Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Tonight

Trump Will Turn Himself In At Manhattan Courthouse; Angel Reese Aims Taunting Gesture At Caitlin Clark; Panel Discusses A Case About A Goat; Woman Goes On 34 First Dates In 19 Countries Over The Past Year. Aired 11p-12a ET

Aired April 03, 2023 - 23:00   ET

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

[23:00:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

ALISYN CAMEROTA, CNN HOST: So, we've just learned that the Manhattan judge will allow five pool photographers to take still photos of Donald Trump's arraignment tomorrow, but no broadcast cameras will be allowed in the courtroom. Several media organizations, including CNN, had asked for permission to broadcast the proceedings, but that won't happen. The former president is in Trump Tower tonight in the midst of a massive security presence in New York City.

Here with me on our panel, we have Vanity Fair's Molly Jong-Fast, former federal prosecutor Paul Krieger is here, former Senate candidate Joe Pinion, former Secret Service agent Jonathan Wackrow, and joining us is CNN's Donie O'Sullivan, who as far as we know is not former anything.

(LAUGHTER)

Um, okay, guys, great to have you all here. Jonathan, tell us about Secret Service and what-how they're preparing tonight and how they can possibly be everywhere and cover this unprecedented event tomorrow.

JONATHAN WACKROW, CNN LAW ENFORCEMENT ANALYST, FORMER SECRET SERVICE AGENT: Well, listen, the Secret Service tomorrow plays an interesting role. It's not what we typically see them playing. They're not playing the lead role. The NYPD is the lead organizing entity for the security operation tomorrow.

The Secret Service is keenly focused only on Donald Trump, getting him safely from Trump Tower down to the courthouse, and then whether it's back to Trump Tower or to the airport safely and efficiently. But they're not taking that coordinating role and there's a reason why here, Alisyn.

Because the Secret Service has to show that they are neutral in this, that they're not currying favor towards the former president, which quite honestly in the last administration they were accused of. They have to make sure that they are not showing favoritism towards him by asking for any special conditions through the-through the processing of him tomorrow. But also, that they're not focused on the D.A, that they're not siding with anything that the D.A. wants to do. So, tomorrow, what you'll see is the Secret Service in a very unique role as just the protector, focused on Donald Trump, and then should anything happen, deferring to the NYPD to deal with the perimeter, the city at large, they are in close coordination, but they are not the main entity tomorrow.

CAMEROTA: I thought it was very interesting because obviously, nobody is above the law or nobody should be above the law. But some people, I think do deserve special treatment, and that's what we're going to see tomorrow. He is not going to be handcuffed because he's a former president, number one, and the Secret Service is going to be around him.

WACKROW: Yeah. And also, it's a nonviolent crime tomorrow where he's escorted by armed Secret Service agents 24 hours a day. What is he going to do? Let's be a little bit pragmatic about how we're going to work through tomorrow.

But all the rest of the processing will be the same. He will be fingerprinted just like everybody else. His pedigree information will be asked by an investigator just like everybody else that's processed through that location. The question is, does he get the mug shot or not? That-we'll find that out tomorrow. But the condition of having somebody handcuffed, most likely not.

CAMEROTA: Okay, Donie, tell us what we should expect in terms of security because of extremists. So, is there a sense that chatter has increased and that more threat-you know, that police are seeing more threats? We know that Marjorie Taylor Greene, who is a big Donald Trump supporter, is coming to protest. And the mayor of New York City called her out by name and told her to behave.

DONIE O'SULLIVAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yeah, Alisyn. I mean, look, there have been fears that tomorrow would be a sort of January 6th- style event and what we're seeing online right now does not indicate that that is going to happen.

Of course, there are some qualifications there that I'll get to, but what we have seen is there is a lot of outrage online. There has been kind of steady stream of violent rhetoric which we have seen, including threats to the district attorney here, Alvin Bragg, and also, you know, just the general sort of outrage. But what we're not seeing what we saw, you know, in the days and weeks leading up to January 6. We're not seeing that kind of mobilization where people are talking about coming to New York, where people are organizing bosses and flights, etcetera, despite, of course, Marjorie Taylor Greene calling people to New York City.

Senior law enforcement officials, people who are familiar with the planning and also experts who track this online are echoing that they're not seeing that kind of surge in mobilization.

I will point out, though, very importantly and of course something that law enforcement will be wary of tomorrow, is that, you know, the sophisticated players in this game, they are going to be using encrypted private channels. They know now, especially after January 6, that law enforcement, the media, and everybody else is keeping an eye on these public forums, so it is possible that organizing is happening in private channels.

CAMEROTA: Sure, but Donie, tell me that the police and law enforcement can break into the encrypted channels, too, right?

[23:05:00]

O'SULLIVAN: Jonathan could probably speak better.

CAMEROTA: I mean-I mean, tell me that they are on top of that.

WACKROW: Listen, not to get into specifics, but law enforcement wants to make sure from an intelligence standpoint that they're staying one step ahead of everybody else. So, the actual capabilities, I don't want to get into, but let's just say they have a very good understanding of what these groups are doing.

But to Donie's point, we did not see in the last 48 hours anybody, you know, mobilizing a call for action, a call for, you know, violent protest, not First Amendment free speech protest with violent protest leading into tomorrow other than, you know, one congresswoman.

CAMEROTA: Joe, what are your-what are your thoughts tonight?

JOE PINION, REPUBLICAN STRATEGIST, FORMER SENATE CANDIDATE: Look, I think we have the finest law enforcement department on the planet. And then within that law enforcement department, we have some of the finest intelligence gathering on the planet. I mean, you look at the NYPD intelligence bureau, it is better than some nations.

And so, I think at the end of the day, yes, we all know that there's this cloud of January 6th that hangs over and not just this day, but I would argue the nation as a whole, and that time capsule is sealed, those images will be in there, but I wouldn't call that a sophisticated day when you've got shamans and all types of nonsense.

So, that has not undermined the real threat of what happened on that day, but I think that we do ourselves a disservice on this unprecedented day when we're trying to find some level of common ground, when we're seeing a pretty divisive action to try to kind of allow that to have even more of an impact on how we view and talk about the day.

CAMEROTA: Molly, your thoughts?

MOLLY JONG-FAST, SPECIAL CORRESPONDENT, VANITY FAIR: I mean, they're not Democrats going to protest. I mean, I think this has a part-I think we have to remember and Trump has encouraged them, a lot of these people have really been punished. You know, some of these people are still in jail from January 6.

So, I do think-but there has been-I think Trump has really tried to make trouble and Marjorie Taylor Greene, too. And like there's an opportunity here to just, you know, get-I mean, I don't think he has had a lot of incendiary language. She has, too. She has been tweeting up a storm, fighting with Alvin Bragg, fighting with, you know, the mayor.

This is not their city. You know, this is our city, and we want to keep it safe. So, I do think that's really problematic.

CAMEROTA: Um, Paul, former President Trump predicted death and destruction if he were to be indicted. And then he just tweeted. Well, a few days ago, he tweeted this. The judge assigned to my witch hunt case, a case that has never been charged before-in all caps-hates me. Um, which, you know, could obviously incite some feelings about that judge.

Of course, it is also not true that this has never been charged before. It has never been to a former president, that's true. However, as "The New York Times" reports, the false business records charge, which is what people expect with this, is the bread and butter of the district attorney's white color practice.

Mr. Bragg took office in 2022. Since then, prosecutors have filed 117 felony counts of that charge against 29 individuals and companies. That is not never charged before.

PAUL KRIEGER, FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR, SDNY: Well, I think there's a distinction that's important to make. What we understand the charges are going to be are falsification of books and records in order to commit some kind of election or campaign finance fraud. Right? So, that is unclear about how often that has been charged. The fact that falsifications of books and records are charged regularly, no surprise.

CAMEROTA: But those are often misdemeanors. But these are the felony charges that have been filed, 117 felony charges. So, it has to be connected to another crime in other words.

KRIEGER: Right. But here, it's apparently going to be connected-

CAMEROTA: Perhaps.

KRIEGER: -- to the campaign finance-

CAMEROTA: That is one of the speculations.

KRIEGER: -- which makes it I think unusual and maybe unprecedented. We'll find out.

CAMEROTA: And what do you think about the way that president-former President Trump is talking about this in terms of the judge and the court and the protesters?

KRIEGER: Look, I don't think he's going to do himself any favors with the judge if he's from the get go criticizing the judge in this way, but my assumption is that this judge is going to handle this as fairly as possible because he knows the eyes of the world are around him.

I think also to that point the president does himself a disservice because I think the easiest way for him to try to get this resolved in a timely manner may have been to try to get some form of (INAUDIBLE) or have the judge just throw it out on the actual merits of the case. So, yeah, I don't think he's helping himself there, but I do think-

JONG-FAST: This is all a disservice. He makes our city more dangerous.

PINION: Look, I don't-I don't think that the act of simply saying that I don't agree with the persecution or the prosecution is something that inherently makes the city less safe.

JONG-FAST: But he said there is going to be carnage.

CAMEROTA: It's not the same.

PINION: Look-

JONG-FAST: And he said that there are drug addicts falling over the street. This is my city. I grew up here. It's great.

PINION: I think-I think you're giving Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene a little bit too much credit. At the end of the day, people are talking about it through a political prism because as the polling shows, many, many people believe that this be motivated by politics. So, I just think we can't excuse that. At the end of the day, this is going to be unsealed, this is going to play out, it is likely going to last longer than the presidential election.

[23:10:00]

And I think, again, we're going to see how that impacts the politics itself, but I think that we have to actually just be honest about the fact that there is a mixed bag here when it comes to people across the aisle saying this is not the strongest case and maybe should have been brought.

JONG-FAST: It could not be the strongest case. That's certainly true. There are many other cases coming down the pike. Great. I mean, this is not like a guy who never did anything wrong. I mean, there are many-I mean, in fact, one could say he has been using the presidency as a way to sort of stave off others.

PINION: I think that is a theory that is only believed by many people who decided they didn't want Trump to be president of the United States before he ever came down that escalator. So, I just think at the end of the day, we just have to let the facts lead where it may, talk about the actual merits of the case when we actually know exactly what they are.

But I think, again, the notion that people weren't going to talk about this politically, if that was the goal, Alvin Bragg should have never brought this case in the first place.

CAMEROTA: Well, we will know soon enough. We will know tomorrow what the indictment says. Thank you all very much. The latest CNN poll finds a majority of Americans approve of the decision to indict Donald Trump, but even more think politics did play a role. So, what does all of that mean for 2024? We'll talk about it.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[23:15:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CAMEROTA: A new CNN poll shows the majority of Americans approve of former President Trump's indictment, 40% disapprove. My panel is back. Jay Michaelson joins the conversation. Great to have you here.

Okay, so let's look at these CNN polls. They're interesting. So, in terms of how it breaks down by Democrats or independents or Republicans approve, disapprove of this indictment being leveled against Donald Trump, um, no surprise, 94% of Democrats approve of this. What's interesting, I think, is that 62% of independents approve and then 21%, Joe, of Republicans approve of the indictment. That's interesting.

PINION: Well, look, I think at the end of the day, polls can only tell you so much. I think you cannot look at one poll, but maybe just the actual aggregation of all the polls. You have this poll that says that most Americans agree. You have the Quinnipiac poll and the ABC poll that says most Americans do not agree. I always try to see what is the thread that runs in between all of those polls. And the thing that does run it between all those polls is that most Americans believe this to be political. And so, whether you believe that it is a witch hunt, as some have suggested, which I think is a bit far, or do you believe that somehow that it's just individuals who have maybe abused the discretion here, I think either way, there's enough people there saying there's something here about this that doesn't quite feel right.

CAMEROTA: Here is the poll on that, Molly, before I let you answer, is the-did politics play a role in the decision to indict Donald Trump? Seventy-six percent who responded say yes, 14% say no, 10% say not sure. Okay.

JONG-FAST: I mean, again, it doesn't matter what the polling is, right? If you do a lot of crimes that-you know, the job is to then prosecute those crimes. I would say-and again, we don't know if he has done crimes yet. We just know that he certainly has been nearer things that look problematic.

But I would just say the thing with this is that if I were a Republican, I'd be really worried about all those independents who think this is a good idea because, like, the republican base loves this guy and they are all in, he's raising money and they are-you know. But you're going to have to-in order to become president again, he would have to win over some of those swinging voters. I just don't think that those people are going to be drawn in by those indictments.

PINION: Look, I think-I think to your point, again, they're going to try to hang the felony indictment around every single Republican up and down the ballot come 2024, but ultimately, as you get closer to election day, it's going to be about the economy, it is going to be about the state of the world when it comes to Russia and Ukraine, it is going to be about a lot of issues that ultimately will not be tied to what Alvin Bragg decided to do tomorrow.

CAMEROTA: Uh, Paul, as a former prosecutor, what do you think about the claims that this is political?

KRIEGER: So, look, I know Alvin Bragg. I've worked with Alvin Bragg. I have a lot of respect for Alvin Bragg. I don't think he's a political person. But look, we haven't seen the indictment. I think these polls you just referenced, people's views of this indictment in this whole prosecution are going to evolve and they're going to evolve quickly after they see what the charges are, after the sense of what the proof is, after they have a sense of what Donald Trump is going to put forward as his defense.

CAMEROTA: Jay, if this is political, Alvin Bragg has made a miscalculation because Donald Trump has raised millions of dollars from this. In other words, if it was politically designed to hurt Donald Trump, he's-it appears strengthening his base and he's raising millions of dollars.

JAY MICHAELSON, RABBI, WRITER FOR ROLLING STONE: But I think the point again is some of those centrist voters who are not in the base and who-I would think if I were, you know, sitting to my right or doing republican strategy work, I'd be pretty concerned about when the base gets way ahead of the centrist kind of regular Republicans who used to run the party and kind of runs away with this.

But, you know, I'm finding the whole-I was thinking back to the Clinton impeachment a million years ago, and I suspect then the numbers were probably pretty similar. But as we just said, you know, when-when the details come out, they may still track your priors. You may just still feel-it may just be Republican, Democrat. But there will be more detail here.

And I think, really, this should be a somber moment, right? I have a lot of friends on the-on the left side of the spectrum who are doing a happy dance right now. I don't think that's appropriate. If we-again, we don't really know what's in the in the indictment yet, but it looks like these are serious.

These are potentially serious crimes. This is a former president. This is an incredibly divisive and political moment and this should not be times to be inciting anger on the hard right or doing happy dances on the hard left.

CAMEROTA: Joe, what about my argument that if this was political, it doesn't seem to be working, it's only helping Donald Trump?

PINION: Well, it only seems to be helping him if, to your point, the goal is to actually somehow wound him with the primary. If the goal is to ensure that he is the nominee, I think Alvin Bragg may have just succeeded. So, I think if you take a step back, part of why-

CAMEROTA: But isn't that good? To ensure that he's the nominee. Isn't that what Donald Trump wants? In other words, if Alvin Bragg is doing this to politically injure Donald Trump, it's not working.

[23:20:01]

PINION: The Senate majority leader decided they are going to spend millions of dollars in primaries to help nudge through people that were deemed MAGA nominees back in 2022.

CAMEROTA: (INAUDIBLE) Alvin Bragg, like, do you agree that this isn't hurting Donald Trump?

PINION: I think that for whatever reason, Alvin Bragg thinks this is the right thing to do. I don't know him personally, I'll take many mutual friends at their word that he is a good man who thinks he is doing the right thing.

I would simply note that part of the reason why you see the disproportion outrage over this is because this is not a man who's out here doing the Oprah Winfrey. You get a felony. You get a felony. Everyone gets a felony. He's not doing that. I think you see the rampant crime that we've seen all across New York City.

JONG-FAST: This is a GOP talking point.

PINION: I think that-I don't it is a GOP talking point.

CAMEROTA: But I just read to you, there were 117 felony charges in the past 15 months.

PINION: You're talking about is the charge which, again, we don't know the full nature of the charges being brought forward on a consistent basis.

CAMEROTA: Yes. The answer is yes.

PINION: I'm talking about-I'm talking about-we don't know. I think the fact of the matter is that when you're looking at what are the issues with crime around New York City, part of the reason why Lee Zeldin had one of the best performances going all the way back to 1994 was because of the fact that there is concern for safety in the city and the fact that we have a D.A. that doesn't prioritize issues. I think it finds a lot of people-

CAMEROTA: But first, you were saying this is political. Go ahead, Molly.

JONG-FAST: Sorry. This is just such a GOP talking point. The guy is in trouble for paying off his mistress, the woman that he had an affair with his third-allegedly had an affair with while he was married to his third wife. This is a-this is about a politician. This is not about crime in New York. I mean, the GOP talking point on here is so crazy.

PINION: I don't think it's that crazy when you look at the fact that again, Alvin Bragg has failed in many ways as a D.A. I think that's a perception that a lot of people across the political spectrum have shared. I think that if you're looking at having the conversation about is this the best allocation of resources, I think there are great number of people-

MICHAELSON: That is a perception that has been egged on by, you know, a prominent news network and a whole sort of cheering squad saying the crime is up when actually crime is not up in 2022 or 2021.

PINION: Crime is only down if you're looking at it through a 1990 lends, not if you look at it from a 2021 to 2020.

MICHAELSON: That's not accurate. The crime-violent crime in New York City declined in 2022. There is not a claim that this Alvin Bragg is not one of these DAs who said I'm just not going to prosecute anything.

PINION: He had a day one memo that effectively said as much.

CAMEROTA: There wasn't about violent crime.

MICHAELSON: It didn't say as much. It said nonviolent crime and certain nonviolent drug offence.

PINION: But they have chosen to prosecute many of the people who have walked into buildings with weapons for the purpose of committing crimes as misdemeanors. Here's what I'm saying.

CAMEROTA: Quickly.

PINION: I think that there is a reality here that people don't want to accept which is that yes, there was a point in 2022 when sexual assault had been up 300%. There was a point in 2022 when shootings have been up 14% --

JONG-FAST: What does have to do with Trump?

PINION: That is-those are crimes. Those are victims. And I think that people look at that and see hypocrisy when he has come up with what appears by many, again, not just there needs to be a novel legal theory.

JONG-FAST: So, here is the question. Does Trump never, ever-I mean, he just gets a pass for anything no matter what?

PINION: I don't think he should gat pass. He is clearly not getting the pass. But he hasn't-again, at this point-

JONG: (INAUDIBLE) think he should get a pass?

PINION: I think that there are many people who are attorneys, not me, who have said that this case to them doesn't seem-

CAMEROTA: Was not one of the strongest. I hear you, Joe. That is true, but it wasn't one of the strongest of the ones that he is being investigated for. Paul, if you can just bring it home-

(LAUGHTER)

because you are- KRIEGER: Sure.

CAMEROTA: -- the person who knows Alvin Bragg and who has been a prosecutor.

KRIEGER: I think it is a little premature now to assess whether this case is strong or weak, political or not. I think we will know a lot more tomorrow and we'll know a lot more as this case goes forward about the strength of it, the motivations behind it, and the proof.

CAMEROTA: I have to go, but I am curious just because we were hearing you at the SDNY. Do you have a sense of why the SDNY didn't do this?

KRIEGER: I have no firsthand knowledge. All I've-all I have is what I've read in the papers, which is there is some concern about Michael Cohen not being fully forthcoming. And, of course, there's the DOJ memo, which prohibits indicting a sitting president.

CAMEROTA: Back when he was sitting president.

KRIEGER: Correct.

CAMEROTA: But now, as you see, the D.A. has done it after President Trump was out of office. The SDNY could have done that as well since Michael Cohen went to jail for this crime.

KRIEGER: They could have if they thought the proof was there. They decided not to.

CAMEROTA: Got it. Thank you all very much. Okay, up next, controversy on the court. LSU star Angel Reese aims a taunting gesture at Iowa basketball star Caitlin Clark. We are going to take a look at what really happened there.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[23:25:00]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

(APPLAUSE)

UNKNOWN (voice-over): Kim Monkey in year two has orchestrated a turnaround for the ages!

(APPLAUSE)

LSU has captured its very first national championship!

(APPLAUSE)

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CAMEROTA: That was the moment LSU became the NCAA women's national basketball champion. That was last night. But of course, there's controversy. Critics are blasting LSU star Angel Reese for a taunting gesture right there that she made at the end of the game to Iowa star Caitlin Clark. But Clark made a similar gesture earlier in the tournament.

I'm back now with my panel. Also joining us is Kierna Mayo and CNN sports analyst Christine Brennan. Christine, I don't get the controversy. Isn't this what you do in sports and games?

CHRISTINE BRENNAN, CNN SPORTS ANALYST: Well, yes, especially when the women's game is this popular now. It is this physical Title Nine 50 years old. Here's the birthday present for Title Nine 50th.

[23:30:00]

You know, this game, the rating is more than 12 million people, more than 100% better than last year. I mean, these are extraordinary numbers. Women's sport is here to stay. Ut's a tough game. And yes, there's some trash talking and people have to get over it. I-frankly, here we are, Alisyn.

The men's game on another network is probably ending about now. What are we doing more than 24 hours later? We're talking about the women's game, talk about a wonderful development. Controversy is good no matter what you think and people are going to be talking about Caitlin Clark and Angel Reese for a long time.

CAMEROTA: Okay, plot twist right there. I did not see you wrapping it up that way. I thought you are going to be like-here we are talking about the controversy instead of their incredible, you know, skill. But you think it's good that we're still talking about this.

BRENNAN: Oh, totally. I mean, the skill is there. We know that. I mean, my goodness, Caitlin Clark, the reason those ratings were so great is because of Caitlin Clark. I mean, that is a fact. She's a singular athlete. The way she's had the 41 points twice, you know, in a row, you have magic Johnson and people like her-people like him tweeting about her.

You've got guys I know well who would never turn on women's sports, who are going absolutely crazy about Caitlin Clark and the women's tournament. She had 30 points yesterday. It wasn't her best outage. She was still the leading scorer in the game. Angel Reese and LSU won.

But absolutely, as long as you're talking about it, as long as you're not ignoring it, Alisyn, as long as people care about it and are passionate and are out there on social media having arguments, I don't think arguments about racism, um, are good but a national conversation about these issues, absolutely, and what it involves women athletes, that is success.

CAMEROTA: Okay. So, Kierna, let me show you what Angel Reese said after people gave her grief for making this gesture.

KIERNA MAYO, EXECUTIVE EDITOR, ONE WORLD: Sure.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) ANGEL REESE, FORWARD, LSU TIGERS: All year, I was critiqued about who I was. Nobody-I don't fit the narrative. I don't fit in a box that you all want me to be in. I'm too hood. I'm too ghetto. You all told me that all year. But when other people do it, you all say nothing. So, this is for the girls that look like me, that's going to speak up on what they believe in. It's unapologetically you.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CAMEROTA: Your thoughts on all of this?

MAYO: Angel is a Black girl at work. That's how it lays. Sometimes, we don't always get a fair shake. It doesn't matter how talented one is. Clearly, Angel is an elite athlete. But I want to use this moment, really, I think to echo what was just said. Women's basketball is leading the basketball conversation. And Angel is a big part of that, you know?

Where she's from and where people play basketball for real in the hood, the hood that she's referring to, talking crap is part of the game. So, I don't think that any additional attention on her because of that is really fair. But I just think that she is in her moment. She said it herself, she's in her bag. And to be in one's bag, she is over this.

We're talking about it. She's over it. She's celebrating. She's popping bottles. She's living her best life right now. And I'm-I'm here for that.

CAMEROTA: Molly, your thoughts?

JONG-FAST: I'm here for her, too, man. I mean, I just-you know, for the little girls who look like me and sound like me, you can have it. You know, this is what we're-this is the goal of, you know, what we're all trying to do here. So, yeah, I was really moved.

CAMEROTA: I'm scared of trash talk. That's why (INAUDIBLE) nothing-

(LAUGHTER)

has nothing to do-has nothing to do, Joe, with my skill, okay? I just I'm scared of it.

PINION: Look, I think at the end of the day, there's a deep history here, which is why I think there were so many people-maybe she's in her bag but there are some people that were troubled by it and they should be.

This goes all the way back to when we had the first women's HSBC (INAUDIBLE) team that went to the final four only to be left off of the t-shirt. Three teams on the t-shirt for final four. This goes all the way back to when we had Black women, young women refer to as nappy headed, you know what, by Don Imus famously.

So, I think, again, there is a long history here that what is different here, right? If the actions are the same, what has deemed that person a threat? When is it gone from competition-

CAMEROTA: Meaning like guys seem to trash talking all the time and-

PINION: I think we do ourselves a disservice to shrink it down to the size of a mustard seed. What is the difference between somebody walking on the Dartmouth campus with the hoodie and somebody walking in South Florida with the hoodie on their way home with a package of skills? The only distinct difference between those two people is the color of their skin.

And so, I think if you translate that to what happened here with this young lady just again reveling in the competition, going against somebody that will go down as one of the greatest ever, and they're going to walk away without the ring that was promised, I think that to me, yes, we should be talking about women carrying the day.

[23:35:04]

There are probably more people excited about that game than around the game that we're missing tonight. Certainly, I was. But I think, again, um, we will be doing ourselves a disservice not to recognize the layers upon layers of pain and suffering that goes through it.

MAYO: Great point.

CAMEROTA: Go ahead, Jay.

MICHAELSON: Yeah, it's just a truly inspiring moment that also brought up sort of the beauty and the terror of the American experience. It's funny that all of this can happen in the context of a-of a basketball game. And yet it does. You know, this is where we have some of these recognitions again about what's beautiful and what's tragic about our country's experience.

CAMEROTA: Thank you all very much. We have to get to this because up next, there's this sad legal battle over a goat and the little girl who tried to save its life. We will explain.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[23:40:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CAMEROTA: A nine-year-old girl in California bonded after she was able to take care of a goat as part of a 4-H Program. When her family tried to save the goat from being auctioned off at a county fair for slaughter, the Shasta District Fair got the police involved. The detectives allegedly drove more than 500 miles to capture the goat, which was then reportedly slaughtered.

The girl's family is now suing Shasta County and District Fair officials. We reached out to them, but they're not commenting on the case. So, I want to turn now to the attorney for the girl's family, Vanessa Shakib. She is co-founder of Advancing Law for Animals. Vanessa, thanks so much for being here. Can you just give us a little bit of a history? When this nine-year-old girl whose name we're not broadcasting, when she got this goat, what did she think the end result was going to be with this goat?

VANESSA SHAKIB, ATTORNEY FOR THE LONG FAMILY: Well, thank you so much for having me today. I really appreciate it. This is truly a shocking story and a textbook example of government gone rogue. We have a nine- year-old who raised a little goat and absolutely fell in love with Cedar, and it wasn't until she got to that auction that she truly understood what would happen to him.

And because Cedar was her property before the auction and at the auction and because she had an absolute statutory right to walk and disaffirm that contract, there was no problem legally speaking with her leaving. And what happened next was absolutely outrageous.

CAMEROTA: Okay. So, let's talk about that. Her mother basically wrote a letter to the fair officials and said, um, my daughter actually had a very hard year. She lost three of her grandparents. We'd like to not have the goat-well, I'll actually read it here. Our daughter lost three grandparents within the last year, and our family has had so much heartbreak and sadness that I couldn't bear the thought of the following weeks of sadness after the slaughter of her first livestock animal.

So, they were basically asking, you know, for leniency for this goat, and then what happened?

SHAKIB: What happened next is truly abhorrent. As I've said, the little girl owned Cedar and she had a statutory right to leave this fair. But the officials here transformed what at best was a simple property dispute into a criminal circus. And sheriffs here got a warrant authorizing them to breach entryways to go get a little girl's beloved pet goat. This is absolutely a gross miscarriage of justice and a failure of priorities.

CAMEROTA: So, somehow, police drove something like 500 miles looking for this goat. They thought it was at one, um, you know, sort of retreat. It wasn't. They had to drive back. They found the goat and it was reportedly killed. So, now the lawsuit. What's the crime here? What are you suing for?

SHAKIB: We have a laundry list of crimes here going through the Constitution. We have claims for violations of the First Amendment, the Fourth Amendment, the Fourteenth Amendment. We are alleging viewpoint discrimination, unlawful search and seizure, of violation of this little girl's due process rights as well as intentional infliction of emotional distress, because the bottom line is here, these officials knew of the property dispute.

And, in fact, my clients owned this goat and they went with a warrant, drove 500 miles, crossed several county lines, to take this goat. And instead of abiding by the law and holding Cesar until this issue was adjudicated, they turned him over for slaughter. They improperly acted as judge, jury and executioner, and that is not the role of the sheriff.

CAMEROTA: Here is what the Shasta District Fair CEO said about why they would not allow this nine-year-old to keep the goat from being slaughtered. They said, making an exception for you will only teach our youth that they do not have to abide by the rules that are set up for all participants. Also, in this era of social media, this has been a negative experience for the fairgrounds as this has been all over Facebook and Instagram.

So, that was their rationale for not giving her, um, you know, any-any sympathy on that. So, how is she doing, Vanessa? How is the little girl doing?

SHAKIB: As we can all imagine, she's absolutely devastated and traumatized. We are a nation of pet lovers. Many of us have pets at home. We have dogs and cats that we know and love and we consider members of our family. This little girl lost a member of her family, and she is absolutely heartbroken.

CAMEROTA: Vanessa Shakib, thank you very much. Please keep us posted on what happens here.

[23:45:03]

And my panel is back with me now. Molly, wasn't this the plot of "Charlotte's Web?" This was exactly how "Charlotte's Web' went when Fern fell in love with Wilbur. But she was able to keep Wilbur, remember? And we all love that book.

MAYO: We were happy about it.

CAMEROTA: And so, we were happy about that. And this went in the opposite horrible direction.

JONG-FAST: I don't think this is the best use of the police's resources. I mean, driving 500 miles and going and executing a search warrant for a little goat. I mean, I think this is wrong. And by the way, the fairgrounds really come off looking terrible, right? It is all over-

MICHAELSON: On Instagram, no less.

CAMEROTA: On Instagram.

MICHAELSON: This is not good for the socialists.

JONG-FAST: I mean, really like-these are people. These are children, like, I don't care about your brand, this is a child.

CAMEROTA: But, I mean, what they say, Jay, because I know you-you blame me when I try to defend them. But they say-

MICHAELSON: You're a heartless goat, Alisyn (ph).

CAMEROTA: Thank you. That's what you've been telling me during the commercial break, is that this was a setup. You were going to this- part of the learning experience was you were going to see how you care for a goat and the food process. The food pyramid is you care for this goat, this goat is then slaughtered to be turned into meat for people's barbecue-

MICHAELSON: Alisyn, this is-

CAMEROTA: -- and that was the process that you are going to be learning.

MICHAELSON: The quality of mercy is not strained. Spare the goat, right? This just feels like this bizarre-definitely feels like there's something we don't yet know about this case. I'm curious. Look, we spent two weeks with Gwyneth Paltrow's ski trial. Maybe, you know, the goat, the sort of George Romero version of Charlotte's Web is going to be the next thing to capture America's interest-

CAMEROTA: All right.

MICHAELSON: -- or not.

CAMEROTA: Joe?

PINION: I mean, look, there's so much here. First of all, if you have a pet that you love, hire that woman.

(LAUGHTER)

Second of all-because that was amazing. I mean, we have everything here. We have big government overreach. Big government has gone rogue. Remind people that Senator Rand Paul has a no knock warrant, a proposition sitting in the Senate collecting dust. Call Chuck Schumer. Ask him to get it passed.

I just think at the end of the day, there is so much that we can dig into here because that goat should still be alive today. And we're not for big government. That girl-

CAMEROTA: The Shasta Fair is now big government.

MICHAELSON: This is clearly-these guys, whoever these sheriffs are and the fairgrounds who are upset about how it looks on Facebook, this is-this is the law and order caucus. These children need to learn a lesson. You're going to kill your goat. You're going to kill your goat. This isn't John Wayne.

MAYO: Who's tax dollars-who's tax dollars, who paid for these cops and the overtime?

MICHAELSON: And the gas, 500 miles, that wasn't an electric car.

MAYO: And why did we give the goat a name?

CAMEROTA: Great point.

MAYO: Problematic.

CAMEROTA: That is such a great point. If you give a goat a name, that is not generally what goes to auction.

MAYO: Do all slaughter goats have names?

JONG-FAST: I don't think so.

MAYO: I have trouble.

JONG-FAST: But Rand Paul-

CAMEROTA: I think that is called a pet.

JONG-FAST: Let us not call Rand Paul the hero of this story. Let us just take a moment-

(CROSSTALK)

MICHAELSON: He could be.

JONG-FAST: I don't know that he could be.

MICHAELSON: I'm pretty sure the legal defense fund for animals has a pretty hard left view about like animal rights. Also, in the Constitution. So, be careful who you kind of get into bed with.

CAMEROTA: All right, all right, friends, I don't know how we got to Rand Paul from that story-

(CROSSTALK)

Yes, strange bedfellows (ph), indeed. All right, thank you very much. Now, listen to this story. Imagine going on 34 dates in 19 countries in just one year. A woman from Washington State did just that. Wait till you hear what she learned as a result. That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[23:50:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CAMEROTA: Talk about going to the ends of the earth to find a partner. A woman from Washington State says she went on 34 first dates in 19 countries over the past year.

I'm back with the panel. Okay, Kierna, I know you have strong feelings about this. The woman's name is Loni James. We have a picture of her in various places around the world. She went to Jordan, Cyprus, Turkey, Switzerland, France, Italy, Slovenia, Norway, Iceland, the Azores, Morocco, Tunisia, the Mauritania, Senegal, Gambia, Namibia and South Africa. Okay, your thoughts.

MAYO: Well, I feel cynical, you know.

CAMEROTA: Why?

MAYO: (INAUDIBLE) of a certain kind of privilege. Can we just go ahead and say that?

CAMEROTA: You're saying who paid for this around the world-

MAYO: Who paid for this? It's just-exactly. And it also, like, I don't-maybe it's because I'm a book editor, but it seems like a ploy for a book deal. It just seems slightly disingenuous. The original premise, are you looking for love? Do you need to go to 100 countries? It just doesn't seem-I don't buy it. I think that's where I'm landing.

CAMEROTA: Interesting. How did she find the dates? Such a good point. But I mean, I guess on-

JONG-FAST: And Hinge. Hinge.

MAYO: Yeah. Are you looking-what-what's the angle (ph)? I think it's just to have a story to tell and then to sit amongst the natives. That's the other piece. That's not really being stated. But I feel like there is some white girl privilege here that, um, is being used in a very awkward way.

CAMEROTA: Molly?

JONG-FAST: I also feel like if we're going on a date, you should be open to the date and not the-you know, not the five days after that date, you know? There is a certain, like, lack of-you know, you should-if you're going to waste somebody's time, you want to really be open to possibly going out with that.

CAMEROTA: So, you don't believe that she was actually looking for love. You think she was looking for an experience. She is talking about looking for experiences here. She says here, as a younger woman, she saw dating as a means to an end to find a husband. But now, she considers it a privilege to hear someone's story and get to know them without the burden of expectations.

[23:54:58]

MAYO: I mean-but the burden of expectation. You mean, like, the second date? What's the burden? What's the burden? She was having a good time. Just call it a good time trip, girl. Just call it a good time. Eat, pray, love.

MICHAELSON: Yeah. Exactly like she wants to have her adventures but, you know, it's just kind of a catfish if you don't say what you're really about, you know? If you're saying, oh, yeah-and one of those meals-I read the story. You know, she was, I think, in Egypt and during Ramadan. You know, they have tried the big meal. It's a big meal, right? That's like a big deal. And so, she like gets this whole thing and then leaves the country.

(LAUGHTER)

I mean, if this guy-I didn't know it was Hinge, actually, because that's supposed to be a little more of a relationship be. So, she's kind of putting it out there that, you know, she's looking for something. Meanwhile, she's doing a tour of the Middle East and North Africa.

CAMEROTA: (INAUDIBLE), Jay.

(LAUGHTER)

PINION: This whole, I would agree. It's eat, pray, and book deal to me, and I just think that the under currents of that are saying, what are you going to make some broad extrapolation about a whole type of people based on one date with one person on your way through town? It's just-

CAMEROTA: It's not (INAUDIBLE) for you.

PINION: Yeah.

CAMEROTA: Well, Loni James is here. I'd like to bring-

(LAUGHTER)

CAMEROTA: Just kidding.

MICHAELSON: When I was a lot younger and (INAUDIBLE). Some of these conversations are great. Just be honest about what they are like. Hey, I'm traveling through town, let's get dinner, and I loved that time in my life. You know, I look back on it and just don't make it into either the book deal material or-

MAYO: I'm looking for strangers. I just want to meet strangers.

MICHAELSON: It's okay. It doesn't have to be-

MAYO: Exactly. It's too much of a hook.

CAMEROTA: Friends, thank you very much. Really entertaining. All right, tomorrow morning on "CNN This Morning," the team is going to be live from the Manhattan courthouse covering all the angles as Donald Trump turns himself in. We have special coverage. It begins at 5:00 a.m. Eastern.

Thanks so much for watching tonight, everyone. Our coverage continues now.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)