Return to Transcripts main page
Hala Gorani Tonight
Paul Manafort Jailed for 43 More Months; New York City Prosecutors Charge Manafort Immediately After Federal Sentencing; Theresa May Says I Understand the Voice of The Country; UK Parliament Prepares to Vote on No- Deal Brexit; Interview with MP John Glen, Conservative Party, Salisbury, UK; Safety Concerns Grow as More Countries Ban Boeing 737 MAX 8. Aired 1-2p ET
Aired March 13, 2019 - 13:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[13:00:00] HALA GORANI, CNN HOST: Hello, everyone, we are live once again from outside the U.K. Houses in the Parliament in London. I'm Hala Gorani.
Paul Manafort is sentenced to an extra three and a half years behind bars. We have a live report coming up. Also, British MPs will shortly get there
say on a new deal Brexit after sinking Theresa May's EU agreement once again.
And the U.S. is now the only major aviation authority not to ground Boeing 737 MAX 8 aircraft.
Saying I'm sorry I got caught is not an inspiring plea for leniency. That's what a federal judge just said as she sentenced Donald Trump's
former campaign chairman to several more years in prison today. 43 months today on top of the 47 months he was sentenced to last week in a separate
case, seven and a half years total. This was Paul Manafort's second sentencing in less than a week. The bottom line is, as I mentioned, he is
facing seven and a half years behind bars between the two cases. Manafort's prosecution stems from the Russian investigation, but both
judges have said the special counsel's central issue, possible collusion, was not an issue before their courts in these two cases. Today's sentence
came in two parts and left people in the courtroom scrambling to do the math. Let's bring in Jessica Schneider for all the details. This was
Judge Amy Jackson, another judge separate from the judge who presided over last week's case. What did she say as she delivered the sentence?
JESSICA SCHNEIDER, CNN JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: Well, Hala, despite Paul Manafort's plea that he was sorry for what he had done, this judge
sentenced him to an additional three and a half years. That's beyond what he received in Virginia and it amounts to about seven and a half years
total in prison minus time for time served and good behavior. Manafort's defense team, though, they came out after this and they were lashing out.
They called this callous since really they were asking for this D.C. judge not to add on much additional time to Manafort's Virginia sentence. Once
again, just minutes ago outside the D.C. courthouse, as they did right outside the Virginia courthouse last week, Manafort's lawyer, Kevin
Downing, they said that the court ruled that there was no evidence of any collusion with the Russians. That is not accurate, though. Both of the
judges here, the one in Virginia and especially today, Amy Berman Jackson, they took great care to distinguish the crimes that Manafort was charged
with which include witness tampering in D.C. as well as tax and bank fraud in Virginia. They distinguish that from any collusion charges which were
not at issue in this court. In fact, Hala, you mentioned at the top Judge Jackson specifically saying today collusion was not in this case and
therefore it was not absolved in this case. But in court today, the judge blasted Manafort for his deception, his crimes, and his lies to the FBI and
the grand jury. And she questioned his apology, as you noted, as well. She said, saying I'm sorry I got caught, it's not an inspiring plea for
leniency. So now Paul Manafort, he will stay locked up for about seven and a half years minus a little bit of time, but we are just learning that at
the exact same time the judge was considering Paul Manafort's sentence, just moments after she announced it, the district attorney in New York City
charged Paul Manafort with mortgage fraud, falsifying business records and conspiracy. The district attorney there putting it this way, saying, no
one is above the law in New York. And importantly, Hala, these state charges, if Paul Manafort is convicted, they cannot be pardoned by the
President as opposed to the federal conviction, which the President could pardon, so it remains to be seen what will happen here, but at least on the
state front, Hala, Paul Manafort now facing additional charges that the President really can't get him out of.
GORANI: That's interesting because these were two federal cases, and here in the case of the state of New York, they would be state charges, and as
you mentioned, this is not something that Paul Manafort could get out of if the President decides to pardon him. Talk to us a little bit about these
state charges and how they come in addition to the federal charges and how that works in this particular case.
[13:05:04] SCHNEIDER: Well, we know the state authorities, whether it's the Attorney General or the Manhattan District Attorney which just charged
him in this case, they have been looking into Paul Manafort for a number of things they say he did. Some of these things were incorporated
tangentially into the cases in Virginia and Washington, D.C., Virginia in particular he was convicted for tax and bank fraud. This is particularly
mortgage fraud. And some of those state causes of action that he can now be prosecuted for, Paul Manafort may go into court and sort of plead double
jeopardy saying, wait a minute, here, I was already charged and convicted in Virginia for counts that are very similar, they said they were federal
statutes, federal charges. It's not clear how that will play out in the double jeopardy realm, whether or not his attorneys will be able to get the
charges filed against him in New York, whether or not they'll be able to get them dismissed. But this will play out on another front at the exact
same time that Paul Manafort is serving his sentence in federal prison. We'll see what happens. This is just the beginning of these charges and
what could potentially be other charges as well on the state side. Hala?
GORANI: Jessica Schneider in Washington, thanks very much. News in just the last hour, Paul Manafort, President Trump's ex-campaign chairman sent
to 43 additional months in prison in addition to the one he was sent to 47 months in prison last week, minus a little bit of time served, and all of
this could be reduced for good behavior. Paul Callan is our legal analyst and he joins me now. What did you think of this additional 43 months?
PAUL CALLAN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: He was facing as much as an extra ten years in prison over and above the four years he had been sentenced to by
Judge Ellis in the prior case. The judge ended up handing down a more lenient sentence that, as you just described, will result in him spending
another three to four years on top of the four years. So he'll be around the seven-year mark when this is over and will be probably 77 years old
when he's out of prison.
GORANI: Those state charges that are coming on top of the federal cases, can his lawyers argue double jeopardy here?
CALLAN: Well, they will have a hard time arguing double jeopardy in a lot of jurisdictions, and the reason I say that is because in the United
States, the state system is considered entirely separate from the federal system, they call it the separate sovereign doctrine, and you can in fact
be sentenced on the same charges in different jurisdictions depending on state laws. But if the President gives him a federal pardon for the
federal charges, which is always a possibility here, then he would be left only with facing the state charges in the future if they go forward with
them. So it's a complex picture going forward.
GORANI: All right, but a bad day once again for Paul Manafort. He says he's sorry, and Amy Jackson saying him saying he's sorry he got caught is
no reason for leniency. As we speak in the building behind me, members of Parliament are debating whether members of the U.K. should leave without a
deal. In just two hours they'll vote on that very question, should the country leave without a deal at all, or should they vote to make sure their
country does not have this option? They'll vote again tomorrow on whether to extend the deadline beyond March 29th, just 16 days from now, and if
that's a no, then it's anyone's guess. Tonight's vote comes after another mammoth defeat for Theresa May's Brexit deal last night, but they say it's
the only deal on the table, which is something they are doubling down on.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
THERESA MAY, PRIME MINISTER, UK: I may not have my own voice, but I do understand the voice of the country. And that is that they want to leave
the EU, they want free movement, they want to have our own trade policy, they want to ensure that laws are made in this country and judged in our
court. That's what the deal delivers. That's what I continue to work to deliver.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GORANI: Well, Theresa May is sticking by her deal and her strategy. Meanwhile they say the deal is in tatters. Bianca, the expectation is the
MPs will vote to take no deal off the table tonight, right?
[13:10:07] BIANCA NOBILO, CNN CORRESPONDENT: That is the expectation, but first of all, that's not really legally binding, neither are the amendments
being voted on. One is particularly interesting that is amendment F, and that is because it is one that has been agreed on between remainders like
Nikki Morgan and Damion Green both former cabinet members. And then leavers people like Boris Johnson. That would be essentially a managed no
deal scenario extending the day of Brexit to the 22nd of May at 10:59 P.M. Why so specific, I'm not sure.
GORANI: A day before the European election.
NOBILO: Yes. And then after that they would like to see a standstill period instead of a transition period playing into the EU, and after that
they would be on their own and negotiate another deal. So that's also on the table for debate tonight. Something significant which we heard about
in the chamber, Michael Gove, the Environment Secretary, said if the deal goes the way we expect, there could be a series of votes tomorrow,
indicative votes on various different Brexit scenarios, so we might be able to discover where the consensus in Parliament is apart from against Theresa
May's deal and against no deal.
GORANI: Sure. We'll be covering this in a special program later this evening which is in about less than two hours from now with Richard Quest,
and you'll be joining us as well. Erin, briefly in Brussels tonight, in order for this to pan out so the U.K. knows what to do moving forward, they
need the agreement of the EU, don't they? What are officials saying about what's happening in Westminster?
ERIN MCLAUGHLIN, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT, LONDON BUREAU: At this point, Hala, you're right. To avoid a no deal Brexit, there would need to
be some sort of extension, and that would need to be agreed on unanimously by all 2017 leaders. There is no consensus on the question here, though,
because it is to be discussed at the EU 27 level. Essentially what I'm hearing is leaders would want three specific questions answered, the first
and foremost being the length of the extension, how long the U.K. wants to extend the deadline. The second question being the purpose of the
extension, and then finally the effect of an extension on EU institutions, namely Parliamentary elections which, as Bianca mentioned there, are in
May. So all those questions would need to be answered by the United Kingdom. But the main question I'm hearing today in Brussels, we've heard
from Michel Barnier as well as the chief of Parliament, what does the U.K. want out of the relationship? The U.K. needs to answer that before
requesting an extension. Take a listen to what they had to say in Strasbourg earlier today.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GUY VERHOFSTADT, EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT BREXIT COORDINATOR: I'm against an extension, one day, one week, even 24 hours if it is not based on a clear
opinion of the House of Commons for something that we know what they want. Is it less ambitious to end the deal? OK, it's less ambitious to end the
deal. That's your opinion. If it is a customs unit, it is a customs unit. If it's the deal, it's the deal. If it's a Norway plus, it's a Norway
plus, but make your decision in London because this uncertainty did not continue. Not for us, not for Britain and certainly not for our citizens.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MCLAUGHLIN: And you could detect there, Hala, a note of frustration and what he is saying, that frustration echoed throughout conversations I've
been having here with diplomats and EU officials.
GORANI: Let's get to John Glen, Conservative member of Parliament and Economic Secretary To The Treasury. Thanks for joining us. You voted to
support May's deal yesterday. How do you vote this evening?
MP JOHN GLEN, CONSERVATIVE PARTY, SALISBURY, UK: I support the minister. We're in a situation where we need to find a solution, and I support her
while she tries to achieve that. What we are now trying to do is actually rule out some options but I think it's important we find a deal in the next
couple of weeks.
GORANI: Will you vote to rule out no deal tonight?
[13:15:11] GLEN: I think we need to move to no deal but I think we need to think about the implications of that. I'll reflect and see what amendments
are made in due course. It will depend on the votes as well, whether it's amended and whether I can vote.
GORANI: So you think it's a bad idea to take no deal off the table?
GLEN: I feel bad about that, but I will hopefully get more comfortable throughout the hours.
GORANI: How do you feel about taking a deal off the table?
GLEN: I want a deal, and that's my focus. I've been working across the government the last 18 months to try to secure that.
GORANI: You're working on tariffs, principally, on the economic disaster of no deal?
GLEN: We published an interim schedule. I have 16,000 tariffs if there is no deal.
GORANI: You would remove tariffs? They would go down to zero?
GLEN: We would need to decide what to do. I don't want this to be the outcome.
GORANI: Of course, but if it is the outcome, and I've spoken with antidotally, but pretty much every MP I've spoken to said the same thing,
there is no deal on the table and they could vote to keep it on the table. It could be the Parliament does not agree to take no deal off the table.
GLEN: In the next couple weeks, where can we find compromises and movement on all sides so people can be reassured that the Prime Minister's deal will
not keep us locked in, that she's secured several movements over this week. It's not enough for some to be reassured. We'll work on that in the next
couple of weeks.
GORANI: What else could she do? These are horrendous defeats for the Prime Minister.
GLEN: I need to analyze that a bit more carefully --
GORANI: It's not an analysis. Those were terrible defeats she suffered. At what point will you say this deal just will not pass Parliament?
GLEN: Those who voted against it didn't all vote against it for the same reasons. So there is a variety of people that want to stop it. There are
a variety of people who believe another outcome is achievable. If we look at what's been put down today it's what is reasonable through the EU. I
think we need to be realistic about what actually is in the realm of what is achievable.
GORANI: But in Westminster, just putting the EU to one side, how do you get this deal through Parliament when it has been voted down so precisely
twice. Where do you find that compromise you're talking about in 17 days?
GLEN: There is always opportunities with colleagues.
GORANI: Where if you could have one area where you're hopeful?
GLEN: I think there are outstanding concerns on how the backstop would work. I think that is an area of significant concern to the dup. I think
if the dup were in a position where they were more comfortable than that, that would put out a large number of colleagues who would be able to
support the deal. But it's a very tense and difficult time for the government.
GORANI: By that, you would need to provide some sort of legally binding component to the agreement that's already been discussed. It doesn't seem
prepared to do that.
GLEN: We'll see, won't we? We've got not many days left to try to resolve this. There is obviously an amendment today about extending article 50. I
don't think that instinctively is a great way to go, because the people voted to leave the EU. We need that to happen.
GORANI: Would you vote to extend the negotiation?
GLEN: Let's see what comes out of the votes today. It's very contingent on things happening, so I will take stock and see what happens.
Principally, if you don't have a deal. I think it's virtually impossible to get through in March. The issue, really, is the question of an
extension. For what purpose and to what end?
GORANI: You said it would have to be for something significant.
GLEN: Exactly. And we're not at the point of discerning exactly what that is.
GORANI: John Glen, really nice to see you.
Frustration over Boeing 737 MAX 8. More customers are banning the plane and what some pilots have said that have aviation experts concerned.
We'll be right back.
[13:20:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)
GORANI: We want to bring you another big story we are following, the crash of that Ethiopian Airlines plane, the tributes today For Some of the 157
people that died on the flight. They came from 35 different countries. 22 of them worked for U.N. and their agencies, everything from the World Food
Program to Save the Children to high commissioner for refugees as well. Family members paid their respects at the crash site and as more and more
countries are announcing they are banning that model of that plane, that particular plane, the Boeing 737 MAX 8. Before we get to that angle, Dave
McKenzie is in Ethiopia near the airport from where it took off with more tributes being paid to the victims. David?
DAVID MCKENZIE, CNN CORRESPONDENT: That's right, Hala, it's been a very poignant day as families of these victims travel to the crash site, some
two hours' drive from where I'm standing. It was just a few minutes it took that plane to get to that area before it slammed into a hillside.
There were families particularly from Kenya, the worst affected country, sent in buses. They had flowers on the scene and paying their respects.
Very little possibility for closure yet, of course, a long process because of this investigation.
We spoke to Feisal Hussein who went there to pay his respects for his father with his uncle, he tried to keep it together, but, Hala, it was a
very tough day for him and others.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
FEISAL HUSSEIN, PLANE CRASH VICTIM'S RELATIVE: at the end of the day people are still crying back home and that will not cease until the burial
is done, and also the entire ceremony. It was work to feel as a family, our kin our beloved, a fitting sendoff, I really, really fear going to that
site. I don't want to go but I have to. I have no words for what happened. [inaudible]
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MCKENZIE: We've been at the site for days. I can't imagine anyone connected to this crash what it must be like for them, Hala. Officials
saying the black boxes will be heading to Europe. Exactly which country, they have said they are making that decision and it will be very much in
the minds of the families, than for people across the world getting answers. Many airlines have abandoned this aircraft, this type of plane.
[13:25:05] GORANI: The list of countries banning flights on the Boeing 737 MAX 8 seem to be growing by the hour. Here's the map of countries. You
can see Canada was added in the last few hours, banning the MAX 8 models in the Canada air space. Just about every airline that has those planes have
grounded them minus the United States. Let's talk to Mary. Mary, what do you make of the fact that America is not banning the MAX 8?
MARY SHIAVO, CNN AVIATION ANALYST: Fortunately for the United States and its airline passengers, too early on Boeing made a statement that no
changes were need, and then the FAA followed suit, so they painted themselves in a corner. The FAA -- this is the way they work. They defer
to Boeing, and in their directives and statements about the changes needed to the max 8, they fully disclose the FAA says they were relying upon what
Boeing told them and the work of Boeing. So what has happened is, unfortunately, they've gotten into a position. Instead of defending it,
they should say, look, we realize not knowing what's wrong with this plane certainly suggests it's not airworthy instead of waiting for evidence to
prove to us that it's unairworthy. It's a war of words in some ways trying to make the words they have said make sense, and they simply do not.
GORANI: But what's the point, then, of having an FAA, a federal agency, in this way if they defer to the plane manufacturer on questions of safety?
SHIAVO: Well, that's been their modus operandi for a number of years. The FAA rather openly, including on their website, said they believe they are
in partnership with airlines and with manufacturers to enhance the national air space system. So for years they have been deferring to Boeing, to
airlines, to other manufacturers. It's certainly not unique to this instance, and they take their guidance from Boeing. The FAA just does not
have the expertise to examine these complicated and very technical computer systems, not on the amp and not even in the air traffic control system.
They've been criticized for that.
GORANI: Just based on these two crashes, Lion Air and Ethiopian Airlines, do you believe this plane should be banned for now until they figure out
more?
SHIAVO: Absolutely, because it's so obvious that you say you don't know what's gone wrong, and yet two have fallen from the sky. Of course you
have to ground it until you can figure it out. And the guidance that has come out is terribly confusing. I've read it all. The first guidance says
you have to put a new page in this aircraft's manual and give the pilots an hour of training and they'll be good to go. Then the second one crashes
and now the FAA is saying, again, based on what Boeing has done, the FAA is saying, you have to change this computer program and you have to make it so
the plane can't put its nose down as far as it has. Oh, and by the way, it's still airworthy but you have to make these changes by April. It's
utter nonsense. The plane should be on the ground. They should fix it. And they're creating far more problems for themselves by not doing that.
GORANI: I wonder, as an expert, would you yourself fly on one of those planes today?
SHIAVO: No. And it's just common sense. It would be foolish to do so. What is occurring here is it appears that the federal aviation
administration of the United States is willing to bet passengers' lives on the fact that they're hoping another one won't happen. They don't know why
it has happened, but they're saying they're not going to rescind the airworthiness certificate. That's not fair, absolutely I won't get on it.
And I think we'll know within a week. Waiting for a week to spare the lives of perhaps hundreds more people, it's just common sense.
GORANI: Mary Schiavo, thank you very much. Always a pleasure speaking to you. Thank you for your expertise.
Still coming this evening, another vote on the Parliament. Now Britain is wondering whether it needs a deal at all. We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[13:30:23] HALA GORANI, CNN INTERNATIONAL HOST: Another day, another Brexit vote in the building behind me. But wait, didn't British lawmakers
torpedo Theresa May's Brexit deal and parliament just last night?
Yes. But now, they want to say in whether Britain leaves the E.U. in 16 days without any deal at all. The dreaded no-deal scenario that many say
will spell disaster for the British economy.
However, staunch Brexiteers insist no-deal could usher in a brave new dawn for the bring much to the United Kingdom. Others say, well, you'd be
shooting yourself in the foot and possibly in a place that could hurt a whole lot more.
In a couple of hours, we will know, for sure, if no-deal is off the table. That could mean another vote here on Thursday night. In case, you haven't
had enough. To help us unpack this, Carole Walker joins me now.
CAROLE WALKER, POLITICAL ANALYST: Hello.
GORANI: So in layman's terms, tonight M.P.s are being asked, do you want to take no-deal off the table? So that that we are sure that the country
won't fall off a cliff? That's what they're being asked.
WALKER: Yes. Look, today feels a little calmer, but essentially, I think that's because we're in the eye of the storm as this political crisis
swirls around.
The motion tonight says that the U.K. should not leave the E.U. without a deal, but then goes on to recognize the fact that legally, the position is
that the U.K. will leave on the March the 29th, unless something happens to change that. And that means that it would have to be a delay agreed with
the rest of the E.U. or Britain could decide to revoke Article 50 altogether, but that would have to go through the commons and the laws, and
that is something that would ultimately cause uproar.
The prime minister has now said she's going to vote for that motion. But essentially, if it goes through the main effect is going to make it even
more difficult to get anything further, whatsoever out of the European Union.
GORANI: And so your expectation, and the expectation and I've been hearing from many people, is that tonight M.P.s will vote in favor of that motion,
to take no-deal off the table, but still leaving the door opening potentially to that happening. Because in shrine and law, the U.K. leaves
March 29th? Right?
WALKER: Yes. This will be an expression of the will of the House of Commons. It is M.P.s delivering an instruction to the government. And
let's face it, the government is now in an incredibly vulnerable position. And the prime minister herself, is she's just about made it hoarsely
through prime minister's questions today when she was asked what your plan is.
All she could point to, with a series of votes and amendments that are down tonight and tomorrow which essentially are going to dictate what happens
next in this tortuous Brexit process.
GORANI: All right. So if indeed tonight, M.P.s reject the idea of a no- deal or express the opinion that no-deal is undesirable, then tomorrow they vote on what?
WALKER: Well, tomorrow, there will be a motion that recommends a delay to leaving the European Union. But I think what that's going to do is open up
the agenda to all kinds of different groups of M.P.s to try to say what will happen if there is an extension and what should happen during that
time.
This whole issue is, of course, hugely fraught. The rest of the European Union, every other 27 country has to agree to a delay if there is a delay.
We know that there are European elections happening in May. So many of them don't want a delay that's any later than May the 22nd. And it's very
difficult to see what could change in those few short months.
So I think what we're going to see for tomorrow is a real battle for the Brexit agenda at the time that the prime minister having suffered two
shattering defeats on her deal is showing absolutely no sign of changing course.
[13:35:11] GORANI: John Glen, who's a member of the prime minister's cabinet was on the program just about 15 minutes ago, and he still says he
believes there can be a compromise that would get her deal through. Is that fantasyland here?
WALKER: Extraordinary. The prime minister herself still seems to be clinging to that hope that if it gets close enough to the date for
Britain's departure from the European Union, if M.P.s look at, perhaps, a series of votes tonight which could mean not just a short delay, but
perhaps a much longer delay, that they will very likely be attempts to get a second referendum onto the agenda tomorrow. That that might still at the
11 and a half hour --
GORANI: Carole, there's still no new strategy. This has been her strategy for months. We've been reporting on it for months. Just kind of run the
clock out at some point with a gun to their head. M.P.s will have to vote for that deal because the alternative is worse.
WALKER: Yes, absolutely. It is quite extraordinary. Most -- leaders, if they went down to the biggest defeat in history with M.P.s on all sides of
the argument voting against her deal would have changed course, would have adopted a different tack, might have attempted to change the agenda.
The prime minister is sticking absolutely doggedly to her deal as though it's the only life raft that is going to see her through this, but she is
frankly running out of road and it was very interesting that was made clear to her in the House of Commons earlier, amidst questioning that if she does
simply try to bring back the same deal a third time, well, you can actually do that under parliament she wrote. She'd have to have something new to
put to M.P.s and the European Union have been making it very clear that they're simply not prepared to give any further, no more concessions.
GORANI: We'll see what happens, whether there'll be even a new general election. At some point, will she be under so much pressure she'll have to
step down? But we'll have more answers in an hour and 20 -- I guess in two hours. That's when the result of the vote on this motion will be revealed
and you'll be with us.
Carole, thank you very much.
Well, as lawmakers debate whether to leave the E.U. with no deal, some voters are wondering why it's even up for debate. Among them the fishermen
of Whitby in northeast England who are keen to leave the E.U. and its Common Fisheries Policy as soon as possible. Phil Black is there and has
more.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
PHIL BLACK, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): On England's blustery northeast coast, the spectacular ruins of Whitby Abbey crown the
cliffs overlooking the town's harbor. Whitby's immense breakwalls and long sheltered fishing boats from the power of the North Sea.
But the harbor is surprisingly quiet. This is a proud fishing town that just doesn't do a lot of fishing anymore.
RICHARD BREWER, FISHERMAN: As you could see Whitby now is just shadow of one's self.
BLACK: The Harbor side tea shed is where lifelong fishermen like Richard Brewer gather to chat, swap stories and grumble about their number one
enemy, the European Union.
BREWER: We're just disgusted with them how the fishing industry being treated over there over the years.
BLACK: It's a common view here, blaming E.U. imposed quotas for almost wiping out Whitby's fleet.
BLACK (on-camera): What has being a member of the European Union meant for this town, your industry?
JAMES COLES, FISHERMAN: It's absolutely decimated the Yorkshire (ph) coast. We used to have a 20-strong fleet here. Each boat had four, five
men going to sea.
BLACK (voice-over): It's why so many voted for Brexit. And they want it to happen as soon as possible, regardless of the prime minister's repeated
failed efforts to get a deal through parliament.
COLES: We want a really good deal, but we dictate all fishes in our waters. We want a no-deal and everybody out and then we still dictate when
it comes to fishing our waters.
BREWER: If we got a no-deal, I wouldn't lose any sleep over it.
BLACK: Up the hill, we find more of Whitby's living history. Barry Brown's great-great grandfather started smoking herring here 147 years ago.
Barry's an optimistic Brexiteer and a pragmatic supporter of Theresa May's efforts.
BARRY BROWN, FORTUNE'S KIPPERS: I think she's done all right, to be fair. She's tried her best. It maybe -- it maybe troubles be liking. It may not
be completely to my liking. But we've to come somewhere, to middle ground somewhere.
BLACK: But this part of England isn't just about fish and there are people here who fear Brexit will bring more pain.
Tattoo lover Chris Warrier (ph) says Brexit uncertainty has already triggered redundancies at the local plastics company where he works.
BLACK: You worried?
CHRIS WARRIER, TATTOO LOVER: I am, personally, I am. So, well, I'll probably be one of the next ones if anyone else goes person. I'm worried.
[13:40:04] BLACK: Some people in Whitby ask, what would James Cook make of all this?
The town's most famous resident, one of Britain's greatest maritime explorers, was the first to chart much of the Pacific Ocean, including New
Zealand and parts of Australia. Celebrated world-changing achievements that somehow seem far less challenging than solving the mysteries and
contradictions at the heart of Brexit.
Phil Black, CNN, Whitby, Northeast England.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
GORANI: Well, you can check us out online, faecbook.com/halagoranicnn. And on Twitter, @HalaGorani as well.
U.S.-backed forces in Syria say we are witnessing the final moments of ISIS. But the terrorist group is still holding on to its last tiny little
sliver of land despite the fiercest bombardment yet. Take a look at some of these pictures.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GORANI: Our CNN team on the ground filmed this exclusive footage showing the intensity of the battle, literally fireballs rising up into the air.
Thousands of ISIS fighters have already surrendered, but others are launching counterattacks. The diehard fighter is still within that small
enclave.
Ben Wedeman has been watching all of this unfold in eastern Syria. He reports from near the front line.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
BEN WEDEMAN, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: What we hear behind me is actually an ammunition depot of some sort that's been hit. And so
there are probably thousands, tens of thousands of rounds going out somewhere behind that thick pall of smoke that's been rising from the
junkyard that is all that remains of the so-called Islamic State.
We have been watching since about 6:00 p.m. local time last night. A very heavy bombardment with artillery, mortars and multiple heavy airstrikes.
There's been a lot of exchange of machine gunfire as well.
ISIS, we're told, has actually tried to counterattack. It's really windy up here. I'm just going to have to hold onto the wall. Taking two
positions that were previously held by the Syrian Democratic Forces. They're also using one of their old methods which is suicide car bombs,
five of them being used overnight, that hampering the progress of the troops.
But every officer, commander with the Syrian Democratic Forces, we speak to, say that there will be no pause to this battle. That they are going to
continue and intensify until they finally defeat what is left of this so- called Islamic State.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
GORANI: And that was Ben Wedeman in Syria.
At least six children have been rescued after a building collapsed in Lagos, Nigeria. But it's not yet known how many more were killed or
trapped inside the multistory building.
It was partly residential but it also housed the school, unfortunately, on the top floor. Emergency workers are digging frantically. You can see the
images there from Nigeria. Parents anxiously awaiting to learn the fate of their children.
Still to come tonight, long delayed justice for two victims of sex abuse in the Catholic Church, as the once powerful cardinal is sentenced to hard
time. We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[13:45:48] GORANI: The Vatican's former treasurer has been sentenced to six years in prison. Cardinal George Pell was convicted in December for
sexually abusing two choir boys in the late 90s.
Pell was once the most powerful catholic official in all of Australia. He's denied all the charges and says he's planning to appeal.
Anna Coren has our story.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Pell, you're the devil. You're evil. You're a monster.
ANNA COREN, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): For the survivors of clerical sexual abuse in Australia, the sentencing of the
country's highest ranking catholic for heinous crimes was a moment they had long been waiting for.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Today is a victory for not just but widely.
BRIAN VENILLE, ABUSE SURVIVOR: And justice has been served. The truth has come out.
PETER KIDD, CHIEF JUDGE, COUNTY COURT VICTORIA: Cardinal Pell, would you please stand? I sentence you to a total effective sentence of six years
imprisonment. I set a non-parole period of three years and eight months.
COREN: 77-year-old Cardinal George Pell who until last month had been the Vatican treasurer was found guilty on all five counts of sexually abusing
two teenage choir boys when he was archbishop of Melbourne in the late 90s.
Chief Judge Peter Kidd who allowed his hour long remarks be televised live described the attacks as brazen, appalling and sexually graphic, saying
that Pell had not only breached trust but had abused his power.
KIDD: The feigning, which the jury has found you have engaged in, was on any view breathtakingly arrogant.
COREN: The conviction of the cardinal came down to the testimony of one choir boy who said that in 1996, Pell forced him to perform oral sex on him
and carried out indecent acts with him and his friend in the pre-sacristy after Sunday mass in Melbourne's St. Patrick's Cathedral.
The other choir boy died of a heroin overdose in 2014. His father, whose identity can't be shown for legal reasons, says he was disappointed and it
hoped the cardinal would receive a longer sentence.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Most of them did. That's a life sentence. He didn't get a life sentence for what he did.
COREN: The surviving choirboy who wants to remain anonymous asked his lawyer to read a statement on his behalf.
VIVIAN WALKER, LAWYER FOR SURVIVING CHOIRBOY: I appreciate that the court has acknowledged what was inflicted upon me as a child. However, there is
no rest for me. Everything is overshadowed by the forthcoming appeal.
COREN: Pell, now a registered sex offender maintained his innocence and his appeal will be heard in June. But if his conviction stands, he won't
be eligible for parole until the end of 2022. The judge will aware this man with deteriorating health may in fact die in prison.
Anna Coren, CNN, Hong Kong.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
GORANI: More to come, including cheating on tests and faking athletic abilities. These are the outrageous and criminal steps some wealthy famous
parents allegedly took to get their kids into elite universities.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[13:50:30] GORANI: Now to a massive fraud case involving a college admission scheme. Prosecutors in the U.S. say that wealthy parents and
thousands of dollars -- paid thousands of dollars to fix their kid's standardized test scores or fake their participation in sports in order to
get them to elite universities.
Fifty people, including CEOs, college coaches, and two well-known actresses are facing charges. Brynn Gingras has our story.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
BRYNN GINGRAS, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Oscar nominated actress, Felicity Huffman, and actress Lori Loughlin, best known for her
role as Aunt Becky on "Full House."
LORI LOUGHLIN, AMERICAN ACTRESS: Then you'll pop in and get a pelvic ultrasound, and then it's off to the worst.
GINGRAS: Among dozens, charged in the cheating scam helping to get students into a string of prestigious universities.
ANDREW LELLING, U.S. ATTORNEY FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS: Fifty people nationwide two SAT or ACT exam administrators, one exam proctor, one
college administrator, nine coaches at elite schools, and 33 parents.
GINGRAS: According to prosecutors, the center of the scheme is prep organization, The Key, founded by William Singer. He has pleaded guilty to
four charges including money laundering and obstruction of justice.
LELLING: Between roughly 2011 and 2018, wealthy parents paid Singer about $25 million in total to guarantee their children's admission to elite
schools.
GINGRAS: The scheme involved two kinds of fraud. Parents paying a college prep organization to help their children cheat on SAT or ACT exams and
others paying to allegedly bribe college coaches to help admit the students as athletes regardless of their athletic skill.
LELLING: Singer helped parents take staged photographs of their children engaged in particular sports.
GINGRAS: Lori Loughlin and her husband fashion designer Mossimo Giannulli have been charged with conspiracy to commit mail fraud and honest services
mail fraud.
OLIVIA JADE GIANNULLI, DAUGHTER OF LORI LOUGHLIN: Hello, everybody --
GINGRAS: For allegedly paying more than $500,000 in bribes to get both of their daughters admitted to USC. Getting them on the rowing team, a sport
which neither of them has ever participated in. Their daughters have not been charged.
An e-mail written by Giannulli in the complaint reads in part, quote, "I wanted to thank you again for your great work with our older daughter. She
is very excited and both Lori and I are very appreciative of your efforts and end result."
Their daughter, though, seemingly making light of going to college in this YouTube video posted in August.
GIANNULLI: But I'm going to go in and talk to my deans and everyone and hope that I can try and balance it all. But I do want the experience of
like game days, partying. I don't really care about school.
LELLING: The parents charge today, despite already being able to give their children every legitimate advantage in the college admissions game,
instead, chose to corrupt and illegally manipulate the system for their benefit.
GINGRAS: Huffman is also charged with conspiracy to commit mail fraud. Allegedly paying $15,000 to Singer's organization. In a phone conversation
recorded as part of the investigation, Huffman says, "We're going to do like we did with my older daughter." The cooperating witness responds,
"OK, So cooperating witness two, will take it with her and for her at Igor's place at the West Hollywood test center."
According to the complaint, Huffman discussed the plan as late as last month. But did not go through with this game for her younger daughter.
Prosecutors are calling the scam, Operation Varsity Blues and includes Georgetown, Stanford, UCLA, USC, University of Texas at Austin, Yale
University, and several prominent Boston institutions.
LELLING: We're not talking about donating a building so that a school is more likely to take your son or daughter. We're talking about deception
and fraud. Fake test scores, fake athletic credentials, fake photographs, bribed college officials.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
GORANI: And there you have it. That was Brynn Gingras reporting on that scandal. And thanks for watching tonight. But I'll be back in about an
hour with our Brexit special.
[13:55:37] After the break, "Amanpour" will be next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
END
