Return to Transcripts main page
Anderson Cooper 360 Degrees
Jury Reaches Partial Verdict In Sean "Diddy" Combs Trial; RICO Charge Has A Maximum Sentence Of Life In Prison. Trump And Musk Clash Again On Social Media Over The "Big, Beautiful Bill"; Pres. Trump Visits "Alligator Alcatraz"; Families Of Murder Victims React To Suspect's Plea Deal; Study: USAID Funding Cuts Could Lead To More Than 14 Million Additional Deaths By 2030; Jimmy Swaggart Dead At 90. Aired 8-9p ET
Aired July 01, 2025 - 20:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
ED LAVANDERA, CNN SENIOR NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: So, it's not exactly clear when the general public will be able to use it, but that we do know that since last week, there have been more people who have received the invitation to sign up for the app and ride around in the robo-taxi. So, it seems like it's growing little by little, but it's not exactly clear when anybody, just anybody, can use it -- Brianna.
KEILAR, CNN HOST: All right, I guess they'll do a little more troubleshooting so that early ended rides don't stop in the middle of the road like that one did there. Ed Lavandera, thank you so much, live for us from Texas. Thank you so much for joining us. AC360 starts now.
[20:00:36]
ANDERSON COOPER, CNN HOST, "ANDERSON COOPER: 360": Tonight on 360, jurors agree on some but not all of the counts in the Sean Combs sex trafficking trial, what their partial verdict may say about what their final decision will be.
Also, with the Senate passing the President's Big Bill, the Trump-Elon Musk divide deepens. I'll talk with Kara Swisher about Musk's pledge to start a new political party and the President's latest threat against Musk.
Also, inside the President's newest migrant detention center, who will house and the opposition to it.
Good evening, thanks for joining us. It cannot be comfortable tonight ahead for Sean "Diddy" Combs or his accusers or the legal teams on either side of the federal racketeering and sex trafficking case against him. That's because late today, jurors told the judge they'd reached a verdict, but only a partial one.
They've reached agreement, they said, on two counts of sex trafficking by force, fraud or coercion. One involved his former girlfriend, Cassie Ventura, the other involved an alleged victim known only as Jane. They've also agreed on two counts of transportation to engage in prostitution, involving each woman. They're deadlocked, however, on the most serious federal racketeering or RICO charge. Now, if convicted on all charges, Combs could spend the rest of his life in prison. The charges cover conduct which even the defense admitted was problematic, but not, they argued, unlawful. As one of his attorneys put it in her opening statement, Sean Combs has a temper, and when he drank and took the wrong drugs, he got violent. She then added he's not charged with being a jerk or being mean.
Jurors got to see some of that conduct during the trial, most notably this video of him beating, kicking and dragging Cassie Ventura through a hotel hallway in the midst of one of their marathon sex and drug sessions, he called freak offs.
Now, the government put on 34 witnesses, including Ventura and the woman known as Jane. The defense called none. Jurors began deliberating just yesterday. The judge ordered them back tomorrow. CNN's Kara Scannell was in court today joins me now in Lower Manhattan. So what was it like inside the courtroom when the jury sent word of that partial verdict?
KARA SCANNELL, CNN CORRESPONDENT: It was just after 4:00 P.M. and the courtroom was empty. But for Combs' lead attorney, who just happened to walk back in, he sees the note being delivered. He gets his team, the prosecutors come back in, and then Combs is led into the courtroom by the marshals. He's standing surrounded by his lawyers. He has a look of concern, but confusion on his face. Then they all sit down and they are huddled around him in a tight circle.
His lawyers are talking animatedly. It's very unclear what's going on, but we know that something serious is happening. Then Agnifilo walks up to the courtroom deputy, gets a copy of the handwritten letter, brings it over to Combs, who is looking at it, and then we can even hear the weather from inside the courtroom. We hear thunder in the air. The judge takes the bench, and that's when he reads the note aloud, saying that the jury reached a partial verdict, but they could not reach a unanimous vote on count one.
And then he asked the parties what they wanted to do. Again, there was more consulting with Combs. Both the prosecution and Combs' lawyers wanted the jurors to continue to deliberate. The judge brought them back in, reminded them that they have this oath and obligation to deliberate, and those deliberations will begin again tomorrow morning.
COOPER: I should point out it is raining behind you. That's the crackling sound some people may hear. What happens next and how has Combs' demeanor changed over the course of the trial?
SCANNELL: So, what happens next is the jurors will be back tomorrow and they'll continue to deliberate. If for some reason they come back and then tell the judge they are at a deadlock, the judge could issue what's known as an Allen charge. That is a more forceful instruction to them to try to reach a verdict, to try to come to a conclusion.
If not, though, the judge has already said he could accept a partial verdict in this case, and one of the prosecutors signaled if that happened, they might retry Combs on that charge, or if it is not reached. Combs has been in the holding cell during the deliberations because he's not allowed to sit in the courtroom since he's in custody. So, when he comes out, he is looking at his family, his three adult sons, his three adult daughters were there today, along with his mother and his sister and then he confers with his attorneys. Throughout the trial he's been very hands on in talking to his attorneys about key moments during key cross-examinations. He's handing them Post-It notes. They always huddle with him and consult with him.
And today, when he was leaving the courtroom after the jury had left and he was -- he looked at his children. He kind of exchanged some whispers with them. His mother signaled for him to come over, and he walked over to her. They had a discussion of some kind. And then he said to her, "I'll be all right. Love you," and tapped his chest.
So, really trying to communicate some sense of confidence to them. But the serious nature of this in the room was unmistakable -- Anderson.
COOPER: Yes, Kara, thanks very much, appreciate it.
Joining me now is criminal defense attorney Arthur Aidala, CNN anchor and chief legal analyst, Laura Coates, who was at the courthouse today throughout the trial as well, CNN senior legal analyst Elie Honig and jury consultant Alan Tuerkheimer.
Laura, to you, what does this partial verdict signal?
[20:05:29]
LAURA COATES, CNN HOST AND CHIEF LEGAL ANALYST: It signals that this is a sleepless night for Sean "Diddy" Combs and the entire prosecution team as well. This was the most serious charge that they wanted to get him on, it carries potentially life in prison. But it also was the most complex. I mean, that verdict form not only required them to find guilt or innocence when it came to the RICO, they had to go through the kind of mini-trials of the so-called predicate crimes.
It included kidnapping, did we prove it or not? They had to check these boxes when it came to bribery, arson, witness tampering, it went down the line. And so, this prosecution team had to have a series of sort of mini trials to prove each of these. So, to have this be the one they're hung on and that there is overlapping charges for sex trafficking and prostitution. It doesn't bode well in terms of them being able to accomplish their ultimate mission of a complete conviction. But also, if you're the defense team, it says to me, I'm not quite sure what combination is possible.
Could it be a full acquittal on everything? Could it be you found me guilty on some charges, the least of them? Maybe prostitution and others you did not. It is really, really impactful.
COOPER: I mean, Elie, again, we don't know what they have decided on these other charges, but it would be hard to imagine a world where they found him not guilty on RICO and not guilty on everything else.
ELIE HONIG, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Right, so all the qualifiers first, right? Juries are unpredictable. They're humans, they're illogical at times. But let me tell you, the conversation that's being had right now in the prosecution room as they're trying to figure out what this could mean.
We know two things. We know there is a unanimous verdict on each of counts two through five. Guilty or not guilty, we don't know. But we know there's unanimity. We also know there's a split as to count one. That means at least one juror. It sounds like two because they use the plural in their note. At least two jurors say he's guilty on RICO, at least two jurors say he's not guilty.
COOPER: And that's the bigger charge, the more all-encompassing.
HONIG: That's number one, that's the bigger charge. That's the whole enterprise. That's the most important charge. How could it be that somebody says, yes, I think he's guilty of RICO. And two people, at least on the jury, think that, but not guilty of all the others. That's almost impossible.
On the flip side, it could well be that somebody says, well, I think he's not guilty of RICO, but I still think he's guilty of all the others because they failed to make the showings that Laura was talking about. So, if I'm the prosecution again, all the qualifiers, I feel pretty good right now. If I'm the defense, I'm kind of nervous.
COOPER: Arthur, you had -- Arthur, you've had a case, though, where you were the defense, where this happened essentially.
ARTHUR AIDALA, JURY CONSULTANT: Yes, two-and-a-half weeks ago in the Harvey Weinstein trial. The biggest difference was in the Harvey Weinstein trial, the judge asked them after their fifth day of deliberations. Have you reached a verdict on anything? Because the notes kept coming. This jury volunteered after only two days, literally like a day and-a-half. You know, we've reached a partial verdict. So that's a big difference there.
I think the prosecutors here were a little greedy. If I was the prosecutor in this case and there's these verdicts, and I'm feeling as confident as I think they have a right to feel, I would take it because, Anderson, it's a misnomer, there has not been a verdict in the Puffy Combs case. They could go home tonight and one of those jurors, five of those jurors, could change their mind.
There's no official verdict, they come in and be like, I slept on it. You know what? I'm changing my mind. And all of a sudden there's that victory and its ripped away and now it's a defeat.
COOPER: Laura.
COATES: Here's why I don't agree that it's impossible that he could be found not guilty of everything.
AIDALA: What is impossible?
COATES: No, I know, I know, I get the qualifiers, but listen, the RICO charge allows you to find someone guilty. If there is a pattern of racketeering activity, it could be kidnapping or arson or bribery. They could find that there was no sex trafficking, and yet they could say, well, you know what? I find sex trafficking to one of the victims, Jane or Cassie Ventura, but not the other and there's a pattern yet.
They could also think to themselves, because they don't find a pattern of these two crimes. I might think that the other ones, they haven't proven as well. I opened this up just to suggest that the complexity of a RICO charge that's normally for something like the mob. You know this quite well.
The idea that you would have this sort of thing opens up the possibility that jurors can get confused. They tried to streamline it. They tried to say, you only have to find one example of X, Y, or Z. At the end of the day, these jurors are learning this in real time, and they may not have made their case.
COOPER: I want to bring in Allen. Allen, how do these conversations normally play out in the deliberation room?
ALAN TUERKHEIMER, JURY CONSULTANT: With time, I think what's happening is -- this is the more complex charge. And look, it's not necessarily a discordant jury. They are 80 percent of the way there. It looks like at this point, four of the five counts. So, what's happening now is jurors try to come up with other arguments, other angles, other ways to persuade fellow jurors to come around to their point of view. And when that's not successful, there's usually one of two ways when the jury comes back and says, we're done here, we can't move anything forward.
That's when old arguments get recycled or rehashed, and it doesn't land or a juror says, you know what -- this is what I feel, nothing you guys say is going to change my mind. I'm sticking with it. That's when there's an impasse and were not there yet. It seemed like maybe they were heading in that direction, and maybe they still will. But there's still time to revisit different arguments and try to persuade others.
A lot of it depends on the alliances in the jury and the personalities and how strongly held some of these beliefs are about the RICO charges.
[20:10:48]
COOPER: So, Elie, if there is somebody who just says, look, this is it, and there's no agreement on the RICO charge, do they deliver the verdict on the others?
HONIG: So yes, if the jury ends up hanging on the RICO charge and one of two things is going to happen tomorrow, by the way. We're going to get a note at some point and the jury is either going to say -- okay, judge, we talked further and we've actually now reached unanimity on count one. So, we have verdicts on all five. Great. Come out and give the verdict.
The other option is the jury sends an even more exasperated note out, which happens. And they'll say -- we've tried, we're still stuck. The judge may give them one more instruction to try again, but eventually, and I think this will happen tomorrow, if they cannot reach agreement, the judge will say, fine, you are hung as to count one, and I'm going to take the partial verdict on the remaining.
AIDALA: But, Elie, there is a third option. They can just keep working. It's happened before. They could just spend the whole day and what we just heard there, going back, they're rehashing their arguments and seeing if they can make different points of view and see if they can reach a verdict.
Look, they feel the pressure. Jurors who are on a -- it's a two-month trial, May 5th this trial started, right? It will be July 3rd, on Thursday. They know the press, they know the families. The judge tells them, if you don't reach this verdict, there's going to be 12 other people who are going to have to do this.
So, they may go in there and continue to work. And what Laura said is right on. The RICO count was for organized crime, where the enterprise is only for the purpose of crime, criminality.
Here, Sean's companies were doing clothing and music and alcohol and then, yes, they were doing some crimes as well. So, it's not as easy as the other counts to reach a verdict.
COOPER: And Laurie, if the RICO charge is off but he's convicted on the others, what kind of time is he facing?
COATES: Well, they're all serious charges. You're talking about 15 years for sex trafficking. You're talking about ten years, possibly for prostitution. These could run consecutively as well because these are different incidents at different points in time. This is a lot of time for somebody over the age of 50 as well.
I should say, it might be counterintuitive to people. Why would the defense want them to keep going? Isn't the hung jury kind of like a win? Well, no, because we know double jeopardy normally attaches when the trial has started and you cannot try someone twice for the same crime. But if there's a hung jury, there's still the invitation to keep prosecuting this person.
They want finality here. But when you look at all the grand scheme of things, RICO is also difficult in this case because they did not call the alleged coconspirators to testify. And you can try someone on conspiracy with just one defendant, that's possible, but they have to be wondering if the prosecution team -- should they have tried to call more witnesses on that particular point? They were available to both. They said that, but it's the prosecution's job to prove guilt, not the defendants to prove innocence.
COOPER: Alan, how likely do you think it is that this looming, you know, 4th of July holiday is going to be motivating factor for the jury to reach an agreement on that remaining charge?
TUERKHEIMER: Well, certainly, this is an accomplished jury. They look at their careers and what they do for jobs. It's not like they have nothing better to do. So, there is going to be some pressure and what's going to happen is I think if we're here tomorrow talking about the same thing that it's going to play into the pressure to get it resolved. But right now, I still think they're focused on what they need to do to try to be unanimous on the RICO charge. But again, 24 hours from now, if they're still deadlocked, I'm not sure. I don't think that's going to happen.
But if they are, then it really is hard to be in a position where you're keeping somebody else from doing something. And so yes, with the July 4th weekend looming, the third being Thursday, it's on the radar, that's for sure.
COOPER: Yes, well, thanks to our panel, appreciate it. You can catch more of Laura tonight with her special "Laura Coates Live: Diddy on Trial" at 11:00 P.M. here on CNN.
Next for us -- Did the President get more than he bargained for with the Senate passage of his budget straining, poll challenged budget bill? We'll talk about that and the new back and forth between him and Elon Musk, with the President hinting at some dire consequences for Musk including deportation. Kara Swisher joins me ahead.
And later, the crime was horrific for university of Idaho students slaughtered. Now the alleged killer gets a plea deal. How victims' families and the community feel about that.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[20:19:15]
COOPER: President Trump got what he wanted today by the narrowest of margins. Vice-President Vance had to break a 50/50 tie. The Presidents so-called One Big Beautiful Bill Act passed the Senate. Every Democrat, three Republicans voted no, Thom Tillis, Susan Collins and Rand Paul.
The bill now goes to the House, where Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries says all legislative tools are on the table, those were his words when it comes to trying to stop the measure. But the bill, which extends the President's 2017 tax cuts but only partially pays for them with deep cuts to Medicaid, food stamps and other spending, also faces opposition from far right Republicans, who say it does not cut deeply enough. Even though the congressional budget office says it would cost nearly 12 million Americans their health coverage while adding $3.3 trillion to the national debt --that said, the President seems pleased.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP (R) PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: It's a great bill. There is something for everyone and I think it's going to go very nicely in the House. Actually, I think it will be easier in the house than it was in the Senate.
We really were very, very cognizant of three things, Social Security, were going to take care of it beautifully. Medicare and Medicaid, and we are going to save it.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
[20:20:22]
COOPER: Well, he added online -- to my GOP friends in the house, stay united, have fun and vote "yay." And yes, "yay' is misspelled.
Elon musk, on the other hand, is not happy. He's promised that those who voted yay, "will lose their primary next year if it's the last thing I do on this earth." He also says, he'll start an opposition political party if the bill passes. As for the President, he was asked about Musk today and had this to say.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REPORTER: Are you going to deport Elon Musk?
TRUMP: I don't know. I mean, we'll have to take a look. We might have to put DOGE on Elon, you know? You know what DOGE is? DOGE is the monster that might have to go back and eat Elon. Wouldn't that be terrible? He gets a lot of subsidies.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COOPER: Some perspective now from CNN contributor, Kara Swisher joins me. She's the host of the "On" podcast and co-host of the "Pivot" podcast with Scott Galloway. She's also the author of "Burn Book: A Tech Love Story." So, Kara, I mean, you see this renewed fight between President Trump and Elon musk over the spending bill. Did it surprise you that they are fighting again? Or that that Musk went down this road again?
KARA SWISHER, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: No, I told you that last time. I said he can't help it. He can't help himself. And when they when he apologized, I was like, this isn't going to hold. And because actually, Elon Musk, for all his negatives these days, can do math. And he is absolutely correct about the issues around this.
And so, I think he can't stand it that they're pretending, it's something that it isn't. And he has been very concerned about the deficit for a long time. And so, it sort of slaps everything in the face that he was there to do and sort of ruined his career for.
COOPER: When he says every member of Congress who campaigned on reducing government spending, then immediately voted for the biggest debt increase in history, should hang their head in shame. They'll lose their primary next year. If it's the last thing I do on this earth. Does he follow through on that? I mean, if you're a member of Congress, would you gamble that Elon Musk is so stable that he will follow through on something he said? Or would you gamble on the administration?
Well, it's tough picking Trump versus Elon. Trump always wins. And politically speaking, if you're against Trump, you obviously have a lot more trouble. That said, this is a man with a lot of money and means, and he learned something during the Presidential race. So, I wouldn't want someone putting an enormous amount of money against me, especially if you're backing someone who's a little more appealing. So, I think he will follow through on some of this stuff.
COOPER: I just want to play what the President said today about Musk outside of the White House.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REPORTER: Are you going to deport Elon Musk?
TRUMP: I don't know. I mean, we'll have to take a look. We might have to put DOGE on Elon, you know? You know what DOGE is? DOGE is the monster that might have to go back and eat Elon. Wouldn't that be terrible? He gets a lot of subsidies.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COOPER: I mean, do you think they're just trolling each other at this point? Do you think the President, you know, would go after the -- you know, the subsidies? I mean, he does a lot of business with the government. The government relies on, you know, a bunch of his base stuff.
SWISHER: Yes, a lot, billions and billions. Yes, I think, I mean, it hit the stock. Wall Street certainly believes it because the stock got hit today, both Tesla and you know, SpaceX is not public. But it's got to have hurt its value. Yes, sure, he can do damage to Elon. He used to threaten Jeff Bezos if you recall in the last administration all the time with space contracts and things like that.
But its critical to Elon's future for SpaceX to go public. And so, yes, I think he could follow through. The fact that he's doing it is horrible. The President shouldn't be able to do this, threaten individuals he doesn't like in this manner or else not do it quite so publicly. The eating part, I don't even begin to understand, it is just weird, honestly. It's like a breakup, it's weird.
COOPER: Yes, well, and they can't stop talking about each other. He's also promising to start a new political party. I mean, not just support candidates, but starting new political party again, I question the follow through.
SWISHER: I don't -- actually, you know, he's been interested in this for a long time and something he used to talk about when he was in his more sane mode was the idea that the two parties are really problematic. And, you know, there's been some interest in silicon valley to this. You know, a lot of them backed Andrew Yang. They're always looking for someone else or something else. I mean, it's not a perfect relationship between tech and the Republican Party and I don't expect it to last that long.
But it's also not a perfect relationship between the Democrats. But if there are Democrats that they can deal with more, they will. This is a group of people that doesn't have any loyalty to any party, and starting a new one actually appeals to their startup mentality. COOPER: There's this CNN reporting that a senior White House official brushed off Musk's criticism of President Trump's agenda bill, saying that there was the administration are not focused on it and, "no one really cares what he says anymore." And the President does seem to care because he certainly -- if you look at his overnight social media posts.
SWISHER: Yes, I think that's stupid. The world's richest man being angry at you, even if you say decided to sideline him or whatever, I think you never know what Musk is going to do. And I think anyone who said that is incredibly stupid.
[20:25:18]
COOPER: What is his relationship as far as you understand with the DOGE people? I mean, those people that he brought in, are they still, I know some of them have left. Are they, to your knowledge, are they still there?
SWISHER: No, some of them are there. I guess Big Balls is still there, but a lot of them are not. The key ones, Steve Davis and other people that were involved are gone. And so, the question is, the other people like David Sacks doing A.I. and crypto and things like that, how long do they stay? He had his own relationship with Trump, so, who knows.
But you know, I think a lot of them, the key people have all left. And so, the question is how powerful is DOGE? Is it already, you know, embedded in these agencies? There was already the digital service was already there. So, I assume it's just a slightly more, slightly stronger digital service there. But I think the secretaries have gotten control of the agencies again.
COOPER: You know, there are a lot of people have looked at like the Tesla vehicles and say, look, there's not a lot of innovation there in terms of what we've seen. They look kind of the same to what they've been over the last several years. When you look at other parts of Tesla, it seems like there are other things. I mean, there's the self- driving vehicles, the robots, are there things that you think have an exciting future?
SWISHER: No, I don't actually. I think he really needs to get back to making good cars. He may be not interested in them. I mean, they were definitely hangover from the Trump affiliation but the fact of the matter is, if Elon had great cars, they'd sell. He's still very popular as a car, but there's all kinds of innovation happening for many other car manufacturers, that's number one.
The second thing is their self-driving car. Waymo has been on the road with millions and millions of hours that that Tesla hasn't. So they're not in that business yet. They certainly could be and do it cheaper, that's for sure. But they don't have any record. They're just in Austin and it's a very controlled test. The robots good luck I'm sorry. You know, maybe in a hundred years, but not today. So I don't know, I think they've just got to make better cars, that's their business.
COOPER: Kara Swisher, thanks so much.
SWISHER: Thank you.
COOPER: More ahead tonight, including new part of the President's deportation push known as "Alligator Alcatraz." What Trump said when he toured it today and why critics say it has no place in this country.
Also, the plea deal in the murder of four young people and how it's being received in the Idaho community, still reeling from the crime.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[20:32:15]
COOPER: President Trump toured a newly built migrant detention center in the Florida Everglades today, nicknamed Alligator Alcatraz. It was a photo op on a day he was dealing with criticism back in Washington for Senate passage of his bill.
Now the trip to Florida enabled President Trump to try and shift focus away from that. He was flanked by his one-time presidential rival, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, and the Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem. The facility's creation, location, and cost has already caused controversy.
CNN's Randi Kaye has more.
(BEGIN VIDEO TAPE)
DONALD TRUMP (R), PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: It's an amazing job.
RANDI KAYE, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): President Donald Trump getting an up-close look at Florida's brand new migrant detention center, dubbed Alligator Alcatraz.
TRUMP: You don't always have land so beautiful and so secure. You have a lot of bodyguards and a lot of cops that are in the form of alligators. You don't have to pay them so much. But I wouldn't want to run through the Everglades for long.
KAYE (voice-over): Alligator Alcatraz sits right in the middle of the Florida Everglades, surrounded by a swamp which is home to alligators, pythons, and other wildlife. Officials don't think security will be an issue.
TRUMP: It might be as good as the real Alcatraz site.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes.
TRUMP: It could be. Well, that's a spooky one too, isn't it? That's a tough site. I'd like to say, you know, a little controversial, but I couldn't care less.
KAYE (voice-over): Located in both Miami-Dade and Collier County, the facility is on the same footprint as an airport that has been used for military training. It's expected to house at least 3,000 detainees in repurposed FEMA trailers and tents.
GOV. RON DESANTIS (R), FLORIDA: They come here, say they already or have been ordered to be deported. You drive them 2,000 feet to the runway, and then they're gone. It's a one-stop shop.
KAYE (voice-over): The state-run facility is expected to cost about $450 million for the first year of operation. Governor Ron DeSantis says the federal government will reimburse the state of Florida.
Protests have erupted outside the gates in response with environmentalists and immigration rights activists. Members of Florida's indigenous community also raising concern about the threat to their sacred lands.
ZAC COSNER, PROTESTER: This is an absurd affront to the people, the nature, the community of South Florida. This is a environmentally destructive and spiritually poisonous prison camp.
KAYE (voice-over): Environmental groups are suing the federal government and the DeSantis administration over potential impacts to the ecosystems and endangered species. Immigration rights groups call the plan cruel, noting detainees will be housed in makeshift facilities in the middle of hurricane season in Florida's sweltering summer heat.
Today's photo op, a reminder that the president's immigration policy is not just rhetoric.
TRUMP: I will say I ran on the issue of illegals, and we have to get them out.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: They're going to sleep there six times.
[20:35:00]
KAYE (voice-over): Trump and DeSantis appeared in lockstep as they walked the grounds despite their strained relationship coming off last year's presidential race. DeSantis and other state officials here have aggressively worked to help the Trump administration up the number of mass deportations.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: How would you describe the relationship and what future does Governor DeSantis have?
TRUMP: I think it's a 10. Maybe 9-9 because there might be a couple of little wounds. So maybe 9-9. I think we have a 10. We --
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (INAUDIBLE)
TRUMP: We get along great.
(END VIDEO TAPE)
COOPER: Randi, how are officials responding to the accusations that the facility is inhumane? KAYE (on-camera): Well, Anderson, it's clear from today that Florida Governor Ron DeSantis has embraced Donald Trump on immigration. He is all in, both of them together, pushing back against critics who are calling this plan inhumane. The governor, more specifically here in Florida, saying that those temporary trailers and tents that are being used to house the detainees here are the very same ones that are used to house people who have been displaced by hurricanes here in the state of Florida.
He also said they will be air conditioned, and he said there will be, quote, "zero impact" on the environment here. But, Anderson, it's clear that the plan is not for the detainees to spend any length of time here. The plan is to get them in, get them processed, and get them shipped out of this country. Anderson?
COOPER: Randi Kaye, thanks very much.
The suspected killer of four Idaho college students is expected to enter a plea deal tomorrow that would allow him to avoid the death penalty. Bryan Kohberger, a former PhD student of criminology at the University of Washington, was charged with stabbing and killing four students at an off-campus house in Moscow, Idaho, back in 2022. His trial was set to begin in August.
Now the family members of his alleged victims are trying to make sense of the sudden end to a lengthy legal process marked by multiple delays. CNN's Julia Vargas Jones has more.
(BEGIN VIDEO TAPE)
STEVE GONCALVES, FATHER OF KAYLEE GONCALVES: We're all destroyed. We're all let down. We're so disappointed with the court system.
JULIA VARGAS JONES, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): One victim's father telling CNN his family's reaction to a plea deal in the murders of his daughter, Kaylee Goncalves, and her friends, Maddie Mogen, Ethan Chapin, and Xana Kernodle. The suspect, Bryan Kohberger, has agreed to plead guilty to four counts of murder and felony burglary, in exchange for avoiding the death penalty.
GONCALVES: We feel a little defeated. We feel betrayed. I felt like we tried everything. We had all the evidence. We just didn't have somebody willing to push it that final step.
VARGAS JONES (voice-over): The family of Mogen expressed a different reaction on CBS.
BEN MOGEN, FATHER OF MADDIE MOGEN: We can actually put this behind us and not have these future dates and future things that we don't want to have to be at, that we shouldn't have to be at, that have to do with this terrible person.
VARGAS JONES (voice-over): The prosecutor's office telling CNN they could not comment on the plea deal because of a gag order.
SAMUEL NEWTON, ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR OF LAW, UNIVERSITY OF IDAHO: Ultimately, the prosecutor represents the state, not necessarily the victims. And so the prosecutor gets to make the decisions.
VARGAS JONES (voice-over): The deal marks a sudden end to a case that has been 30 months in the making, with numerous delays, defense motions to suppress evidence, and then a change of venue. A lot of uncertainty for this small community of Moscow, Idaho.
DAVID CLAY, FORMER UNIVERSITY OF IDAHO STUDENT: I was expecting a long process, all the evidence to be brought forward. I'm still hoping that justice will be done.
VARGAS JONES (voice-over): The trial was set to begin in August and would have taken place more than two and a half years since the four students were stabbed to death in an apartment near the University of Idaho on November 13, 2022.
Kohberger's arrest at his parents' home in Pennsylvania was nearly seven weeks later. He was charged with a student's murder in January 2023 and initially refused to enter a plea, standing silent at his May 2023 arraignment, before the judge entered a plea of not guilty.
Tomorrow, as part of his plea deal, Kohberger will likely be asked to confess to his crimes, but it's possible he could allow his attorney or the prosecutor to relate what he's pleading to.
NEWTON: He has to say the facts in a way that meet the law. Many judges will require the defendant to say what happened.
VARGAS JONES (voice-over): And he will likely have to waive his right to appeal and will be ineligible for parole.
NEWTON: The strategy may have been to get the state to get the death penalty off the table. And I think of the gravity of what that looks like. These victims are coming back no matter how this proceeding plays out.
(END VIDEO TAPE)
COOPER: Julia Vargas Jones joins me now from Idaho. What else are you hearing from people in the town?
VARGAS JONES (on-camera): Well, frankly, Anderson, people here are not sure how to feel about it because they do want justice more than anything for these four young people who lost their lives here. After everything they went through, they feel so strongly about this case in this town that they had to move the case to Boise. They couldn't find an impartial jury over here.
But at the same time, they're telling us they're just so exhausted of this case and just the possibility of having a plea deal, meaning that this could come to an end, and they can put all of that behind them. That could just mean getting a little bit closer to closure. Anderson?
[20:40:16]
COOPER: Julia Vargas Jones, thanks very much. Coming up, today, USAID officially ceased operations and a new study says the potential impact could cost millions of lives. I'll talk to Former Administrator Samantha Power.
And later, a look at the life and scandal-plagued career of televangelist Jimmy Swaggart, whose death was announced today.
(BEGIN VIDEOCLIP)
JIMMY SWAGGART, AMERICAN TELEVANGELIST: I have sinned against you, my Lord.
(END VIDEOCLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[20:45:19]
COOPER: As of today, the United States Agency for International Development, or USAID, has been shut down. A small fraction of its programs and personnel will become part of the State Department. This week, former presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama and rock star Bono spoke to thousands of USAID employees, hailing their accomplishments and criticizing the decision to dismantle the agency.
Now, a new study in the medical journal The Lancet estimates that USAID funding cuts could result in millions of additional deaths in the next five years. They wrote, quote, "According to the forecasting models, the currency funding cuts, coupled with the potential dissolution of the agency, could lead to more than 14 million additional deaths by 2030, averaging more than 2.4 million deaths per year. These deaths include 4.5 million among children younger than five years or more than 700,000 deaths annually."
Samantha Power is the former administrator of the agency during the Biden administration. She also served as U.S. ambassador to the United Nations under President Obama. I spoke to her shortly before air.
(BEGIN VIDEOCLIP)
COOPER: Ambassador Power, Secretary of State Marco Rubio said in a statement, quote, "This era of government-sanctioned inefficiency has officially come to an end. Under the Trump administration, we will finally have a foreign funding mission in America that prioritizes our national interests." How do you make the case to people that USAID's previous mission was in the United States' national interest?
SAMANTHA POWER, FORMER USAID ADMINISTRATOR: Well, USAID did so many things in so many places, and national interests were affected in a whole range of ways. When we built, when USAID built lab capacity in developing countries in Africa, that meant it was easier to spot a pathogen before it became a full-fledged pandemic.
And we saw in West Africa the work of USAID in stomping out the Ebola epidemic at a time when one person had come to the United States and brought Ebola, but at a time where, had the Ebola pandemic spread further, many, many more could have come.
COOPER: Secretary Rubio had in the past, prior to the Trump administration, praised a lot of these efforts. His argument and the argument of the Trump administration, I guess, is, well, the State Department can do most of this. It's better under the State Department. It's going to be less politicized. It's going to be more efficient.
POWER: Well, first, it's important that the facts actually be stated in the context of Rubio's claims. They have cut 80 percent, 90 percent of the life-saving programming going on overseas. It depends on the program. We can go through specifics, but whether it's HIV-AIDS or malaria or TB, right now there are families not getting malaria bed nets, even as they prepare for the onslaught of mosquitoes.
That's going to mean hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of kids who are at risk of dying from a mosquito bite. That's not something that any American should tolerate. But what Secretary Rubio continues to state publicly is that the life-saving assistance is continuing. It is not.
What he is saying is false. So far, what he has done in the name of efficiency is cut this life-saving programming. And as The Lancet studies shows, it does not just a retrospective on the lives that have been saved, it also warns that 12 million lives will be lost, two- thirds of whom are kids under the age of five, if these cuts continue.
So efficiency, we're all for efficiency. But actually taking away programming that is saving lives, programming where people have relied on the American stamp of -- and the trust of the United States and the trust of USAID, that's just devastating.
COOPER: I think, you know, some people out there kind of think, well, look, these problems just are endless and they just keep going on and, you know, we don't see progress on it, which is simply not a reality. Child infant mortality has been cut in half, which is an incredible achievement. I've talked to Bill Gates about this. He's helped fund it.
USAID has been a huge part of this. And there were predictions that in the next 10 years, it might be cut in half yet again. I mean, which is, you know, millions of children who could be the next Einstein or, you know, just decent human beings living lives and contributing to their societies. You've seen progress. I mean, there has been progress in a lot of areas that is now, it seems, in peril.
[20:50:02]
POWER: In the health domain, the progress is measurable on malaria, on TB, on the 25 million lives saved by virtue of President Bush's PEPFAR program. This is progress every American can feel proud of and the vast majority of global health progress.
COOPER: Let me just jump in because there's 25 million lives saved because of PEPFAR which is, as you said, George W. Bush started this. I mean, that's an extraordinary thing. That -- I mean, I've seen this. This access to retrovirals, access to HIV treatment, it has saved, I mean, 120 million lives. That's an extraordinary thing. What is going to happen to those people? Because the administration says, well, PEPFAR is going to continue.
POWER: But it's not. They've fired all the people who administer the programming. All across Africa, you have nurses and health workers and people going out to educate communities who are no longer being paid, who no longer are able to do this work. So, again, the first important thing to do is to set the record straight. The programming that the Secretary of State says is continuing at scale is not.
It has been slashed and it is now unrecognizable in the communities where it was saving all those lives. If it can be resurrected at the State Department, again, every USAID, fan of USAID or worker at USAID would celebrate the relaunch of this programming that has been so valuable, not only for those lives saved and all the work and good that those individuals go on to do in their communities and their countries, but also for America's reputation.
I think this is the part of this discussion that has not gotten enough attention, the extent to which the State Department, the Defense Department, the intelligence community, the people going out in pursuit of America's national interest every day, those people are able to leverage the work that USAID has done to win hearts and minds, to change lives. And we can't quantify what it does to American foreign policy to take away that soft power bonanza that USAID brought over those years.
COOPER: Ambassador Power, thank you so much. I appreciate your time.
POWER: Thank you, Anderson.
(END VIDEOCLIP)
COOPER: Coming up today, we learn of the death of televangelist Jimmy Swaggart, once viewed by millions on TV. His fall from grace was swift. We'll take a look back at his scandal plagued life.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[20:57:07]
COOPER: Televangelist Jimmy Swaggart became a household name in the 1980s for his fire and brimstone preaching and the millions of dollars he made from it. Nicknamed the King of Honky Tonk Heaven by Newsweek, Swaggart was rocked by scandal, you may remember, at the height of his influence.
This morning, nearly 40 years later, his death was announced on a social media page in a post that reads in part, "Today was the day he has sung about for decades." Here's Tom Foreman with a look back.
(BEGIN VIDEO TAPE)
SWAGGART: Without Jesus Christ in this life, life is no life. There is no living. There is no fulfillment. TOM FOREMAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): In the early 1980s, few preachers on the planet rivaled Jimmy Swaggart, who captivated millions through TV, radio, books and his Pentecostal message of hell, fire and heaven. It helped him build a multimillion-dollar earthly empire until it all came crashing down.
SWAGGART: To my Lord and my Savior, my Redeemer, the one whom I serve, I have sinned against you, my Lord.
FOREMAN (voice-over): In 1988, Swaggart was photographed going to a motel outside New Orleans with a sex worker, who would later tell CNN --
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: He would want me to do various poses. And in these poses, he'd want me to use like a sexual toy.
(SINGING)
FOREMAN (voice-over): A cousin of the late rockabilly star Jerry Lee Lewis and the late country singer Mickey Gilley, Swaggart was born poor in Louisiana, married in his teens, and turned to religion early, in the pulpit and behind the piano.
(SINGING)
FOREMAN (voice-over): Over his lifetime, he sold 15 million gospel albums, according to his ministry, and was nominated for a Grammy.
SWAGGART: They want to try to justify their strobe lights and their weird, wild suits and their pink hair.
FOREMAN (voice-over): All while vigorously calling Christian rock an abomination.
SWAGGART: Music to God is to worship God. It is to worship God, to glorify God.
FOREMAN (voice-over): Swaggart's mesmerizing way of delivering a sermon, his attacks on Catholics, Jews and gay people --
SWAGGART: I'm very much against gay marriage.
FOREMAN (voice-over): -- drew adoration from his followers, condemnation from his foes.
SWAGGART: Would wash and cleanse every stain.
FOREMAN (voice-over): But his tearful apology after the first sex scandal, there would be another, made the preacher a punchline.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Do some of those impressions you're so good at.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Oh, God. Oh, God. Oh, God.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Jimmy Swaggart, right?
SWAGGART: Do you have your Bibles this morning? Turn with me, please.
FOREMAN (voice-over): Swaggart went on preaching, but his following never fully recovered. His health failed. And at 90, his passing was marked with a post, Brother Swaggart has finished his earthly race.
Tom Foreman, CNN.
(END VIDEO TAPE)
COOPER: Jimmy Swaggart was 90 years old.
That's it for us. The news continues. The Source with Kaitlan Collins starts now.
