Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Judge Weighs If He Should Unseal Redacted Mar-A-Lago Affidavit; Judge Rules Idaho Can't Enforce Abortion Ban In Medical Emergencies; Democrat Pat Ryan Snags Surprise Win In NY-19 Special Election; Georgia Elementary School Student Tests Positive For Monkeypox. Aired 3-3:30p ET

Aired August 25, 2022 - 15:00   ET

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

VICTOR BLACKWELL, CNN HOST: So according to The New York Times, genetic researchers studied pairs of look alikes and found that those who had the most facial similarities also shared important parts of their DNA sequences. And that prompted one's researcher to make a comment that sounds like we're now living in an episode of Westworld. "Now there are so many people in the world that the system is repeating itself."

ALISYN CAMEROTA, CNN HOST: Yes, we're all recycled and here's my evidence of that. I have doppelgangers and here they are. They're at CNN. I don't have to look far for them. This is who I'm always mistaken for at airports. People will yell out like Poppy or Dana to me. So my doppelgangers are right in front of me and then you and I also share a doppelganger.

BLACKWELL: I get the same person all the time. How do we share a show doppelganger?

CAMEROTA: I'll show you. Okay, poof. How do we - those are our doppelgangers.

BLACKWELL: Oh, yes. I get this all the time. You look like Tyler Perry.

CAMEROTA: You do.

BLACKWELL: I mean, I kind of see it.

CAMEROTA: You're also wearing the exact same outfit that he is.

BLACKWELL: Yes. Yes.

CAMEROTA: That's crazy.

BLACKWELL: We still need a royalty check from this.

CAMEROTA: Yes. Okay. We're ready for our royalty check.

It's the top of the hour on CNN NEWSROOM. I'm Alisyn Camerota.

BLACKWELL: I'm Victor Blackwell. Good to be with you. New action in the legal tug of war over transparency into the FBI's

Mar-A-Lago search. This afternoon, the Justice Department submitted its proposal under seal for redacting the search warrant affidavit. That's the key document that could explain why the DOJ took the extraordinary step of searching former President Donald Trump's home.

CAMEROTA: The rest of this fight will mostly take place in secret. The judge who approved the search warrant will now privately decide on how to move forward. He could release the affidavit with or without redactions or he could not release it at all. CNN Senior Justice Correspondent Evan Perez is here with us. So Evan, when could we see a decision from the judge?

EVAN PEREZ, CNN SENIOR JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: Well, Alisyn, we could see something as soon as today, obviously. The judge knows exactly what's in this warrant, in this affidavit. He, after all, approved the search warrant and he has said in that hearing last week, he said that he believed that there were parts of this, certainly that could be made public without endangering the Justice Department's investigation.

The other thing is that in the intervening time and just in the last few days, we've learned a lot more about what went into this and so certainly at a minimum, right, the Justice Department could be able to tell us about some of the interactions with the Trump team that we've now learned from the archives release of a letter in the last few days as well as from the Trump campaign or the Trump legal team's own filing in another courtroom.

So at a minimum, the judge could release some of that information. When he'll do that, we don't know.

BLACKWELL: All right. So about four months after the former President left office, Evan. The National Archives asked him to return missing documents. What do we know it's revealed in this new correspondence we have?

PEREZ: This is a new email that was first published by The Washington Post or Jamie Gangel gal also has some reporting on this. And really what it does, Victor and Alisyn, it really shows that almost certainly, almost immediately after the former President left office, the archives started pushing for the return of these boxes of documents. At least initially, there were 12 that they were concerned about.

And according to this correspondence, Pat Cipollone, the former White House counsel himself had told the Trump team that this is stuff that should go to the archives. Now, we don't know what - why was that Trump did not return these boxes initially - certainly at that time. But what it shows you is that this discussion was happening almost pleadingly on the part of the archives for months and months before we get to the situation where the FBI feels that they need to do a search and seizure at the former president's home.

CAMEROTA: Evan, how about the - how the Justice Department has just released this unredacted memo from former Attorney General Bill Barr, what is - what does this reveal?

PEREZ: Well, it's a memo from 2019 and what - the reason why this is even in our hands now is judges looked at this and said, well, the reason why this memo exists is to give cover for Bill Barr who never intended to charge the former president with a crime, despite the fact that the Mueller investigators found plenty of instances where there were obstruction or obstructive acts by the former president or really just a part of it.

And the bottom line is that - is this: "The Special Counsel's obstruction theory," this is the - according to the memo that was produced by the Justice Department, "The Special Counsel's obstruction theory would not only be novel, but, based on his own analysis, it would also be unusual because volume I of the Special Counsel's report is conclusive that the evidence developed 'was not sufficient to charge that any member of the Trump campaign, including the president, conspired or coordinated with representatives of the Russian government to interfere in the 2016 election."

[15:05:04]

The bottom line, Victor and Alisyn, is that Bill Barr viewed this as a non starter because he thought since there was no charges of collusion, there can't be obstruction.

Of course, we know that the former president was doing things like leaning on people not to 'flip on him'. There's an analysis of things like that. And they explained it away by saying Trump was really worried about this investigation overshadowing his presidency, and he was worried people were going to make things up about him. That's the analysis that goes into this.

Of course, just before I leave you, it's interesting to note that that was the one obstruction investigation in 2019, right, that ended in 2019 and now we're in the middle of another obstruction investigation in this case.

BLACKWELL: Yes, certainly interesting. And we'll certainly get into that in our discussion now. Evan Perez, thank you.

Let's bring in Harry Litman. He helped lead the Justice Department during the Clinton presidency as Deputy Assistant Attorney General. He's now a Legal Affairs Columnist for The Los Angeles Times and a CNN Political Analyst. And Margaret Talev is Managing Editor for Axios. Welcome to you both.

Harry, let me start with you about the strategy approaching this submission to the judge. The redactions have been submitted under seal, but would it be counterproductive to just send in this affidavit with huge sections blacked out and only trivial details left considering that the judge wants more?

HARRY LITMAN, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: Well, the question is counterproductive for whom. So the DOJ did say last week if we redact, you could see - it could be gibberish and the judge acknowledged that possibility. And the judge, remember, is a longtime DOJ guy before he became a magistrate judge. So he's conscious of all the different considerations that they're trying to protect.

But to follow up on what Evan said, to the extent there are redactions, that non-redactions that are approved, they almost surely go to this back and forth and extended and we now know excruciatingly extended back and forth starting even before he leaves office, that Trump has until over a year and a half later when they have to serve the search warrant on the - on August 8th. That's the kind of stuff that will be detailed and it will be very much, I think, challenging the two submissions that Trump has made since the search was revealed.

CAMEROTA: Margaret, here's what we know, President Trump took hundreds and hundreds of the American people's documents with him when he left the White House. We don't know all that's in them. All we've heard is that there were hundreds of classified, some of them top secret documents. We do know about three. The National Archives in particular thought, where are these, these are sort of famous documents, where are they.

So one was the letter that President Obama had left for his successor as presidents do on the day that Trump began his term. One was the so- called love letters, those are President Trump's term for it that Kim Jong-un wrote to him. And then what was the map of Hurricane Dorian that President Trump had altered with the sharpie to make his prediction, I guess, seem more accurate.

I understand why he wouldn't want that one released to the public, because that would be - that was an embarrassing episode. But these other three, I mean, of course, they're part of history. But it - I don't know, who knows if they're part - if their national security issues connected to them. But, of course, the public wants to know about what's in the other hundreds.

MARGARET TALEV, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: Yes. And Alisyn, I've heard the three documents. It's funny, as you were showing the picture, I was recalling covering the stories involved in each of those three documents. They were major kind of pop culture moments like made for TV moments that help define the narrative of a presidency. And I've heard those documents described as potentially kind of like trophy documents or vanity documents. It doesn't matter. It doesn't matter.

We don't know what the president - former president's motives were. It doesn't really matter what they were. They don't belong to him. They belong to the U.S. government and ultimately American taxpayers. But having said that, we also don't know the totality of the other documents that are not as easy for the public to imagine as all of that.

But I think what we're looking at here, obviously are kind of two parallel stories and one is the legal story. What kind of redactions is the judge going to agree to and how much push and pull will there be. And the second is the one that's unfolding in the court of public opinion.

And if you're Merrick Garland, the first category is really what's most important to you. But the second category impacts your ability to do your job, right? Everything that happens in government or law enforcement exists in a backdrop of public opinion.

[15:09:56]

And what we're seeing in early polling is the public seeming to side with the FBI, but seeming to want to know did the former President Trump do something wrong that could be charged and convicted. And it's that second question that really may have the long-term bearing on how the public interprets what's happening right now.

BLACKWELL: Harry, let me ask you about the Barr memo released ...

LITMAN: Yes.

BLACKWELL: ... explaining why he decided not to charge former President Trump with obstructing the Russia probe. He wrote in the memo, "In every successful obstruction case cited in the Mueller Report, the corrupt acts were undertaken to prevent the investigation and prosecution of a separate crime. The existence of such an offense is not necessary element to providing an obstruction charge, but the absence of underlying guilt is relevant and powerful evidence." I mean, is this a widely held perspective that you need that evidence?

LITMAN: No, it's not true. It doesn't describe all the cases. And by the way, even if it did, what about, say, Michael Flynn? The memo really is precooked as two different courts have said and it really seems sort of commissioned to try to serve up the result.

Two points I just want to make about it, first, the first principle in the memo is we need to bottom line, Mueller didn't. Okay. Well, if that's going to happen, why don't you order the special counsel the bottom line. He's the neutral non political figure. Instead, he served it up to political folks.

Second, there are just several stress points. It's like you take a slinky and stretch it so much that it loses all - its actual form. There are points here, one - here's one good one the memo concludes that Don McGahn's comments to about firing Mueller were ambiguous. Those comments where we've got to get rid of him, call me when you've done it.

There are several stress points like that in the memo, where it really does seem ordered up for a preconceived result.

CAMEROTA: That doesn't sound too ambiguous. We've got to get rid of him.

LITMAN: Right.

CAMEROTA: Margaret Talev, Harry Litman, thank you both.

Okay. So abortion restrictions go into effect today in several states, but one judge in Idaho says not so fast. Details ahead.

BLACKWELL: And heavy rains and flooding forced a nursing home to evacuate the building and its residents out. We are live in Mississippi on extreme weather that's hitting the South. (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[15:16:48]

BLACKWELL: A near total ban on abortion was set to go into effect in Idaho today. But late last night, a federal judge blocked key parts of that law.

CAMEROTA: The judge sided with the Biden administration's argument that the law would stop doctors from giving patients emergency medical care. CNN Correspondent Tom Foreman has the details. Tom, what exactly did the judge say?

TOM FOREMAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: What the judge didn't say was that he was addressing the big picture of abortion. He did say on this one part though, there is a collision of the law. The state law up in Idaho right now says that the only way a doctor can provide an abortion in an emergency situation is because the life of the mother is in danger.

But federal law for how that doctor has to behave in the emergency room is that he needs to perform an abortion if it protects the mother's life or prevent some sort of grievous injury to her or some sort of dysfunction that would impair her life going far into the future. So the state law and the federal law fundamentally disagree. He said in that case, the state - the federal law has to be paramount, we don't know yet if Idaho is going to go after this legally, I presume they probably will. So that's the argument there.

Bear in mind, Texas and Tennessee also came up with - have new trigger laws coming into effect right now. But theirs say there can be abortions performed for impairment of the person's life, the mother's life. There can be something done about that. And, of course, North Dakota and Oklahoma kicking on Friday and Saturday very severe laws as well.

But even there I have to say one of the questions is, if you talk about severe impairment, well, what is that? That seems like a vague term to some of the critics of this and they're saying you put a doctor in the position of saying, okay, I have two laws, one saying I have to save both lives. One saying I can save one life, but only if there's going to be severe impairment and what if I do it and six months from now a prosecutor has people saying we don't think there would have been severe impairment. We think this person would have been fine, therefore you committed a felony.

This is getting to be very, very tricky ground out there for a lot of people.

CAMEROTA: Understood. Tom Foreman, thank you for all that.

FOREMAN: You're welcome.

CAMEROTA: So in one congressional race cast as a referendum on abortion rights, Democrat Pat Ryan surprise the pollsters and won. Ryan beat Republican Marc Molinaro for a house seat and a critical New York swing district. Republicans were optimistic that they could flip the seat that President Biden narrowly won in 2020 and Democrats hope this is a sign that the overturning of Roe vs. Wade will fuel their base in November.

And with us now is Congressman-elect Pat Ryan. Congressman-elect, great to see you.

PAT RYAN, (D) NEW YORK CONGRESSMAN-ELECT: Thanks, Alisyn, you too. Thank you for having me.

CAMEROTA: So polls did not think that you would necessarily win this. How did you do it?

RYAN: The momentum on the ground was incredible, especially after the Dobbs decision. I mean, it shifted the ground dramatically. Certainly in our community, in our district, I think in our country and we just had a groundswell of volunteers of grassroots donors. We couldn't keep lawn signs in our campaign office. I think we really hit a nerve in a country where fundamental rights and freedoms that had been in place for decades were ripped away and people said that is not who we are as a country.

[15:20:10]

CAMEROTA: This is really fascinating because people have wondered whether the overturning of Roe versus Wade would energize the base. And so you say that, I mean, it was a driving issue. How do you know that? What were people saying to you? How do you - how can you connect those so closely?

RYAN: Well, one, the results just overall, when you look at the district, as you said, no one - almost no one thought we would win this and that this opposed red wave was coming in all these things. But we were feeling the opposite of that on the ground. We were feeling deflation of Republican energy and a lot of momentum for us.

But some of the some of the personal moments right after the decision was leaked back in May, there was a big rally in Kingston, about 90 miles north of New York City. I'm walking at the front of this rally with hundreds of people, peacefully protesting and there's a woman in her probably mid 60s standing there looking, watching as this crowd is coming towards her and tears are just streaming down her face. And I stopped and I - and she said, I just cannot believe we're - we have to do this again. And I just think there's a certain set of issues that are sort of guardrails of democracy in American values and this is one of them.

CAMEROTA: It's interesting that you say that, because when in the most recent polling, this is an NBC poll taken a couple of weeks ago, about what are the most important issues in the U.S. abortion is not the top. In fact, abortion, I think, just comes in seventh, so threats to democracy, cost of living, jobs and the economy, immigration, climate change and then abortion and guns are tied. So do you think that this is an issue that will resonate in swing districts around the country or is there's something particular about yours? RYAN: Well, I think actually when you see threats to democracy as

number one, which is I think one of the first times that's happened in certainly my recent memory, that is an overarching umbrella for all of these rights, fundamental freedoms being taken away.

I think, the - that poll sort of separates them out, but in people's minds, these are all related. The idea that if a group of - a small number of nine people can take away a fundamental right that we thought we had worked to protect and had enjoyed for 50 plus years, what does that say about all these other rights and protections? I think that's a core threat to democracy, actually.

CAMEROTA: I do want to ask you about another issue that is really timely today and that is President Biden's plan to relieve some student debt. Because you're in a swing district, is that popular or not? I mean, where are you on that issue? Is that a good idea?

RYAN: People desperately need relief right now. I think it's a critical way to provide relief. In addition to talking about choice and reproductive freedom, we talked a lot about economic relief. At the local level, I cut our county gas tax in half introduced the single biggest property tax cut in 40 years. At the federal level, we've seen inflation Reduction Act, bring down prescription drug prices, make big corporations finally pay their fair share of taxes, one of the most popular things on the campaign trail, not surprising, and student loan relief, 40 plus million people have had a weight lifted off their shoulder, that that is powerful. And so I absolutely support it and it will make a big difference immediately in people's lives.

CAMEROTA: So this was a special election that you won. You have to do this all over again in two months.

RYAN: Seventy-five days, we have another election. New York's redistricting has been quite interesting. But I'm completing a term of our now lieutenant governor in New York, Antonio Delgado. So I'll be sort of finishing out the remainder of his term through the end of the calendar year and at the same time seeking to get reelected in New York's 18th district, so that's exciting.

CAMEROTA: Exhausting is what I would call it. Exciting is one (inaudible) ...

RYAN; I'm excited. I'm excited.

CAMEROTA: Well, Congressman-elect, thanks for making time to sit here and share all of this with us.

RYAN: Thanks, Alisyn.

CAMEROTA: Great to see you.

RYAN: I really appreciate it, thank you.

CAMEROTA: (Inaudible), take care. BLACKWELL: An elementary school student in Georgia tested positive

for monkeypox and while pediatric cases are rare concerns are now rising about the potential for spread in the classroom. More on that just ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[15:29:28]

BLACKWELL: An elementary school student in Georgia has tested positive for monkeypox. Now the case is raising some questions about how concerned parents and teachers should be about the small but possible risk of the virus spreading in classrooms.

CAMEROTA: CNN Health Reporter Jacqueline Howard joins us now. So Jacqueline, what's the plan in schools?

JACQUELINE HOWARD, CNN HEALTH REPORTER: Alisyn, the CDC has released guidance for schools and childcare centers and the plan here is similar to other infectious disease protocols that they have in place to disinfect and clean surfaces and, of course, if there is a case to do contact tracing and see who the infected person has been in contact with.

[15:30:05]