Return to Transcripts main page

CNN This Morning

Civil Rights Groups Sue Texas over New Border Law; Colorado Supreme Court Rules Trump Ineligible for Office; DeSantis' Record on Smokable Medical Marijuana in Florida Raises Questions About His Promise to "Drain the Swamp" in the State; Dozens of Epstein's Victims, Associates to be Named. Aired 7:30-8a ET

Aired December 20, 2023 - 07:30   ET

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

ROSA FLORES, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Exactly why El Paso County, the localities, are so concerned about this.

[07:30:04]

Take a look behind me. This is El Pass -- Eagle Pass, Texas. What this is thousands of migrants waiting to be transported for federal immigration processing.

Now, this is the responsibility of the federal government, to apprehend and uphold these individuals. Now, with us before with the new creation of the state law that makes the illegal entry into the state of Texas a state crime, this could be the issue, the problem, of a state, and in particular, localities, local county judges and also sheriffs, for example.

And so, that's the big concern here. Now, all of this as we are learning more about what is driving this surge.

Now, we learn from a CBP official that there are pseudo-travel agencies that are promising people in other parts of the world travel to the United States, but they are ultimately connecting them to smuggling organizations south of the border. And the smuggling organizations are crossing large groups into the United States at random locations on the U.S. southern border, in groups of 500 or even 1,000 individuals at one point in time. And that is what is overwhelming the U.S. border patrol.

Now, Phil and Poppy, I want to leave you with this because we also learned from the CBP official that CBP is resourced for half of the volume of the apprehensions that they are seeing in one -- in any particular day. Now, yesterday in a 24-hour period, apprehensions were at about 2,600.

So, think about this, CBP, the federal enforcement law agency that's supposed to keep border security is resourced finance for half of the volume of the apprehensions, again, highlighting why the White House and Congress need to do something about this issue on the U.S. southern border -- Phil and Poppy.

POPPY HARLOW, CNN ANCHOR: The numbers are absolutely staggering. Rosa, thank you for the reporting there from Eagle Pass, Texas.

PHIL MATTINGLY, CNN ANCHOR: Well, new overnight, a local Philadelphia news helicopter crashed in New Jersey, killing two people on board. According to the station's website, the pilot and the photographer from their news teamwork killed. Names of the victims were not being released until their families are notified.

WPVI officials report the chopper crashed into a wooded area of Washington Township as it was returning from an assignment on the Jersey Shore. The station said an investigation into the crash is underway. Our thoughts with both the station and their families.

HARLOW: All of them.

Next, our coverage of this unprecedented ruling out of Colorado Supreme Court continues. Former President Donald Trump has been removed from the state's 2024 ballot because of the insurrectionist ban. We'll talk about it.

Next, a member of the group that filed this lawsuit is with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[07:36:17]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CHRIS CHRISTIE (R), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: I do not believe Donald Trump should be prevented from being president of the United States by any court. I think he should be prevented from being president of the United States by the voters of this country.

NIKKI HALEY (R), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: I want to see this in the hands of the voters. We're going to win this the right way. We're going to do what we need to do. But the last thing we want is judges telling us who can and can't be on the ballot.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HARLOW: Those are 2024 presidential candidates responding to the Colorado Supreme Court decision overnight to disqualify Donald Trump from the state's ballot.

The group that brought the case says that the ruling is, quote, justified and necessary for the future of our democracy.

Joining us this morning, Noah Bookbinder, the president and CEO of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington. It is his organization that filed this lawsuit.

Noah, good morning. Thank you for being with us.

That's your case -- I mean, you prevailed here so far. That is your argument, that it is necessary for the future of democracy. What about those that say actually not letting the voters have their

say is antithetical to democracy?

NOAH BOOKBINDER, PRESIDENT, CITIZENS FOR RESPONSIBILITY & ETHICS IN WASHINGTON: Yeah. The problem with that is that we tried that already, right? In 2020, voters had a chance to decide if they want Donald Trump to be president. They decided that they didn't.

And what happened after that was Donald Trump refused to accept that result and incited a violent insurrection to try to keep himself in power despite having lost. There's simply no reason to think that somehow we can do it this way and it will come out differently.

That's why the framers of the 14th Amendment put this provision into the Constitution. It was specifically meant to defend the republic from those who have attacked it in the past, attacked the democracy in the past. That's what we have here.

And, you know, the Constitution sets out what the qualifications are to be president of the United States. You've got to be 35 years old. You have to be a -- you have to be --

HARLOW: Born here.

BOOKBINDER: Born here. You can't have -- served two terms. And you can't have engaged in insurrection.

HARLOW: Well --

BOOKBINDER: You know, those are the rules of this democracy.

HARLOW: Let's just dig into the law here just a little bit because when you read in the Section Three of the 14th Amendment, the language, which is what the Supreme Court, if they take this up, is going to asses, quote, having previously taken an oath as a member of Congress or as an officer of the United States. That part doesn't say president.

And here's what Ty Cobb, former White House lawyer under Trump and now has been very critical of Trump, here's what he said about this. Listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TY COBB, FORMER TRUMP WHITE HOUSE LAWYER: And to the extent that the president or the vice president are included as an officer or included within the admonitions of the Constitution, they are typically highlighted, like in the impeachment clause, which specifically says president and vice president.

So I think this case will be handled quickly. I think it could be 9-0 in the Supreme Court for Trump.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HARLOW: He said the high court could rule unanimously against you, Noah. Why do you think you could prevail there?

BOOKBINDER: Look, that was a big focus of the argument in front of the Colorado Supreme Court. It's a big focus of the decision that came out yesterday.

And what it -- what it says is that actually, the language of the Constitution, in a lot of different parts is very clear that the president, he is in office of the United States. The debate over this provision on this 14th Amendment was made very clear, that all offices including the president were meant to be included. You know, there's discussion of dictionaries and common understanding at the time.

We think, actually, it's very clear from the history and the language that this was meant to include all officers, that includes the president.

[07:40:01]

And just logically, it simply doesn't make sense that the framers of the 14th Amendment wanted to protect the country from those who had rebelled against it, those who had engaged in insurrection, except for the very top person who can do the most damage. It doesn't -- it doesn't make logical sense. And we think the support is not there in the language or the history for that argument.

We're pretty confident about that one going forward.

HARLOW: You are looking at the majority of these justices being textualists and originalists and looking it at that way to arguably be in your favor.

But I was struck by a dissent, Noah, from three of the justices. Let me read you one of the dissents on this court from Justice Carlos Samour.

Quote: Even if we are convinced that the candidate committed horrible acts in the past -- dare I say, engaged in an insurrection -- there must be procedural due process before we can declare that an individual is disqualified from holding public office.

He writes: I am disturbed about the potential chaos wrought by imprudent, unconstitutional and standardless system in which each state gets to adjudicate Section Three disqualification cases on an ad hoc basis.

What he is saying is what does this do to our republic beyond Trump? If this is what it is, then what? How is this not portend chaos?

BOOKBINDER: Well, look, our elections are run by the states. States on a routine basis decide the qualification of candidates. We've had decisions in Colorado and a whole lot of other states about the age of the candidates, about whether they were born in the United States.

And, you know, on process, I think it's really important to bear in mind, as I think the majority of this court did, that this is a situation where you didn't have a court making an arbitrary decision. There was in fact an extensive process.

In the -- the trial court held a multi-day evidentiary hearing with testimony from law enforcement officers, members of Congress, experts, other government officials, organizers of the January 6th protests, and reviewed thousands of pages of documents. The Colorado Supreme Court reviewed that entire record. There was able advocacy from all sides, with top lawyers, Republicans and Democrats. There was a tremendous amount of process. In fact, this is the only case in the country where there has been that kind of proceeding.

And reviewing all of that, this court found -- the trial court found that Donald Trump engaged in insurrection. This court down found that Donald Trump is disqualified. I think the evidence is actually quite overwhelming when there is that kind of very comprehensive process.

HARLOW: Every quickly before you go, Noah, you told Abby Philip, our colleague, Colorado, quote, won't be the last stop. Where is next?

BOOKBINDER: Well, I think the first thing that we need to do is to focus on this case, defending this really important ruling. So, that's going to be our -- our focus in the immediate term. I am confident that other states will be looking at this, but we're taking this one step at a time.

HARLOW: Noah Bookbinder, thanks very much.

BOOKBINDER: Thank you.

MATTINGY: Well, next, CNN looks into the very first bill Florida Governor Ron DeSantis signed into law, and how it raises questions about his record of catering to campaign donors and special interest.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The reason why Ron DeSantis became governor of Florida is because of a little plant called cannabis.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[07:47:12]

MATTINGLY: Republican presidential candidate Ron DeSantis is criticizing Donald Trump for failing to drain the swamp in Washington while he was in the White House. But DeSantis made a similar pledge in his campaign for Florida governor.

Now, a CNN investigation is raising questions about his record on special interests and campaign diners.

And as Randi Kaye reports, it has to do with legalizing smokable medical marijuana in the state.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

GOV. RON DESANTIS (R-FL), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Thank you. God bless you.

RANDI KAYE, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): After Ron DeSantis was elected governor of Florida in 2018, the very first bill he signed into law, legalized smokable medical marijuana in Florida.

DESANTIS: Whether they have to smoke it or not, who am I to judge that? I want people to be able to have their suffering relieved.

KAYE: A CNN investigation reveals how DeSantis was courted by key figures in the medical marijuana industry who donated to his campaign. He got a political boost and they got a financial one. Yet DeSantis is still boasting that he drained the swamp in Florida.

DESANTIS: We've drained the swamp in here.

KAYE: That all sounds good, but did he really drain the swamp?

Turns out Trulieve, one of the leading medical marijuana companies in the U.S. today contributed $50,000 to the Florida GOP, which helped pay for DeSantis's campaign ads.

Trulieve then boasted of record profits just months after DeSantis signed that law, telling investors that patient growth was driven primarily by the introduction of smokable flower, which by then constituted half of its sales in Florida.

Florida hand surgeon turned marijuana entrepreneur Jason Pirozzolo was among those who co-hosted fundraisers for DeSantis.

This one at his posh lakeside home near Orlando just weeks before Election Day in 2018. CNN obtained this exclusive video. That's Pirozzolo arriving for the fundraiser with Republican Congressman Matt Gaetz, who as a state lawmaker in 2014 introduced legislation that became Florida's first marijuana law.

Pirozzolo's attorney says he never discussed marijuana legislation with DeSantis.

Also at the party, then Florida State Representative Halsey Beshears, his family's tree farm later joined with other nurseries to become Trulieve, that top medical marijuana producer, which donated to DeSantis's campaign. All three of them have ties to Florida's billion dollar marijuana industry.

DESANTIS: It's an honor to be here. I thank you guys for your support.

KAYE: All of them a united force in raising money for DeSantis.

REP. MATT GAETZ (R-FL): One of the things that really impressed me about Ron is that he pushes against the grain.

KAYE: DeSantis would also soon play a key role in Florida's so-called Green Rush, which gave rise to a billion dollar industry.

LEV PARNAS, FORMER REPUBLICAN FUNDRAISER: The reason why Ron DeSantis became governor of Florida is because of a little plant called cannabis.

KAYE: That's Lev Parnas, one-time associate of Rudy Giuliani and Donald Trump.

[07:50:01]

In May of 2018, when Ron DeSantis's campaign for governor was in trouble, Parnas says DeSantis sought him out.

KAYE: You met him at the Trump hotel at Washington, D.C.?

PARNAS: I met him at the Trump Hotel. Ron approached me, introduced himself to me, told me that he's running for the governor of Florida.

KAYE: Were you traveling in Trump's circles at that time then?

PARNAS: Oh, very much so.

KAYE: If his name sounds familiar to you, that may be because Lev Parnas played a role in the impeachment of Trump.

PARNAS: I'm with Rudy. Congratulations.

KAYE: He coordinated with Giuliani to try and dig up dirt on Joe Biden in Ukraine. Parnas was also convicted of trying to illegally secure recreational marijuana licenses in other states and sentenced to 20 months in prison last year.

During our interview at his Florida home, Parnas told us DeSantis came to him seeking help for his struggling gubernatorial campaign.

Did DeSantis make it clear to you that he needed Trump's endorsement?

PARNAS: Absolutely, that's how he approached me. He said he needed to get Trump's endorsement.

KAYE: When he met DeSantis, Parnas was looking to get into the lucrative marijuana industry in Florida. DeSantis had previously taken a stand against marijuana. As a U.S. congressman, he voted against making cannabis more accessible to veterans.

PARNAS: I realized that he was not pro-cannabis. With all due respect, I said, how can I support you to be the governor of Florida where, you know, it would be going against things that I personally believe in?

KAYE: After that, Parnas says DeSantis had a change of heart.

PARNAS: He would be willing to look at cannabis in a different light, and I was like, whoa, that was a quick shift.

KAYE: Parnas says DeSantis told him he wouldn't stand in the way of expanding the legalization of marijuana in Florida. At this point, smoking medical marijuana was illegal and so was all recreational pot.

KAYE: Did DeSantis ever tell you specifically, if you can get Trump to endorse me, then I will change my mind about legalized medical marijuana here?

PARNAS: You know, I don't recall us having an exact conversation like a quid pro quo type of a situation, but the whole conversations was a quid pro quo.

KAYE: Parnas says he went to Rudy Giuliani and convinced him to get Trump to endorse DeSantis, which Trump did in June 2018, tweeting that he will be a great governor.

Parnas also donated $50,000 to DeSantis and attended rallies with him. After his victory speech on election night in 2018, one of the people DeSantis hugged was Lev Parnas.

PARNAS: He hugs and congratulates -- and I congratulate him and he thanks and says, we did it.

KAYE: Under DeSantis, medical marijuana has become an estimated $1.8 billion industry in Florida. On his first day as governor, there were fewer than 100 dispensaries in the state. Now there are nearly 600, serving more than 800,000 Floridians.

As for Lev Parnas, he says he didn't benefit from that growth. CNN was unable to independently verify Parnas's account regarding Trump's endorsement. DeSantis returned Parnas's $50,000 contribution and declined to answer questions about their interactions, accusing CNN of reporting opposition narratives about his campaign.

Neither the Trump campaign nor Giuliani would comment either.

Parnas admits others may also have had a hand in securing Trump's endorsement for DeSantis, but insists he played a key role.

Would you have connected Trump and DeSantis if DeSantis hadn't changed his mind on marijuana?

PARNAS: No, never.

KAYE: Randi Kaye, CNN, Boca Raton, Florida.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

MATTINGLY: Our thanks to Randi for that reporting.

Well, this morning, dozens of documents naming Jeffrey Epstein's alleged victims and associates could be made public in the New Year. What we could find out? That's next.

And new video smoke rising over Gaza after a suspected airstrike. It comes as Israel introduces a new proposal for a pause in the fighting in exchange for more hostages. We're going to be live in Tel Aviv with the latest on negotiations.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[07:58:11] MATTINGLY: More than 150 of Jeffrey Epstein's alleged victims and associates are set to soon be revealed. A federal judge is ordering the unsealing of previously redacted court documents early next year. The ruling references multiple individuals who have been referred to as a John or Jane Doe, as being public figures.

CNN's Kara Scannell joins us now.

What are we expecting to see here?

KARA SCANNELL, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, this is all part of a lawsuit, so it's the documents that they've recovered during the discovery process. So, this could be anything from deposition testimony where someone's name is mentioned in the deposition, or it could be like a calendar entry, or emails. We don't know the full scope of what it is going to be.

But the judge did, this has been a lengthy litigation process, and the judge ordered on Monday the unsealing of these names, which he went through, individually. So, it's not going to be a list of people. She individually went through all these people, more than 150 names, and going through why they would be unsealed.

And so, as she wrote it -- and this was a constant thing she wrote in a lot of these. The material should be unsealed in full. First, this individual did not raise any objection to unsealing and thus did not meet his or her burden of identifying interest that outweigh the presumption of public -- of access with specificity.

Now, another thing she noted through a number of these names was that these names were already public, a number of these people had already given interviews to the media, so they made themselves public, and that there were also names that came out during the course of the trial. There are some names that will not be made public and those are some of the victims that were minors at the time. She's saying that those will not be made public.

But the vast majority seems to be people who were in his orbit, associates of him. And the judge even noted that the some of these references are not salacious, but their names are included in the documents, and they have been protected for years because of the association. But now that so much of this has already come out to the public, she's saying that, you know, there is no reason to keep it sealed anymore going forward.

Now, if anyone objects to this, she's giving them 14 days to appeal this decision. But if not, these names will be public just right around January 2nd, just about the first of the year.

MATTINGLY: Well, it's fascinating -- fascinating story --