Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Evenly Divided Poll Of Americans Who Favor Impeachment Of Donald Trump; Rep. Brenda Lawrence (D-MI) Is Interviewed About The Impeachment Inquiry; Tight New Polls On The Democratic Presidential Campaign; New Sections Of Border Wall Being Breached; Elie Honig Answers Legal Questions In "Cross-Exam"; President Trump Blames Governor Of California For Wildfires; Former Alt-Right Woman Speaks Against White Supremacy Movement. Aired 5-6p ET

Aired November 03, 2019 - 17:00   ET

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

[17:00:00]

ANA CABRERA, CNN HOST: Hello on this Sunday. You are live in the "CNN Newsroom." I'm Ana Cabrera in New York and this is a milestone weekend on the road to Election Day 2020. It is now just one year away and we have some brand new sign posts that are showing us what direction American voters are leaning as they think about the economy, national security and the wheels now turning that could lead to the president's impeachment.

Three new national opinion polls all released today and all showing the same one, two, three leading the race for the Democratic nomination; Former Vice President Joe Biden, Senator Elizabeth Warren and Senator Bernie Sanders.

And while the election is a year away, more pressing for the Democrats are the Iowa caucuses exactly three months from now. That's why nearly every Democratic candidate is cutting a path across that state this weekend.

The new national opinion polls made public today show the country almost evenly split on whether President Trump should even finish out his first term in the face of House impeachment proceedings. This is one of them from NBC News and the "Wall Street Journal," 49 percent of respondents says the president should be not only impeached, but also removed from office.

Those numbers being shrugged off by the White House today. CNN's Jeremy Diamond is there. Jeremy, the president told you himself that he doesn't think very highly of those polls.

JEREMY DIAMOND, CNN WHITE HOUSE REPORTER: That's right, Ana, and this is something of course that we have previously heard from the president. When there are polls that the president does not like, he simply dismisses them as fake or simply as unreliable.

And what we're seeing now in these three most recent national polls, first of all, that impeachment is extremely divisive and that now we are seeing about half of Americans supporting impeaching and removing the president and in fact, that is a plurality of Americans. More Americans now are saying in these three polls that they support

impeaching and removing the president than those who do not. And I pressed the president today on that very fact. Listen in.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DIAMOND: Mr. President, according to several recent polls, more Americans want you to be impeached and removed from office than the number of Americans who don't.

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: -- you're reading the wrong polls. You're reading the wrong polls.

DIAMOND: Fox News, Wall Street Journal, NBC, ABC, Washington Post, out with those polls.

TRUMP: Let me just tell you, I have the real polls. I have the real polls. The CNN polls are fake. The Fox polls have always been lousy. I tell them they ought to get themselves a new pollster.

But the real polls, if you look at the polls -- if you look at polls that came out this morning, people don't want anything to do with impeachment. It's a phony scam. It's a hoax. And the whistleblower should be revealed because the whistleblower gave false information.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

DIAMOND: And Ana, there you have, the president's reaction to the latest snapshot that we have of the American public's thinking on these impeachment proceedings. And clearly, he is not thrilled with what is coming out in these latest polls.

That's not to say that there are not political benefits for the president and these impeachment proceedings as well. We have already seen his campaign and the Republican National Committee fund raising very successfully off the impeachment and the president's base is certainly very fired up.

But what is clear is that there is mounting evidence coming in these impeachment depositions suggesting that the president did carry out some kind of a quid pro quo involving security aid to Ukraine.

And this coming week, we could see additional current and former administration officials discussing all of this. However, one official, one top official close to the president, Robert Blair, has already said that he will refuse to testify when he is called to sit for a deposition tomorrow, Ana.

CABRERA: Okay, Jeremy Diamond, a big week ahead. Thank you very much. As the president continues to lash out at the whistleblower today, the impeachment inquiry in the House is moving full steam ahead. I want to bring in Congresswoman Brenda Lawrence who is on the House Oversight Committee, one of the committees currently leading the impeachment inquiry.

Congresswoman, good to have you with us this weekend. So the lawyer for the whistleblower says Republican lawmakers can now submit questions to his client directly without having to go through the Democratic leadership. What are your thoughts on this offer?

REP. BRENDA LAWRENCE (D-MI): I think that the Democratic Party deserves a that a boy or appreciation because the Republican Party has repeatedly stated that they wanted a more -- more transparency, more inclusion to the public, access to the public and that has been granted with this vote.

They asked for something and then when given the opportunity, didn't vote for it. But we're moving forward and I have sat in those hearings and repeatedly, member of the administrations, members of our military, of our ambassadors, they have all come and said the same thing.

The president asked for a favor. He asked for something and he would not release funds, and when asked about it, he went back to, have you given me, have you done the investigation. So we're moving forward.

CABRERA: Right.

[17:04:58]

LAWRENCE: And I am very, very concerned because now the Republicans, because they can't talk about process anymore, are saying yes, he did it but it's just not impeachable. How dare you sit there and say that this is impeachable when it impact national security, our allies, its lives, its agreements that we have, our word as Americans and you reduce it down to a personal favor for me gearing up toward an election in our country.

CABRERA: Okay. So we will soon, I'm told, hear from all of these witnesses or at least some of them who have been speaking behind closed doors. We already have a lot of evidence that's been made public from the president's phone call, that memorandum that was released by the White House as well as what the president has said on record himself.

But going back to the whistleblower, you know, now offering, the whistleblower's lawyer now offering his client to answer questions from Republicans directly in written form, is that a good idea?

LAWRENCE: The whistleblower as you know has protections. The whistleblower also has the independence to agree to a certain amount of exposure. I am very concern when we start exposing whistleblowers because it deters others who want to come forward. But this is a very, very serious action. I don't take it lightly.

I didn't run for office to impeach the president, but if this whistleblower is part of the investigation and he or she willingly agrees to come forward and to give statements, then we need to ensure that we're protecting that whistleblower beyond just that moment where they're giving their statement.

CABRERA: Who is the most important person that you want to talk to that you haven't heard from yet? LAWRENCE: I would love to talk to Giuliani. I will tell you. That

would just be the icing on the cake.

CABRERA: Why?

LAWRENCE: Because Giuliani has been the one name that keeps coming up. It comes up because he was doing the intervention or doing the work for the president. You know, doing the work because the president actually referred the president of Ukraine to Giuliani.

So what did you do? What did you say? Who paid you? What were you marching orders? What did you tell the president on behalf of our president?

CABRERA: The president's Counselor, Kellyanne Conway's new defense this morning was I don't know. Listen to this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DANA BASH, CNN HOST: So you feel totally confident that at the core of this, the heart of this --

KELLYANNE CONWAY, COUNSELOR TO THE PRESIDENT: Here's what I feel confident about.

BASH: -- there was no quid pro quo.

CONWAY: I feel confident about the fact Ukraine has that aid and is using it right now. That is because of this president that they have it. The last administration --

BASH: Kellyanne, you very notably won't say yes or no.

CONWAY: It doesn't --

BASH: Quid pro quo, yes or no.

CONWAY: First of all, I just said to you I don't know whether aid was being held up and --

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CABRERA: Congresswoman, what's your reaction to that?

LAWRENCE: Maryanne (ph) does her job. She is hired to protect --

CABRERA: Kellyanne.

LAWRENCE: Kellyanne, I'm sorry. She does her job. She deflects. She tries to reshape the message. I don't give a lot of credibility because she is so biased. However, with the question that you asked and this is one that the Republicans are running from, is did the president hold hostage funds based on a request to interfere with our election with a foreign government?

And statement after statement after statement from multiple people, they're confirming that. So now the pushback is well, he may have done it, but it's not impeachable. Where is the impeachable action if this is not?

CABRERA: In Washington, of course, the impeachment inquiry is front and center right now and that's something 2020 presidential candidate Andrew Yang addressed this morning. Watch this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ANDREW YANG (D), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: I am for impeachment, but the fact is, when we're talking about Donald Trump, we are not presenting a new way forward and a positive vision for the country that Americans will get excited about.

That's the only way we're going to win in 2020 and that's the only way we're going to start to actually solving the problems that got him elected. Even when we're talking about impeaching Donald Trump, we're talking about Donald Trump and we are losing.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CABRERA: Do you agree with him?

LAWRENCE: I know that there is a message that is not true that's being put out that all we're doing as Democrats is working on impeaching the president, which is absolutely not true -- bill after bill after bill that we have passed addressing issues and concerns. We are actively negotiating right now the trade deal. We are actually negotiating and marking up a bill to address prescription drugs.

[17:10:02]

We have already sent the bill for gun violence. We've already sent a bill to the Senate to increase the minimum wage. We have kept our promises. When we were elected to office, these are things we're going to work on.

We have kept our word but we also cannot walk away from our constitutional responsibility for checks and balances of our government. I sit on government oversight. That's our number one priority, is to ensure that our government is in compliance to the rules, the Constitution.

And I'm going to uphold that and the Democratic Party should, too, but we also are addressing those issues that the American public are asking for, but now we need to talk to Mitch McConnell because he will not bring those issues forward. All he wants to do is elect judges, appoint judges.

CABRERA: Congresswoman Lawrence, I hear what you're saying. Thank you very much for being here.

LAWRENCE: Thank you, Ana.

CABRERA: A quick programming note. Stay tuned for a CNN special hosted by and Anderson Cooper, "The White House in Crisis: The Impeachment Inquiry." That's tonight at 8:00 eastern right here on CNN.

Now as we mentioned, on this date next year, Americans will be casting their ballots in the 2020 election. We have new polls showing just how tight the race is. How candidates are reacting, still ahead.

Also, a CNN investigation looks into the hidden threat posed by white supremacist groups in U.S. communities. They aren't just made up of men. Women also get drawn into these cults, and we'll meet one who got out, ahead this hour.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[17:15:00]

CABRERA: One year from today, Americans go to the polls to choose the next president, but who will be at the top of the Democratic ticket? As the 2020 pedal hits the metal, polling starts the matter a little bit more, right?

Jessica Dean is in Sterling, Virginia with the Biden campaign. And Leyla Santiago in Muscatine, Iowa with the Warren campaign. So Jessica, let me start with you, and another poll, this one is from Fox News. It shows potential head to head match ups with Donald Trump. Look at that, Joe Biden has a 12 point edge. How is the Biden campaign reacting to these numbers?

JESSICA DEAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Fred, they like the see polls like this because they really believe that this re-enforces their message that they've been saying for months. It's about electability. That's the argument that Biden and his campaign have been making really from day one.

That when it comes down to it, Joe Biden is the person that can best take on Donald Trump. And when I spoke with an adviser today, they pointed me to a similar type of polling from the "Washington Post" and ABC News poll that showed double digit leads for Joe Biden when it comes to who can best take on President Trump and who's the strongest leader.

So again, when they see numbers like that, they feel like that reinforces their message about electability. And to that end, on Friday, they also put out some new numbers, $5.3 million they've raised online in October. That was their best online fund raising month that they've had so far.

And what's interesting is that's coming as Vice President Biden is taking all of this incoming from President Trump about Ukraine, these unfounded allegations about Ukraine and about Hunter Biden. So, they really saw a spike in fund raising online for them.

And yes, Ana, it's just been a lot. It's been very positive from their perspective in the last several weeks from a fund raising perspective online.

CABRERA: Okay, now to Leyla who's with Elizabeth Warren's campaign, she has been taking flak for not detailing plan to pay for her Medicare for All plan. She has one now and last night, she had this to say.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. ELIZABETH WARREN (D-MA), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: This is no increase in taxes for anyone except billionaires. Period. Done. This is what access to health care for everyone. This is about taking the $11 trillion that families will be reaching in their pockets to pay over the next 10 years and bringing that to zero.

And funding it by increasing taxes on billionaires and on China and corporations, that's the whole thing. And the other pieces all just stay where they are. The federal government keeps contributing. The state governments keep contributing.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CABRERA: Clearly, Warren is going to continue to take fire on this. Bernie Sanders is now publicly criticizing her funding plan. Pete Buttigieg says her math is controversial. How does her campaign hope to get ahead of this?

LEYLA SANTIAGO, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Ana, I think part of it, I took note of three things that she is saying today that sort of speaks to what you have asked. One is what you just heard.

She is trying to make the pitch directly to the middle class and saying my plan will be funded without raising taxes to the middle class and that will put $11 trillion back in your pockets because of no co-pays, premiums, deductibles, et cetera. You already heard that part.

The other thing that she has said today is that she is still with Bernie. She's not really trying to distance herself much on that. She says Bernie and I want the same goal. We just have different ways of getting there.

And the third thing and this is kind of interesting. She's sort flipping the script here, right? She's saying where is everybody else's plan, because remember, on that debate stage, the last debate stage, a lot of people specifically Buttigieg and Biden, were going after her for having a plan for everything but not how to fund Medicare for All.

That led to what we saw this week in her release of funding her Medicare for All plan. But why does this matter? Because the latest poll on Fox News shows that when voters were asked how important is health care for you in making their 2020 decision, 53 percent said extremely, Ana.

CABRERA: It is the top issue in a number of polls right now. Leyla Santiago and Jessica Dean, thank you both.

A new report details how smugglers are sawing through President Trump's new border wall, apparently with cheap saws. We'll ask President Trump's former acting director of ICE if that's cause for a concern. (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[17:20:00]

CABRERA: President Trump's border wall, it served as the central pillar of his 2016 victory. It's fueling his re-election campaign. It's touted by the White House as impenetrable. And according to a new "Washington Post" report, it's being regularly breached.

"The Post" says smugglers have been cutting holes through the new sections of the wall large enough for adults and drug loads to fit through. They're using a simple household tool known as reciprocating saw which retails at just 100 bucks. The president was asked about it yesterday.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: I haven't heard that. We have a very powerful wall, but no matter how powerful, you can cut through anything.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CABRERA: Border agents told the "Post" that due to the height of the steel support slats known as bollards, which are between 18 and 30 feet tall, it's easy to push the steel to the side and pass through.

Now, agents say despite fixing the damaged areas, smugglers often return to the same spot since the metal and the concrete have already been weakened. Ronald Vitiello was the acting director of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement until April of this year. He is joining us now. Ron, are you surprised that new sections of this wall have already been breached?

RONALD VITIELLO, FORMER ACTING DIRECTOR, U.S. IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT: No. Ana, thanks for having me on. I'm not surprised. This is the nature of what happens at the boarder. The incentives to cross illegally, smugglers getting people into the country, getting contraband into the country, that's a constant thing that happens at the border.

[17:24:59]

And so every time the government, the border patrol puts fortifications, infrastructures and improves conditions, the smugglers try to find a gap in and it so this is what's happening now.

CABRERA: Now the "Post" is reporting that the smugglers are using just a $100 household tool essentially to breach the wall. Is it a flaw in the design?

VITIELLO: No. That design was tested in fact by CBP. They tested it for climb -- anti-climb and they tested it for a breach and that is one of the best designs out there. And so, you have to think about, yes, they can get a saw and they can access and they can cut it open, but it takes a lot of time to do that and also makes a lot of noise. And so the wall in and of itself won't stop people from coming in. This is an example of that. You have to have sensors to go along with it and you have to have an agent response, and so all those three things have to work in concert in order for us to have a fortified barrier.

CABRERA: So people can just get through the wall no matter how high- tech that wall is. Is that proof then that the wall maybe wasn't the answer?

VITIELLO: No, the wall definitely helps. It helps illegal activity from happening. It prevents some people from coming into the country and it anchors the technology and the response that agents will need to effectively control the border.

CABRERA: Given what we've learned from this report, can one argue that the current barrier is any more effective than previous border barriers?

VITIELLO: No. The one that's out there now has been tested. Now, there were features that we learned about in the anti-climb and the anti-breaching testing that we're not able to access in this action plan now because the appropriators kind of outlawed the use of some of these new techniques.

And so, we'll just have to adapt to it. You know, the border patrol is well aware of what's going on now and they'll be able to recover for what's happening to make sure that this doesn't become a trend.

CABRERA: So when you say the appropriators outlawed the use of other techniques, what do you mean by that?

VITIELLO: Effectively, the appropriations language prevents the CBP from accessing any of the new walls that we're learned of in the prototypes. It's some kind of game that they played in the politics of it. But there are features they can put on that fence that could prevent some of the ropes and some of the ladders that people are using now.

CABRERA: But why couldn't you do that? What do you mean it's not allowed if that's what is going to be more effective?

VITIELLO: Yes, you would think that if we get something more effective that agents and the testing says it should be used and it isn't. It's just the way the politics worked out. They wrote it out as a language.

CABRERA: Is it a money thing? Is it a money thing or is it something else?

VITIELLO: No, it's politics. They said the president couldn't have anything he learned off of the prototypes to build the wall where he needed it so they have to use the system that's in place now. It's a good one, but there are some features that it lacks that would make it better. CABRERA: What makes it better though than the previous border

barriers that are being replaced? Because obviously this is still costing money and a lot of people who don't know it as well as you know the specifics and the nuances would look at it and say this kind of seems like it could be a waste of money if it's a new wall that's still being breached regularly.

VITIELLO: No. What was there before in San Diego was barely eight foot high and dilapidated. It was very thin. People could get over it very quickly. What is there now is either 18 or 30-foot high, the agents can see completely through it and the enforcement zone is much better protected because of a new wall that's there.

It's very effective to have a strong barrier to go along with what the agents need to do and what the technology allows them to do in cuing (ph), sensing when people are cutting or trying to cross.

CABRERA: Clearly it's not a deterrent though so what other methods do you think would be more of a deterrent?

VITIELLO: I think effectively it is a deterrent for a certain segment of the population, but the incentives to smuggle and get into the country are high so you have all three of those elements, the personnel, the technology and the infrastructure.

And we also need some specific policy changes. The law needs to change that stops enticing people to come to the border and bringing their children.

CABRERA: All right. Ronald Vitiello, thank you very much for taking the time.

VITIELLO: Thanks for having me.

CABRERA: Democrats are expected to en enter a new phase in their impeachment inquiry with a busy week ahead. Elie Honig joins us next to break down what we know, the legal implications and he'll answer your questions. That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[17:30:00]

CABRERA: House Democrats are anticipating another busy week signaling that they are ready to start the next phase of the impeachment inquiry even if their subpoenas are ignored across the board.

Democratic sources tell CNN that they are discussing a timeframe that would include public impeachment hearings before Thanksgiving and possible votes on whether to impeach President Trump by Christmas.

Time now for "Cross-Exam" and CNN legal analyst Elie Honig is here to answer your questions on impeachment. Elie is a former federal and state prosecutor. So Elie, under the impeachment resolution approved by the House, one viewer wants to know does the GOP gain subpoena power with impeachment resolution. ELIE HONIG, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Yes, Ana, so it was a historic moment

this week in the House. Only the fourth time in our 232 years under the Constitution we had an official vote recognizing procedures for an impeachment inquiry.

Now, what are the big things a resolution does? First of all, authorizes the intel committee, Adam Schiff, to release depositions of those closed door hearings that have been going on. We'll see the full transcripts of those soon.

Second, as you said, we will have public hearings soon where both parties will have a full chance to question those witnesses. And third, it requires Schiff to file a public report putting out there his conclusions, his recommendations. That report then goes over to the judiciary committee which will then recommend articles of impeachment to the full House.

Now, do the Republicans get subpoena power? Yes, but not really, because that subpoena power is subject to approval by the Democratic majority. You can bet, if the Republicans want to issue a subpoena, the Democrats don't like it, it's going to be a no.

This resolution though does have major political and legal implications. Politically, I think it helps Democrats take away the argument Republicans have been making that there's no process or it's been secret. And legally, this resolution should help Democrats go into court and enforce their subpoenas.

CABRERA: Okay, speaking of court, former White House counsel Don McGahn as well as former deputy national Security adviser, Charles Kupperman, they were both in court this week.

[17:35:01]

Their hearings were about whether they have to testify before the House. So one viewer asks, legally, can Congress force executive branch officials to testify?

HONIG: I think the answer there will be yes. It was quite a scene down in federal court in D.C. I went down to help cover it for CNN. We had two hearings happening at the same time in same courtroom in the same court house. In fact, on the same hallway though.

And what we saw in both cases was a battle of the branches. The legislative branch, Congress saying we need this testimony and the executive branch saying, but we're entitled to block it.

The White House's argument here, the big argument is absolute immunity, which is this fairly extreme argument that we have the power to stop executive branch employees from testifying.

Now, the judge in the McGahn case in particular seemed very skeptical of that argument and the judge in the Kupperman case noted the resolution, the impeachment resolution, had just passed and he noted that that resolution actually strengthens Democrats hands. So, I do expect rulings in both cases fairly soon. I would guess that

both rulings are going to go in favor of Congress then they'll be appealed to the Court of Appeals and potentially the Supreme Court.

CABRERA: There was major testimony in this past week. We heard from the National Security Council's top Ukraine expert. Lieutenant Colonel Alexander Vindman. He testified again behind closed doors, but we did have some access to some of his testimony that was made public.

And one viewer wants to know after he testified that he was told not to talk with anyone about the July 25th phone call between Trump and the Ukrainian president and Trump, the viewer asks, can Vindman be court-martialed for disobeying Trump's direction not to testify in the House?

HONIG: It's a great question. I heard it a lot this weekend. So I consulted with General Mark Hertling who is one of our contributors here at CNN, of course knows as much about the military as anybody.

Now, a court martial first of all is a prosecution within the military system for violations of the uniform code of military justice. Just for context, think the movie "A Few Good Men." That is based on a real life court martial that sort of what it looks like procedurally.

Now, General Hertling told me that all members of the military take an oath to defend the Constitution and to obey lawful orders, but emphasis on that word, lawful.

Because they also have a duty to obey -- excuse me -- to report perceived misconduct up the chain of command whether that is war crimes, violations of treaties or rules of engagement, or potential crimes, abuse of rank or abuse of power.

And so, as General Hertling said in conclusion as a soldier, Vindman acted exactly as he should.

CABRERA: Quickly, your top questions this week.

HONIG: So, first of all, will John Bolton testify in the House. The House wants him in there Thursday. His lawyers said he won't go without a subpoena. If he gets a subpoena, will he obey it or will he fight?

Second of all, will there be any new factual developments that are strong enough to move House members off of party lines? That resolution was almost entirely a party line vote.

And third, will the White House identify and execute a coordinated defense strategy. Up until now, it's been shifting almost by the hour, almost by the Trump tweet. Now, this is very real and the question is will the White House come together and come up with a coordinated coherent impeachment defense strategy.

CABRERA: Okay, Elie Honig, thank you.

HONIG: Thanks, Ana. CABRERA: So much good information there. Keep your viewer questions coming. Of course, you can submit them on CNN.com. Again, it's under his "Cross-Exam" column>

Wildfires rage across California right now as President Trump says he wants to cut federal funds to California for fighting these fires. Why his claim that environmentalists are to blame is false, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[17:40:00]

CABRERA: Day after day, firefighters in California have been working tirelessly to extinguish more than a dozen wildfires burning across the state. Thousands of families have either lost their homes or have been forced to leave.

And while crews risk their lives trying to save others, President Trump is placing blame on California's governor, Gavin Newsome. Trump tweeted in part, "The governor of California has done a terrible job of forest management."

Newsome quickly responding, "You don't believe in climate change. You are excused from this conversation." CNN meteorologist Karen Maginnis joins us now. Karen, the U.S. National Climate Assessment reports that half of the increase in western wildfires is due to climate change. How are the two related?

KAREN MAGINNIS, CNN METEOROLOGIST: Yes. We see a laundry list of reasons why these fires erupt so early. They last so long and the Cal Fire director said here on CNN, we no longer have fire seasons. We have fire years.

And all we have to do is go back to 2018 and see just how crumbling and crippling a fire season it was, that last for most of the fall. Back in 1980 to 1989, that decade, we saw an average of 140 major wildfires. Then you pump up to the 1990s, 160.

And whenever you see these bar graphs that go upward when we're talking about climate or weather typically, that's bad news. From 2000 to 2012, in excess of 250 major wildfires.

What causes them? Well, we see a lot of changes taking place, a longer fire season. One just transitions into the other -- major fire season during the warm summer months, June, July, and August. And a secondary season as we enter into the fall months. That's when it's typically drier. And a lot of fire takes place because of a lot of the tender vegetation is just very dry.

All right, we saw 90-mile an hour winds with the Santa Ana winds blowing in across southern California this past week. So we see a longer warm season. Those summer months, well they continue into the early fall then the fall becomes very dry.

And because California underwent seven years of a drought, Ana, it has been especially bad -- last year, more than 100 dead including six firefighters.

CABRERA: It's all connected and also tragic. Karen Maginnis, thank you for that. Coming up --

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SAMANTHA, LEFT ALT-RIGHT MOVEMENT: It's all very old, very antiquated ideology, just packaged in khakis and loafers.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CABRERA: A CNN exclusive report about one woman's journey into the heart of America's white supremacist movement, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[17:45:00]

CABRERA: In a span of six months, Samantha went from a liberal non- voter to what she describes as a productive racist as part of the inner circle of the modern white power movement. She burned books with white supremacists and helped plan a white power protest before leaving and speaking out about the dangers of the movement.

CNN's Elle Reeve spoke to Samantha about what draws people in and the rampant misogyny that was part of the reason she finally got out.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

ELLE REEVE, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): The face of America's white power movement is screaming young, white men. But there are a very small number of women who join. Samantha was one of them.

SAMANTHA: This I wore to the last alt-right party that I ever went to.

REEVE (voice-over): The 29-year-old tells new friends she spent a year in a cult, a cult of racism. After she left, she feared being exposed for what she'd done. Now, she wants to come forward on her own terms and warn others about the power of online radicalization.

She welcomes us into her home. We agreed not to show its surroundings or share her last name due to safety concerns.

How important do you think that sense of alienation is in attracting people?

SAMANTHA: 100 percent. I think alienation is like the number one reason that people join. I was seeing this guy and I was going through a lot of turbulent like emotional and just personal mental things where my sense of self was pretty damaged.

[17:50:03]

It was just this emersion into the culture of it with someone that I so badly wanted the affection of and the approval of just -- it didn't take much. It's not as if this person was like strapping me down like I was hungry to learn, I was hungry to figure this our.

REEVE (camera): On January 1, 2017, you became a member of Identity Europa. Can you explain what that is?

SAMANTHA: It was a white civil rights group or a white advocacy group, I believe, was the term. Identity Europa was trying to project this image of being, I mean, you know, clean cut, law-abiding, nonracial slur using, polite kind, handing out water bottles to old ladies on the street. Just like a nice group of people.

REEVE (on camera): They didn't want to look like the skinheads?

SAMANTHA: No, absolutely not. The language that was used was always pro white. It was never anti anything else, and so it made it really easy to ignore the parts that you don't want to see.

REEVE (on camera): Like violence.

SAMANTHA: Yes, violence or just blatant racism.

REEVE (voice over): Today known as the American Identity Movement, Identity Europa was created in 2016 as a kind of fraternity to promote white power with a more clean cut face.

SAMANTHA: It's all very old, very antiquated ideology just packaged in khakis and loafers.

REEVE (voice-over): The alt-right is far more hostile to women than previous iterations of the white supremacist movement. It emerged from an internet culture that cross pollinated with men's rights and incel forums, an online subculture of men who are involuntarily celibate and blame women for it.

Samantha says there are only a handful of women in IE when she joined. She kept her day job as a manager at a cocktail bar even as she interviewed up to 20 people a week to be new members of IE.

SAMANTHA: I wasn't the only interviewer.

REEVE: Part of her job was to screen out Jews. She was named women's coordinator and she says she helped membership grow to about 50 women in a group of roughly a thousand people.

(on camera): Why did you do it so much?

SAMANTHA: Because it felt good to help. It felt good to be productive and to feel like I was a part of something bigger than myself.

REEVE (voice-over): Samantha's rise in the alt-right paralleled to the rise of the alt-right in America. In the spring of 2017, members of the movement were feeling emboldened.

TRUMP: I will faithfully execute --

REEVE (voice-ever): Donald Trump had been sworn into office. Steve Bannon was a White House aide. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You will not replace us!

REEVE: (voice-over): And protests like this one referred to as Charlottesville 1.0 which Samantha helped coordinate were popping up across the country. Then she started a new relationship with a rising leader within Identity Europa and was welcomed into movement's inner circle.

SAMANTHA: We took a weekend and went to a bunch of parties in New York.

REEVE (on camera): What kind of parties?

SAMANTHA: Fancy parties.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This is the type of awful tool --

SAMANTHA: I went to a book burning that was pretty scandalous. It's all so surreal. Like you're literally standing there going, I'm at a book burning in someone's house. Like there are families that live next door. There's probably a nice person who lives across the street and I'm burning books about Jewish people. Like it was just so -- I don't know, it just feels -- like it doesn't even feel like it's wrong or right. It just feels unreal.

REEVE (on camera): Did you guys present yourselves as like a white power power couple?

SAMANTHA: Yes, kind of. I think that's how people looked at us, that we would be like the next generation of a power couple within the white movement.

REEVE (on camera): So, in public you were a couple, but behind the scenes --

SAMANTHA: The misery was growing exponentially like every day. I had tried to break up with him several times. I had told him I couldn't do it anymore. I tried to do all these things, but I was so afraid.

REEVE (voice-over): A meme among the internet Nazis was white sharia. It's a racist interpretation of Islam that portrays women as subhuman.

SAMANTHA: And as a woman you are secretary, mother, babysitter, but never an equal.

REEVE (voice-over): Private messages to Samantha show that while the women might have played along in public, in private they found it disturbing. But at the same time, Samantha says they felt trapped, afraid that they'd be doxxed.

That means your identity and personal information is released online. Samantha says she and boyfriend broke up privately but he wouldn't move out. There were shouting matches, financial struggles. She realized the only way to leave the relationship was to also leave the movement. The reaction was more degradation.

[17:55:00]

SAMANTHA: I was told a lot that I would be really good that I could probably hold a lot of Nazi semen and birth a lot of Nazi babies whether I liked it or not, that they would break my legs so that I could not run away, and then I would just be killed afterwards.

REEVE (voice-over): The threat scared her but they were clarifying. In October 2017, she quit IE. She eventually stopped making excuses and realized she had actively promoted racism.

SAMANTHA: All of that, the weird propaganda that I was buying into, all of the ideology and the rhetoric, it just immediately hit me that it was all bull (BLEEP). It just all hit me how much of an idiot I was.

REEVE (voice-over): The American Identity Movement tells CNN it is unaware of anyone being coerced to stay in the organization. Today, Samantha has joined a different kind of organization, one that helps people leave hate groups. She hopes coming forward with her story can make a difference.

SAMANTHA: For a lot of people, I don't think it's about the politics. I don't think anyone wakes up and says like I really want to make a poster about being racist. And I just think that the alt-right really knew how to play on this like weird new form of nihilism that people are feeling.

REEVE (voice-over): Samantha says she joined a fraternity based on hate because it gave her a new sense of meaning. She didn't realize how fast they could turn that hate on her. Elle Reeve, CNN, New York.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

[17:59:59]