Return to Transcripts main page

Anderson Cooper 360 Degrees

Federal Judge Strikes Down President Trump's Executive Order Targeting Prominent Washington D.C. Law Firm Perkins Coie; No Support From Viewers Like Him; Trump Admin. Considering Labeling Some Suspected Cartel And Gang Members As "Enemy Combatants"; Inside The Sinaloa Cartel & The Mexican Military's Battle To Defeat Them; "The Wired Rainforest" Airs Sunday At 8PM ET/PT; Prince Harry Wants "Reconciliation" With Royal Family But Says King "Won't Speak To Me"; "Laugh-In" Legend Ruth Buzzi Dead At 88. Aired 8-9p ET

Aired May 02, 2025 - 20:00   ET

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

ERIN BURNETT, CNN HOST: Harvard President Alan Garber telling "The Wall Street Journal" that if Trump follows through on his threats, it would send a dire message to colleges and universities across the country. Trump posted on Truth Social today, "It's what they deserve" when issuing his threat. "It's all part of an extraordinary war over free speech, political ideology and federal funding for the Ivy League school." Harvard insists it will not give in to Trump's demands.

Thanks so much for joining us, AC360 starts now.

[20:00:24]

ANDERSON COOPER, CNN HOST, "ANDERSON COOPER: 360": Tonight on 360, breaking news. After weeks of the President threatening and intimidating big law firms after bowing down and giving him hundreds of millions of dollars in free services, one federal judge for the first time has stood up and said enough.

Also tonight, the President tries to starve public broadcasting of money. Why and how he's doing it, and legendary documentary filmmaker, Ken Burns joins me to talk about what's at stake.

And later, what happens when remote communities in the Amazon rainforest get satellite internet for the first time? A remarkable story from our Nick Paton Walsh and what it tells us about the internet's impact on you and me and our kids as well.

Good evening. Thanks for joining us. We begin tonight with breaking news, in the Presidents campaign of intimidation and retribution against big law firms, which has been remarkably successful. He has extracted deals where they promise to give him tens of millions of dollars of free legal work.

Tonight's news concerns one big firm which has refused to make a deal, Perkins Coie, which represented Hillary Clinton's campaign in 2016 and which the President targeted with an executive order. A federal district judge has just struck that order down.

Judge Beryl Howell, writing: No American President has ever before issued executive orders like the one at issue in this lawsuit targeting a prominent law firm with adverse actions to be executed by all Executive Branch agencies, but in purpose and effect. This action draws from a playbook as old as Shakespeare, who penned the phrase -- the first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers."

CNN's Evan Perez has been going through the ruling joins us now. So, the judge gave a sharp rebuke of the Trump administration. What else did she say?

EVAN PEREZ, CNN SENIOR JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: That's right, Anderson, this is a sharp rebuke because it totally cancels the Executive Order. This is the first order from a judge that says the entire order is unconstitutional and is blocking it in a final order.

And one of the things she does is she points out that quote again from Shakespeare's "Henry VI," and she says, in a cringeworthy twist on the theatrical phrase, "Let's kill all the lawyers." She says that this executive order takes the approach of let's kill the lawyers I don't like. Sending the clear message that lawyers must stick to the party line or else.

And Anderson, she goes on to point out that one of the key parts of this is the fact that it essentially makes it impossible for defendants, companies, or people to choose a lawyer of their own -- of their choice, essentially because you now have to pick a lawyer that the President likes in order to defend yourself in federal court and she says it's a clear violation of the of people's constitutional rights.

And she also points out, Anderson, that President Trump made clear his intentions. You know, normally in cases like this, you have to try to figure out what was the President thinking, what was the intent of the President? In this case, he made it plainly clear in the preamble to all of these executive orders. He makes clear that he's doing it because he doesn't like who these law firms were representing, that they oppose him. And he also points out that he doesn't like their diversity practices -- their hiring practices.

COOPER: The whole thing is designed to intimidate them and prevent people who may get fired by this administration or want to sue this administration from actually being able to hire lawyers in Washington, D.C. with experience.

Evan, stick around, I want to bring in former federal prosecutor and best-selling author Jeffrey Toobin. Jeff, we've been covering this now for a long time. Judge Howell also wrote that what the President is trying to do is contrary to the constitution, which requires that the government respond to dissenting or unpopular speech or ideas with tolerance, not coercion. So, does this ruling -- does it apply -- Is it just about the executive order regarding this firm, or does it apply to all the other firms as well?

JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN CHIEF LEGAL ANALYST: It just applies to Perkins Coie. But it's important to remember that three other judges have also issued preliminary rulings. Not a more final ruling like this one also rejecting what the Trump administration has tried to do regarding three other lawyers -- three other law firms.

So, the scorecard at this point is four judges finding these orders against law firms unconstitutional and zero judges supporting what Trump has tried to do. Now, these cases are all going to start to move through the appellate process. Perhaps they'll go to the Supreme Court. But it is just worth noting that judges across the political spectrum in different cases involving different law firms, have all said what Trump is trying to do in these completely unprecedented coercive orders against law firms is unconstitutional.

[20:05:10]

COOPER: And just so -- does this render toothless any similar threats the President might be making -- might decide to make to other law firms as well?

TOOBIN: No, it doesn't, I mean, he is going to -- he is free to keep trying because Judge Howell's opinion only applies to Perkins Coie. Now it becomes a precedent that other judges can look to, but it's not binding on those other judges. But --

COOPER: And Jeff, why do you think this is so important? Well, I mean, it's not just about -- why to you is this so important? Because it's not just about defending high powered law firms. I mean, they're wealthy, they can take care of themselves. But what is at stake here?

TOOBIN: What's at stake, is whether lawyers work for their clients or they work for the government.

I mean, the idea that the President can decide that a lawyer or a law firm has represented someone that he doesn't like, and thus can sanction those lawyers. And remember, think about the sanctions here. I mean, what Trump has tried to do to Perkins Coie is say they can't enter federal buildings. Their clients are exposed to sanctions simply because they hire Perkins Coie.

These are incredibly coercive sanctions that are meant to be applied to the law firms. And the only reason is because Trump doesn't like their clients. It's not that they violated any law.

And you know, that puts in peril the idea that all individuals, all companies have the right to pick the lawyers of their choice. That's what's at stake here.

COOPER: Evan, has the government said they're going to appeal this? They haven't said they will.

PEREZ: Oh yes, exactly. They haven't said yet, Anderson. But yes, I mean, they -- every one of these things, they've decided that they want to try to go all the way to the Supreme Court and look. And I think what, what Jeffrey's pointing out is extremely important here because this set of orders has been extremely successful, you know, for the President, as you pointed out, a number of other firms, because of this, has had a chilling effect. And you've had a number of firms who've gone straight to the White House and tried to make deals.

COOPER: I think it's like hundreds of millions of dollars at this point. I forgot the actual total.

PEREZ: Over a billion dollars. Over a billion dollars is what the White House has said they have been able to get. What they say is free legal services, pro bono legal services, essentially for things that whatever the Trump wants, right, with the firm's agreement.

And so, that's part of this. And it's also spilled over into other things, right. They -- not only law firms, but obviously they've gone after universities with Harvard. And so, other universities have been afraid to stand up to the President because of this example.

And so, if you can go after these firms, the question is what else can you go after? And so, that's part of why this is such an extraordinary and important ruling from Judge Howell.

COOPER: Yes, Evan Perez, thanks very much, Jeff Toobin as well. Next, legendary filmmaker Ken Burns on the President's effort to choke off funds for public broadcasting.

Also, CNN takes you inside the Mexican government's fight against drug cartels. What it looks like on the ground with soldiers up close.

We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[20:12:50]

COOPER: Keeping them honest tonight, two stories that in many ways are different facets of the same thing, namely the President of the United States taking action against institutions which have been part of the American landscape of public and private for generations.

Tonight, that means public broadcasting. And once again, Harvard University, which has been around longer than the country has. Today, the President posted this on his social network: "We are going to be taking away Harvard's tax exempt status," adding "It's what they deserve."

There's that coming two weeks after the administration froze more than $2 billion in federal money to the university. And last night he signed an executive order aimed at the corporation for public broadcasting, which is the private nonprofit organization set up by Congress to fund public television and radio.

It comes a bit more than a month after Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene chaired a subcommittee hearing on the subject and largely echoes her complaints then.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. MARJORIE TAYLOR GREENE (R-GA): For far too long, federal taxpayers have been forced to fund biased news. This needs to come to an end and it needs to come to an end now.

(END VIDEO CLIP) COOPER: The President's executive order directs the corporation for public broadcasting, in part to cease direct funding to NPR and PBS, consistent with my administration's policy to ensure that federal funding does not support biased and partisan news coverage.

Now, the order goes on to demand that all funding be cut as well, that local public stations not be permitted to use any funding from the corporation for public broadcasting to pay for PBS and NPR programming.

Now, a perfectly good case can be made, which conservatives have for decades, that taxpayers should not be funding public broadcasting or wealthy private universities, and that government should not be involved with either. But that's not what this President is doing. His words and actions make it clear he's leaning on Harvard and other schools because he wants them to follow his guidelines and implement his policies.

And he seems to be taking aim at public broadcasting, as his executive order suggests, because of what it puts on the air. Programming, which you really don't get anywhere else. Targeting PBS and NPR certainly fits into the kind of wider culture war he's said many times, he's fighting.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP (R) PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: The menacing specter of left wing repression, has been growing steadily for years and years, it's been growing and we were stopping it very powerfully for four years, and now it's picked up at a level that nobody's ever seen before.

First, they slandered Americans of faith as haters and bigots. Then they corrupted the media.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

[20:15:17]

COOPER: Now, just from that, it's not hard to figure out the President's motives toward public broadcasting. But it's not just that he's repeatedly taken action to control or constrain institutions with which he or his followers disagree, especially cultural institutions. He has, as you know, purged the Kennedy Center board, installed his own board members, and he's now the chairman. He's overseeing a purge of the Smithsonian Institution, aimed to erase parts of American history.

DOGE has stopped all funding to the National Endowment for the Humanities, which funds museums and historical and cultural projects and sites, gave funding to Ken Burns his incredibly documentary series the civil war more than 30 years ago. And we're going to talk to Ken Burns in just a moment.

These efforts by the administration have the potential to limit our understanding about our country and ourselves, the good and the bad, the beautiful and the shameful.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It was never discussed. Nobody told us anything about what had happened in our own town. I remember there sort of being whispers, talking about a race riot.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It wasn't talked about. It was deliberately covered up. We still have to contend with 120 years of silence and fear.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: That's an episode of "The American Experience," a remarkable series on PBS. This one about the 1897 massacre of Black people in Wilmington, North Carolina that, as you hear, was not in history books for a long time. And its attack on diversity efforts, inclusion efforts, this administration has made clear they are just fine with covering up the pain in our collective past.

In an executive order titled "Restoring Truth and Sanity to American History," President Trump railed against anything that doesn't and I quote, "... remind Americans of our extraordinary heritage, consistent progress toward becoming a more perfect union and unmatched record of advancing liberty, prosperity, and human flourishing."

Now, I've said it before, but it's worth repeating. Whitewashing history that doesn't make us stronger, it doesn't make us better or great. It takes strength to acknowledge our past, our mistakes, and learn from those mistakes. And yes, of course, there's plenty of programming on public television the President might not like. The award winning documentary series "Frontline," for instance.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: They put their faith in Donald Trump and he deceived them.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I don't think by any large stretch can you characterize it as bipartisan?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The Select Committee laid the path down for the Department of Justice.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Donald Trump is going to be the defendant and the candidate. It's hard to imagine how it's going to play out.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Now on "Frontline," democracy on trial.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: That was from last year. Then again, earlier this year, frontline ran an hour titled "Trump's Comeback." And throughout its long history, done important investigative reporting on all sorts of subjects, many of them having nothing to do with politics.

But even within the political realm, there's plenty of programming on conservative viewpoints and conservative heroes.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Mr. Buckley, I've noticed that whenever you appear on television, you're always seated. Does this mean you can't think on your feet?

WILLIAM F. BUCKLEY, AMERICAN CONSERVATIVE WRITER, PUBLIC INTELLECTUAL, POLITICAL COMMENTATOR AND NOVELIST: It's very hard to stand up carrying the weight of what I know.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: That's from a profile in "American Masters," a biography series. That one was about William F. Buckley. By the way, the show he created, "Firing Line," that still airs on PBS stations, and so does "Mister Rogers," which underscores another aspect of the fight over public media. This is not the first time an administration has targeted public television.

In fact, not the first time the Trump administration has. The first Trump administration tried to zero out funding for it. Congress said no. It survived, in part because public broadcasting throughout those decades has been able to convince lawmakers of all stripes that Americans would be missing something without it. And that's true.

I want to play you a clip from 1969. President Richard Nixon had just proposed deep cuts to the corporation for public broadcasting, just like now. And here's a very young Fred Rogers, Mister Rogers, testifying before a Senate Committee hearing about that funding, $20 million at the time was the funding or about $180 million now. He's talking to Senator John Pastore of Rhode Island.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

FRED ROGERS, AMERICAN TELEVISION HOST, AUTHOR, PRODUCER, AND PRESBYTERIAN MINISTER: This is what I give. I give an expression of care every day to each child to help him realize that he is unique.

I end the program by saying, you've made this day a special day by just your being you. There's no person in the whole world like you, and I like you just the way you are.

SEN. JOHN PASTORE (D-RI): Do you narrate it?

ROGERS: I'm the host. Yes, and I do all the puppets and I write all the music and I write all the scripts.

PASTORE: Well, I'm supposed to be a pretty tough guy, and this is the first time I've had goosebumps for the last two days.

ROGERS: Well, I'm grateful not only for your goosebumps, but for your interest in our kind of communication. Could I tell you the words of one of the songs, which I feel is very important?

PASTORE: Yes. ROGERS: This has to do with that good feeling of control, which I feel that that children need to know is there. And it starts out, what do you do with the mad that you feel? And that first line came straight from a child. I work with children doing puppets in very personal communication with small groups.

[20:20:30]

What do you do with the mad that you feel? When you feel so mad you could bite, when the whole wide world seems oh so wrong and nothing you do seems very right. What do you do? Do you punch a bag? Do you pound some clay or some dough? Do you round up friends for a game of tag or see how fast you go? It's great to be able to stop when you've planned a thing that's wrong, and be able to do something else instead and think this song.

I can stop when I want to, can stop when I wish can stop, stop, stop any time. And what a good feeling to feel like this and know that the feeling is really mine. Know that there's something deep inside that helps us become what we can for a girl can be someday a lady and a boy can be someday a man.

PASTORE: I think it's wonderful. I think it's wonderful. Looks like you just earned the $20 million.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: Fred Rogers, 1969 and boy, could we use some of his wisdom now. Before I bring in our guest, I should mention out of transparency, I have a PBS connection. Sesame Street once gave me a big break.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: This is Anderson Cooper, in for Oscar the Grouch, who's on assignment at the dump. I'm here with two legendary grouch newscasters. Dan Rather-not, and Walter Cranky to discuss today's "Letter in the News." The letter "G" say hello, Da. Rather-not.

DAN RATHER-NOT, SESAME STREET, GROUCH BROADCASTER: I'd rather not.

COOPER: Walter?

WALTER CRANKY, SESAME STREET, GROUCH BROADCASTER: Grrrr.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: Just for the record, I was not paid for that appearance, I volunteered.

Joining us now is PBS CEO, Paula Kerger and Emmy award winning filmmaker Ken Burns, whose many documentaries including "The Civil War", "Baseball", "PROHIBITION," have aired on PBS over the years. He's working on a new project, "The American Revolution," which will premiere on PBS in November. Ken, what do you say to people who don't believe taxpayer dollars should be spent to fund media or the arts at all? There's plenty of documentaries on Netflix, for instance. What's the value of public broadcasting?

KEN BURNS, AMERICAN FILMMAKER: Well, I think it's important that we do things together as a country. The enrichment that PBS has brought to my life, to our collective lives is just undisputable.

I think PBS is part of the pursuit of happiness machine. They're part of what makes the country what it is. Like the National Parks. We called -- we subtitled our series on the National Parks, America's best idea. This is this is the Declaration of Independence applied to broadcasting.

I couldn't have made, Anderson, any of the films I've made, nearly 40 films over the course of the last 45 years, any other place, but PBS. And it's not because I couldn't go raise the money to do it elsewhere. I could, with the kind of reputation that I've developed. It's just that they wouldn't give me the time to be able to explore these subjects.

The footage you're showing now on "The American Revolution," we spent more than nine years working on it. By the time we broadcast it will be one month short of ten years.

You don't get that kind of space anywhere else, but public broadcasting. And it's just one of our crown jewels, like higher education that you mentioned at the beginning, like our National Parks. This is this is who we are. It puts the us in the U.S.

COOPER: Paula, help put this in perspective. What would a loss of federal funding mean for your organization in NPR, what would the impact of these cuts be for shows like "Sesame Street" or "Daniel Tiger's Neighborhood?"

PAULA KERGER, PBS CEO: Well, it would impact the shows, but what it particularly will impact is many of our stations that serve this country. We have 330 stations across the United States. Many of them are in very small communities.

The whole idea when Lyndon Johnson signed the Public Broadcasting Act is he wanted to make sure that there would be public broadcasting in communities accessible to people, no matter what the size of those communities where, wherever you live, what your economic means, you should have access to really great content.

And so, for a number of our stations, Ken and I have crisscrossed the country often on behalf of PBS. We visit so many of our stations, and we see on the ground the great work we do. We talk to the people in the communities who benefit from those stations. Those stations will not stay on the air. We get about 15 percent of our funding from the public government -- from the public funding from the government. That's 15 percent, that's an aggregate number.

For some of our stations, particularly in small communities. Ken and I have both been to Granite Falls, Minnesota. I think the federal appropriation for that station is closer to 40 percent. It is hard to imagine how those stations will exist without the support of the federal government.

[20:25:26]

COOPER: Ken, I mentioned this executive order Restoring Truth and Sanity to American History. And in it, it says that, the President basically is attacking anything he doesn't, "remind Americans of our extraordinary heritage, consistent progress toward becoming a more perfect union and unmatched record of advancing liberty, prosperity, and human flourishing" all of which are true things that have occurred in this country. What value, I mean -- is there to you, what is the value at looking at painful parts of our past, of acknowledging, you know, race riots or racism or what is the value of learning our past?

BURNS: You mentioned "Baseball" as one of the films I've done, Anderson. We try to be umpires calling balls and strikes. That's the true story of the game. That's the true story of the history of the United States. If you make it only one thing, you fail to present a clear picture of where we've been, where we are, and more importantly, where we may be going. We want to have and I think PBS supports this citizens and not subjects.

This revolution is the story of something new under the sun. The Bible said there's nothing new under the sun, something new under the sun came about in 1776, and that was the creation of the United States. And for the first time, people were citizens, not subjects. They were able to explore questions of individual liberty. Our founders thought that by being virtuous, we would earn the right of citizenship, which was the highest office in a way, in the land. And that virtue comes from lifelong learning. And that's what they called the pursuit of happiness.

And I think that's what's so important about PBS. My "Civil War" series got more than 50 percent of its funding from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and the National Endowment for the Humanities. I could not have made it without still the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and other groups are a significant part of the funding of this most recent project on "The American Revolution."

I just don't know where to go. I'll figure it out because I've been around for a while. What I'm really worried about are the new filmmakers coming up. Where are they going to get it? Just as Paula has to be concerned about all of the stations there, many of them in rural communities that really depend not just on our children's programming, not just on the extraordinary prime time, but on continuing education. You know, classrooms of the air, crop reports, weather, homeland security things, these are places.

And somehow when you go up to Capitol Hill and you're being accused of being, you know, serving only Beacon Hill and Nob Hill and the upper west side, you sort of think -- I think PBS is less significant in those places than it is in all the other places of the United States. And as you pointed out, William F. Buckley had a show on PBS for 33 years. COOPER: Yes.

BURNS: You know, if you sit around going, "Aha, got you," then you've made a huge mistake of what our responsibility is as citizens, which is to listen to all of our stories.

COOPER: Ken Burns, Paula Kerger, thank you very much. We're going to continue to follow this.

Just ahead, what happens when Amazon villagers get or villagers living in the Amazon get internet access for the first time?

Also next, what the drug fight in Mexico looks like from the military's point of view and one cartel.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: According to the Trump administration, you are a terrorist and even the cartels have been labeled a foreign terrorist organization. What do you make of that?

(UNIDENTIFIED MALE speaking in foreign language.)

TRANSLATION: Well, the situation is ugly. But we have to eat.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[20:33:49]

COOPER: We've learned of another potential major change by the second Trump administration. According to multiple people with knowledge of the deliberations, the administration is considering labeling some suspected cartel and gang members inside or outside the U.S. as enemy combatants.

The label was used after 9/11 to keep several suspected terrorists detained at the U.S. naval base at Guantanamo Bay without charges or a trial. Meanwhile, President Trump has put pressure on Mexico's president to go after the cartels on her own turf.

CNN's Isobel Yeung is in Mexico with an up-close look at how that effort is going. We want to warn you of some of the video is graphic.

(BEGIN VIDEO TAPE)

ISOBEL YEUNG, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): We're with the Mexican military in the state of Sinaloa, the heartland of the infamous Sinaloa cartel. Soldiers find and burn acres of marijuana and poppies that would otherwise be turned into heroin.

YEUNG: They're just looking for a place to land now, which isn't easy given that it's just hills and trees everywhere.

YEUNG (voice-over): But it's synthetic drugs like fentanyl and meth that are produced by the cartels in enormous quantities, generate huge profits and are responsible for most overdose deaths in the U.S. They're often made in remote rural areas.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE (through translation): OK, look over here. This is an area with the chemical products. Everything here will be destroyed.

[20:35:08]

YEUNG: This is pretty tough work. I mean, they're wearing full on hazmat suits. They have to wear masks because these drugs obviously and the chemicals are very, very potent. But they're just trying to make sure that the cartels don't come back and finish making the drugs here.

YEUNG (voice-over): Over a six-month period, thousands of suspected cartel members have been arrested across Mexico, and more than 140 tons of drugs have been seized. But the reality is more than 1,200 people have also been killed in Sinaloa in the past year. Hundreds more have disappeared, fueled by a vengeful war between two rival factions of the Sinaloa cartel.

In downtown Culiacan, the capital of Sinaloa, the military's narrative that they are fully in control begins to unravel.

YEUNG: Very stark reminders here of people who are missing, who have been disappeared as part of this cartel war between the two factions that's playing out right now. All very recent cases. This was last week. Twenty-three-year-old went missing.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Those, you cannot say if they are real.

YEUNG: What do you mean?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Those wires are old.

YEUNG: No, this is the -- post the date here. This is the 22nd of March they went missing, right?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE (through translation): Yes, but this is a copy. Who put this? We don't know.

YEUNG (voice-over): As we're talking, a soldier blocks our camera.

YEUNG: You mean it's not verified? Yes. Presumably people aren't just putting up posters for the fun of it. They're putting them up because they're missing family members, right?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We don't know.

YEUNG: What's up? You don't want us filming it?

YEUNG (voice-over): The military steer us off and invite us to film something else. But we call the number on the poster of the missing woman. Her name is Vivian Aispuro. Her family tell us she disappeared 17 days ago. We promised to follow up on her story.

But who are the men running this criminal network, wreaking havoc on people living here? We part ways with the military.

YEUNG: So we've just entered an area of the city that is still very dangerous. After weeks of trying, our contact here on the ground has managed to secure a meeting with a member of the cartel who's involved apparently in the production of drugs. And so we're meeting him now in somewhere around here in an undisclosed location.

(through translation): How are you?

YEUNG (voice-over): This man is talking to us on the condition we hide his identity and location.

YEUNG: Can I pull up a chair?

YEUNG (voice-over): He says he produces fentanyl for the Sinaloa cartel.

YEUNG: How safe or dangerous is this area to be in?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE (through translation): Right now, all areas are dangerous.

YEUNG: The Mexican military are making a big effort to crack down on the drug production here. How are you responding to that and how does that impact your work?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE (through translation): They're doing a good job. There are more of them now, so we have to find a way to keep doing this, to keep working. Of course, on a smaller scale, not the same as before. But it continues.

YEUNG: I mean, according to the Trump administration, you are a terrorist. I mean, the cartels have been labeled a foreign terrorist organization. What do you make of that?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE (through translation): Well, the situation is ugly. But we have to eat.

YEUNG: What's your message to Donald Trump if he's watching this?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE (through translation): My respect. According to him, he's looking out for his people, but the problem is the consumers are in the United States. If there weren't any consumers, we would stop.

YEUNG: There is a lot of violence playing out on these streets here at the moment every day, right? I mean, people are dying on a daily basis. Children are afraid to go to school. Do you have any sense of remorse over your role and your involvement in this group?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE (through translation): Of course. Of course. Things are sad, but -- well, things are sad.

YEUNG (voice-over): His phone is pinging. Someone is nearby. He tells us we need to leave for our own safety.

But it's because of the action of cartel members like these that civilians too are caught up in the violence. Vivian Aispuro, the missing woman from the poster we saw two days ago was one of them. Her body has just been found.

YEUNG: I'm so sorry for your loss, I really am. Are you able to tell me a little bit about your sister?

[20:40:02]

ALMA AISPURO, SISTER OF VICTIM (through translation): She was very loved. She really likes cats, Harry Styles, Lady Gaga. We wanted to go to her concert together. Not anymore.

YEUNG (voice-over): Vivian sister believes she wasn't directly involved with the cartels. But the conflict here has broken all norms, she says, and violence has come for everyone, including women and children.

YEUNG: I mean, the authorities are saying that they're going after the bad guys, they're making a lot of arrests, they're going after the drugs, they're going after the weapons. Do you feel like they're not doing enough?

AISPURO (through translation): No, they're not doing enough. Culiacan has become a place where it's impossible to live.

YEUNG: Thank you for talking with us. I mean, you're being so strong, she'd be so proud of you.

AISPURO (through translation): Thank you very much, really.

YEUNG: Thank you.

AISPURO (through translation): Thank you for telling my sister's story.

YEUNG (voice-over): For Vivian's family, the authorities' efforts amount to nothing more than anguish.

Isobel Yeung, CNN, Sinaloa, Mexico.

(END VIDEO TAPE)

COOPER: Still ahead, Britain's Prince Harry sits down with the BBC for a new interview, which is making headlines right now. This comes after he lost a court case over the security for him, his wife, Meghan, and their two children. What he says now about why his father, King Charles, is not speaking to him, that's coming up.

And next, this.

(BEGIN VIDEO TAPE)

NICK PATON WALSH, CNN CHIEF INTERNATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): It is night when the village really joins the new online world, increasingly one where they are together alone.

(END VIDEOCLIP)

COOPER: What happens when satellite internet comes to a remote Amazon community? Nick Paton Walsh joins us with that story when we come back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[20:46:26]

COOPER: It's hard to imagine a world without the internet, but there are communities of people living deep in the Amazon rainforest who have been living largely untouched by the digital revolution until now. CNN's Nick Paton Walsh has a remarkable look at what happens when remote communities and the kids who live in them get linked up to the internet for the first time. Take a look.

(BEGIN VIDEO TAPE)

PATON WALSH (voice-over): It is night when the village really joins the new online world, increasingly one where they are together alone.

Kids use their parents' cell phones, and oddly, adults explain how to use them, a new rite of passage so distant from being taught fishing.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (Speaking in Foreign Language). We mostly use WhatsApp. To talk with relatives, for communication for emergencies, those things.

PATON WALSH (voice-over): Adults even after a year here are aware that damaged these machines can do to them but especially to children.

(END VIDEO TAPE)

COOPER: This is for an hour-long episode of The Whole Story which airs this Sunday at 8:00 p.m. Nick joins me now.

In the place where you saw Starlink getting installed for the first time in that village it had been there for a year, for the people there, you compare to going from a horse-drawn carriage to a high- speed Tesla in minutes, what was the reaction to this explosion of information?

PATON WALSH (on-camera): I mean, it's fair to say these villages had some kind of knowledge or even at times fleeting experience of the internet where they've gone to the city. But this is probably for you and me a bit like rental video versus Netflix. It's a sea change in the availability and the volume of their access to information, and it is staggering.

You can feel the calm, the silence. I mean, one of the villages we saw the internet installed in the first time, we didn't even know if anybody was there when we first arrived. It was that isolated, that calm. And within literally minutes, as soon as this goes up on the roof and the power is installed, you see the impact of this information, of people flooding around one device, looking at a sort of TikTok-like app called Kwai that's very popular in Brazil with CGI people on there, manipulated in some way.

A staggering volume of really kind of benign at times videos, but the immediate change on the lifestyle was palpable there. People huddled around one phone. We got back a week later, and it had just accentuated more time, more people, and an acute awareness already of the damage it was doing, Anderson.

COOPER: Was there any resistance to bringing the internet to the remote village?

PATON WALSH (on-camera): Yes, I think it's really -- it's a complex choice for them because they know they need it at times for access to better health care information, to even inform the authorities when they see poaching, illegal mining, logging that impedes upon the land in which they live, and they need to survive.

Frankly, we and the rest of the world need to survive as well. But they're also aware that it is ultimately changing how they live. Yes, one even warned us of the physical damage of people hunched over phones. It's, as I said, benign at times, what they're seeing.

But what was most fascinating to me, and I think some of this experience was actually teaching us more about ourselves in the very online world in which we live.

[20:50:04]

These communities, after a matter of weeks, sometimes months, realized they needed rules. They needed to protect children from the worst things online, and they needed to switch off. They needed to turn these dishes off at 9:00 in the morning until the evening to provide a space for normal life to exist.

And to me, you know, that may seem obvious, now I say it, but in our normal urban environments here in the Western world, an alien concept.

COOPER: Yes. Nick Paton Walsh, thanks so much. It's a fascinating hour. Don't miss Nick's report, "The Wired Rainforest", in a new episode of The Whole Story, this Sunday, 8:00 p.m. Eastern and Pacific, right here on CNN.

Up next, a surprising emission from Prince Harry in a new interview with the BBC as he loses a U.K. court case about funding for security. Listen to what he said about his father, King Charles, who's battling cancer.

(BEGIN VIDEOCLIP)

PRINCE HARRY, DUKE OF SUSSEX: He won't speak to me because of this security stuff, but it would be nice to reconcile.

(END VIDEOCLIP)

COOPER: What else is he saying about the king and his family, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK) [20:55:44]

COOPER: There's a new interview with Prince Harry. The Duke of Sussex talked with the BBC after losing a years-long court battle aimed at restoring his publicly funded security in the U.K. The protection was stripped when he and his wife Meghan stepped down from their official roles and left the country in 2020.

Today, Prince Harry opened up about his fractured relationship with his father, King Charles, who's battling an undisclosed form of cancer.

More now from CNN Royal Correspondent Max Foster.

(BEGIN VIDEO TAPE)

PRINCE HARRY: I would love reconciliation with my family.

MAX FOSTER, CNN ROYAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Prince Harry revealing he no longer speaks to his father, King Charles, in an explosive BBC interview.

PRINCE HARRY: You know, there's no point in continuing to fight anymore. As I said, life is precious. I don't know how much longer my father has. He won't speak to me because of this security stuff. But it would be nice to reconcile.

FOSTER (voice-over): The Duke of Sussex spoke to the BBC after losing a court case over his security arrangements when he and his family visit the United Kingdom. Harry saying Friday's ruling makes it impossible for his family to return to the U.K.

PRINCE HARRY: Obviously, pretty gutted about the decision. We thought it was going to go our way. I can't see a world in which I would be bringing my wife and children back to the U.K. at this point.

FOSTER (voice-over): The British government downgraded Prince Harry's security in 2020 after he and Meghan stepped down as working royals and moved to California, where they're raising their children, Prince Archie and Princess Lilibet.

PRINCE HARRY: When that decision happened, I couldn't believe it. The one thing that I could rely on is my family keeping me safe.

FOSTER (voice-over): A palace spokesperson issued a statement about the court's ruling, telling CNN issues raised by Harry in the interview were "examined repeatedly and meticulously by the courts, with the same conclusion reached on each occasion".

The Duke of Sussex also talked about the years-long rift with the royal family. He said the publication of his book, "Spare," in 2023 ripped open old wounds after he shared scathing and intimate details about his experience as a royal.

PRINCE HARRY: Of course, some members of my family will never forgive me for writing a book. Of course, they will never forgive me for lots of things.

FOSTER (voice-over): But losing this case, Harry said, is a sticking point.

PRINCE HARRY: The only thing that I've been asking for throughout this whole process is safety. I love my country. I always have done, despite what some people in that country have done.

FOSTER (voice-over): Max Foster, CNN, London.

(END VIDEO TAPE)

COOPER: I want to take a moment tonight to mention the death of someone I and perhaps many of you grew up watching. Her name is Ruth Buzzi, and we learned today she has died. If you watched TV in the late 60s, 70s, and 80s, chances are you remember her and maybe laughed with her.

She popped up on pretty much every show, it seemed like, when I was a kid. The Carol Burnett Show, Donny Marie, Tony Orlando and Dawn, The Tonight Show. Later, she was regular on Sesame Street.

Ruth Buzzi first made it big on Rowan and Martin's "Laugh-In", a goofy, borderline, hallucinogenic clown car of a sketch show. In its heyday, "Laugh-In" was not just wildly popular but also as subversive as broadcast television would allow at the time. No one, though, on it was as darkly funny as Ruth Buzzi. She became famous across America as Gladys, the spinster who'd had enough.

(BEGIN VIDEOCLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You want to see a moon? Got you.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Where's a got you.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Seen a moon?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Got you.

(END VIDEOCLIP)

COOPER: It was a different time. Buzzi died today at her Texas home after a battle against Alzheimer's disease. Her long career included movies like "Freaky Friday". She even starred in the original Broadway cast of "Sweet Charity". But it was Gladys who was her most enduring creation.

No one was safe from her handbag, not Dean Martin, not Frank Sinatra, not even Muhammad Ali.

(BEGIN VIDEOCLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It's all your fault. And if you want to make something of it, I want you to meet me out in the parking lot and we'll have it out man to man.

(END VIDEOCLIP)

COOPER: The 1970s. Ruth Buzzi had a big laugh, an even bigger smile, hardly a big ego, though. She once said, "I never took my work for granted nor assumed I deserved more of the credit or spotlight or more pay than anyone else. I was just thrilled to drive down the hill to NBC everyday as an employed actor with a job to do".

She did that job remarkably well. Ruth Buzzi was 88 years old.

That's it for us. The news continues. Hope you have a great weekend. The Source with Kaitlan Collins starts now. See you Monday.