Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Trump Charged With New Crimes In Classified Docs Case; "Real Housewives" Star Calls For Reality TV Rights; Rep. Greg Casar (D-TX) Discusses Leading Thirst Strike To Urge Heat Protections & Biden Unveiling Measures To Address Extreme Heat; TX Police Admit Mistake In Pulling Over Family At Gunpoint; Poll: Fewer Are "Extremely Proud" To Be American. Aired 5-6p ET

Aired July 29, 2023 - 17:00   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[17:01:01]

PAULA REID, CNN HOST: Live from Washington. I'm Paula Reid in for Jim Acosta. You're in the CNN Newsroom.

And we begin this hour with yet another consequential week for former President Donald Trump. On Thursday, as we waited for an indictment in the special counsel investigation into election interference, we learned of three new charges in the Mar-a-Lago documents case, instead. The new charges include two counts of obstruction related to Trump's alleged efforts to get his employees to destroy security video before it could be viewed by the Justice Department.

CNN's Zach Cohen joins us now. Zach, explain these new allegations, starting with the effort to try, though they were unsuccessful, to delete security video.

ZACHARY COHEN, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY REPORTER: Yes, Paula. These new charges really center around allegations that Trump employees not only attempted to destroy this surveillance video at Mar-a-Lago, but they did so because Trump himself is the one who asked them to.

And the reason Trump wanted that footage destroyed according to prosecutors is because he wanted to prevent the grand jury in the classified documents case from seeing it. Now, as you mentioned, obviously, they were unsuccessful in this -- in this task of destroying the surveillance video. But now we have Trump and two employees, two of his employees facing criminal charges as a result of what prosecutors say was an attempted, frankly, an attempted cover up.

And look, Carlos De Oliveira began to third co-defendant in this Trump case. Once this indictment was unsealed, he was named alongside Walt Nauta and Trump as being an active participant, prosecutors say, in this effort to destroy the surveillance video.

His first court appearance is scheduled for Monday. So it remains to be seen how that might impact the timing of a potential trial. But all the same, we now have three co-defendants in this Trump case. And of course, the third charge that we learned about in this superseding indictment related to a classified document that we've actually heard about before.

And as you know, CNN has learned that it is the same document that was referred to in an audio clip that was recorded during an interview in 2021 that Trump was doing with biographers at his Bedminster resort. Take a listen to how Trump described this document at the time.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: And you know, he said, "he wanted to attack Iran, and what -- "

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: And you did.

TRUMP: These are the papers.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You did.

TRUMP: This is done by the military and given to me. I think we can probably, right?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I don't know. We'll, we'll have to see. Yes, we'll have to try to --

TRUMP: Declassify it.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: -- figure out a -- yes.

TRUMP: See as president I could have declassified it.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Yes.

TRUMP: Now I can't, you know, but this is still a secret.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Yes. Now we have a problem.

TRUMP: Isn't that interesting?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Yes.

TRUMP: It's so cool. I mean, it's so -- look, her and I, and you probably almost didn't believe me, but now you believe me.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: No, I believe you.

TRUMP: It's incredible, right?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: No, they never met a war they didn't want.

TRUMP: Hey, bring some Cokes in please.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COHEN: Paula, you broke the story of this audio recording previously, and it was a little bit surprising that this was not listed among the 31 counts of willful retention of defense information in the first indictment. Of course, now we know it is number 32 that Trump is facing after the superseding indictment. Paula?

REID: Zach Cohen, thank you so much.

And joining us now is Ed O'Callaghan. He is a former Justice Department official. He served during the Trump Administration as a top official at the Justice Department. And during that time, one of his many responsibilities was being the liaison between Main Justice and the Special Counsel Probe conducted by Robert Mueller.

I'm so glad you're here. Thank you so much for joining us.

ED O'CALLAGHAN, FORMER TOP DOJ OFFICIAL AND NATIONAL SECURITY PROSECUTOR: Thanks for having me, Paula. Always glad to be here.

REID: I want to get your reaction to the Mar-a-Lago documents case. We'll get into the superseding indictment, but this is the first time we've gotten to talk about this case. When you read this based on your experience, what was your reaction?

O'CALLAGHAN: Yes, what has struck me from the very beginning is the type of classified documents that are originally were listed in the search warrant return that we saw from the Mar-a-Lago search and then has been follow up now in the actual indictment.

[17:05:06]

These are the types of documents where you would understand the intelligence community being very concerned about the national defense information that's contained in those documents. And what I'm talking about here are documents that are classified, not just top secret, but top secret special access program documents.

And as we've seen in this superseding indictment, top secret, special handling, those are just levels of classification where the intelligence community, whoever has the authority to classify the documents themselves have put them at a very, very high level of classification, meaning not very many people should see it, and certainly they need to be handled with care according to the rules of handling classified documents.

REID: And your reaction to those photos, I mean, showing they're restored in bathrooms, ballrooms, a bedroom?

O'CALLAGHAN: Yes, I mean, it is -- does not comport whatsoever with the way that classified documents are required to be handled. I mean, the whole point of actually having a classification system and providing certain clearances to people who need to know, they have to have a need to know the information.

The national defense information is to make sure they're handled properly, so obviously, they don't get into the hands of people who don't have that clearances and keeping them in shower stalls and lockers such as those are not even close to being sufficient. REID: I just want to go through the details of the superseding indictment, but let's start with even before the indictment. This investigation was conducted in Washington, D.C. But then prosecutors have brought the actual case down in Florida. What was your reaction to that?

O'CALLAGHAN: Yes, I was quite surprised by that decision. You know, obviously a venue considerations are important. Venue means that the prosecutors will look to bring the case in the geographic area where the conduct principally occurred.

And so here, the unlawful retention has been charged, obviously occurred in Florida. And so there was certainly grounds to bring the venue there, but the whole grand jury investigation was conducted in D.C. Certainly there were justifiable reasons to bring the indictment in D.C. and everything looked like it was going to be in D.C.

And frankly, as a line prosecutor myself, I would be inclined to continue to pursue the indictment in D.C. even on -- if, on the face of it, it looked like Florida was a more natural geographic home for that. And that's not to get a home court advantage or anything like that in D.C. versus Florida. It's just that the, frankly, the judges in D.C. are more experienced in handling national classified information cases.

And they're more familiar with the certain procedural rules that have to occur when you're trying to try a case that handles classified information. For the Florida courts, they're great courts, but they are not nearly as savvy with regard to those rules. And so I would have done my best as the line prosecutor handling the case to have it in D.C.

REID: And Judge Cannon, a Trump appointee, just objectively an inexperienced judge, only been on the bench for a couple years. Let's talk about the superseding indictment. As Zach was just reporting, they finally added that document that Trump talks about in the tape. We've also learned through our own reporting that the archives has always been in possession of that, that document was one returned in those initial 15 boxes.

We don't know. Trust me, we've tried to figure it out why they just added it now. Do you have any theories of why it's so significant?

O'CALLAGHAN: Yes.

REID: Why they might've added it in a superseding.

O'CALLAGHAN: So look, the difficulty with the Department of Justice bringing classified information related prosecutions is that you need to have the intelligence community saying that they will support the department to bring a prosecution on that particular document all the way to trial in an open Article III court. And so I don't know what the back and forth with the intelligence community may have been with these several documents that were charged.

But I suspect that that was one where perhaps there was just either more hesitation or they really needed to do some more digging on the intelligence community side to say, yes, we're supporting. Go ahead, and bring an Article III prosecution related to the offer retention of that document itself.

REID: And Ed, it's so important to have you here because there's so many talking heads, particularly in Washington, who are going to look at this indictment and say it's the worst thing he's going to jail. But if anyone thinks, right, that you are not going to be fair to the former president, we have to remind people that in your role as liaison to the Mueller probe, I mean, you were one of the authors of a memo laying out why the former president should not be charged with obstruction of justice based on what was uncovered in the Mueller probe.

[17:10:01]

So I just want to read for you really quickly the outline of the obstruction case here. I mean, they're saying, you know, he suggested to his attorneys that they falsely represent to the FBI, that Trump did not have documents called for by the grand jury. Directing Walt Nauta to move boxes, to conceal them from his own attorney, suggesting his attorney hide or destroy documents providing the FBI and the grand jury some documents while claiming he was cooperating fully, causing a certification to be submitted to the FBI and the grand jury.

Falsely representing that all documents called forward by the grand jury subpoena, had been produced and attempting to delete security footage at the Mar-a-Lago Club. Based on your assessment, if you had to draft a memo about whether they should pursue obstruction, what is your assessment of this case for obstruction of justice?

O'CALLAGHAN: Yes, so obviously, you have to have the evidence to get all of those allegations into court when you bring the case. But just on the -- this is clearly a speaking indictment meaning that you're putting a lot of details in it so people actually know the strength of your case and by all objective standards, it seems like a pretty strong case of obstruction here.

I mean, the material difference there are a lot of differences between --

REID: A lot of differences, yes.

O'CALLAGHAN: -- between here and what Special Counsel Mueller was investigating. But here, what we had -- the circumstances were, he had already been issued a grand jury subpoena. There was a grand jury that was already investigating whether or not he has unlawfully retained these national defense information documents.

And he, according to the allegations in the indictment, knew that the grand jury was investigating this and specifically engaged in that conduct and conduct with others including the new defendant De Oliveira to specifically obstruct that grand jury proceeding. And so the conduct that's alleged in the indictment is of the kind that any prosecutor would be comfortable bringing that case.

REID: Does he have a defense here?

O'CALLAGHAN: So look, the difficulty would bring any obstruction case is proving corrupt intent, right? And so that is a very speed (ph). You need to, as an individual, the government needs to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that there was some benefit to you that you expected to obtain by obstructing the investigation.

So his defense would be that as we know, going back to -- he could have declassified these documents whenever he wanted. That's what his lawyers have been saying and he's been saying from the beginning. So he's going to say, I didn't have any corrupt intent because I didn't think they were classified because I had declassified them.

That's an interesting tack. I do think that the conspiracy charges that were added, including De Oliveira and some of the facts there are specifically intended to show what's known as consciousness of guilt. If someone actually believed that they could keep these documents and they had no problem keeping these documents, why did he go about instructing others to try to attempt to destroy security camera footage of them moving the documents around?

Why did he give instructions for people to do these things? And it looks like they have witnesses who will corroborate each other in having received those instructions. So that's good from a prosecutor's perspective, again, good consciousness of guilt evidence that having these other counts allows you to get in before the jury to help you prove the other counts that are already charged.

REID: And even though they're wrapping me, I have two quick questions I do want to get in. You completely understand the complexity of a case like this. Do you think this is actually going to go to trial before the election?

O'CALLAGHAN: I would see -- I think it's going to be challenging. I would be surprised if it does. I think there's a May 24th trial date set out. Having done, you know, classified document, unlawful retention prosecutions, there are just so many more procedural hurdles that have to be accomplished to actually get to a jury -- in a jury -- in a trial courtroom to put your evidence on, including clearance issues with the defense counsel making sure that they get the amount of discovery that they're going to demand to put on a valid defense here.

And typically those cases take longer than, you know, the six or eight months that we're talking about to May of next year. So I would be surprised even if it would happen before the election. I think that there's a chance and principally that's if, again, this goes back to the judge.

The judge needs to be comfortable in a case like this to make some unusual rulings in terms of what actually needs to be provided to the defense to put on a valid one, that it's more limiting than what would typically happen because of the classified document that are involved in this case.

And Judge Cannon, unfortunately, doesn't have that experience. Whereas a judge, in these, he likely would have.

REID: And she got hit pretty hard for one of the rulings that she made early on. OK, lastly, before the controlling hits the eject button, how close, I mean, you're one of the few people who's ever been, you know, at the top of justice during a special counsel program. I mean, realistically, based on your experience, how close to an election do you think the Justice Department would actually put on a trial?

[17:15:14]

Typically, they don't take action in an investigation about 60 days out, that's sort of a --

O'CALLAGHAN: Yes.

REID: -- rule, small r. I mean, how big of a zone do you think there is where they'd just be unlikely to actually put on a trial?

O'CALLAGHAN: Yes, I think it's very, very difficult to say, but the thrust of that rule is not doing any overt investigative matters close to an election because it could impact an election, but that doesn't mean an investigation has to stop. Here, it's already overt. And the cat's out of the bag.

REID: A trial feels can be overt.

O'CALLAGHAN: It's -- but it is overt. I mean, the case itself is already overt charged.

REID: Do you think they pulled the guy off the campaign trail?

O'CALLAGHAN: I don't --

REID: I don't know.

O'CALLAGHAN: I don't think so.

REID: OK.

O'CALLAGHAN: I think that that's probably not the case. But I don't think that it's something -- if, for instance, the trial's already started --

REID: Yes.

O'CALLAGHAN: -- I don't think that they're going to stop the trial. And the judge would have something to say about that. So I think it's, again, we're in uncharted water here.

REID: So uncharted.

O'CALLAGHAN: But --

REID: You'll all have got it.

O'CALLAGHAN: But it is fun to think about. And I think that there are going to be some interesting motions that we haven't seen.

REID: Yes.

O'CALLAGHAN: Not just venue motions and things of that nature. But, you know, the impact on whether he can get a fair jury pool when we're talking about maybe a presidential candidate of against another presidential candidate's Department of Justice. That's never been done before.

REID: Ed, thank you so much for joining us and thank you to the control room for indulging on my questions.

All right now to Georgia, where a decision may be imminent on whether to indict the former president and his allies, security barriers are now in place around the Fulton County Courthouse. In a statement, the sheriff's office there says it's proactively coordinating with local, state, and federal agencies to enhance security during his high profile legal proceedings.

A state level investigation into efforts to overturn the 2020 election has been ongoing since early 2021, and some of the biggest players in Trump's orbit are involved. In a new episode of the whole story with Anderson Cooper airing on Sunday, CNN'S Sara Murray takes us inside the events that led to the sprawling investigation in Fulton County, Georgia.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

SARA MURRAY, CNN POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): We are more than two years past the pressure campaigns, the harassment of public and private citizens, the coordinating of fake electors, the breach of election equipment, and we still don't know.

Will Trump and his allies face charges here in Georgia? And if so, will there be convictions?

TRUMP: They rigged the presidential election in 2020 and we're not going to allow them to rig the presidential election of 2024.

MURRAY (on-camera): Did voters deserve an answer to this question before Donald Trump became, you know, an announced candidate again?

MICHAEL MOORE, FORMER U.S. ATTORNEY: Yes, I don't think there's any question about that. I mean, so from a national perspective, no question about it. From a local perspective here, no question about it.

MURRAY (on-camera): We saw former president Trump lie to the American people. You saw him gin up this outrage. Is it a remedy if he's charged with a crime in Georgia?

GABRIEL STERLING (R), CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER, GA SECRETARY OF STATE'S OFFICE: If they indict him and they can't convict him, it will be an exoneration. Is that better or worse? I don't know.

(END VIDEOTAPE) REID: CNN's Sara Murray joins me now. Sara, my office neighbor, thank you so much for joining us. You are the absolute best person to do this episode. I mean, you have done so much reporting on this. You've been following this more closely than anyone. What should people be looking for this weekend?

MURRAY: Well, thank you for that. I think what we did in this documentary is really dove into not just the obvious parts, I mean, everyone knows about Donald Trump calling Brad Raffensperger, pressuring him to find the votes. A lot of people also know about Rudy Giuliani showing up, talking to Georgia State lawmakers and spreading a number of conspiracy theories.

But people have heard less, I think about this voting machine breach in Coffee County, Georgia. We dive into that. We dive into some really wild moments where people are just showing up to try to pressure election workers to confess that they participated in fraud. They didn't participate in. People you would not expect, like Kanye West, former publicist.

So it kind of gives you an indication of how sprawling this investigation is and just how wild the events were that were unfolding in Georgia around the 2020 election.

REID: Wild indeed. And former President Trump just weighing in on his social media account saying that he expects to be indicted in both the special counsel's January 6th investigation and the Fulton County probe. What was your reaction to that?

MURRAY: You know, I wasn't totally surprised, and I bet you weren't totally surprised either. I think that Donald Trump and his team have basically been bracing for the summer of indictments. So the same way we've been bracing for this summer of indictments.

I think that they know that they could only be halfway. You know, there could be a third indictment, there could be a fourth indictment, and in some ways I think that Donald Trump is a little bit resigned to that even though he does not seem excited about the prospect of being indicted multiple more times. We do know he uses it as a fundraising benefit.

[17:20:10]

REID: Absolutely. The one thing about Fulton County is even if he's reelected, it doesn't go away.

MURRAY: Yes.

REID: Sara Murray, thank you so much.

MURRAY: Thanks, Paula.

REID: And be sure to tune in in all new episode of "The Whole Story with Anderson Cooper". One whole story, one whole hour airs tomorrow at 8:00 p.m. Eastern and Pacific only on CNN. And coming up, amid the writers and actor strikes, there's now a push for better conditions for reality TV stars as well. Leading that push is Bethenny Frankel, and she joins us next live in the CNN Newsroom.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

REID: There is a new fight taking shape in the entertainment world. One of the most iconic personalities in Bravo's "Real Housewives" franchise is taking a stance.

[17:25:01]

Bethenny Frankel is calling for reality TV stars to unionize and fight against alleged exploitation by networks and the studios that are currently relying heavily on unscripted material as the writers and actors strikes continue to unfold.

So, joining us now is Bethenny Frankel. Bethenny, thank you so much for joining us. I think most people know who you are. Few people have been as successful following a reality TV stint. So why are you the right person to bring this message about how reality TV stars need more compensation for their work?

BETHENNY FRANKEL, ENTREPRENEUR, PHILANTHROPIST, PRODUCER AND AUTHOR: It's not just TV stars, it's TV production, it's people in casting and people in lighting and sound, and this entire industry. I just spoke to someone today who's been working in it for 18 years who's never had a health insurance, and this person said to me that they exploded. Their business exploded during the last strike because everybody relied upon reality for entertainment and it's happening again now because of the strike, the writers and actor strike.

And I realized that when I'm in Australia, I see full-size pictures of me on all buses promoting shows over a decade later from when I filmed them and I'm not being compensated. And it's just the difference between right and wrong and reality television's talent exploits themselves so much more because they are not reading someone else's lines.

They could say something that could ruin their life or get paid nothing and go on a dating show that could ruin their life. And the stakes are really high and it's very enticing to be famous and to make money. But most people aren't as successful as I am. Most people regret it and they still have to watch it years later after their careers have been destroyed.

REID: So what specifically are the asks here?

FRANKEL: So I did a video first talking about that it was ludicrous to me that this wasn't something that anyone was talking about. And then I did a video saying that we should receive residuals and that there should be a minimum wage if you're on a show that makes it to air, and that we should see money on merchandise.

There's merchandise sold. There's a big Bravo con, a big conference in Vegas where people spend up to $500 to go, thousands of people going in and out of there to watch displays with my clothing, my taglines, and so many other people. But like I said, it's really -- it's a model too for other industries, whether it's nurses or public workers, like people just feel like they're not heard, and it effectively is a union.

I've teamed with Brian Friedman and Mark Geragos. There are hundreds of stories of people whose lives have been ruined, whose rights have been violated, who are not treated equal, who don't have insurance, who are no better off 20 years later working in this industry than the day they started. They're always starting over.

And they feel like they're just pawns. And right now they're going to feel really used. And the networks are getting to a lot of the people that are filming now by showing them the shiny objects and putting gag orders on them and tightening up their language. And in many cases, these networks and streamers have said that anyone who's on a reality show has to give a percentage of what they make to the powers that be.

And that started after my Skinnygirl deal. Once the networks got wind of my Skinnygirl deal, they locked in all talent and made them promise away their rights, but also future earnings.

REID: And as the actors and writers strikes continue in Hollywood, do you think the pressure on reality stars will continue to grow? I mean, do you think that this is a moment where this will be successful, or do you think people are going to see what you just described as those shiny objects now as their time? What do you think about the timing?

FRANKEL: I think it's going to be very interesting because it's a time when the networks and streamers really can get everything they want out of this talent because they want to create more product. But at the same time, people like myself and Friedman and Geragos are going to be breathing down their necks, making contracts better and banding together.

And there are more people that have been wronged by reality television than have been righted. So this is really not the fight for the person who's made millions. It's ironically not the fight for someone like me who's already out of the woods. I got out and played chess the whole way, fighting for every cent, but most people don't feel that way.

And all of them have reached out to me, either secretly or publicly and told me how they've been violated. Things, you know, faulty contracts, people invading their privacy and never getting proper releases or just a lot of -- so, you know, this is like mice coming out of the floorboards. There are so many more. And now that I open my mouth, everyone's coming through.

[17:30:00]

One last question, in terms of the challenges with this mission. I mean, unlike nurses or auto workers, writers or actors people tend to go on reality TV and then they go back to whatever they were doing before, what they want to do.

Have you thought through how that could be a challenge in terms of how to sustain a union?

FRANKEL: Well, you're talking just like I said about the talent. And I don't think most people go back. Most of these people want some level of fame and try different things.

But some people do go back. And many of those people go back with big problems because they take no money to the show maybe about dating and it opens up some part of their life or family or their religion or their skin color that they didn't want to get into, or their sexuality, and they can't go back to that job.

Also, we haven't talked about kids working for free. Children working with mics on who are free and spouses working for free and losing their jobs because the pressure of their spouse to be on that show and production saying everything's going to be OK.

So it's really more for the people that work in production, also, that are begging me to help them because they're saying we've been abused this entire time, and we're nobodies. So we have less of a voice than the least famous reality talent.

So they are the unsung work forces of this workhorse group that are going to be heavily relied upon now.

They're confused because they want to come with me publicly. But they also want to grab all the nickels off the floor now even though they know they're being abused.

Like many people will be treated poorly for pay. You see it happen with illegal workers all the time. We're not qualified as workers literally.

They are not -- I was on a shoot of one of my shows that was produced by a network. And I said to the head producer, is this legal? Because it was 2:00 in the morning and everyone was freezing. And they said it's not legal, it is -- it's not illegal, but it's not right.

So I've seen it myself. And it's really -- it's got to stop. It's going to stop. We're going to take serious action, make some changes.

Do I know the level, do I know the level of a, quote/unquote, union? Technically, this is a union because it's a group of people wanting change.

But I do know there will be language and that contracts will be changed. I know that we'll make a change. I know it because I know that once this has been opened you can't put the toothpaste back in the tube.

REID: Bethenny Frankel, thank you so much for joining us.

FRANKEL: Thank you.

REID: And CNN reached out to NBC, which owns Bravo, for comment on this story but have not heard back.

And we'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[17:36:46]

REID: A brutal heatwave is gripping large parts of the country tonight. A hundred million Americans, nearly a third of the population, are under heat advisories.

This week, Texas Congressman Greg Casar held a nine-hour thirst strike on the steps of the U.S. capitol. The congressman is joining outdoor workers in calling for federal standards for dealing with extreme heat, including mandatory water breaks.

Let's discuss with the congressman himself.

Congressman, thank you so much for joining us.

Let's talk a little bit about these actions that have been under way to try to get workers just water breaks, why is this such a difficult thing?

REP. GREG CASAR (D-TX): Big corporate lobby interests in Washington, D.C., for decades have kept OSHA, the federal agency in charge of keeping us safe at work, they've been able to keep OSHA from putting heat protections in place. It's finally time to get it done.

In those nearly 50 years that the federal government has been trying to protect workers from the heat, lately, local cities have started passing protections, like Austin where I represent and Dallas in Texas.

But this summer, this summer, Governor Greg Abbott signed a bill wiping away those local water break protections. It's outrageous.

So that's why we staged this thirst strike standing on steps of the capitol in the sun, calling on the president, supporting him to get this done and protect workers in this historic heatwave.

REID: Well, the actions President Biden announced this week include directing the Labor Department to issue a hazard alert for workers who face greater risk of injury or death from extreme heat, boosting inspections of high-risk workplaces, investing in improving weather forecasts, and expanding water storage in the western U.S.

Do you think that these go far enough to meeting what you are asking for?

CASAR: These are important first steps. And the first step is the president getting this process going. So he has put in the first high heat hazard alert ever in the nation's history.

He also really heard the stories of Texas workers that were standing on the capitol steps two days before his announcement, calling out the governor for taking people's right to a water break away from them in Texas. And so the president stated that it was outrageous what Texas is

doing. That's a critical first step, which is listening to workers in Texas.

The next step is putting in strong requirements, not just a hazard alert but strong requirements that require that you have the right if you're up on a scaffold in the heat in 110 degrees in Texas and you're not feeling well, to come off the scaffold, gets a drink, get some shade.

It's outrageous that that isn't currently a right. We're going to get it done.

REID: And this particular move disproportionately impacts minorities. Can you explain how that is in terms of the make-up of the particular workers who are seeking these breaks?

CASAR: This affects all of us. We know it affects folks like construction workers and warehouse workers the most.

[17:40:02]

In Texas, a University of Texas report showed that nearly 40 percent of Texas' construction workers don't receive a regular water break. And the vast majority of Texas construction workers are immigrants and people of color.

But this is a problem across industries. There was recently an airplane that hit 110 degrees, and a flight attendant and a passenger had to get taken to the hospital over this.

So this is impacting indoor workers and outdoor workers.

We deserve the basic dignity and respect of protections, especially as the climate crisis gets worse and worse.

So our third strike was asking for this respect. It was calling out governors that are taking away workers' rights.

It's part of a bigger movement, I know our last segment was about protecting actors and writers and people in reality TV. All of us deserve a union, a living wage, and working should not be a death sentence.

We honored families on those capitol steps over those nine hours standing in the sun that had lost a loved one in the heat because their bosses had denied them a water break. So I think those families' stories are finally being heard.

And we can finally beat those corporate interests that have kept us from having basic things like water break and rest break protections over so many years.

REID: Congressman Greg Casar, thank you.

And we'll be right back. CASAR: Thank you so much for having me.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[17:45:26]

REID: The police chief of Frisco, Texas, is apologizing to an Arkansas family after officers in his department pulled them over at gunpoint. The frightening encounter is captured on this police body cam video.

CNN's Camila Bernal has the story.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

DEMETRIA HEARD, MOTHER: Whatever happens to me --

CAMILA BERNAL, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): An overwhelmed father.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: My son for no reason, y'all.

BERNAL: Police say it was all a mistake.

UNIDENTIFIED LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER: I ran -- (INAUDIBLE) to A.R. to arizona --

BERNAL: On July 23rd, a Frisco, Texas, police officer ran plates on a black Dodge Charger. But instead of typing A-R for Arkansas, she says she typed A-Z for arizona. The information came back as a possible stolen car.

Police say it was a high-risk traffic stop, and at least one officer had his weapon drawn.

UNIDENTIFIED LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER: Everybody in the car, hands outside the window. Hands outside. Maintain your hands outside.

Hey, find out if there's any weapons in the car.

BERNAL: The family tells police they have a gun in the car.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: In the glove box. In the glove box!

UNIDENTIFIED LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER: If you reach in that car, you may get shot, so be careful. Do not reach in the car.

HEARD: I have -- (INAUDIBLE)

UNIDENTIFIED LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER: OK.

BERNAL: Demetria Heard was behind the wheel. In the car were her husband, son, and their nephew.

HEARD: My baby.

BERNAL: They were on their way to a basketball tournament.

She explains what it was like to see her sixth-grade son involved.

HEARD: They actually bring him in, cuff him, and put him in the car. They're walking him to put him in the police car. And I'm already have been -- I'm crying, hyperventilating.

UNIDENTIFIED LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER: Thank you.

BERNAL: She says they were instructed not to move.

UNIDENTIFIED LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER: Do not move.

HEARD: My husband explains to me that my nephew is in there literally screaming for his life, and telling him, uncle, we are about to die.

BERNAL: But finally --

UNIDENTIFIED LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER: The officer made a mistake on the plate.

BERNAL: -- the officer realizes it was a mistake.

UNIDENTIFIED LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER: A-R, it's Arkansas.

BERNAL: An incident review is now under way.

UNIDENTIFIED LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER: I'm not justifying anything. I'm saying, like, it wasn't a computer that read it. It was our human error. So please forgive us, ma'am.

BERNAL: The ongoing review would identify further changes to the department's training policies and procedures.

HEARD: I thank God that we were not physically injured, but we have suffered a lot of mental and emotional trauma from this.

BERNAL (on camera): And the family is saying they do want to share this for awareness.

In his statement, the chief of police saying they don't hide from the mistakes. Instead, they learn from their mistakes and saying he spoke to the family and understands, Paula, why they are so upset.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

REID: Camila Bernal, thank you.

And we'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:52:41]

REID: New polling shows that fewer Americans are extremely proud of their country. And more are saying that there are better countries than the U.S.

CNN senior data reporter, Harry Enten, joins us now.

Harry, what do these numbers show?

HARRY ENTEN, CNN SENIOR DATA REPORTER: Not good news, as far as I'm concerned, as well as those who love this country are concerned.

Take a look here. Extremely proud to be an American. A decade ago, a clear majority. 56 percent. Look where we've averaged over the last two years. Just 39 percent. At its peak in the mid '00s, it was near 70 percent. A very big divide in those extremely proud to be Americans.

REID: How do these break down by age?

ENTEN: Yes, so if you look here, all the age groups have seen a drop from where we were a decade ago. Ages 55 and older, ages 35 to 54.

But take a look at ages 18 to 34. Those under the age of 35. Look at that drop. A 26 point drop over the last decade. Now just 22 percent on average of those under the age of 35 say they're extremely proud to be an American. That is quite the drop.

REID: Another big change in the numbers shows more people saying there are better countries than the U.S.

So where? What are they talking about?

ENTEN: Yes. Take a look at this. This is a question that has been asked by Pugh Research over the last decade. And they ask it as a multiprong.

But one of the responses can be there are other countries better than the U.S. Look at that. Overall, that number has nearly tripled from 8 percent to 23 percent.

But it is even larger among those under the age of 30. This is the same thing we saw on the extremely proud question where it is the younger folks driving this change.

Look at that, 12 percent in 2011 said there are other countries better than the U.S. Look at that. More than tripled, up to 42 percent now. My goodness gracious. That number shows no sign of slowing down in terms of its rise.

REID: So what do you see when you break this down by political affiliation?

ENTEN: Yes. So let's concentrate with those under the age of 29 and under the age of 30. What we see here is, take a look here, it is really Democrats who are driving this. It is Democrats who are driving it.

[17:55:01]

Look at that, 13 percent in 2011. Look where we are today, 55 percent of those under the age of 30 say that there are other countries better than the U.S.

Republicans, far less of a drop. It is really young Democrats who are driving this.

REID: Fascinating.

Harry Enten, thank you so much.

ENTEN: Thanks.

REID: Now be sure to check out Harry's podcast, "Margins of Error." You can find it on your favorite podcast app or at CNN.com/audio.

This week's "CNN Hero" believes that giving children the opportunity and encouragement to read for fun is a necessity.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

ALVIN IRBY, CNN HERO: What's up, man? How are you doing?

We installed a child-friendly reading space in the barber shop. We literally ask little black boys, what do you like to read. And those are the books we distribute to our national network of barbers.

Use the opportunity when they're sitting in the chair to even talk to them about books.

Many black boys are raised by single mothers. So there is this opportunity to support barbers in becoming --

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: How is the book going so far?

IRBY: Black male reading role models.

I'm just excited that we get to create a safe space for boys to do something that is really life-changing. That's what I really believe reading is. It unlocks potential.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)