Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Live Event/Special

CNN TONIGHT: Indiana Attorney General Says He's Investigating Doctor Who Helped 10-Year-Old Girl Get Abortion After Rape; Watchdog: Secret Service Erased Texts From January 5 & 6; Ivana Trump, Donald Trump's First Wife, Dies At 73. Aired 9-10p ET

Aired July 14, 2022 - 21:00   ET



ANDERSON COOPER, CNN HOST: The Fire Department said, they responded to a report, of someone suffering cardiac arrest, at the home, where Ivana Trump died. According to a statement, place found her unresponsive, pronounced her dead, at the scene. The New York Police Department says, there doesn't appear to be any criminality, related to her death.

Ivana Trump is the mother, obviously, to the former President's eldest children, Donald Jr., Ivanka, and Eric Trump. The two divorced in 1992, after his affair with Marla Maples, who became the former President's second wife. Ivana Trump was 73-years-old.

The news continues. Want to hand it over to Laura Coates, and CNN TONIGHT.


LAURA COATES, CNN HOST: Thank you, Anderson.

I'm Laura Coates. And this is CNN TONIGHT.

It'll be three weeks, tomorrow, since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade. And ever since, we've seen trigger laws, across the country, going into effect.

We've seen celebration, from those who wanted Roe to be overturned. We've all seen protests, from those who didn't. It's been triggering. I mean, anti-abortion activists have been accused of being cruel and controlling.

Abortion rights activists have been accused of exaggerating the harm of overturning Roe v. Wade, even been accused of concocting victims, whose stories will pull, on the heartstrings, of America, including being accused of concocting the story of a 10-year-old girl, who was raped, and forced to seek an abortion, outside of her own state.

Because man! A story like that would really prove the problem, of having no exceptions, with abortion bans, or lay the bans, themselves.

Well, the truth is, this case, gained national attention, since President Biden referred to the little girl, while discussing abortion rights actions, telling the story of how she had to cross state lines, from Ohio, to Indiana, to have her abortion, after becoming impregnated, by her rapist, at just 10-years-old.

Because rape victims are ineligible, for abortions, in Ohio, after there's been a cardiac activity, which is around six weeks, while this little girl and, I will stress, this little girl, had to travel, because she was six weeks and three days into her pregnancy.

Now, many Republicans, who supported overturning Roe v. Wade, well, they wanted her story not to exist.

The Wall Street Journal editorial board even called it "An Abortion Story Too Good to Confirm."

Listen to their own State's Attorney General, just three days ago, casting doubt on this little girl's horrific trauma.


DAVE YOST, (R) OHIO ATTORNEY GENERAL: We have regular contact, with the prosecutors, and local police, and sheriffs. Not a whisper anywhere.

I know our prosecutors and cops in this state. There's not one of them that wouldn't be turning over every rock in their jurisdiction, if they had the slightest hint that this had occurred.


COATES: "Not a whisper anywhere," said A.G. Dave Yost, with great certainty.

And fellow Ohio Republican, Jim Jordan, he joined in. The Ranking Member, on the House Judiciary Committee, seized on that, and tweeted "Another lie. Anyone surprised?"

Well, they wanted to render her invisible, a figment of your imagination. But the sad truth is she does exist!

A 27-year-old undocumented immigrant, is under arrest, and charged with raping that child. That little girl! And Columbus police say that he has confessed. He has admitted, they say, to raping the 10-year-old little girl, and not once, on no less than two occasions. He is now charged, with felony rape, of a minor under the age of 13, a law that's on the books, because this can happen.

And even after an arrest, and a reported confession, by this suspect, Ohio's top law enforcement officer says, he stands by everything he said. And well when he was asked, if he would apologize, he replied, "Apologize for what? Questioning a newspaper story?" That wasn't quite what it was!

And that tweet, by Congressman Jordan, has disappeared! But CNN's Manu Raju was able to track him down, for this follow-up question.


REP. JIM JORDAN (R-OH): Well, because we learned that this illegal alien did this heinous crime. So, we deleted the tweet.

RAJU: Yes. Would you apologize for the - to the girl, and the family, for suggesting it was a lie?

JORDAN: Never doubted - never doubted the child. I was - I was responding, to a headline, from your profession, the news profession, which happens all the time, on Twitter. We doubted Joe Biden, which is usually a smart thing to do.

But we never questioned the child.


COATES: Maybe I didn't hear right. But explain what you said to the child? Something tells me that maybe the "Blame the media," or reference to President Joe Biden, and semantics, aren't going to do the trick, in this case.


And speaking of misdirected anger, Indiana's Attorney General is now vowing to investigate the doctor, who helped this little girl, get an abortion. And the State, today, asked the Supreme Court, to hurry up, and officially transmit, its opinion, overturning Roe v. Wade, so it can put its strict abortion law, into effect.

Now, let's think about this. You hear about a child raped, multiple times, and your focus is going to be on her doctor? Or maybe, as Congressman Jordan seem to indicate, our immigration laws, which undoubtedly would be the next horizon frontier, in this discussion.

But the A.G., in Indiana, has called into question, whether the OB/GYN, who performed the procedure, properly reported the case. But according to "The Indianapolis Star," a public records request revealed the physician actually, she did, or he did, they did report the abortion.

Now, the sad reality, is that her case of sexual assault, is hardly an anomaly. That's why exceptions for rape and incest, were largely codified, across this country. Sadly, it can and will happen again.

The question is, will those, on the side of abortion rights, be able to do anything about it? With the House likely voting, tomorrow, on a bill, to codify abortion rights, and with the Senate, most likely not to pass it, I mean, what are the other potential avenues?

Joining me now, Dr. Mae Winchester, an OB/GYN, in Ohio, where they've banned all abortions, after a fetal heartbeat is detected, unless the mother's life is threatened. She says that she's now forced to call her attorney, before terminating a pregnancy, and working to save a mother's life. Also with us, Nancy Northup, President and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights.

Ladies, I'm glad, to have both of you, with me here, today.

Dr. Winchester, I have to ask you to sort of react to this case, and what it's become.

There is the obvious horror, of a child, being sexually assaulted. Full stop! Then there's the second horror, really, of a story like that being doubted, and treated, as if it was a political pawn.

What is your reaction to that?

DR. MAE WINCHESTER, OB/GYN MATERNAL FETAL MEDICINE SPECIALIST, FELLOW, PHYSICIANS FOR REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH: I care for many patients, with many stories that have brought them to me, when they needed an abortion. And all of them are valid.

But, as someone, who provides comprehensive reproductive health care? That means that sometimes I do care, for very young people, who need an abortion, and who have often suffered from traumatic, devastating abuse.

And the story coming out of Ohio, my hometown, is not an isolated event. It is not new. And it's certainly not one of a kind, by any means. These bans on abortion that limit access, hurt everybody, but especially those who need it the most.

COATES: Nancy, when you hear that, the idea of it not being an anomaly, the idea of it happening? I mean, one of the reasons we have laws like this on the book that are so specific, to sexual assault of minors, is because we know, as a society, whether we want to admit it or not that it can happen.

And yet, we have the conversations, Nancy, surrounding the agency and autonomy over a body. We often think about a woman's body. But it's more expansive. It's about a little girl's body. It's about those, who may find themselves, with little recourse. And, in states, like this, possibly not.

What is your reaction to this real possibility? Has it been dismissed, by too many, at this point?

NANCY NORTHUP, PRESIDENT & CEO, CENTER FOR REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS: No. Here we are. It is just short of three weeks since the Supreme Court overturned Roe versus Wade. And this is one story coming to the fore. And there are so many others.

I mean, this girl was a victim of a crime. And yet, she, and her mom, were made to feel that they were criminals, because they had to leave their state, of Ohio, because abortion has been banned, after six weeks.

And, of course, she went to Indiana, where they are looking to have a special session, so that they can also put in a ban on abortion. And it is just unconscionable.

This is fundamental health care. It is protected. It should be, as such. And the story of this little girl being made to have to flee her state, is why we do need to have nationwide protection.

It is important that tomorrow, the House will be voting, on the Women's Health Protection Act, and also on the right to travel, to go to another state, where abortion is legal.


COATES: Dr. Winchester, on this note, I mean, we think about, this is obviously a very controversial subject-matter. I mean, the idea of abortion rights versus those who don't support it. It's no secret that this has been a topic of discussion, of intense debate, for a very long time.

But one thing that might surprise people, is that you, as a doctor, before you are tasked with deciding, how you're going to perform, maybe life-saving treatment, and consultation, with a patient, maybe having a medical emergency? You're thinking about litigation. You're thinking about not just your Hippocratic Oath. You're thinking about having to contact an attorney.

What has this done to you, in terms of your ability to practice, without the constraints, of politics, or the threat of litigation?

WINCHESTER: It's been really unnerving. And a recent patient has allowed me to share her story. And she unfortunately broke her water, at 19 weeks, and really wanted to keep the pregnancy going, despite risks, to both her and the fetus.

And one of the main risks is an infection. And it can develop very quickly, and can become severe, very quickly. And that's exactly what happened. And the medical treatment for this, the standard of care, for this, is an abortion. And the patient chose an abortion, to save her life.

But three weeks ago, I would have, you know, we've done - this is medical care. We do this, not infrequently, because this happens more commonly than people might imagine.

But the new thing is, how am I going to protect my patient, legally? How am I going to protect myself? Because, I'm not a lawyer. I have not been able to understand that 20-page bill, like my lawyers have. So, my first call has to be to my lawyer to make sure that I am protecting the patient, as best as I can.

COATES: Nancy, when you hear that, I mean, what goes through your mind, about the idea that this is one of the thoughts, in terms of the provision of medical care, even in a medical emergency? This has got to be the next horizon, for doctors, all across this country.

NORTHUP: Yes. I mean, at the Center for Reproductive Rights, we've been providing legal advice, and support, to doctors, and abortion providers, for our 30 years. And we've now entered this very frightening situation, and circumstance. No one should have to be practicing medicine, with their lawyer, on the phone, to make sure that what they can do, is legal, in the state.

And so, I think that's one of the things that people don't think about, when they think about bans, on abortion, is that it puts every single pregnancy complication, in a very, very difficult realm. And we're going to be seeing that, with people, who are miscarrying, and not being able to get the medical care that they deserve, because of these draconian bans on abortion, in states.

It is really imperative that everybody, who supports the fundamental right, to make these decisions, for oneself, makes their support known, because we're in a critical period, right now.

COATES: And ladies, thank you for joining. This is not a hypothetical. I mean, you're experiencing this, Dr. Winchester.

In Texas, they're now suing the Biden administration, I should note, for the guidance that they've given to hospitals that they have to allow abortions, in emergency circumstances, for the life and health of a woman, if it's at risk. This is on that - not only on the horizon. It's here right now.

Dr. Mae Winchester, Nancy Northup, thank you, for your time.


COATES: We're about to dive deeper, into how the politics, surrounding the 10-year-old little girl's case got so twisted. And yes, I will keep saying, 10-year-old little girl's case, just to remind you, where we are, right now. And the role that the right-wing media played, in frankly sowing, so much doubt. Next.



COATES: So, this began, and frankly, it still is a horrific story, in a local paper, about a 10-year-old little girl, who had to cross state lines, to get an abortion, a story that was cited, by the President of the United States.

And well, it soon turned into this!


TUCKER CARLSON, FOX NEWS HOST: Biden administration, speaking of lying, just repeat a story about a 10-year-old child, who got pregnant, and they got an abortion, or was not allowed to get an abortion, when it shows that the story is not true.


COATES: Well turns out actually it's true, right? The right-wing media, jumping on the story, to suggest that it was somehow a hoax. And the Wall Street editorial board called it quote, "An Abortion Story Too Good to Confirm." That's not a thing, by the way.

That is until a suspect was arrested, on Tuesday. And, as you can see, the Wall Street Journal had to add an Editor's Note, to its unfortunate piece. It also filed a new editorial to quote, "Correct the Record," after a man confessed to the crime.

Now, the about-face is as astounding as it is awful. And what's worse? Figures like Fox's Jesse Watters, who piled on the suspicion, now want to take credit, for the suspect's arrest!


JESSE WATTERS, FOX NEWS HOST: You would think the story, of a sexual abuser, roaming free, assaulting 10-year-olds, would raise quite a few concerns, in small town Ohio. But no one seems to be doing anything about it. No one even knows anything about it.

"PRIMETIME" covered this story, heavily, on Monday, put on the pressure. And now, we're glad that justice is being served.


COATES: Oh OK, sure!

Joining me now is Ashley Allison, Jonah Goldberg, and Alice Stewart.

I'm glad you're all here.


Just, to clear up the record. They were not waiting on him, to actually announce this, on Monday. We've known about this story, for quite some time. But to take credit for it really shows me something very different.

I mean the fact that this was a story, nobody wants to be true. No one wants it to be true that a 10-year-old has been raped, repeatedly, let alone got pregnant, and had to have an abortion.

But why, politically, why, in terms of the media landscape, why was this such a story that just could not be true? Was it because it posed so much of a threat to the idea of not having the exceptions?

ALICE STEWART, FORMER TED CRUZ COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR: I think what's disturbing is, we heard a lot, this week, of the same Republicans and conservatives that use false claims, of election fraud, to now push false claims, of abortion fraud. And that should not happen.

The story here, as you said, is a tragic story of a 10-year-old girl, who was raped, by an undocumented man. He, fortunately, has been arrested, and will face justice for his crimes.

And what we need to look at this, is this is an anecdote about how we navigate the post-Roe world? What do we do moving forward? Me, as a pro-life advocate, I believe that we should support life, and the sanctity of life. I think there should be exceptions, in the case of rape, incest, and life of the mother. And how would that affect a case like this? How will this affect the next case, because unfortunately, there will be another one.

And, in this case, states are going to dictate the laws. And, in this case, this girl, if she had reported this sooner, she could have opted for emergency contraceptives, in this case. Unfortunately, it was reported and got to the authorities too late for that.

But there are other alternatives. And what we need to do, in this post-Roe world, is navigate and educate people. What do we do next time, this comes up? Early reporting, believing these girls, and making sure they get the best pre-birth care, they can.

And, in my case, I would advocate for supporting life, and encouraging women, how they can go about getting the financial treatment, and the medical treatment, they need, to choose life, instead of abortion.

COATES: Well one thing--


COATES: --one thing about six weeks, I mean, talk about grown women, not necessarily knowing they're pregnant--


COATES: --before a certain period of time. I mean, a 10-year-old, not knowing that they're pregnant?


COATES: To be able to report? That's probably what you're going with this thought?

ALLISON: Yes. I mean, she's 10. There are women, in their 50s, who have been raped, and who have never told their story, let alone a 10- year-old. And you want her to have the courage, in six weeks, to be educated enough?

I don't want to have to educate a 10-year-old, about rape, and what happens, if you're raped. That shouldn't be the life that they have to live.

And the thing that - the reason why these Republicans didn't believe her is because they know they are wrong.

When we talk about abortion rights, people who do this, they said there are cases. Every case is unique. But cases like this will come up. And they call us, the "Woke Left." They call us, these "Radicals."

No, we're people, who deal with folks, every single day, and know the lived experience, of what it's like to have to decide, whether or not you're going to terminate an abortion, or not.

And they got caught, in their lie. And they got caught, in trying to take autonomy, out of a woman's right to choose, and especially a little girl. And so, they tried to dismiss her. They tried to erase her.

And that's what Republicans, who don't believe in the - what actually happened, in the election, Republicans, who don't want a woman rights - right to choose, they want us to be erased. And that's unacceptable. And they got caught in their lies. And they should be shamed.

COATES: Jonah, you can't be quiet, during this. I know you--


COATES: I want you to bring - coming here, I know, we invite to talk.


COATES: I want you to weigh in as well.

GOLDBERG: Let me - let me take the safest course, and disagree with you.

COATES: But is that the safest course? Wow! That's new! It must be a breaking news!

GOLDBERG: Yes. We're the farthest away.

COATES: OK, fine.

GOLDBERG: Look, there's a - look, I agree with your slams, on Jesse Watters, and on Tucker. What they're doing is irresponsible and grotesque.

And - but you said something about the "Wall Street Journal," where they said their about-face was as astounding, and outrageous, or something like that. I think their about-face was the exact right thing to do. They apologized. They corrected the record. They said, "We were wrong." And that's not what Tucker and Jesse are doing.


GOLDBERG: And we should be clear about this. There were legitimate reasons, to say that that - the story wasn't nailed down. I mean, Glenn Kessler's piece was utterly reasonable to me.

I stayed out of it, entirely, because I am sick of what it - social media encourages this race to be wrong first, where people run with stories that you should wait for the second shoe to drop on them. And it happens all the time.

And sometimes, those stories are going to be beneficial to the Left. And sometimes, they're going to be beneficial, to the Right, when they go the wrong way. There're going to be bad stories, for the pro-choice side, in the next few years. There're going to be bad stories, for the pro-life side, probably more bad stories, for the pro-life side, given the way things are going.


But to sort of say that being skeptical, about a story - I understand, what they meant. I thought it was a terrible headline. But I understand, what they meant, when they say "Too good to confirm." What they're meaning is that it does lend incredible moral power, to the pro-choice argument. This is such a horrible story. And there're going to be more of those kinds of stories. And one of them--

COATES: You and I have actually talked about this idea of the moral power. And if you could just flesh it out, because, I think, I understood you to mean in that notion, is sort of the moral shaming aspect, or moral bullying, I think, was the phrase--


COATES: --you had used, in the past, with me, is the idea of - not against me. But the phrase we've talked about together--

GOLDBERG: Yes, yes.

COATES: --has been the idea of, if somebody brings up a story, like this, that is so heart-wrenching, that is so awful, that it shuts down the other side's ability, to respond? Because what are you going to say, aside from--

ALLISON: "I'm wrong."

COATES: --it didn't happen?

GOLDBERG: Right. Yes, I mean?

ALLISON: Or "Didn't happen."

GOLDBERG: No one is going to want to be maneuvered into the "Well, I'm in favor of the horrible rape of a 10-year-old girl" position. No one wants to seem like it, which is why, like Jim Jordan, should just man up, and say, "Look, I got out over my skis. I screwed up. I let my biases get the best of me. I thought the bias media was pulling one over on me. I was wrong."

People are going to be wrong. It's going to be an ugly fight, for the next five years, as people figure out how to deal with this stuff. And, so like, that's why I hate - I hate the whole story.


STEWART: Well, and not to mention, not only acknowledge that you are wrong, and apologize, and set the record straight. But don't go the other extreme, and say, "Oh, this is because of Biden's open-border policies, letting undocumented people, in this country." That's not the answer, either.

ALLISON: That's the answer--

COATES: That actually might be where they go next.

GOLDBERG: They'll stick on that (ph).


COATES: I mean, we - they're there.

ALLISON: They're there.

COATES: We're here. We're coming right back.

Ashley, Jonah, Alice, thank you so much.

Listen, first on CNN, new developments, to the January 6th investigation. Did Cassidy Hutchinson's version, of a key moment, just get confirmed? What a police officer, from the January 6th presidential motorcade, is now saying.

A Select Committee member, joins me live, next.



COATES: A ton of January 6th headlines, tonight!

The Secret Service allegedly erased text messages from January 5th and January 6th. That's according to the Department of Homeland Security Inspector General. The messages were erased, after DHS investigators asked for them.

And first, on CNN, a D.C. report - D.C. police officer testified before the committee, backing up details, of Donald Trump's heated exchange, with his security detail, on January 6th, when he was told he could not go to the Capitol, after the rally.

Plus, there's new reporting, the committee is discussing talking with both the former Vice President and the former President.

We'll get some answers, straightaway, from the member of the House Select Committee, on January 6th.

Congressman Pete Aguilar, welcome to the program.

A lot has happened, in the last few hours, right, since we heard from the last hearing. And I'm wondering, first, what is your take on the idea that there are deleted Secret Service text messages? That's pretty stunning that they came - they were taken away, after they were asked for. What does that tell you?

REP. PETE AGUILAR (D-CA): Well, I read the letter that was sent to the Homeland Security Committee. Chairman Bennie Thompson chairs that committee, obviously. And I trust that he will work through that, and seek answers, to additional questions that he has. But I think the committee has proven, time and time again, that we're going to follow the facts. And we're going to make sure that if it's relevant, to the investigation, of January 5th, and 6th, we're going to ask these questions. And so, I think that people should expect us to do just that.

COATES: I mean, at first blush, I mean, and going into in detail, I mean, how many texts are we talking about? Is this from a wide swath of people? Are they relevant that is thought to be? Do we have any information about what and who deleted?

AGUILAR: I'm not going to get into the evidence that the committee may have in its possession. But what I can say is that congressional committees have looked at this.

Obviously, that letter was sent to Chairman Thompson, in his capacity, in Homeland Security Committee. But if it's relevant, to the work of our committee, we're going to - we're going to find the facts. We're going to chase these. And we're going to make sure that we do everything, we can, to seek the truth.

COATES: It will be important, to follow that thread, into that vein. I mean, I wonder, I mean, we're talking about this motorcade incident. That was a very big part of Cassidy Hutchinson's testimony. Quite riveting to hear about the how it was relayed to her, at the White House, about what transpired, in the car.

What can you tell us about the testimony of a D.C. police officer that seems to corroborate what she said?

AGUILAR: The committee has said, since Cassidy Hutchinson came forward, that we stand by, her account, of what happened.

Nothing we have heard, I'm not going to get into specific witnesses, but nothing we have heard contradicts that. Nothing we've heard contradicts the testimony that she gave under oath. And we continue to stand by, her recollection of events, for that day.

COATES: Did you inquire, in greater detail, for people to try to corroborate? I mean, there was a lot made about right after that testimony, later that evening, I recall, the next day, people were picking up on the idea, and suggesting that there was something not credible, about what she said, and trying to undermine it.

Did the committee then seek out further ways to corroborate? Or had that been done prior to her testimony?

AGUILAR: All I'm going to say is that no one has come forward to contradict what she has told us under oath.

If people want to come forward, and have different recollections, we would encourage them, to come forward, and give testimony, under oath. That's very different than putting out anonymous statements that we have seen before.

So, that's - the committee feels strongly about this. We all stand behind Cassidy Hutchinson. And we hope additional witnesses, and individuals, who have relevant testimony, come forward, and share, with the committee, what they know.

COATES: Well, one would hope. I mean, as a former prosecutor, I certainly understand the idea of people not being able to hide, behind anonymity, and the value of testifying, under oath, for credibility, for transparency, for people to really better understand it.

But speaking of coming forward, I mean, we've heard from a number of witnesses, the committee interviewed, I think, over 1,000. I'm hearing about that number as an estimate. But how seriously is the committee, about interviewing Donald Trump, or Vice President Mike Pence?


AGUILAR: What we've said is that our investigation continues. We're going to follow the facts. We're going to make sure that we do everything, we can, to ask the relevant questions. We plan to have an additional hearing that we have - that we've talked openly about, next week that will piece together the next piece of the puzzle.

We feel that we have done a good job, in conveying the information, about what happened, and connecting these dots, and chasing the facts, about what happened on January 6th, and the run-up to that.

This most recent hearing, talking about the violent extremists, and the role that they played, in the lead up to that event. And how the President's tweet, on December 19th, wasn't just a call to action, but a call to arms, as my colleague, Stephanie Murphy said, in the hearing. And so, we're going to do just that.

But if there are new details and things to announce, the Chairman will announce those, at the appropriate time.

COATES: How close, do you think, you are, to the finish line, of these hearings?

AGUILAR: Well, we've understood from the minute that we took this assignment that this was going to be complicated, this was going to be big. And this was going to be important, to protect our democracy.

And so, we're not guided by a clock, or a congressional calendar. What we're doing is chasing the facts, and trying to do our level-best, to protect democracy, here, and to tell this full and complete story.

And so, we're going to take that as far as it can. Ultimately, we will produce a report, of our findings. But, in the meantime, we're going to continue to do the work that the American people expect.

COATES: As they often say, what a marathon, not a sprint, it seems!

Representative Pete Aguilar, thank you so much.

AGUILAR: Thank you for having me.

COATES: We're going to take what we just heard, from the Congressman, amid these new developments, to our political and legal insiders, next.



COATES: Chairman Bennie Thompson saying today that he hopes next week's primetime hearing will be the last, for the January 6th House Select Committee. Yet, he is still leaving open the possibility, for more later, this summer. We call that a hedge, everyone!

But if this is it, do we know enough? And does the DOJ know enough, for its purposes?

Miles Taylor was Chief of Staff, for the department that oversees Secret Service. And while Jonah Goldberg can discuss the politics, Elliot Williams brings experience, from the DOJ, to the conversation, as well.

I didn't mean to have that weird intro, but - and while you can discuss things, Jonah, like it came up a little odd. I'm glad you're here.

Thank you so much. I know.


COATES: Why do we talk about anything? Talk about that!


COATES: It might come in handy, in this conversation. Let's talk about Secret Service, everyone, today. Because deleted text messages, I mean, after there's a request, for you to hold on to them? Something smells a little fishy to me. How about you?

TAYLOR: Well, Elliot, and I both worked at DHS. And I'd be interested in what he has to say, on this front.


TAYLOR: Look, I love the Secret Service. I love the agents. When I was on Capitol Hill, I was on both committees that oversee the Secret Service. Same when I was at Department of Homeland Security. Immense respect!

My bigger concern than the deleted text messages? Because we don't know the full story yet. And the Secret Service spokesman is opposing it. My bigger concern, though, is the cultural issue, there.

As Elliott knows, Secret Service agents are going to be put in a very, very difficult conflict. And they already are, with this investigation. And that is, they feel an obligation, to the President. That is to take a bullet, for that person. When you drill into someone's head in training, at the Rowley Training Center, where the Secret Service trains, outside of Washington, D.C., that they're going to take a bullet for someone? When it comes to an issue, like maybe deleting the text message that's incriminating? Maybe not? I worry that there will be many more issues, like that, where we might not get the full story.

And we're already seeing the difficult position, Donald Trump put people, like Ornato, in, by naming him White House Deputy Chief of Staff, while he's a career civil servant, in the Secret Service. That creates conflicts.

It was something we were worried about during the Trump administration, is these careers, he brought close to them. But especially, the Secret Service, it creates this conflict of interest that I don't know if the committee will get to the bottom of. But they need to probe.

COATES: The way you prefaced it, though, it made me kind of say, "Well, gosh, do we want to change that culture? If the job actually is to take the bullet?" I mean, is that what we want to change? The idea of being much more forthcoming, and exposing, certain aspects? I mean, there is an element of secrecy that is required for that level of responsibility.

WILLIAMS: Yes, it's just, you know? But to back this up, it's sort of - and even going back to the years, when I was there, probably (ph) a decade ago, at this point, the Department of Homeland Security, is sort of beset by these kinds of problems.

And this is not the first time you've had sort of ethical lapses, at the Secret Service. You hear the rumors of "Wheels up, rings off," and the sort of misbehavior that folks would engage in, when going on trips. And so, it's problematic, on that level.

To me, sort of from a prosecutorial standpoint, or just investigating it, the fact that they had been requested, by the committee, and law enforcement, and that's when they disappeared.

Now, in the statement, it had seemed that there was a device replacement program. So, perhaps it was switching out phones, and somehow magically text messages got deleted, I don't know. But something seems incredibly suspicious about it. The committee is right to look into it, and get to the bottom of it.

TAYLOR: I mean, I want to say just to be really, really clear on this. There's the conflict, each of these agents face, personally.

COATES: Right.

TAYLOR: But also, to foot-stomp Elliot's point, this is a very broken agency. I left DHS, feeling like the agency itself had enormous cultural issues, staffing issues. The agents, committed to their jobs. But it's a broken agency that has created now this moral conflict that agents aren't equipped to resolve, on their own, nor should they necessarily. GOLDBERG: Yes. I agree. It's been a messed-up agency, for a long time. I've met a lot of Secret Service agents. They're almost all miserable about the job.

I had a problem when Bill Clinton's lawyers argued that there was basically a protective function privilege that excluded sworn law officers, from having to testify, about evidence, in crimes.


And I get the argument that they need to have a certain amount of like, "I got your back. Everything, what happens when we're around stays secret" kind of thing. But we're not - we're not even talking about an affair, right? We're talking about--

COATES: That was the flight - the "Wheels up, rings off."

WILLIAMS: Right, yes.

COATES: Which is probably a show in the making, as it is!

GOLDBERG: Yes. And so, like that means turn off my phone, as far as I'm concerned. Rings off!

COATES: Good job!

WILLIAMS: Oh, look at that!

GOLDBERG: But the - we're talking about potentially an attempt to steal an election, sort of an auto coup, about fomenting a mob, or do you want to call it, or insurrection, or just a riot.

And the idea that Secret Service agents should put their loyalty to a past president, above telling the truth, and upholding their oaths, as law officers, or sworn officers, whatever the right term is, just strikes me as a non-starter.

COATES: It does. And it's different than say almost sound like people are talking about a privilege.

WILLIAMS: I was going to say that.

COATES: Like, "Look at the lawyers in that."


COATES: Yes, yes, they say.


COATES: They give a privilege notion here like, "Look, I need to have these candid conversations, with my advisers." That to me is different than the person, whose job it is to make sure, there's not a threat, to the President of the United States of America.

But how about this motorcade incident though? I mean, we were also hearing tonight about D.C. police officer, who is corroborating that what she said was actually right, and actually happened. Does that fall in the same line, with the ideas of "Speak no evil," sort of the Fight Club mentality?

WILLIAMS: Look, at the end of the day, and this, to the privilege point, we actually want these privileges to exist. I want my president to be able to speak--

COATES: Right.

WILLIAMS: --to his senior aides, in sort of comfort and secrecy, and be able to do the business of government. You want Secret Service agents, to keep their mouths shut, about what they see with the President, unless there's wrongdoing, and criminality, happening.

GOLDBERG: Criminality.

WILLIAMS: Right. That's what I mean.

GOLDBERG: Wrongdoing is in the eye of beholder.

WILLIAMS: Yes, but, right, no, but--

GOLDBERG: Like crimes are crimes.

WILLIAMS: But - but - or serious ethical lapses that weigh on this person's fitness to be President of the United States, which may not be criminal, but perhaps the public should know about.

GOLDBERG: I would say politically, though, if the - if the Capitol Police story about corroborating this altercation is true?


GOLDBERG: And if the hard version, the worst version of this deleted texts thing is true? The Secret Service needs to basically be disbanded and rebuilt from scratch.

WILLIAMS: Oh, wow!

GOLDBERG: If both those stories are true, the political consequences of that are enormous. It means a lot of people have been lying to the committee. It means a lot of these Secret Service agents knew about things, and covered it up, and it would be a huge deal.

COATES: Well, easier said than done. I mean, we have to protect the President of the United States, and everyone, who is protected by Secret Service agents.

Miles, Jonah, and Elliot, thank you so much.

Listen, coming up, we'll look back at the life, of Ivana Trump, her years with Donald Trump, their tabloid headline divorce, and her legacy. A Trump biographer will join me, next.


COATES: Ivana Trump was a glamorous businesswoman. She was best known for her high-profile marriage, to the man she called, The Donald. The pair had three children together, Don Jr., Eric, and Ivanka.

This afternoon, Ivana was found dead, in her New York City apartment, at the age of 73. The cause of death has not been determined. But police say, there does not appear to be any criminality involved.

Joining me now is Trump biographer, Michael D'Antonio.

Michael, it's so good to see you.

You have some insight, of course into what Ivana Trump's life was like. You've written the book on Donald Trump, The Donald. What do you know about Ivana Trump, the woman, the mother, the wife of Donald Trump?

MICHAEL D'ANTONIO, DONALD TRUMP BIOGRAPHER, AUTHOR, "THE TRUTH ABOUT TRUMP," CNN CONTRIBUTOR: Well, I think, one thing we have to all recognize is that this was a very creative woman. Not only did she come up with that nickname, The Donald, which stuck. But she raised his three children, all on her own.

At, in the various businesses, she was the creative force, behind the interior spaces. So, whether it was a casino, in Atlantic City, or a hotel, in New York, or anywhere else in the world, she - her hand, was there, her creative hands. So, you got to give her propers for that.

COATES: And the former President seemed to appreciate that aspect of her. I mean, he even offered her, while he was the President of the United States, an opportunity, to be an ambassador, to her home country.

Listen to what she had to say about this.



OK, why would I go and say bye-bye, to Miami, in the winter, bye-bye, to Saint-Tropez, in the summer, and bye-bye, to spring and fall, in New York? I have a perfect life.


COATES: A spicy personality shown right there, right?

D'ANTONIO: You got to love it. I mean, she's got her own perspective, on everything. And that included her marriage.

She was famous, for having her own sources, in the tabloids, her sources of publicity. So, if something came up, and Donald was going to the "Daily News," saying one thing, well, Ivana went to the "New York Post," to say another. So, she was really spunky.

One of my favorite stories is that early in their relationship, Donald Trump, took Ivana, to dinner, with his family. And the elder Trump, Fred Trump said, "Everyone will have the steak." And Ivana spoke up, and said, "I'll have the fish." So, you got to give her credit for that. This is a woman, who is making a statement, right there that she was not going to be pushed around.

COATES: Well, and I always sort of cringe, when I hear about the life, of a human being, only in relation, to who they've married, and who was their spouse. And I know that she stands in her own right. And one of the reasons she was so well-regarded, for that very notion.

I mean, you describe her life as the American Dream. Tell us why.

D'ANTONIO: Well, it sure was. I mean, this is a woman, who immigrated, to the United States, at a tender age.


She spent time, in Canada, first. She did very well, there. She came, here. She learned everything that was necessary, to rise in society, very quickly, really, by her own wits, and by her talent, and by her drive. She succeeded. Now, there's nothing more American than that.

It's certainly actually more of our myth, our American myth, of what it means, to be an American striver, to be Ivana, than to be Donald, who was born, with the silver spoon, in his mouth. This is a great story of a woman who succeeded at a level that she couldn't even have imagined.

One thing you got to remember, she grew up, living in a Soviet-era factory house, in a small city, where the big game in town, was the Bata shoe factory.


D'ANTONIO: So, to go from that humble beginning, to where she ended up, it's amazing.

COATES: Pretty astounding, the way you describe it. And obviously, also a great skier, we're told, as well, from her background.

Michael D'Antonio, thank you so much.

Everyone, we'll be right back.

D'ANTONIO: Great to see you.


COATES: Hey, thanks for watching, everyone. I'll be back, tomorrow night.

"DON LEMON TONIGHT" starts right now.

Hey, Don Lemon?