Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Tonight

Bodycam Footage Shows Deadly New Mexico Shooting; Biden and McCarty Have Untested Relationship; Disney Scraps Florida Campus; Twitter and Google Score Major Victories at Supreme Court; Communities Seek Migrant Workers; "CNN Tonight" Presents "On the Lookout." Aired 11p-12a ET

Aired May 18, 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]

ALISYN CAMEROTA, CNN HOST: The video that you're about to see is, of course, disturbing. You're going to hear a lot of gunfire, and this shows the moment that a police sergeant in Northern New Mexico was shot after responding to the scene.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

(GUNFIRES)

UNKNOWN (voice-over): I'm shot!

UNKNOWN (voice-over): Ugh!

UNKNOWN (voice-over): Oh, my gosh!

(GUNFIRES)

CAMEROTA: This happened Monday in Farmington after an 18-year-old high schooler shot nine people in his neighborhood, killing three of them. Let's go first to CNN's Josh Campbell, who has been covering the story. Josh, thanks for being here. So just walk us through what we just saw on that video.

JOSH CAMPBELL, CNN SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: Yeah, Alisyn. So, police held a press conference just earlier today. The chief described this mass shooting as an assault on his community after this 18-year-old just opened fire on this neighborhood indiscriminately.

They walked us through the timeline. This started when 79-year-old Shirley Voita was driving through the neighborhood. The suspect just opens fire out of nowhere. She falls out of her vehicle. Police say the two other elderly women were driving by. They stopped to try to render aid. They were fatally shot. He continues on this rampage.

I warn our viewers that what you're about to see is disturbing. We see please gathering together, forming what is called a contact team. They see the shooter. They are tracking him. This is a moment that they ultimately take him down. Watch.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNKNOWN (voice-over): Get back inside! Let's see your hands.

(GUNFIRES)

UNKNOWN (voice-over): Ugh!

UNKNOWN (voice-over): You're good?

UNKNOWN (voice-over): I'm good!

(GUNFIRES)

UNKNOWN (voice-over): Sergeant down! Sergeant is down!

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CAMPBELL: Now, Alisyn, two officers were shot in that exchange with gunfire. This is the latest example underscoring the dangerous nature of this profession. You know, it is important to point out that we are coming up on one year since that fatal shooting at Robb Elementary in Uvalde, Texas. That, obviously, a colossal failure by law enforcement in Texas. There are families there who are still demanding transparency from the police.

As you look at all these other examples across the country, it's important to point out, whether it is, you know, San Jose, California, Louisville, Nashville, Duncanville, Texas, Allen, Texas, now the latest example in New Mexico, we also see time and time again, these officers disregarding their own safety to go to try to stop this gunman. That is what we see here in New Mexico in this really chilling video.

CAMEROTA: Yeah. I'm so glad you point that out. Since -- since Uvalde, we've seen so many acts of bravery, of course, on the part of police, which they do every day.

So, you, Josh, asked the police chief about the arsenal of weapons that the suspect had. Do you know how he got them? Do you know if any family members could be charged here?

CAMPBELL: Yes. So, police say that they are still looking into the motive. The suspect's family, this 18-year-old, they told us that he had some kind of mental health issues. Of course, that is what we hear time and time again in so many of these shootings. The question is, if they knew that he had mental health problems, how was he able to obtain these weapons?

We are told that two of the weapons, police say, were owned by a family member. One weapon that he had was an AR-15 that he bought just about a month after his 18th birthday.

Now, as you mentioned, I asked the police chief, will other family members, whoever own those guns, part of that arsenal that this suspect had access to, could they be charged? The police chief told me that, at this point, they don't -- they are not planning to charge anyone else but they're continuing to gather information. He says that everything right now is on the table.

That is important to know because, again, as we see in so many of these cases, police will obviously go after the gunman, the suspect, but we have seen a greater effort by police and prosecutors to also look at who helped equipped these people. If they knew that they were issues, if they knew that this person could be dangerous and deadly, how could they give them access to weapons? Certainly, a major question in this case.

CAMEROTA: Okay. Josh, thank you very much for all of that. Jeremy, I want to turn to you because President Biden has come out and talked about how exasperated he is, as everybody is, with the state of all of these mass shootings. Has he done everything? He has called on Congress to act.

JEREMY DIAMOND, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Yeah.

CAMEROTA: Has he done everything that he can in his executive action power?

DIAMOND: Well, that is what the president says. And when you look at what the president -- let's talk first about what he has actually done on guns, right, because he did sign the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, which was the most significant piece of legislation on gun in several decades.

It incentivized red flags, it funded mental health funding for states, and the president has assigned nearly two dozen executive orders on this.

But this is also a president who described this issue as a crisis, right? And he says that he is now reached the extent of his executive action. And every time one these shootings happen, we do see him come out with a statement, a very forceful statement.

But I've pressed the White House on this before. Do you feel like you are using the bully pulpit to the fullest extent, to the fullest extent for something that you described as an ongoing crisis in America?

And I think it is clear that, look, when one of these shootings happens, it gets in the news, you hear the president talk about, but you're not seeing him go out there day in and day out talking about it in a way that you might with something that you described as a crisis.

[23:05:04]

CAMEROTA: Okay. Let's talk about something else that people are calling a crisis. And we talk about this every night here, but I am looking forward to you giving me an update here --

DIAMOND: Yes.

CAMEROTA: -- so that we can get out of this vicious cycle, the debt ceiling.

DIAMOND: Couple more weeks.

CAMEROTA: No, I'm not doing it. No. The debt ceiling, where are we?

DIAMOND: Yeah. Look, both sides seem to be coming out today and say that they do see progress. The talks are happening now at a high level between top White House officials and deputy to the speaker of the House, Kevin McCarthy.

The thing is also that this is still looming over President Biden's foreign trip right now. He is currently abroad, in Japan, and you already see reporters asking him questions about this.

But interestingly, what you also heard was a senior administration official today in a briefing with reporters offer a pretty blunt assessment of the impact that this is having on the United States standing in the world.

He said this: Debt ceiling brinksmanship that Republicans are diving -- are driving in Washington, D.C., undermines American leadership, undermines the trustworthiness that America can bring to not just our allies and partners but to the rest of the world.

And so, when you think about that, the president has talked previously about the impact that default would have on the U.S.'s standing abroad, but clearly, already, just the threat, just the very logjam in Washington, D.C., is already having, according to the senior administration official, an impact on the U.S.'s ability to lead.

Nonetheless, the president does have an opportunity tomorrow or actually a few hours from now in Japan to show that U.S. leadership is still there, and he's going to do that on Ukraine in particular.

On that, he has got a series of new sanctions, 300 new sanctions on Russia for its role in Ukraine, export controls. All of these, of course, in coordination with those G7 allies. The United States really has been central to that effort to do those things.

CAMEROTA: These are live pictures right now of the president in Hiroshima, Japan. As you guys know, he had to cut his -- some of his trip short because of the debt ceiling crisis. So, you know, it is interesting to hear Jeremy talk because there are these big crises from gun violence to the debt ceiling that even as the president of the United States, you can only do so much.

SARA FISCHER, CNN MEDIA ANALYST: Yeah, and that tough balance between trying to manage all of the domestic problems and foreign affairs. When he is at a G7 conference like this, they are not thinking about what is happening to our gun crisis or our mental health crisis here in the U.S. He is forced to pivot and think about all these other things, the war in Ukraine, tensions with China, et cetera.

And to balance those two agendas is really hard, especially when Congress is not really working with you to get a lot done. The bipartisan split, it becomes very difficult.

ALAYNA TREENE, CNN POLITICAL REPORTER: I will add, though, that I do think that the debt ceiling, potential crisis of this, is looming over this trip in the sense that it will impact all of these other countries.

I know that it's something that foreign leaders are very much watching very closely because if the government default on its debt, which would happen -- which would be the first time in history that ever happen, it would have economic impacts across the globe. And so, it is something that I think is undermining this trip in some ways and also undermining some of his conversations with other foreign leaders.

MIGUEL MARQUEZ, CNN SENIOR NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: You think that decision of him to cut the trip short is telegraphing that something is coming or is that just telling the world we are taking this seriously, we're going to be home?

DIAMOND: It's both. And that is one of the things that we have heard from White House officials in terms of why he got the trip short. It shows the U.S.'s commitment. It shows President Biden's commitment to ensuring the U.S.'s creditworthiness going forward and the financial stability of the global economy. What it also signal is that this is a deal that is going to come to Joe Biden and Kevin McCarthy. I had a new piece today --

CAMEROTA: You have new reporting on their relationship.

DIAMOND: Yeah.

CAMEROTA: Tell us about that behind the scenes.

DIAMOND: Look, this is the relationship that is going to make this deal. And as of now, it is a largely untested relationship, an underdeveloped relationship. These are two men who are from different generations, who are ideologically opposed, and who don't have any of the personal chemistry that Joe Biden and, say, Mitch McConnell, the Senate minority leader, have because they haven't spent decades together in Congress.

And, frankly, Senator Roger Wicker, he released some -- the relationship up well to my colleague, (INAUDIBLE), when he said, well, it would help if McCarthy and Biden were golf buddies, but they aren't and they were never going to be.

And that is where things stand. Look, personal relationships aren't everything, right? I think the two leaders understand the stakes of this for the global economy. But nonetheless, this is Washington and relationships do matter.

And also, interestingly, these are two men who both really thrive on the idea that politics is personal. We have seen Kevin McCarthy take that approach in the House. We have seen President Biden take that approach with Congress and also with foreign leaders. And yet here we are at a moment where this is going to come down to these two men who don't know each other all that well.

Now, that being said, just this last quick point, the first meeting that they had a week ago over the debt ceiling was pretty frosty. [23:10:01]

There were some sharp exchanges between the two of them. But I am told that this latest meeting was far more cordial between the two men and that both sides seem interested in resolving this.

CAMEROTA: I think it is interesting that you said that they are both these people who prize their personal relationships and who are sort of extroverted and yet energy from the politicking of it all. And so, if they are stylistically the same, they should be able to have a close relationship if they are similar in that way.

TREENE: But they also have a lot at stake with their own parties. I mean, Kevin McCarthy isn't just doing this with President Biden. He has to take this package and sell it to his party, including a lot of very conservative members. I mean, we saw the House Freedom Caucus today issue a statement saying that they shouldn't be negotiating at all and they should be passing the bill that Republicans passed.

Biden is having that problem on the left as well with people. Democrats in his party saying, you should consider the 14th Amendment and not budge on negotiations.

I think that is the key here. It is not just these men in the room who are negotiating. It is their entire parties who have to pass this.

MARQUEZ: And there is no scenario where four, five, six centrist Republicans come over to Democrats where they can force a vote.

DIAMOND: I mean, that -- that is the like plan C, right? And that is something that the House minority leader, Hakeem Jeffries, has set up. He has set up this process for discharge petition, which would essentially bypass the speaker's control of the floor, allowing them to bring up a bill.

But it is a highly, highly unlikely scenario and really kind of a last-ditch situation. If we come to June 1st and there is no deal, perhaps they try that, but discharge petitions are rarely, rarely successful.

CAMEROTA: All right. Friends, thank you very much for all of that reporting. Up next, Disney is upping the ante in its battle with Governor Ron DeSantis. And it is going to cost the state of Florida 2000 jobs. Alayna is going to explain all of this for us, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[23:15:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CAMEROTA: Disney is scrapping a $1 billion plan to build an office complex in Florida. This is the latest battle in its war with Republican Governor Ron DeSantis.

The new building would have brought in 2,000 jobs to the state with an average salary of $120,000. Disney says, given the considerable changes that have occurred since the announcement of the project, including new leadership and changing business conditions, we have decided not to move forward with the construction of the campus.

Alayna is following the story for us. This feud has just gotten real --

DIAMOND: It has.

CAMEROTA: -- like they have been feuding and there has been a war of words. But now, there -- this has real world impact on real employees and real money for the state. How is -- is Governor DeSantis now rethinking this feud? How is he reacting to this?

TREENE: Oh, he is leaning in. He is leaning in, and he is not shying away from this fight with Disney. I know from even talking to some of his advisers that it is something that he is also planning to continue to rail against on the campaign trail.

But he did -- a spokesperson for DeSantis released a statement tonight that read, you have basically three people at this point that are credible in this whole thing. Mr. DeSantis- told -- I'm sorry, I think we have the wrong statement here.

I have a copy here. The right statement from the spokesperson is that it said Disney announced the possibility of a Lake Nona campus nearly two years ago, nothing ever came of the project, and the state was unsure if it would come to fruition given the company's financial straits, falling market cap, and declining stock price. It is unsurprising that they would restructure their business operations and cancel unsuccessful ventures. So, that is from DeSantis's team again just leaning into this fight.

And really, I mean, where this all stems from? This is going way back now, like, back to 2020, 2021 when DeSantis -- obviously, culture war is a big thing that he leans into. A lot of this has to do with him railing against wokeness, thinking that Disney is promoting things that children should not be learning about, similar to what he talks about learning in the classrooms.

And it also goes to Disney having their own little tax island in Florida, something that he is very against and finds to be unfair. And so, it really is coming to a head today. We saw that with Disney deciding that they are going to close this down.

One other thing that I will point out, though, just on the Disney side of this, is I was talking with our colleague, Steve Cantona (ph), who has been following this case very closely, and we were saying that we think a lot of this is also Disney kind of scapegoating DeSantis for this.

CAMEROTA: So, they really were not going to go through with the office building?

TREENE: That's what it appeared to be. So, they had -- they fired their old CEO last year and this was kind of his project. And then Bob Iger is back in as chief executive, and he has kind of been against this project for a long time.

And so, um, I think some of this is really being able to use the politics with DeSantis and the animosity between Disney and Florida or Florida Republicans, I should say, as a way to kind of, you know, play this off as more political than it is part of a business decision.

MARQUEZ: A bigger picture, I can't imagine this helps. I mean, he did well with the "don't say gay" stuff and sort of got his support together down there. But going after the mouse and the business, just the money alone and how big Disney is for Florida, I can't imagine that most Floridians think that this is a really great idea.

TREENE: It's true. Also, I mean, not just with Floridians. Another big Floridian in politics, Donald Trump, he issued a statement on this, railing against Ron DeSantis, saying it was not a good idea and that he made a mistake, he has been in error with this.

[23:19:53]

This Trump statement reads, let me make sure I have it, he says, today, Ron DeSantis single-handedly lost the state of Florida nearly $1 billion in investment and over 2,000 jobs with an average salary of $120,000 because he was too weak to fight for the state. Ron DeSantis's failed war on Disney has done little for his limping shadow campaign and is now doing even less for Florida's economy.

So, Donald Trump agrees with you.

(LAUGHTER)

DIAMOND: Let's also be honest here, though, like if Trump had picked this fight, like he would be singing a very different tune --

UNKNOWN: Oh, of course.

DIAMOND: -- and he would have -- he would have gone all the way in the same way that DeSantis has, to me, I say that because this whole DeSantis-Disney fight really tells you everything you need to know about the evolution of the Republican Party. Right?

When you think about the Republican Party of 410, 15, 20 years ago, this was the party of business, pro-business party. Right? And yes, of course, there was always that culture wars aspect, but now, that culture wars aspect has taken over the party entirely and completely pushed aside this pro-business mindset. I think that this Disney- DeSantis fight is emblematic of that evolution.

MARQUEZ: What is the endgame?

FISCHER: Well, it has also changed Corporate America because it used to be that if you would create jobs, especially at the local level, you are heralded in politics. And now, Disney employs 80,000 people in Florida and that is not enough for Ron DeSantis just because Disney railed against him for one bill? That is a completely different ball game for Corporate America. We had to deal with different companies. Trump, during the Trump era, one tweet could send your entire stock (INAUDIBLE). This kind of indicates that no matter who is going to be in the presidency, a nomination for the Republican Party, whether it is DeSantis or Trump, this party is no longer the pro-corporate party that you were saying, Jeremy Diamond, and that is a huge shift in America.

CAMEROTA: And so, is DeSantis about to launch his presidential campaign in earnest?

TREENE: Yes.

CAMEROTA: When is that happening?

TREENE: We have some new reporting on this, actually.

CAMEROTA: Oh.

TREENE: So --

DIAMOND: Perked up --

(LAUGHTER)

CAMEROTA: I was leading you to the new reporting.

TREENE: We have a new reporting. He is expected to enter, formally enter the presidential race next week. Our sources are telling us that he is expected to file with the FEC, which is really, you know, the most tangible way that you can do this, and soft launch his campaign in his hometown in Florida as well.

This is a huge development. I mean, obviously, everyone has kind of already been referring to Ron DeSantis as Donald Trump's biggest competitor in the 2024 race and treating him like he is already in the race.

But this is going to change things. I know, when I spoke to some people on his team, that he is -- because he is not running for president officially, he has been actually holding back on some of his attacks against Donald Trump as much as Donald Trump has been criticizing him fiercely, repeatedly, he has done so or defended himself in a more veiled way. We have seen him ramp up, though.

CAMEROTA: But why -- I mean, why hold back?

MARQUEZ: There's so much time.

CAMEROTA: Yeah. Why hold back?

TREENE: Well, a part of it was that because he still governor, because he is still trying to show, like, one of his big things. Ron DeSantis's big thing was that he needed to finish out the policy term as governor before he formally launched. I think that he wants to have a very hard shift to campaign DeSantis versus Governor DeSantis.

And so, I do think that we are going to see a lot of this get more nasty very quickly.

FISCHER: How quickly -- you know, for these two contenders, what is the delta between the two? Is that Donald Trump is that far ahead of polling than Ron DeSantis? Are the two of them that far ahead of everybody else like Nikki Haley? Where does the landscape stand?

TREENE: So, um, Donald Trump is definitely the frontrunner. He is pretty far ahead in polling. And then right -- not right behind him but second is Ron DeSantis. I don't have the numbers with me but he is not trailing too far behind Donald Trump. There is a good gap there. And then, Nikki Haley, Mike Pence, other --

DIAMOND: Six percent.

TREENE: -- Tim Scott, yeah, much lower in the polling. And so, um, they really are seen as the two people that will be vying for this. And I do think that it is still so early, so you cannot rely that heavily on polls right now.

But I do think that Ron DeSantis getting into the race, being on the campaign trail, it is going to be very interesting to watch, especially because if you look at what he has done in Florida, he's really been able to control the media narrative around him. He has created a bit of an echo chamber with who he will speak to, the interviews that he gives.

That is not going to fly on the national stage and that's going to be a very difficult thing that he has to face.

CAMEROTA: And it will be interesting to see, if you are right, that he is ramping up his attacks on Donald Trump, but that sounds like when he is ready to do that.

All right, friends, thank you very much for all that. The Supreme Court hands major victories to Twitter and Google over content published on their platforms. Sara is going to explain the court's decision and why they are a win for big tech. We will see if it is a win for us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[23:25:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CAMEROTA: Big victories for big tech. The Supreme Court shielding Twitter from liability over accusation that it aided and abetted terrorism when it has hosted tweets created by ISIS. That decision was unanimous.

The court also dismissed a case against Google that argues that YouTube, which Google owns, used algorithms to promote ISIS videos to users.

Legal experts had warned that these two lawsuits could have upended the internet as we know it. Sara is here to explain what all of this means. What does this mean for our lives, these decisions?

FISCHER: Honestly, it means your life is going to stay the same, which is probably pretty good.

[23:30:00]

So, the Supreme Court, I was shocked even going to look at these cases, because the role of the Supreme Court is to interpret complex laws. This law is not complex. It is 27 words and it basically says that tech platforms are not liable for third-party content on their platforms.

If the Congress were to ever reverse this law, which is really what is probably going to happen, the Supreme Court deciding to punt this down out of the court system, Congress would have to pass a new law. And by the way, so far from that, they do not have a replacement.

But if they were to change it, what would it mean for us? It would dramatically change our lives. Think about how many things you use online where you are looking at content that other people post. Trip Advisor, checking out food on Yelp, reviews for hotels, even comment sections on news website. All of that would likely go away because these companies do not want to get sued in case somebody puts up a terrorist content or something else.

So, for now, the internet remains the same as we know it. But the fact that we are even having this conversation sort of shows you that all the people that make our country work, policymakers, regulators, enforcers, they are thinking about how we might have to change it.

CAMEROTA: Right because now we always talk about how we do want better content moderation because we are all and our kids are all seeing horrible things that they should not be seeing.

FISCHER: We are. And, you know, I think where is this going, Alisyn, is that instead of trying to do it with a blunt force, meaning just get rid of a law, change the law dramatically, can we implement small changes, small laws, that would incentivize or push tech companies to make their content moderation stronger?

One of the things that Congress is talking about a lot is, could we pass bills that force tech companies to be more transparent about their algorithms? Then maybe we could moderate content better, but we are not shielding them from the liability that protects their business models and allows us to use the internet as it is. I think that is the direction we are going.

DIAMOND: How much -- how much money do these companies spend actually moderating the content? If the idea is incentivizing, they must not be doing enough. Right?

FISCHER: They spend a lot. But the problem is it is a small amount compared to how much they make in profits. If you take a company like Meta, for example, you know, typically, if you're looking at how much revenue they bring in a year, it is like $130 billion. Google is even bigger than that, over $20 billion. So, yes, companies like that have tens of thousands of people who are working on safety and security. But that is a tiny little portion of the money they bring in. I think that is why people who are frustrated that big tech is not doing enough are mad, because they are saying, yes, I know you're doing a lot, but you could be doing more.

MARQUEZ: The bad actors are those people who want that content. They are always going to get around that. I mean, at the end of the day, people are not -- people who want to use the internet for ill will and illegal gains are going to do that.

FISCHER: Yes, yes, thank you. I appreciate you saying that because something that has been frustrating to me is that a lot of bills in Congress are designed to go after two platforms, which is Meta and Google. And if you take a look at where a lot of the bad actors are moving, it is to these tiny, little niche chat platforms like Telegram or Discord.

MARQUEZ: Video games.

FISCHER: Yes, gaming. Exactly. And so, these laws are not even really addressing some of those platforms where a lot of the nefarious activity is moving.

So, my hope is that Congress can start to think about this from a more holistic perspective. Passing laws that would apply to most tech companies instead of going after just two big ones not because they should not be held accountable but because bad doctors, to your point, are in other places, too.

CAMEROTA: Sara, tell us about how we have a window into some of the dysfunction at Twitter.

FISCHER: Oh, another hot topic, right? All I feel like we've been talking about for the past six months is just the chaos that is unfolding at Twitter underneath Elon Musk's reign. But today, there is a big update. A lawsuit from six former employees essentially calling out Elon Musk for creating a culture in which Twitter was not being held accountable financially for a lot of its bills.

Let me read you one of the statements from this lawsuit. Pretty damning. It says, plaintiff Hawkins, which is one of the people who is suing Twitter, was forced to resign after Musk and his transition team fundamentally changed the nature of her job and threatened her professional reputation by directing Twitter to breach its leases and, essentially, steal space from its landlords. Can you imagine?

Elon Musk doesn't pay rent, one member of the transition team told Hawkins, the plaintiff. Another member of the transition team put it more bluntly. They said, Elon told me he would only pay rent over his dead body.

CAMEROTA: Elon Musk doesn't pay rent? Why? We made him mayor of no rent.

FISCHER: Well, that is because Elon Musk is running a company that is hemorrhaging ad revenue right now. It has been marked down by Fidelity and other investors are losing more than half of its value because the business is crumbling underneath Elon Musk.

Now, I'm actually hopeful that the business can return to an upswing. I mean, they just hired a brand-new CEO who is credible. And Elon Musk is a talented entrepreneur. But at the end of the day, it does not excuse not being able to pay rent, not paying vendors, and these are all things that we have been tracking that have been going on for months.

MARQUEZ: But landlords do not care about the business and whether you --

CAMEROTA: He's a billionaire.

TREENE: Yeah.

CAMEROTA: He can't pay rent?

TREENE: He is one of the richest men in the world.

CAMEROTA: Yeah.

[23:35:00]

FISCHER: Correct. But you know what? He can also just go raise money. I reported a few months ago that Ari Emanuel and his company, Endeavor Holdings, was one of the companies that had invested in Twitter once it became private. We do not know which other companies or which other investors might be investing in Elon Musk. But that is the thing when you're a private company.

You know, yes, you might be having financial struggle, just go raise more money. So, I think that Twitter right now is in this weird spot where yes, they've got a lot of lawsuits, but this is what Elon Musk does. Right? Lawsuits are part of his business model. He takes risks. He does crazy things. He takes the force of the lawsuit. He raises more money and it goes away.

CAMEROTA: He is still to pay rent.

MARQUEZ: Rents are coming down in San Francisco as well, as I understand it.

DIAMOND: But Elon doesn't pay rent himself. Does he not have a permanent address?

FISCHER: Right now, he is sleeping at Twitter pretty much. I mean, he --

DIAMOND: He couch serves, right? I mean, maybe he's trying to apply that strategy to Twitter.

FISCHER: Let me actually to that point bring up one more thing that came out in the lawsuit today, which was absolutely wild. It said that Musk wanted to add a bathroom next to his office so that he did not have to wake up his security team and cross half the floor to use the bathroom in the middle of the night. In one regard, I guess --

CAMEROTA: Why do you a security in your office? Who is trying to kill him in his office?

FISCHER: I mean, I think there's a lot of paranoia. He's laying off tons of people. He is doing things that are putting people in precarious positions that they are suing him. And so, it doesn't shock me that he's bringing security with him wherever he goes.

But what I think this whole lawsuit points to and what that quote points to is just the fact that the culture within Twitter is chaos right now. Not paying bills, people suing the company. I mean, again, I am hopeful that it can get better, but until then, we are just going to have a lot of fun watching it.

CAMEROTA: I think if you are hiring security to protect yourself from your employees, you might want to rethink some of your managerial skills. That is all I'm saying. Sara, thank you very much. That was great stuff.

Okay, some communities across the country are desperate for migrant workers to keep their economies running. Miguel has extensive reporting on this story, and he is going to share it, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[23:40:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CAMEROTA: Cities are still scrambling to place asylum seekers who have suddenly showed up in their neighborhoods. More than a dozen New York counties issuing states of emergency in response to New York City's plan to relocate migrants outside of city limits.

But Miguel Marquez has been talking to people all over the country who want and need immigrants in their communities. So, Miguel, tell us where these communities are and what are they saying to you.

MARQUEZ: You know, for all the chaos on the border, the reality is that this country needs more migrants, more immigrant laborers. So, if you look at the Midwest mainly, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota, there is enormous need for workers there.

In a lot of these places, Mahoning Valley, Youngstown, this is a place that was hit so hard when manufacturing went away, they are now projecting that they are going to need 20,000 workers in the next 10 years or so.

And it's unskilled but also skilled workers that they're looking for. And one of the things they're doing is going to the immigrant community, migrant community, trying to find workers there, advertising for workers both overseas and people who may be here now.

The problem with all of this is that the visa situation is just very, very difficult for them to overcome. And as the political class focuses on the chaos of the border, it makes it much more unlikely that they're going --

CAMEROTA: Let's talk about this, Miguel, because, in other words, undocumented migrants who show up seeking asylum or not or -- can they be useful in these communities or no?

MARQUEZ: They could not unless they have some sort of way to work at some point, unless there is some sort of pathway to work. Keep in mind, half -- what? Twelve million illegal immigrants in this country right now. About half of them came in over the border illegally, entered somewhere illegally. The other half came in legally, overstayed their visas and are just here.

So, what -- what chambers of commerce and companies say is that they need more migrant laborers, more -- more people to do the sort of work, both skilled and unskilled. There is a company in Minnesota that is looking for Mexican workers with four-year degrees to do higher and agricultural stuff, animal husbandry. I love seeing animal husbandry.

(LAUGHTER)

CAMEROTA: Say it as much as you want here.

(LAUGHTER)

MARQUEZ: There's a great need for both skilled and unskilled workers.

CAMEROTA: Okay. Well, why doesn't Governor Abbott send buses of migrants? And I understand that these are not necessarily documented, but while they wait for their asylum process, why doesn't he send them to (INAUDIBLE)?

MARQUEZ: Well, they are sending -- buses are going to cities everywhere, not just New York. But they can't work legally. That's a federal issue. So, the federal government would have to change those roles. That would have to be a massive change in the way that we allow migrants to come to this country and get work visas and do the sort of stuff that companies and states need.

CAMEROTA: I understand. I mean, as we know, there are some asylums -- people who have filed for asylum, and then they are out on the street or wherever in the community awaiting the adjudication process. And that can sometimes take months or longer.

MARQUEZ: Years.

CAMEROTA: And they need to work. And companies need workers. So, maybe during that waiting time, Congress could do something --

(LAUGHTER)

MARQUEZ: Good luck.

TREENE: Me and Alayna were talking about this before. I mean, the system is so broken. And it is funny. It's something that Republicans and Democrats alike recognize, that they need to reform the immigration system and that they need to do it in a massive way. [23:45:03]

And, of course, we saw a lot of attention go to this after Title 42 was lifted last week with some changes, but lifted last week. The problem is that they are so far apart because, you know, to get anything bipartisan these days, specifically something like immigration reform, that has been -- it's been the issue that has plagued every party, every Congress for years now. They just can't find a way to do this. But it is so necessary.

Miguel is right. This is the H1B visa process. The whole visa process has long been very broken. And there is a lot of other things they need to deal with as well. But I know from my conversations with people in Congress, as much as they want to try to do it, they are very far from having anything.

MARQUEZ: And the country is aging. All the states are aging. Minnesota, for instance, right now, about over 80% of the working age population there is foreign-born. Sixty --

UNKNOWN: Is that right?

MARQUEZ: Sixty percent is native-born, of the working age population in Minnesota. And Minnesota is looking at years ahead. They are, like, we are going to need a lot more workers. And it would be very easy just to say, oh, well here is a huge number of workers who are more than willing to do it. But it's going to take federal laws. That will be very hard to do because of that chaos, because it has become such a hot political issue. I don't see how they get it done.

CAMEROTA: Jeremy, isn't it interesting because, as you know, Republicans give President Biden a lot of grief about this? But in many ways, his policies now, since Title 42 expired, are more stringent and actually stricter than what Title 42 allowed.

DIAMOND: Yeah, in some ways, right? It is a bit nuanced in the sense that Title 42 allowed them to quickly expel people who were seeking asylum without even asking questions except for a few exceptions. Title 8 now in the way that they have this allows for the expulsion of people who arrived at the border illegally.

CAMEROTA: And for five years, they can't come back in.

DIAMOND: That's right. And there are more severe consequences now. But there are also more --

MARQUEZ: There are some extenuating circumstances.

DIAMOND: There are some extenuating circumstances, some areas where there are more opportunities now to try and seek that asylum claim, even though it is very difficult to actually prove that asylum claim.

CAMEROTA: Yes. And also, the proposal that you must apply for asylum in the country you are transiting through before you get to the U.S. That seems --

DIAMOND: And while it's true that in the -- last week, since this new policy has gone into place, we have not seen that big surge that we were expecting. Some administration officials are still saying, hang on, we don't know exactly what the full extent is because a lot of migrants who are in Mexico right now, Northern Mexico, 150,000 or so, they are waiting to see if, indeed, those policies are stringent as they are.

And remember, all of this could also be undone by the courts. There are already lawsuits that have been filed against these new policies. And if those come down, you're going to see a surge once again.

MARQUEZ: There's also new processes, though, for people in their home country --

DIAMOND: Right, they've expanded legal pathways, particularly for those coming from countries where we have seen large migration movements.

MARQUEZ: Right.

DIAMOND: Venezuela, Nicaragua, Honduras, for example.

CAMEROTA: We will see if any of that makes a dent in all of this. Thank you very much for that reporting. Okay, up next, "On the Lookout," our reporters tell us what stories they are looking out for on the horizon.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[23:50:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CAMEROTA: We are back with our fantastic panel of reporters to tell us what stories they are keeping an eye on. We call it "On the Lookout." Okay, Jeremy.

DIAMOND: Okay, well, President Biden is currently in Japan for the G7, as we know, but there is also a case of a lieutenant -- Lieutenant Ridge Alkonis. He was convicted to three years in a Japanese prison for an incident in which he crashed a car and killed some individuals. His family says that he was suffering from acute altitude sickness.

The Japanese government, though, and the court system convicted him of negligent driving and sentenced him to three years in prison. This case has gone all the way up to the president of the United States. His family, his wife, has met with President Biden. We know that President Biden raised his case previously at the White House when the Japanese prime minister visited.

So, I'm looking to see whether or not President Biden has or does raise this case with the Japanese prime minister again, and whether after this trip, if there is any movement on that case.

CAMEROTA: Okay. Great. Thank you. Alayna? TREENE: I know we sound like a broken record, but Jeremy gave you the White House, I will give you the congressional side. It's all about the debt limit.

MARQUEZ: Oh.

TREENE: It is really the number one story.

(LAUGHTER)

It is true. It is the number one story.

MARQUEZ: Okay.

CAMEROTA: (INAUDIBLE).

TREENE: I mean, you can tell that we are both from D.C. We are obsessed with the story. But I also think a lot of people don't recognize just how catastrophic a default would be. And I know everyone thinks that this is going to get resolved like it always does. They wait until the 11th hour and then waved their magic wand, and boom you avoid debt crisis.

But you never have the first time when you don't have the first time. This could be the first time. I keep saying that to people. Yes, it is unprecedented, but, you know, it could set the precedent.

And I will just say quickly that we are going to say these negotiations continue over the weekend. Biden comes back from his trip on Sunday. They want to have -- McCarthy said they want to have a deal and a bill on the floor by next week in order to get this done.

CAMEROTA: Great, great.

TREENE: I don't know if that is going to happen. I'm not so sure.

CAMEROTA: You have cautioned us, okay, great. We will look out --

DIAMOND: I think you will probably be talking about this again.

CAMEROTA: I suspect I will be, yeah. Okay, Miguel.

MARQUEZ: I am always watching Ukraine. I just think it is one of if not the most important story in the world happening right now.

[23:55:00]

The pace of attacks has really picked up there. And I am just watching every morning to see what the Ukrainians are doing and when it seems that their counteroffensive will begin in earnest. The number of strikes beyond their territory that they control is getting greater. The Russians have been increasing their attacks, their rocket attacks, and it seems that all the pieces are starting to fall into place for Ukrainians. It is very interesting to watch.

CAMEROTA: Okay. Sara, you have one second, go. (LAUGHTER)

FISCHER: ESPN is looking into whether or not they're going to move all its cable programming onto streaming, which would have a huge impact on the way that we consume not just sports but all TV. I don't think it's going to happen for a few years, but the fact that they are preparing for it is a huge, seminal moment for the TV industry.

CAMEROTA: Thank you all. Fantastic stories. We really appreciate you, guys. And tomorrow on "CNN This Morning," meet the 16-year-old pickleball phenom who is not only beating boys her age with some of these sports tough men and making big bucks while she is at it.

Thank so much for watching us tonight. Our coverage continues now.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)