on the association between the brain and weight in her special, what does science say about why it is so hard for certain people to lose weight and how much of it is out of an individual's control?

SANJAY GUPTA, CNN CHIEF MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT: Yeah. I think there is two things. First of all, I think obesity in and of itself is probably not just one disease. It is many different diseases, so different individuals respond differently to things. But when talking about these medical occasions, by the way, I don't know if you've seen this, Anderson, but this is an Ozempic pen. This is what it looks like. You basically can dial in your specific dose, that's what people have at home and they give themselves injections, typically once a week.

What the drug does is several things. One of the things to this point about the brain is that it does seem to affect what is known as the satiation center of the brain. That's an area of the brain that's right in the middle over here. So it makes you feel full. You eat, you feel full. That's what should happen. But for some people, they just don't get that feeling of satiation. They don't get that post-meal sort of feeling of fullness. They continue to have this sort of food chatter as it has been described to me, a term that I didn't know, but they're constantly thinking about food. And that's what this drug seems to be able to target. It allows people to feel full after a meal. And it also slows down to some extent their intestines as well, so that feeling of fullness stays even longer.

COOPER: So, who exactly might be a good fit for these drugs?

GUPTA: Yeah. So, they've got really specific criteria and I am going to put some of this up on the screen here, and I'll preface by saying this. We talk a lot about BMI, body mass index, but it is a pretty blunt tool.


GUPTA: They say a BMI of over 30, that would qualify you for this. I don't know if you knew this, Anderson, but BMI actually was something that was first developed 200 years ago, primarily in European soldiers, so men primarily, not really that relevant to today's day and age. So, a lot of people have problem with the BMI measurement. But if you use that, about 42 percent of the nation would qualify based on BMI alone. They also say people who have a BMI of 27 plus some other condition, be it heart disease or diabetes, or high blood pressure or something like that, so there's a lot of people who would qualify.

I will say there's a lot of people who are taking either Ozempic or this is Mounjaro. This is again a similar sort of pen, you inject yourself at home. Who frankly don't qualify for this? And that's problematic because there have been acute shortages of these drugs. For people who actually do qualify, they have a hard time actually getting a hold of these drugs and there may be significant side effects, maybe even more so in people who are doing this, who don't fit those BMI criteria.

COOPER: So, let's talk about side effects. I mean, how serious can they be and would a person, I mean, stay on these drugs forever or I mean, can you get off them?

GUPTA: Yeah. Well, you know, we are still learning. Some of these drugs have -- iterations have been around for a long time, 20 years, even for some of the Ozempic type of drugs but not in the numbers that were seeing now. So as you start to increase the population of people who are taking that, you're going to see different sorts of side effects. A lot of them focus on GI type symptoms. People may feel constipated, they may have nausea, they have vomiting, stomach paralysis. It can be more serious.

People can develop pancreatitis as well. And again, talking to obesity doctors, they say that the likelihood of these sorts of side effects seem to be amplified in people who are taking it more for vanity reasons other than for really needing it because of BMI. I will say this, a lot of weight loss also seems to come from the loss of lean muscle mass. So especially for older people who might already have a diminished muscle mass, this can be problematic. You're losing your weight because you are losing muscle in addition to fat and that's a problem.

The second question you asked, in terms of do you need to be on it for your entire life. I wanted to pull this graph just to show you. This is a particular drug, this is a Mounjaro type drug and what they found, if we can put up that graph, is that basically in 36 weeks, about eight or nine months, you lose about 20 percent of your body weight. That's a lot. I mean, think about that. 20 percent of your body weight, you can do the math on that.


GUPTA: But at that -- see that vertical line there, they kept certain people on Mounjaro. You see the weight continues to go down and then plateau, but they gave a placebo to the other group and people started to gain the weight back. And within a year, so they gained at least half the weight back.


GUPTA: So, what does that mean? Again, we don't know, but I think talking to a lot of obesity doctors, the presumption is for a lot of people, they may need to be on this medication for the rest of their lives. And there are people who are starting this medication in their 20s or 30s, Anderson. So think about that. Every month for the next 60 years or so --


GUPTA: -- that is a lot of drug. There are shortages. It is $1,000 a month. So, these are these are issues that they are going to have to grapple with.

COOPER: All right, Sanjay. Thanks so much. You can listen to Sanjay's podcast "Chasing Life" on the subject, weight loss drugs, by clicking on the code you see on the screen right now. Don't miss Oprah's interview with Gayle King and Charles Barkley at 10 p.m. Eastern, here on CNN tonight, just about an hour from now.

Coming up next, more royal drama surrounding Prince William and Kate as someone tried to it seems access the Princess of Wales' medical records at the London Hospital where she underwent abdominal surgery. They've launched an investigation reportedly, more details coming up.



COOPER: A new twist (inaudible) the drama surrounding Catherine, the Princess of Wales. Now, the hospital where she underwent abdominal surgery and recovered for nearly two weeks is the center of a scandal over her medical privacy. CNN's Max Foster has details.


MAX FOSTER, CNN ROYAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Another day, another princess headline, this one alleging medical staff tried to illegally access her records while she was there to undergo surgery at this private London Clinic. The country's data watchdog now says it's assessing a breach of confidentiality, reported in the "Daily Mirror." The British tabloid reported that at least one hospital staffer allegedly tried to illegally access Kate's private medical records, while (ph) she spent 13 nights at The London Clinic hospital in January after planned abdominal surgery.

The Mirror says the hospital in the palace and launched a probe into the allegations and did a statement to CNN. The U.K.'s Information Commissioner's Office said, we can confirm that we've received a breach report and are assessing the information provided. On Wednesday, the U.K.'s Health Minister Maria Caulfield warned that hospital staff could face prosecution.

MARIA CAULFIELD, U.K. MINISTER FOR MENTAL HEALTH AND WOMEN'S HEALTH STRATEGY: -- allowed to access the patient notes you're caring for with their permission, and there's really strict rules. The Information Commissioner would take enforcement action against trusts or primary care practices. But also as individual practitioners, your regulatory body, so for me, it would be the NMC, would take action as well. So, it's pretty severe.

FOSTER (voice-over): It is another blow for the princess and the palace that's been protecting her privacy fiercely during her recovery. They've released minimal information which has sparked wild speculation about her true condition and whereabouts.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Wherever she is, I hope she is fine and well. I think that there are a lot more pressing things that people should be putting their attention towards. FOSTER (voice-over): On Tuesday, another U.K. newspaper "The Sun" published a video taken by a member of the public showing a smiling Kate walking from a farm shop alongside her husband, Prince William. Kensington Palace has referred all questions over the hospital breach to The London Clinic. In a statement, the CEO of the hospital, Al Russell said, in the case of any breach, all appropriate investigatory, regulatory and disciplinary steps will be taken. There's no place at our hospital for those who intentionally breach the trust of any of our patients or colleagues.


FOSTER (on camera): So the hospital is investigating, so is the information watchdog, and the government wants answers. The Princess of Wales will simply want to know whether or not the reason she went into hospital, the underlying illness will remain secret as she wished. Anderson?