Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Mercy Chefs Feeding Flood Victims, Responders, Volunteers In Texas; Federal Judge Blocks Trump's Order To End Birthright Citizenship; NYT: FBI Using Polygraphs To Test Officials' Loyalty. Aired 7:30-8a ET

Aired July 11, 2025 - 07:30   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[07:30:12]

SARA SIDNER, CNN ANCHOR: In just a couple of hours President Trump will head to Texas to witness the devastation left behind by the flooding. So far, at least 121 have been killed and this morning about 160 are still missing.

At this hour first responders and volunteers are beginning to search through that debris once again. Flood survivors are trying to figure out how to move forward.

And to help in the effort Mercy Chefs is on the ground in Kerr County giving folks a chance at a warm meal.

Joining us now is the founder and CEO of Mercy Chefs Gary LeBlanc. Thank you so much for being here this morning.

Gary, you founded Mercy Chefs after Hurricane Katrina that devasted New Orleans. Can you describe what you're seeing yourself -- the damage that you're seeing on the ground from this flooding incident in Texas?

GARY LEBLANC, FOUNDER AND CEO, MERCY CHEFS (via Webex by Cisco): Well, the first thing is our hearts are so completely broken for the people here in Texas and around the country in the other places that have had floods.

What we're seeing is just incredible. It's indescribable the damage from this flood here in Kerr County and surrounding counties. I've been doing this 19 years. I've seen an awful lot. In terms of floods I don't think I've ever seen anything worse. Trees that have had bark stripped off of them by the force of the water. Trucks that are buried completely in the riverbed. The homes that are gone. And then the loss of life in such a compact area is just -- it's just unspeakable.

SIDNER: We are seeing some images of the food that you have been preparing and the devastation that you are speaking of.

I am curious what you're hearing and seeing from the first responders who have been on the ground now for seven days combing through unimaginable damage. Finding, unfortunately, bodies and having to tell authorities where they can go to finally identify those bodies.

What are you hearing from them as you're serving them these meals?

LEBLANC: Well, we were able to get on site within 36 hours and the first meals we fed were to search and rescue teams that hadn't had a hot meal since they started. And universally from them we're seeing them take a few bites and put their head down, and you can see they're just contemplating the day. And they'll look up and they'll say, "You know, I've seen things today that I can never unsee."

Those men and women are heroes. The work they do is just incredible -- their dedication. We seem them out at night after the shifts are over and the sun is down. They're still out on the riverbanks with headlights and flashlights looking. They -- they'll do anything they have to do to get their job done.

SIDNER: Yeah. You're speaking really of the trauma that they are going through, but they are still pushing through that just to try to help others deal with this flooding.

Have you heard from families in the area that have been affected by this flooding? Those who have, for example, lost homes or loved ones.

LEBLANC: Yeah. I've spent a lot of time down on the river. We spend a lot of time with the victims as they come in to eat.

I was -- I was at a ranch two days ago and had to -- got to pray with the family who had lost their 29-year-old son. He had been a hero in the floods. He kept pushing everybody else back up and they were all saved, but they lost him.

And the faith and the strength of the people here in Texas is just incredible. They were thankful for the 29 years they had with him and just said if you believe in God you have to take the good and then you have to accept the bad. It doesn't change who God is. And that kind of faith is just -- is something very unusual.

SIDNER: And lastly, what do you think this recovery is going to look like? How long do you plan on being out there? Because as you said, there is no way for a lot of these rescuers or these families right now that are in the area to access good, warm food.

LEBLANC: No. Mercy Chefs always makes a promise that we will stay as long as we are needed -- if that's 10 days, 10 weeks, or 10 months. You know, we're still serving in western North Carolina in the aftermath of Hurricane Helene. We've served meals every day since that hurricane because that's what's needed. That's the same promise I made to the people of Texas -- I will be here as long as you need me.

SIDNER: Gary LeBlanc, thank you for what you're doing there, and I know the first responders and families are also so grateful that you and your organization are there to help -- Kate.

KATE BOLDUAN, CNN ANCHOR: Absolutely.

[07:35:00] Also this morning it's round two, if you will, in the legal battle over President Trump's effort to end birthright citizenship. A federal judge just issued a new nationwide injunction blocking the president's day one executive order ending the longstanding policy. If you are wondering how that is possible after the recent Supreme Court ruling limiting nationwide injunction power -- well, this judge granted class action status for babies.

CNN's Katelyn Polantz has much more for us from Washington. And Katelyn, tell us more about what you are learning here and what this judge did.

KATELYN POLANTZ, CNN CRIME AND JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: Well Kate, round two, but this is another court finding that the birthright citizenship policy from the Trump administration ending that practice for immigrant -- for babies born to immigrants on American soil -- that it appears to be unconstitutional -- blocking it.

What's happening here is the courts are responding to what the Supreme Court did at the end of their term. When the Supreme Court said you have to have class certification. There can't be a nationwide injunction applying to anyone, anywhere. All that means is that the people bringing the lawsuit and who a judge would make an order about -- it has to apply to a specific group.

So the judge in New Hampshire -- this is a federal district judge -- a George W. appointee named Joseph Laplante in the district court -- the trial of a court in New Hampshire. What he did yesterday is he looked at this case challenging the birthright citizenship -- ending it -- executive order -- and he said OK, responding to the Supreme Court -- this is only going to apply to babies born February 20 of this year or after. Babies yet to be born as well. That's the class that we're talking about that the Supreme Court gave direction on.

The judge though looked at the policy from the Trump administration and had a lot of things to say about why he didn't agree with it and why he couldn't let it go forward at this time.

Here's his quote from a 38-page written order. He said -- this judge said that he has "...no difficulty concluding that the rapid adoption by executive order, without legislation and the attention national debate of a new government policy of highly questionable constitutionality that would deny citizenship to many thousands of individuals constitutes irreparable harm."

So here we have a court stepping in ending the policy as of now because it hurts a lot of people. Because this is an executive order that didn't go through Congress. Now it is on pause, Kate. This is a district-level judge.

He's giving the administration seven days to appeal. I just checked and they haven't filed anything yet but the White House, yesterday, said that they disagree with this judge abusing the class certification process and that they are going to try and maintain pushing forward the Trump administration policy to end birthright citizenship. There is very likely many more proceedings to come at many levels of

court and very, very likely at the Supreme Court again at some point -- Kate.

BOLDUAN: Yeah. I mean, we don't -- it's not ever good to bet on anything but you could definitely put some money on that one.

It's good to see. Thank you so much, Katelyn -- John.

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: All right. New this morning what do you think about your boss, FBI addition. According to The New York Times, "Since Kash Patel took office as the director of the FBI, the bureau has significantly stepped up the use of the lie-detector test, at times subjecting personnel to a question as specific as whether they have cast aspersions on Mr. Patel himself."

Now there was no comment to the Times from the FBI on this story.

With us now, Meghan Hays, Democratic strategist and former Biden White House director of message planning, and Republican strategist Melik Abdul.

Meghan, let me start with you. You work in government. How unusual does this sound to you -- a lie-detector test asking what do you think about your boss?

MEGHAN HAYS, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST, FORMER WHITE HOUSE DIRECTOR OF MESSAGE PLANNING, DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL CONVENTION CONSULTANT: It seems extremely unusual to me. I think law enforcement -- especially federal law enforcement -- should be nonpolitical. They should be able to do a job for both Democrat and Republican administrations.

You take an oath to the Constitution. You take an oath to serve the American people. You don't take an oath to who the FBI director is.

So it is very unusual in my experience.

BERMAN: Now Melik, it's worth saying that lie-detector tests -- polygraphs inside the FBI and intelligence agencies -- they're not unusual in and of themselves. What appears different this time, according to the Times, is the specific questions about what you've said about Kash Patel.

What does this tell you about how the FBI is being run right now?

MELIK ABDUL, REPUBLICAN STRATEGIST: I think what it tells us is that the Trump administration is really focused on what they -- what we consider as rooting out the deep state within government.

We saw during the first Trump administration there were Trump officials -- people that Donald Trump appointed himself who were penning anonymous op-eds, and they were published, talking about their dissatisfaction with the President of the United States. And instead of resigning or if it's a situation where you're going through some type of whistleblower process, that would be understandable. But I do believe, and many Republicans believe, that there is an

effort to undermine the President of the United States. So in this case, yes, I think that if you have a problem with your boss or if you -- if you're on record disagreeing with your boss then I think that's something that your boss, or the agency in this sense, needs to know.

[07:40:05]

So I don't have a problem with what the FBI is doing in this sense.

BERMAN: Meghan, quick rebuttal if you want it on this.

HAYS: Yeah, absolutely. I think that the difference here is political appointees are different than federal law enforcement agencies and who you take your oath to. And I think if you want to root out people who are not loyal to you as the president, being a political appointee, that is one thing. But these are federal law enforcement agents, and they are not there to serve a president. They are there to serve the Constitution and the American people. So that is the difference in this instance.

BERMAN: I want to ask about a development that happened late yesterday in Texas, and this has to do with the Republican Senate primary there.

Republican Sen. John Cornyn is running for re-election but he's being primaried by that man, the Texas attorney general Ken Paxton.

Now, late yesterday we learned that Paxton's wife Angela filed for divorce. I want to read you the tweet. By the way, she's an elected official herself in Texas. She wrote, "Today, after 38 years of marriage, I filed for divorce on biblical grounds. I believe marriage is a sacred covenant and I have earnestly pursued reconciliation. But in light of recent discovers, I do not believe that it honors God or is loving to myself, my children, or Ken to remain in the marriage."

Melik, there are a few layers to this first. Again, this is a really tight primary or could be a primary. Ken Paxton, the attorney general, may even be favored now.

What do you think this does to the race itself there?

ABDUL: Well, I think if you listen to the statement and watched the statement from the NRSC, they probably -- I think they're having a good time with this.

Now, I'll say when it comes to people's personal lives we shouldn't care as much as we do. And I had the same position on the Paxtons as I do with the Obamas when many people have been talking about rumors of a pending divorce for the Obamas. I don't think that we should be involved in this because these things are, indeed, very personal.

But it is clear that in the state of Texas a fight in on hand and I -- me, personally, I would actually much rather have John Cornyn remain in his seat than Ken Paxton. And again, the NRSC, the National Republican Senatorial Committee, tends to agree with me on that. BERMAN: And Meghan, Melik kind of alluded to what may be the bigger question here or a big question here, which is in 2025, how much does something like this matter in politics given what we have seen from a variety of elected officials -- the most senior elected officials over the last several decades?

HAYS: I don't think it matters as much as it used to matter. I think that people are going to make their decisions based on what they think is best for their state. But in Texas it may matter more than in other places.

But I think that this is a very tight race, and I think for Democrats we're going to sit back. Paxton would be a much better opponent for Democrats than John Cornyn obviously. And so, I mean, they can fight it out from my perspective. But I think that Paxton -- they are trying to get ahead of a situation they know is going to be a tough fight for them.

BERMAN: You know, it's Texas Republicans who will vote in the primary. But there is this initial primary, Melik, which seems to be getting the endorsement of President Trump. Both Cornyn and Paxton desperately want that.

I wonder how this might impact that endorsement given the president's own interesting, colorful past.

ABDUL: Well, I actually think that the president -- the president's endorsement will matter to a much greater degree here in this Texas race. Whether or not it totally impacts the outcome we don't know.

But keep in mind this is the same Donald Trump that endorsed Lindsey Graham when many people within the MAGA base -- they hate the fact that he's supportive of Lindsey Graham.

So I suspect that eventually Donald Trump may actually back Cornyn.

BERMAN: And Meghan, one last point on Jerome Powell -- what we saw late yesterday. Our White House team doing a great job reporting on this. The letter from OMB attacking Powell for the management of the renovations at the Fed itself.

I wonder what you think is going on here. There are questions about if they're laying the groundwork for cause to dismiss him.

HAYS: I think they are trying to make his life miserable and in a way so he resigns himself because he's made it clear that he's not going anywhere. So I think they're just trying to make it miserable for him and put all this stuff out in the water for him to have no other choice. I don't think that this is going to work but we'll see. But it just doesn't seem like Powell is going anywhere much to the chagrin of Donald Trump.

BERMAN: His term is up in May of next year so there's not that much longer to begin with.

Meghan Hays and Melik Abdul, great to see you both. Have a wonderful weekend -- Sara.

SIDNER: All right. Thank you, John.

The Trump administration is under fire from its own allies after the review of the Jeffrey Epstein case. MAGA supporters are furious after a DOJ memo claimed there's no Epstein client list -- some even calling for A.G. Pam Bondi to resign. There's a lot of talk about this.

CNN's Harry Enten is joining us now with more. What are you learning about just the interest of this case to the public at large?

[07:45:00]

HARRY ENTEN, CNN CHIEF DATA ANALYST: What a massive unforced error by the Trump administration. Donald Trump would love this story to go away but, in fact, interest is climbing higher and higher, to quote Jackie Wilson.

Look at this. Google searches for Epstein up 1,200 percent this week versus last. And get this -- it is currently the top -- the top topic search with Trump on Google alongside his presidency.

So Donald Trump normally leans in -- leans into stories in which there is controversy -- like tariffs, for example. This is a story in which he's trying to get away from -- basically saying why is anyone still interested in this story. But the bottom line is people are very interested in this story to historic degrees, at least this week.

SIDNER: Give us some perspective -- you see that 1,200 number -- about other stories. In comparison how people are viewing this one.

ENTEN: Yeah, OK. So I mentioned tariffs earlier on, right? Epstein has been Googled a lot since Monday. He's actually been Googled 1.4 times as much as tariffs has been Googled, and that is, of course, a huge news story.

How about Grok, which is another insane news story this week.

SIDNER: Yeah.

ENTEN: I mean, my goodness gracious. But, in fact, Epstein has been Googled 2.5 times as much as the Grok story has been Googled.

So the bottom line is this is a story in which there is a lot of interest and it's one of the few stories in which both Steve Bannon and Elon Musk are going after Trump -- at least the Trump administration. He's managed to bring together two parts in the administration that have -- or two parts of the fan base that have normally been against each other.

SIDNER: Yeah. You can bet on anything and this proves it.

What are you seeing as far as whether or not people think that they will actually release these Epstein files?

ENTEN: Yeah. I know my buddy Vin from Jersey would love for Trump -- the Trump administration to release more Epstein files. But get this -- Trump releasing more Epstein files in 2025 -- this is the betting market odds. You go back to two months ago it was 43 percent. You go back even a month ago it was 39 percent. But now it's just at 20 percent.

I think that they are going to be a lot of the normally MAGA fan base who are going to be very disappointed. And this is all a self- inflicted error by Trump and the Trump administration.

SIDNER: Yeah. Many in the administration were pushing all these conspiracy theories and promising bombshells when they got into office, and nothing.

ENTEN: It turns out what goes around sometimes comes around when you push conspiracy theories.

SIDNER: That is true.

All right. Harry Enten, it is a pleasure. Thank you so much.

SIDNER: Thank you, my friend.

SIDNER: Over to you, Kate.

BOLDUAN: And for us the whistleblower's allegations and now the text messages that may back them up, accusing a top DOJ official of directing the department to tell the courts "F you" when it comes to deportation flights.

And this is one way to get the prize or maybe he became the prize. New video showing a little boy crawling into a claw machine only to get stuck.

(COMMERCIAL)

[07:52:00]

SIDNER: In Ohio, new surveillance video shows the moment a child gets stuck in one of the claw machines. The boy walks up to the machine, then he tries his best to wriggle his little body inside the door where those prizes come out. Police and EMS were called to the scene. They moved the machine into a store and there managed to get the child out of the machine. He was unharmed. And it appears he did manage to get a stuffed animal because he hands one to his mom.

All right. And caught on camera new images of the sun from closer than we have ever seen it before. This is NASA's Parker Solar Probe 3.8 million miles from the solar surface. You can actually see the solar wind constantly flowing off of the sun. Scientists hope these close- ups will help explain how solar winds work and how it affects us here on Earth. That is so cool.

All right. Jane Birkin's original Hermes Birkin bag has made history selling for $10 million. It is not the most expensive bag to ever sell at auction and is now in the hands of a private collector from Japan. The bag doesn't look like the flashy Birkins you think of today. It has stains, scuff marks. Even Birkin's small nail clippers hanging from the shoulder strap.

Before her death in 2023 the British actress jokingly told CNN's Christiane Amanpour that when she died people would "possibly only talk about the bag." Boy, she was wrong there. They just paid $10 million for it, John.

BERMAN: Exactly. I've proved you wrong. All right.

SIDNER: Whoo.

BERMAN: New this morning Palestinian activist Mahmoud Khalil has filed a $20 million claim for damages against the Trump administration after being detained by ICE for 104 days. He was detained for deportation as part of the president's crackdown on student activists for alleged ties to terrorist organizations. Khalil calls the allegations "absurd."

He spoke to CNN's Christiane Amanpour about his time in detention.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MAHMOUD KHALIL, PALESTINIAN ACTIVIST, DETAINED BY ICE FOR 104 DAYS: The moment you enter such facilities -- such ICE facilities you would -- your rights literally stay outside.

On the inside, as you would expect, the food was as close as could be to inedible. I had to switch to vegetarian because the meat was -- I threw up, like, after I ate -- I ate the meat there.

It was so cold we had to ask for more blankets, but no one would answer our requests.

CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR, CNN CHIEF INTERNATIONAL ANCHOR: You missed the birth of your first child, a boy. Everybody was very concerned about your wife who is an American citizen there without you. What was that like? And then what was it like when you were first able to hold your child for the first time?

[07:55:00]

KHALIL: Missing the birth of my child -- I think that was the most difficult moment in my life, especially because, like, this could have been avoided. We put so many requests to be able to attend that moment. And I will not -- I don't think I would be able to forgive them for taking that moment away from me.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BERMAN: A federal judge ordered his release from custody last month saying the government's actions were likely unconstitutional -- Kate.

BOLDUAN: There are new documents released by the top Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee that appear to back up explosive whistleblower claims against a top Justice Department official, Emil Bove. Bove is accused of telling DOJ lawyers to ignore court orders ahead of the rushed deportation operation that sent migrants to El Salvador back in March -- something Bove, who is up for a major judicial appointment now, was asked about when testifying before the committee last month.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. ADAM SCHIFF (D-CA): Did you suggest telling the court "(bleep) you" in any manner?

EMIL BOVE, DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL: I don't recall.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BOLDUAN: But the newly released emails and text messages seem to support the whistleblower's claim that Bove urged the department to "tell the courts to F -- tell the courts F you."

In messages exchanged between government lawyers on March 15, which is being revealed, one text message reads: "Guess we are going to say f you to the court," appearing to reference Bove's alleged directive to ignore judicial orders.

Attorney General Pam Bondi is responding to this whistleblower's claims, calling the claims false and dismissing the whistleblower as a disgruntled employee.

Let's talk more about this though. Joining us right now is CNN legal analyst Carrie Cordero. It's good to see you, Carrie. Thank you so much.

As you go through these emails and text messages -- just kind of what is now being revealed -- what do you make of them, and how much they do-don't back up this whistleblower's claims?

CARRIE CORDERO, CNN LEGAL ANALYST (via Webex by Cisco): So as a political matter I think it's probably -- having looked at a lot of these emails it looks like it's unlikely that it probably will change minds. And that's because the text messages and the emails that are in the documents provided and released by the committee are one step removed from a document that includes Bove directing an attorney at the department to ignore a court order.

So there is characterizations of what he is alleged to have said at a meeting but there's not a directive from him in the documents actually directing someone to not comply with a court order.

And so one, we can -- we can take what the whistleblower is alleging and sort of extrapolate from that, but there isn't the direct on-point exact evidence.

BOLDUAN: I want to read the fuller statement that the attorney general Pam Bondi put out on this.

She wrote, "We support legitimate whistleblowers, but this disgruntled employee is not a whistleblower -- he's a leaker asserting false claims seeking five minutes of fame, conveniently timed just before a confirmation hearing and a committee vote." She also said, "No one has ever asked -- no one was ever asked to defy

a court order. This is another instance of misinformation being spread to serve a narrative that does not align with the facts."

The whistleblower says that he lost his job because he complained internally about the department's lack of candor with the court.

And what I -- what feels a little bit coming out of this is -- and I know you can speak to this -- is the tension that inherently exists but seems to definitely be showing itself here between career justice employees and political appointees.

CORDERO: Right. So another thing, Kate, that comes through when one reads through these emails -- and I'm speaking as someone who was a former career attorney who worked for different administrations -- is the fact that in this particular circumstance there definitely is this ongoing back-and-forth between the career attorneys and the interagency at the department -- the Department of Homeland Security and state, in particular -- with the Abrego Garcia case. And they're trying to get -- the career attorneys are trying to get information because they are the ones who are actually going to have to go to court and make assertions.

And so -- although I think this is a really extreme example and we actually have documentation now to look at, but there is sometimes when there is a political leadership that is taking a very aggressive stance on something and then it's the career attorneys who actually have to go before the court. And when they go before the court it's their professional reputation, their professional integrity -- really, their entire livelihood.