Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Senate Faces Immigration Test After House Defies Trump on Iran; Interview with Rep. Seth Magaziner (D-RI): Four GOP Defector Join House Dems to Limit Trump's Iran War Powers; Democrat Seth Moulton on Future of His Party; Brendan Banfield Seeks Double-Murder Conviction Erasure; Search for 20-Year-Old Auburn University Student Missing in Japan. Aired 9-9:30a ET

Aired June 04, 2026 - 09:00   ET

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

[09:00:00]

KATE BOLDUAN, CNN ANCHOR: ... variety for another round of Actors on Actors, where Hollywood superstars sit down together for one-on-one discussions. In today's episode, Kiki Palmer and Sharon Stone. Here's a preview.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

KEKE PALMER, ACTRESS, SINGER: I am so delighted that I had this opportunity to talk to you.

SHARON STONE, ACTRESS: I feel that way about you because I've talked about you so much and I've seen your work so much and you're -- we're not supposed to comment on people's appearances, but Jesus, you're so beautiful.

PALMER: You are stunning. I kept saying that to you and I'm like, she'd probably think I'm crazy.

STONE: No. And your beauty is a light. It's what it is.

It's a light. And I look at you and you do very different kinds of work. And I really like that because you are looking for, for purpose and meaning.

You're not looking for, I'm this. You're looking for a journey through life that demonstrates purpose and meaning. And it's great and it's valid and it's interesting and it's exciting.

And I'm really happy to spend time with you.

PALMER: Thank you for seeing me.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BOLDUAN: You can stream the full episode now on the CNN app. A new hour of CNN NEWS CENTRAL starts right now.

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: President Trump lashing out this morning in a rare Republican rebellion. Members of Congress standing up to the president on issues close to his heart. And this could come to a head today.

A husband convicted of plotting with an au pair to kill his wife. Now hoping a judge will toss out the verdict.

And a child thrown from a car in a chaotic crash. It's terrifying. We've got new information on the kid's condition.

Sara is out today. I'm John Berman with Kate Bolduan. This is CNN NEWS CENTRAL.

BOLDUAN: All right. On Capitol Hill today, President Trump is facing a rebellion from his own party on multiple fronts. In the House, four Republicans crossed party lines to join with Democrats and pass a resolution that would rein in the president's war powers when it comes to Iran.

This morning, the president, well, he's speaking out about that, calling the vote yesterday meaningless and calling the Republicans who voted against him -- well, against voting for the war powers resolution, calling them bad Republicans and unpatriotic. If it clears the Senate, he would have to -- it would direct him to withdraw troops or come to Congress to actually sign off on the war.

But this is, we'll show you what is on the Senate's agenda today. Republicans are expected to launch a voting marathon to try and pass $70 billion in funding for ICE and Border Patrol. It's been held up for weeks by what has been a growing GOP revolt, partially over the president's $1.8 billion anti-weaponization fund. The acting attorney general, Todd Blanche, he told Congress this week that the fund is not moving forward, period.

So that hurdle was passed -- not so fast. The president didn't seem so sure about that when it was asked about it just yesterday, calling the fund a beautiful thing. Now, some Republicans say they are not ready to vote yes on that big immigration funding bill until they are certain that that anti-weaponization fund is truly dead and shall not be resurrected.

CNN's Lauren Fox is live on Capitol Hill today. OK, what are you hearing about all of this?

LAUREN FOX, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes, Kate, we're going to get some early insight into how Republicans are feeling over whether or not this weaponization fund is truly dead or not. We do expect that Senate Democrats, excuse me, as one of their first amendments are going to put forward an amendment that would essentially send the whole bill back to committee and kill the weaponization fund. Now, the question is whether or not any Republicans would be willing to vote for that amendment.

Early indications are that that is extremely unlikely, given the fact that this would likely sink the overall immigration enforcement funding effort from its face. So we expect that it's possible that Republicans will be able to kill that first amendment, but that doesn't mean that this issue isn't going to keep coming up in this "voterama." We also know that Senator Thom Tillis has been working very hard on some kind of amendment that would create some guardrails around any future fund like this one.

It's not clear exactly if he's going to move forward with that effort right now, but yesterday he was working with leadership, having conversations with his Republican colleagues. Any vote on that amendment, though, would be subject to 60 votes. And given the fact that you would need a notable amount of Republicans, it's very unlikely that would get added to it either.

[09:05:00]

But certainly, this is an opportunity over the course of the next several hours for Democrats to make Republicans take a series of very difficult political votes from the weaponization fund potentially to the ballroom.

So those are some things that you should be watching for in the hours ahead -- Kate.

BOLDUAN: All right. A lot to happen potentially today, Lauren, where you are. Thank you so much. I appreciate it -- John.

BERMAN: All right, interesting discussion up there. And it really is unusual in the entire scope of the Trump presidency, both terms to see Republicans, even small numbers taking stands like this.

With us now from Capitol Hill, from the very same camera that we just saw, Lauren Fox. So I'm hoping he has wired up now -- is Congressman Seth Magaziner, who is on the Homeland Security Committee of Congress. He is from Rhode Island, a Democrat and the ranking member of the subcommittee in that larger committee that deals with intelligence issues, which we'll get to in just a moment. And there we are with the congressman fully wired up.

It is great to see you and hoping you can hear me, Congressman. The president said that the House war powers vote was a meaningless vote for Republicans cross party lines to join Democrats trying to restrict the president's powers in Iran. He called that a meaningless vote.

What's your response to that?

REP. SETH MAGAZINER (D-RI), HOMELAND SECURITY COMMITTEE: Well, tell the American people who are paying four or five dollars a gallon for gas because of this unnecessary war that the war powers vote was meaningless. Tell the American taxpayers who are spending a billion dollars a day on this unnecessary war instead of spending that money -- using that money to lower the cost of health care or rebuild our schools or roads or bridges. Tell them that it's meaningless. And tell the American service members whose lives are at risk right now for no good reason that it's meaningless.

The fact of the matter is that the vast majority of the American people oppose this war, do not think that it is necessary, do not think that it is good policy. And today -- or yesterday, the People's House representing the American people in a majority vote also expressed our belief that this war needs to end. Look, under the Constitution, it is Congress, not the executive branch that has the authority to determine whether and when we go to war.

And so the House finally was able to do the right thing yesterday and reclaim our constitutional prerogative in this matter. The Senate now needs to do the same.

BERMAN: As I mentioned, you are on the House Homeland Security Committee. You are the ranking member of a subcommittee that deals with intelligence issues. The president has named Bill Pulte, sort of who runs housing for him, to be the Acting Director of National Intelligence.

What's your view of that selection and what does it tell you about how the president views the intelligence establishment?

MAGAZINER: Well, the American people are less safe with Bill Pulte as the Director of National Intelligence. He is someone who has no experience at all in intelligence or in foreign affairs or in the military, zero experience, none. And the only reason he was chosen is because he has shown a willingness, in his current role at the Federal Housing Authority, he has shown a willingness to use the levers of government to attack the president's political opponents. That's the only reason he was chosen.

And so the fact that he is now being put in charge of our nation's intelligence gathering is chilling. And it's just the latest example that in this Trump administration, the president is staffing up, not with public servants, but with political gangsters, with people who only have the qualification of being willing to use the government against the president's political enemies in a violation of constitutional rights in many cases.

BERMAN: Congressman, I want to ask you a little bit about the future of the Democratic Party. My co-anchor, Kate Bolduan, just had a conversation with another Seth in Congress, Seth Moulton from Massachusetts, who we should note is running for Senate primary, a senior Republican in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts just to your north. I want to play what Congressman Moulton said about the need really to change -- for change within the Democratic Party.

Listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. SETH MOULTON (D-MA), SENATE CANDIDATE: And I think there comes a time to pass the torch to the next generation. And what better time than when the Democratic establishment is just not getting it done. I mean, if you honestly are a Democrat today who says, you know, Democrats are knocking it out of the park.

You know, we're winning all across the board. We shouldn't change a thing. Then vote for the establishment, vote for Chuck Schumer, vote for the status quo.

But if you think we should be doing better, if you think it's time for a new generation of Democratic leaders, if you think it's time for us to take the lead on the economy, to show that we are the party of national security, to show that we are the party that will fight Trump and MAGA Republicans every single day and win, then it's time for a new generation of Democrats. And that's why I'm running for Senate.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BERMAN: His basic idea, Congressman, his suggestion that the Democratic establishment is just not getting it done. What's your view of that?

[09:10:00]

MAGAZINER: Well, my view is that we need Democrats who are willing to shake things up to make life better for the American people. The reason that the American people are struggling with high costs and a lousy economy is that we have a system in Washington that is corrupt. That is certainly evident in the White House, where Donald Trump's administration is the most corrupt in American history.

But we've also had things like stock trading by members of Congress that members of both parties have been guilty of engaging in. And I'm the lead sponsor of a bill to ban stock trading in Congress and in the Oval Office. So listen, to me, it's not about young or old or old or new. It's about who's willing to shake things up and really fight for the American people who are struggling right now.

And, you know, the voters will have to make the determination in individual races of who the best fighters for their interests are. I will say on the House side, we've had a shake up in leadership. You know, Speaker Pelosi stepped aside along with Leader Hoyer a couple years ago.

And we've new leadership in Hakeem Jeffries and Katherine Clark that I think have shown a willingness to fight. And I think Hakeem next year, after November, will be a great speaker. But, you know, I don't want to speak for Congressman Moulton, but I think what the American people want is fighters for them, not for the status quo.

And whatever age you are, whatever length of tenure you have, if you are a fighter for the American people, that's great. If not, then get out of the way.

BERMAN: Congressman Seth Magaziner from Rhode Island, we appreciate your time this morning. Thank you -- Kate.

BOLDUAN: Any moment, a hearing is set to begin in the au pair affair double murder case. So remember this. This is now the last ditch effort by Brendan Banfield to get his conviction overturned before his sentencing.

And an American family is pleading for help right now after their son went missing and has just disappeared during their vacation in Japan.

And a young boy survives after being thrown into a truck during a crash. It is -- the video is unbelievable. We'll be right back.

[09:15:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BERMAN: All right, we're standing by for a last-minute effort today by attorneys for Brendan Banfield to throw out his double murder conviction. This is just one day before he is set to be sentenced. He was found guilty earlier this year of murdering his wife and a stranger in a plot with the family's au pair.

Banfield's attorneys plan to argue that several factual errors were permitted at the trial that had an impact on the jury's decision to convict him. Banfield faces life in prison.

With us now, CNN legal analyst and criminal defense attorney, Joey Jackson. So factual errors. What factual errors and when and how would that rise to the verdict being thrown out?

JOEY JACKSON, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: So first of all, John, good morning. I think he has a shot here, OK? And there's a number of things that the defense is looking at.

And let's talk about three in particular in terms of arguments. The first thing we'll talk about is the fact that he testified. And in him testifying, he has, as we know, a right to remain silent.

We all know that defendants have a right to remain silent. He waived the right and he went on the witness stand. That's fine.

However, when the prosecution presses you, when your theory and your narrative and your testimony is, I did it in self-defense and they say, sir, when the police got to your home that day, did you tell them what specifically happened? Did you tell them you acted in self- defense? When you got in your driveway and spoke to the police again, Did you tell them then? When you in the ambulance going to the hospital, how about then? Oh, when you got back, did you tell them then? That's problematic in as much as you have a Fifth Amendment right now. Other attorneys would say --

BERMAN: He says he didn't speak there. He did not speak.

JACKSON: He did not.

BERMAN: He did not speak and they're suggesting -- they're using the idea that he was silent against it.

JACKSON: Correct. Now, let's talk about one very critical distinction. There's something called pre-arrest silence and post-arrest silence.

Not to complicate this. Once you arrest someone, bingo. No issue. You have the right to remain silent.

Pre-arrest silence -- if you testify, I can, if I'm a prosecutor, cross-examine you on your silence for credibility purposes.

The argument here, John, is that it exceeded that. They not only asked him in their cross-examination about what he said, but they said, in fact, you were silent for three years, weren't you? That's problematic because he was arrested and in the course of time while he was under arrest, you can't muddy me up by weaponizing my silence against me. That is a significant issue.

Additionally, the other argument is the au pair testified. What au pair? The au pair he was having an affair with. The au pair who turned state's evidence. Who said we engage in this plot together and as a result of our love for one another, we were going to get rid of her. You know, easier to do that than get a divorce. Really expensive. She turned state's evidence.

There were issues she brought to the attention of the jury, right, that she didn't bring to the attention of the jury. The fact is, is that they're arguing the defense is that the prosecution suborned perjury. She was getting commissary money from people interested in her story. That's pretty significant to hide from the jury.

Why hide that fact from the jury? You gave testimony with respect to this catfish theory on digital evidence that prosecutors knew was wrong, but they gave it anyway. That's a problem.

Last point. The last point and factually is his boss. There was this big story, John, about the fact when he testified, he said, I had a really important meeting that day. I was meeting with my boss. I was going to get a promotion.

Guess what? The boss was watching Court TV, came in to testify, said, what meeting? He wasn't having a meeting with me. I didn't -- there was nothing scheduled.

And guess what? Anybody else who could have had the meeting, they were all out of town. The defense says, what? These are people who actually watched the trial. You're not allowed to watch the trial if you're testifying.

[09:20:00]

These are significant issues. What will the judge rule? We'll soon know.

BERMAN: Yes, very interesting. All right, Joey. Thank you very much for that -- Kate.

BOLDUAN: So there is a desperate search underway right now for a 20- year-old Auburn University student missing in Japan. His name is James. He's known as Weston Higginbotham.

He was last seen Friday at a train station in Kyoto. He was on vacation with his family, and his family says that his phone's tracking system just suddenly turned off. And now police are reviewing surveillance cameras to try and track his movements.

CNN's Isabel Rosales is joining us. She's got the very latest on this. What are you hearing about this, Isabel?

ISABEL ROSALES, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Kate, good morning. This started as a fun family vacation to celebrate Weston's younger brother's graduation from high school, but then it has now turned into this frantic search that is underway in a mountainous region of Japan for this missing Auburn University junior. Right now, there's dozens of police officers, canines, even a helicopter that's been put above this remote area trying to find this young 20-year-old.

His parents, I spoke with them. They are understandably distraught. They can't sleep. They can't eat. They are so desperate to find him. They believe he might have gotten and wandered too deeply into the woods and have gotten lost.

Now, they originally on Friday were not worried when he got onto this train in Kyoto traveling by himself because they do describe him as an experienced solo traveler and a hiker. But then they realized that something had gone wrong because the location tracking on his app that the family uses to track one another was turned off, something that they define as alarming and so out of character for Weston.

So at this point, he hasn't been seen since Friday. They tell me -- the parents tell me that he had about 62 bucks on him. They've tracked his credit cards. There's been no activity on his credit cards.

But there is CCTV footage from local police that saw him getting out of Yamashina Station in Kyoto toward a path that leads to a hiking trail. Here's what my colleague Hanako Montgomery got from his mother talking to her on camera. Listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

NANCY HIGGINBOTHAM, MOTHER OF JAMES "WESTON" HIGGINBOTHAM: Every single second you think about your kid and then you have the flashbacks of when he was two and yet when I was breastfeeding him, the birthday parties we've thrown for him.

I want that back. I need him back because a family of three is not the Higginbothams. We're a family of four.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ROSALES: And Nancy Higginbotham tells me that right before he disappeared, she did have a -- they were butting heads. They had a spat over her use of ChatGPT to help with navigating. He's a naturalist. He's against the use of AI.

But right now, none of that matters. All that these parents care about is finding their son. They are desperate -- Kate.

BOLDUAN: That poor mother. My goodness. Isabel, thank you very much. I appreciate it.

So one thing -- take a look at these scenes from overnight. It is a good morning to be a Knicks fan overcoming a 14 point deficit to beat the Spurs in Game One of the NBA Finals.

Also ahead for us, actress Julianne Moore will be joining us here in studio to talk about her latest role as an advocate raising awareness about brain health. We'll be right back. [09:25:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BERMAN: This morning, former first lady, Jill Biden's memoir, is currently sitting at number four on Amazon's nonfiction bestsellers list, and it has people doing something that makes some Democrats uncomfortable talking about the Bidens. Maybe not something they want to be doing heading into the midterms.

With us now CNN chief data analyst Harry Enten. What is the Bidens approved -- former president Biden's approval rating?

HARRY ENTEN, CHIEF DATA ANALYST: The American people have one message for the Bidens. That is go away. Go away.

I mean, just look at this. Look at Biden's net favorable rating. In January of 2025, it was minus 22 points.

Has it gone any better now? No, not really. He's still way underwater here at minus 19 points.

He's 28 points underwater with independents. Joe Biden ended his term as president is quite unpopular and he remains quite unpopular. He is an anchor to the Democratic Party and potentially their fortunes in the 2026 midterm elections.

BERMAN: How does that compare to other former Democratic presidents?

ENTEN: OK, let's go back through the history books. I went back through the spreadsheets, right?

This is essentially we're looking at former Democratic presidents net favorability at this point post presidency. The lowest by far is Joe Biden, 19 points under. Barack Obama was a rock star, 31 points above water.

How about Bill Clinton? Wasn't so popular after office, but even then, he was just three points underwater, basically breaking even. And then Jimmy Carter was twenty two points above water. Joe Biden, the most unpopular former Dem president at this point post presidency of any Democrat that I could find going through the spreadsheets over the last 50 years.

BERMAN: How's Dr. Jill Biden doing?

ENTEN: OK, so Joe Biden, obviously not Jill Biden, though they are married. OK, just look at this.

Was she a popular first lady? Dem first lady's net favorability at the end of their final term. She was just two points above water, obviously not as bad as Joe Biden is.

But Michelle Obama was forty three points above water. Hillary Clinton was 13 points above water. Again, you're just looking at this and you're seeing that Joe Biden was historically unpopular for a Democratic first lady compared to the two other Democratic first ladies you see on the screen, which again matches what we see with Joe Biden's unpopular.

BERMAN: This might just be this recent shift sort of against the idea of establishment. What are we seeing in the prediction markets that might indicate there are some issues there?

ENTEN: Yes, I mean, I think one of the legacies of Joe Biden and sticking on for as long as he did is distrust of the Democratic establishment. And that's why I just take a look here. Chance at four plus House Democrats, in fact, lose their primary in 2026.

Look at this. Sixty eight percent. Sixty eight percent.

I look back at every single cycle that I could find that was not a post census redistricting cycle. And the highest I could find in terms of Democrats losing. Get this was only three.

So this would actually beat it. Democratic angst against the establishment and an all time high, I think in large part driven by the fact that Joe Biden is so unpopular and therefore you have just this great distrust of the establishment.

BERMAN: All right, Harry Enten, thank you very much.

ENTEN: Thank you my friend.

BERMAN: We do have a lot of news this morning. We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:30:00]