Return to Transcripts main page
Russian Lawyer Worked with Putin's Kremlin; Sen. Tester Fires Back at Trump over V.A. Pick Ronny Jackson; House Intel Republicans Clear Trump of Collusion; Schiff: Russians Followed Up on Trump Tower Meeting After Election; NRA Faces Scrutiny Over Ties to Kremlin-Backed Banker; Trump Optimistic as North & South Korea Agree to End War; Golden State Killer Arrested After 30 Year Search; Veteran News Anchor Tom Brokaw Accused of Sexual Harassment; Ann Curry Says She Reported Matt Lauer's Conduct in 2012; Some Broadcasters Won't Air Old Bill Cosby Shows After Guilty Verdict. Aired 3-4p ET
Aired April 28, 2018 - 15:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[15:00:00] ANA CABRERA, CNN ANCHOR: You are live in the CNN NEWSROOM. I'm Ana Cabrera, in New York. Thank you for being with me on this Saturday.
We begin this hour with President Trump gearing up for a re-election rally tonight in Michigan after a bombshell admission involving this woman, the same Russian lawyer who promised dirt on Hillary Clinton ahead of that now infamous meeting at Trump Tower. She now says she worked with Vladimir Putin's Kremlin. Take a listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
NATALIA VESELNITSKAYA, RUSSIAN ATTORNEY: (SPEAKING FOREIGN LANGUAGE)
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CABRERA: The keyword there, "informant." Natalia Veselnitskaya met with Donald Trump Jr, Jared Kushner, and former campaign manager, Paul Manafort. That was back in 2016.
But that new detail about her Kremlin ties comes after House Republicans on the Intel Committee released a 253-page document glossing over the Trump Tower meeting. Their conclusion, and I quote, "While the committee found no evidence that the Trump campaign colluded, coordinated, or conspired with the Russian government, the investigation did find poor judgment and ill-considered actions by the Trump and Clinton campaigns."
President Trump tweeting he's, quote, "Honored by this report."
Let's get to White House correspondent, Boris Sanchez, in Michigan, where the president will speak at a rally tonight -- Boris?
BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Hey, there, Ana. Yes, President Trump set to speak here at 7:00 p.m. Already there are several hundred of his supporters outside the venue. They are gathered, listening to music, anticipating the president's arrival. There are some reports that there will be protests nearby, not uncommon during the president's rallies.
Also not uncommon is for him to go off script. So we may see the president break some news tonight as he often does, throwing the script out the window and going with the flow of things. He's very comfortable around his supporters. We may hear him repeat that often- repeated refrain that there was no collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia, calling it a witch hunt, et cetera.
We also may see him say something about Montana Senator Jon Tester, who he's had some testy exchanges with following the nomination of Ronny Jackson to be the Veterans Affairs secretary and his dropping of that nomination earlier this week -- Ana?
CABRERA: All right. And, Boris, we also know today the president has been weighing in on the controversy surrounding Dr. Ronny Jackson, his former pick for Veterans Affairs secretary. What's happening there? What's the latest?
SANCHEZ: Yes, well, following him leaving that nomination in light of some 20-plus sources telling Jon Tester of inappropriate behavior by Ronny Jackson. The president is going after Tester on Twitter this morning. Quote, "Allegations made by Senator Jon Tester against Admiral Dr. Ronny Jackson are proving false. The Secret Service is unable to confirm. In fact, they deny any of the phony Democrat charges, which have absolutely devastated the wonderful Jackson family. Tester should resign. The great people of Montana will not stand for this kind of slander when talking of a great human being. Admiral Jackson is the kind of man that those in Montana respect and admire. And now, for no reason whatsoever, his reputation has been shattered. Not fair, Tester."
The White House also providing documents to CNN yesterday, Ana, that intend to contradict some of the statements that we've gotten from sources about Jackson's behavior. One of the allegations being that he ran a sort of grab-and-go operation when it came to prescription drugs as the head of the White House's medical unit. Several sources telling CNN he was known as the candy man, that he loosely passed around prescription painkillers and other drugs to members of the team and their families. The White House pushing back on that notion. They provided us with documents that showed there were six different audits done on the way those prescriptions were stored. That still doesn't really indicate, however, Jackson's approach to handing these prescriptions along -- Ana?
CABRERA: So there are more questions.
Boris Sanchez, thank you very much.
Joining us now, Democratic Congressman Ted Lieu, of California. He sits on the House Judiciary and the Foreign Affairs Committees.
Congressman, lots to talk about. President Trump tweeting this about the Republicans' Russia investigation report. Quote, "Just out, Intelligence Committee report released, no evidence that the Trump campaign colluded, coordinated or conspired with Russia. Clinton campaign paid for opposition research obtained from Russia. Wow, a total witch hunt. Must end now".
Must end now. Do you think he'll use this report now to fire Mueller?
REP. TED LIEU, (D), CALIFORNIA: I don't think he'll do that because he'll know that that's another example of obstruction of justice.
But let me just say that this Republican report from the House Intel Committee really is a fake report. They did not pursue leads they should have. They let witnesses come in and pick and choose which questions they wanted to answer. There was information the Democrats wanted to subpoena that they chose not to do. So we can't take this report seriously.
[15:05:05] CABRERA: One event mentioned in this report was the meeting at Trump Tower. That involved Donald Trump Jr, Paul Manafort, Jared Kushner, and that Russian lawyer, among others. Republicans call that meeting poor judgment. Now that lawyer, Natalia Veselnitskaya, is admitting she worked with Putin's Kremlin. How significant is this?
LIEU: Well, that revelation already makes this Republican report look really stupid because now we have direct evidence that this Russian lawyer had deep ties to the Kremlin. Not only was she an informant, she had direct contact with Russia's prosecutor general. This suggests the Kremlin new full well about this meeting. If you remember, this meeting was set up so that they could provide dirt on Hillary Clinton to the Trump campaign.
CABRERA: And yet, she previously said she worked in a private capacity. What do you make of the timing of her changing her story now?
LIEU: I don't really know what was going on in her head, but what it does show is that the Russians employed a very sophisticated attack in 2016 on our democracy. In addition to using cyberattacks, they used influence campaigns. And they had a number of people in the United States who were trying to get the Trump campaign to help them and to deliver these e-mails that they had stolen onto the American public.
CABRERA: Congressman Mike Conaway, the Republican who ran the Russia probe for the House Intel Committee, says he wasn't aware of this new information about Veselnitskaya, but that it doesn't matter. Let me play his response.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MANU RAJU, CNN SENIOR CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Is it troubling that she was a Russian informant and had a meeting with senior-level Trump campaign officials in 2016?
REP. MIKE CONAWAY, (R), TEXAS: No, because that's not how she presented herself and there's no evidence she acted on that.
RAJU: Does that require any further investigation from the committee, do you think?
CONAWAY: Not from my perspective.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CABRERA: No further investigation needed?
LIEU: Well, there you go. He establishes why this is a fake investigation. You could give all sorts of information to the Republican House Intelligence Committee, and they wouldn't act on it. They had the view that there was no collusion. Of course, they're going to do a report that shows there's no collusion because they weren't looking for it, and they were actually trying to ignore evidence of collusion and really just now pursue the leads they needed to.
CABRERA: Everybody is pointing fingers at each other. The Republican report is 253 pages. The Democrats have a 98-page rebuttal. There was this ridiculous number of redacts as part of that. Here's one of the pages of the GOP report. Every single word is blacked out there. What are the American supposed to get out of this? Is this all just a waste of time?
LIEU: I think the American people should trust in Special Counsel Mueller. He's going to investigate the leads that the Republicans on the House Intelligence Committee did not. He will interview the witnesses they did not. He will make them answer the questions that the Republicans did not ask. So I have faith in Special Counsel Mueller, and the American people should wait to see what that investigation reveals.
CABRERA: But that wasn't my question to you. My question is, the House Intel Committee spent all this time on this investigation, spent all this time issuing this report, which both sides say doesn't add up to anything. So was it just a waste of time of our Congress members?
LIEU: Possibly. I think this entire investigation was compromised last year when Devin Nunes did his infamous midnight run to the White House and misled the American people saying he had this super-secret and important classified information he had to share with the White House. It turned out that it was the White House that gave him that information. It was already compromised from the beginning. I could agree with you it was a big waste of time because Devin Nunes simply was not serious about this investigation.
CABRERA: I want to get so some other news as well. The president calling on Democratic Senator Jon Tester to resign after Tester raised concerns about the allegations involving former V.A. secretary nominee, Ronny Jackson. What's your response?
LIEU: I'm a veteran. I find it disrespectful to veterans that Donald Trump would nominate someone that had so little relevant experience to lead the second-largest federal agency in America. On top of that, there are over 23 current and former U.S. military members that allege some pretty serious misconduct by Dr. Jackson. I think we need to have a Navy inspector general investigate and get to the bottom of these allegations. And hopefully, that will happen.
CABRERA: So now that his nomination has been withdrawn, you don't think it should end here?
LIEU: Absolutely not. These allegations, if true, show that Dr. Jackson probably shouldn't be a doctor anymore and certainly not the doctor for the president of the United States. These allegations that he was drunk while he was on duty, allegations he gave a lot of Percocet, which is a highly addictive medication with opioids in it, to a person. We just need to look at these allegations to see if they're true or not. Again, they're coming from current and former U.S. servicemembers.
CABRERA: Congressman Ted Lieu, as always, thank you for your time.
LIEU: Thank you, Ana.
[15:10:04] CABRERA: Coming up, our panel weighs in on the House Intel report and what it might mean for the special counsel investigation.
Plus, a CNN exclusive. The NRA, a Russian banker, and allegations of trying to create a back channel between the Trump campaign and Russia.
You're live in the CNN NEWSROOM.
[15:15:20] CABRERA: More now on the new revelations this weekend about the now infamous 2016 Trump Tower meeting, the one Donald Trump Jr hosted after being promised dirt on his dad's opponent, Hillary Clinton. You'll recall the Trump campaign claims this meeting amounted to nothing. There was no dirt, they say. Instead, they say the Russians were there to lobby against the Magnitsky Act, a law that sanctions Russians accused of human rights abuses. However, we're learning that the Russians followed up after the election.
Here's Congressman Adam Schiff, the ranking member on the House Intelligence Committee.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. ADAM SCHIFF, (D), CALIFORNIA: Yes, Veselnitskaya reaches back to the Trump family right after the election, saying we want to follow up now on this request we have on the Magnitsky Act. So clearly, there's an expectation there on the Russian side that they may now have success with the Magnitsky Act, given that the prior meeting in communications dealt with the offer of help and the request on the Russian part for appeal of Magnitsky. It certainly seems like the Russians were ready for payback.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CABRERA: Joining us to discuss, politics reporter for "The Guardian," Sabrina Siddiqui, and CNN contributor and writer for the "New Yorker," Adam Entous.
Adam, we know Donald Trump Jr sent an e-mail about the supposed dirt on Clinton saying, "If it's what you say, I love it," headed into that meeting. You heard Schiff say, it looks like the Russians were expecting payback after that meeting. Is that what it looks like to you?
ADAM ENTOUS, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: You know, frankly, I don't know what it really means. It's natural, obviously, for Putin, who opposed the Magnitsky Act, to seek and to hope that Trump, who is trying to improve relations with the Russians after he won the election, that he would be more inclined than certainly Obama was in rolling back those sanctions. Obviously, what we learned later on, of course, is that the national security adviser to Trump spoke to Kislyak, the Russian ambassador, about the issue of -- not those sanctions, but sanctions the Obama administration had imposed. So there was a general climate, I think, in Moscow. The expectation was that Trump was going to be easier for them to deal with than Obama was.
CABRERA: So, Sabrina, this revelation about this follow-up comes just one day after the president declared total vindication, saying the House Intelligence Committee, the committee Schiff is on, cleared him of collusion. What are we to make of this?
SABRINA SIDDIQUI, POLITICS REPORTER, THE GUARDIAN: Well, I think that the issue with the House Intelligence Committee is their investigation they were conducting into Russian interference in the U.S. election had been mired by partisanship from the get-go. You'll recall that Devin Nunes, the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, was forced to recuse himself from the investigation after meeting in secret with the White House during the course of that inquiry. But he has, nonetheless, stayed very involved in the day-to-day of the investigation. And this report was authored by Republicans. It certainly did not have the approval of Democrats on the committee who claim that Republicans in an effort to absolve the president rushed to conclude the investigation, didn't do critical follow-up with witnesses, and are overlooking some of the central claims about the nature of the contacts and the extent of the contacts between the Trump campaign and Moscow. What it also underscores is, if there's going to be any conclusion to this investigation, it's going to come from Special Counselor Robert Mueller. I wouldn't expect it from Capitol Hill, given the partisan environment that prevails in Washington.
CABRERA: Adam, I wonder how voters might judge those Republicans on the House Intel Committee if the Senate Intel Committee or, more consequentially, Robert Mueller ends up at a different conclusion than the one the president was boasting about today.
ENTOUS: Yes, this was a subject of discussion on the Senate side, which has been operating at a much more bipartisan way. They were concerned that if they wrote their report and laid out what they knew at the time, that Mueller as part of his investigation would uncover information that would conflict what was in that report. So that's why I think you're seeing that, on the Senate side, which has been working in a bipartisan way, that there's a reluctance to put anything down in writing at this stage. So there's no question, we don't know what Mueller is going to find. But if he finds things that contradict what is in this Republican report, there will be questions asked about whether, indeed, this was really designed to basically dismiss this issue and reassure the president or whether there was a thorough investigation and there was more information they could be obtained.
CABRERA: Sabrina, the news about Natalia Veselnitskaya saying she's an informant for the Russian government, does it change things?
[15:19:58] SIDDIQUI: Well, it certainly calls into question what the Trump campaign knew going into that now infamous meeting at Trump Tower. Based on the e-mails that Donald Trump Jr was forced to make public, he was explicitly told there was an effort by the Russian government to aid his father's campaign. So were the high-level officials that included not just Trump Jr, but also Jared Kushner and Paul Manafort aware of the extent of the Natalia Veselnitskaya's ties to the Kremlin? Also, when you played that clip of Adam Schiff discussing her outreach after the election, what was the nature of that conversation from the Trump end of it? And was there, in fact, some sort of quid pro quo that was established? Certainly, this is all the more reason why that particular meeting is a central focus of Mueller's investigation, both as a panel piece of evidence about maybe an intent to collude, but also when it comes to obstruction of justice. You'll also recall the White House put out a highly misleading statement to explain that meeting.
CABRERA: And it does seem to be the cumulation of all of these little contacts.
Adam, we're now learning that the National Rifle Association is setting aside documents related to interactions it had with a Kremlin- linked banker, Alexander Torshin. Now, Torshin is one of the 17 prominent Russian officials recently slapped with sanctions. Your reaction?
ENTOUS: Well, I think one has to look at the NRA and the potential role that the Russians might see in having a relationship with that organization. You got to understand that the Russians, you know, when they approach the 2016 election and, frankly, prior to that, their objective was to divide American society. And based on the intelligence assessments that had been released, we know that at least later in the 2016 campaign, they wanted to help Donald Trump. The NRA is a very divisive organization in American society. It endorsed Donald Trump and spent a record amount of money supporting his campaign. So it's natural that the Russians would see in the NRA a natural affinity group, a group that had a similar objective, and also served Russia's broader goal of trying to, you know, encourage divisions within American society.
CABRERA: Adam Entous, Sabrina Siddiqui, thank you both. I appreciate it.
ENTOUS: Thank you.
SIDDIQUI: Thank you.
CABRERA: Coming up, Kim Jong-Un saying a new history begins as the North and South promise to end a war that started before most of us were born. But is Kim Jong-Un serious this time? And is President Trump getting the credit he deserves? We'll get a live report, next.
[15:27:02] CABRERA: What an extraordinary, historic past few days for the people of both North and South Korea.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CABRERA: Smiles, handshakes, sense of unity. This monumental moment when the leaders of both countries shook hands at their border, walked over it together, and then promised to get rid of all nuclear weapons and formally, finally, end their long war.
President Trump sharing in the positivity, tweeting this just today, "Just had a very long, good talk with President Moon of South Korea. Things are going very well. Time and location of meeting with North Korea is being set."
Our correspondent, Will Ripley, is in Seoul, South Korea, right now.
Will, I'm sure the people of South Korea are still processing the past 48 hours. They'd have good reason to be skeptical after so many decades of tension and distrust, but is there optimism there today?
WILL RIPLEY, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: There is. And in fact, we've been speaking with people even out on the streets here in Seoul, and one fellow told us that he used to have a bad impression of Kim Jong-Un, but after seeing him on TV, this kind of disarming, personable side of the North Korean leader, that he actually -- his impression has changed. Clearly, that's probably what Kim Jong-Un wanted. He knows how to play to the cameras. He knows what makes for a good TV moment. He was cracking jokes, being self-deprecating. It's a contrast of people who describe him that have defected from North Korea, who describe living in a state of fear where any political dissent is brutally crushed. Punishment could be incarceration in a labor camp or worse. But human rights didn't come up at the summit. The North Koreans want to keep it that way.
But what they did talk about is denuclearization. While they say they're committed to total denuclearization, we didn't get specifics about how that might work, what steps North Korea is willing to take, and what they expect from the United States in return.
But if you listen to President Trump's comments, he is obviously very optimistic that they could make some progress when he meets with Kim Jong-Un, possibly, in the coming weeks.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Things have changed very radically from a few months ago, you know, the name calling and a lot of other things. We get a kick, every once in a while, out of the fact that I'll be watching people that fail so badly over the last 25 years explaining to me how to make a deal with North Korea. I get a big, big kick out of that. But we are doing very well. I think that something very dramatic could happen.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
RIPLEY: President Trump likens himself as the master negotiator, but he might have a run for his money when it comes to Kim Jong-Un and the North Koreans, who are known to be shrewd negotiators, very tricky at times with wording. The key, analysts say, is that any promises they make need to be verifiable. So there's a lot of hard work ahead. President Moon Jae-in spoke with President Trump for an hour and 15 minutes. He called him from here in Seoul. And he'll be flying to Washington soon to brief him in person -- Ana?
[15:29:59] CABRERA: It is so remarkable to see the images out those meeting between the North and the South.
Thank you so much, Will Ripley, in Seoul for us this evening.
Coming up, cold case cracked. Thirty years after a rampage of rape and murder, the alleged Golden State Killer is behind bars. How DNA matching from family tree Web sites led police to their suspect.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED SHERIFF (via telephone): Police department, Sheriff speaking.
[15:35:58] UNIDENTIFIED MALE (via telephone): You're never going to catch the -- the East Area Rapist you dumb (EXPLETIVE DELETED).
Gonna kill you.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: (INAUDIBLE)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Every night I pray, you know, Dear Lord, please have the east area rapist identified.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: They'll never figure out who I am. I have nothing to worry about.
ANNE MARIE SCHUBERT, SACREMENTO COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY: The answer was and always was going to be in the DNA.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CABRERA: Twelve murders, 50 rapes, and one suspect. Police say they have finally solved a decades'-old mystery, arresting the man they say is the Golden State Killer who terrorized California in the '70s and '80s. The way they cracked this case is getting a lot of attention.
CNN's Stephanie Elam reports.
STEPHANIE ELAM, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Entering the court while handcuffed to a wheelchair, Joseph DeAngelo spoke softly while addressing the judge. He did not enter a plea to murder charges stemming from a case from 40 years ago where he allegedly killed a young married couple. An attorney for DeAngelo says the 72-year-old is depressed and fragile.
Investigators allege he is the Golden State Killer, a brutal rapist and murderer, who terrorized Californians during the 1970s and '80s.
SCHUBERT: We all knew as part of this team that we were looking for a needle in a hay stack. We found the needle in a hay stack. And it was right here in Sacramento.
ELAM: Investigators were able to unlock the cold case with a DNA sample left by the killer in one of the attacks.
PAUL HOLES, COLD CASE EXPERT & FORMER CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY: We ended up generating a DNA profile from the Golden State Killer evidence, and then were able to take that profile and upload it into an open-source public genealogy database called GEDmatch. GEDmatch then is able to search that profile against the other public profiles that individuals have placed in there. Once we got the initial DNA match results and found very distant relatives, it took us four months.
ELAM: DeAngelo is a Navy veteran who served aboard a missile cruiser during the Vietnam War. He was also a police officer in the towns of Exeter and Auburn, where officials say he was fired in 1979 for stealing a can of dog repellent and a hammer from a drugstore.
For 27 years, he worked as a mechanic at a Save Mart distribution center in nearby Roseville. He retired last year.
The 72-year-old was taken into custody in Citrus Heights, a Sacramento suburb.
SCOTT JONES, SHERIFF, SACREMENTO COUNTY SHERIFFS DEPARTMENT: When he came out of his residence, we had a team in place that was able to take him into custody. He was very surprised by that.
ELAM: For those who survived the Golden State Killer's attacks, like Jane Carson Sandler, relief mixed with shock as new details emerge.
JANE CARSON SANDLER, ATTACK SURVIVOR & CIRTUS HEIGHTS RESIDENT: I also lived in Citrus Heights at this time. So he very well could have been my neighbor, which is -- I just can't imagine. I often wonder how long he had stalked me, where he had first seen me.
ELAM: Carson Sandler clearly remembers the moment a masked man broke into her home.
CARSON SANDLER: He ran down the hall and had that flashlight in my eyes and that big butcher knife facing my chest. He immediately said with clenched teeth, "Shut up or I'll kill you."
ELAM: Law enforcement officials believe DeAngelo is responsible for 12 murders and more than 50 rapes in at least 10 counties. They say he also terrorized some of his victims by phone.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE (via telephone): I'm gonna kill you.
HOLES: The fact that he would call his victims years, in some cases, afterwards, just to continuously torment them underscores the type of person he is.
ELAM (on camera): He was the type to not leave fingerprints. Police were unable to identify their suspect until recently.
DeAngelo is expected next in court on May 14th.
Stephanie Elam, CNN, Sacramento, California.
Let's talk it over with Paul Holes, the newly retired cold-case investigator and former district attorney for Contra Costa County, California.
Paul, this story is unbelievable. I know you hunted for the Golden State Killer every single day for a decade. Tell me about your emotions, your reaction when you first heard about this week's big arrest.
HOLES: Well, I was actually at Sacramento sheriff's office when the arrest went down. I had found out about preliminary DNA results the Friday before and was absolutely stunned that, after 24 years, we finally got to this guy. It was an amazing feeling to get to that point.
CABRERA: It just goes to show you guys don't give up. You say you are 100 percent sure police nabbed the right guy. What makes you so confident?
[15:39:57] HOLES: Well, after the initial DNA testing was done, we needed to get a second sample. A second sample was obtained from DeAngelo when he discarded it into a public place. And traditional forensic DNA testing came back that was conclusive. There is no question about it that DeAngelo's DNA profile matched the profile that the Golden State Killer left behind at crime scenes 40 years ago.
CABRERA: Now, this suspect, DeAngelo, he was a former cop himself. Do you think he used his knowledge from his experience as a police officer to evade capture for so many years?
HOLES: There's no question. You know, all along when I've been reading these case files and visiting the crime scenes, it was obvious that we were dealing with an individual that was tactically sound in how he was approaching the crime scene, how he was interacting with the victims, and his escape. I didn't necessarily conclude that he had law enforcement training, but I concluded that he was intelligent. Now that we have identified him and know it was a former cop, it all adds up. There's no question that his law enforcement training contributed to him being successful all these years.
CABRERA: I still can't get over the fact that this big break came from the DNA genealogy Web site. You had the DNA all along from the crime scene, but you didn't have a match at all. How common is it that police and investigators use these genealogy Web sites as part of their case work?
HOLES: It's not very common yet. It has been used before. It's something that we're learning about. There's not a lot of individuals in law enforcement that understand the technology at this point in time. But considering that law enforcement was pursuing this guy for 44 years with more resources than any other case in California history and then, within a matter of four months, after getting the initial genealogy DNA results, we were able to identify him, it underscores the power of the technology.
CABRERA: Whose idea was it to look there?
HOLES: That was my idea.
CABRERA: Yes, what a brilliant idea, right? Now, there are some reports though that this same method of using genealogy also led to the wrong man. This happened just last year. So what do you say to people who raise concerns, in particular about privacy, over this method?
HOLES: I absolutely understand where the privacy concerns might be there. First, I think people need to inform themselves as to what kind of information we actually get when we search the genealogy databases. We are not seeing these people's genetic profiles. All we're seeing is how much DNA they share with our offender's profile. It tells us roughly how closely or how distantly related those individuals are. It gives us a starting point, just a data point. That person is not under suspicion at all. Then we have to use traditional genealogy methods to try to find individuals that might fit the characteristics of our profile.
CABRERA: Again, these crimes happened in the '70s and '80s. Why do you think the Golden State killings or assaults just seemed to taper off?
HOLES: I'm sorry, could you repeat that again?
CABRERA: Why do you think this suspect stopped committing the crimes given that all of these happened in the '70s and '80s?
HOLES: Well, I think there was two reasons for it. First, when you take a look at Mr. DeAngelo, he was much older than what most people thought he was when he started out committing his crimes back in 1974. So instead of being a teenager or somebody in his early 20s, he was actually 31. So by the time of his last known attack in 1986, he was a 41-year-old male. We typically see serial offenders start to decline in terms of how many crimes they commit after that age.
CABRERA: It's all very interesting.
HOLES: The other --
CABRERA: No, please, continue. Finish.
HOLES: I was just going to say, the other issue is, I believe in 1981, our offender got into a fight with a 6'3" Gregory Sanchez before killing Gregory Sanchez. I think he left that scene scared. And I believe he stopped offending. And we don't have another attack for five years until 1986 when he killed 19-year-old Janelle Cruz.
CABRERA: Paul Holes, thank you so much for joining us.
HOLES: It has been my pleasure.
[15:44:45] CABRERA: Coming up, legendary news anchor, Tom Brokaw, is now embroiled in a sexual harassment scandal. The allegations against him and his heated response when we come back. Stay right there.
CABRERA: Veteran news anchor, Tom Brokaw, is vehemently denying sexual assault and sexual harassment allegations. The claims against the legendary NBC anchor date back to the 1990s and involve former NBC war correspondent, Linda Vester. She told "Variety" Brokaw groped her and tried to forcibly kiss her on two separate occasions. She also alleges that he showed up at her hotel room uninvited.
Now a second woman, speaking on the condition of anonymity, tells "The Washington Post" Brokaw also acted inappropriately towards her when she was a young production assistant starting her career at NBC in the '90s.
Brokaw denies all the allegations, but this scandal has revised questions about the culture at NBC, especially in the wake of Matt Lauer's dismissal for his conduct nearly five months ago.
Joining us now is CNN senior media correspondent and host of "RELIABLE SOURCES," Brian Stelter.
Brian, you obtained an e-mail Brokaw wrote to his colleagues about Vester. What is he saying?
[15:50:19] BRIAN STELTER, CNN SENIOR MEDIA CORRESPONDENT & CNN HOST, "RELIABLE SOURCES": Yes. It's a remarkable e-mail that he says was never meant to get out. This is what he says is a rough draft of a letter to colleagues at NBC. He says he was working on a final draft but then the rough draft was leaked. Whatever happened, no matter what happed, it is an extraordinary repudiation of the claims Linda Vester is making about him.
Let's put part of it on the screen here. You can hear the angry tone in Brokaw's e-mail. He said, "I was ambushed and then perp walked across the pages of "The Washington Post" and "Variety" magazine as an avatar of male misogyny. Taken to the guillotine and stripped of my honor and achievement I had earned in more than a half century of journalism and citizenship."
He's describing how it felt to read these stories that Vester claims.
He said, "I am angry, hurt, and unmoored from what I thought would be the final passage of my life and career. Instead, I am facing a long list of grievances from a former colleague who left NBC News angry that she had failed in her pursuit of stardom."
Brokaw clearly believes he's the victim and blaming Vester for portraying herself as a victim here.
The allegations she's making date back to the early 1990s when she was a young journalist up and coming at NBC. She moved to FOX News in 1999. Brokaw says he helped her get a job at FOX News, and then in the mid-2000s, she left FOX and left the TV industry.
He's describing her as a character assassin, saying she's jealous, disgruntled. It's a different response, Ana, from what we've seen from other prominent men who have been accused of sexual harassment and misconduct. Oftentimes, we see an apology or a partial apology, a partial denial. In this case, Brokaw is making a full-throated denial, completely repudiating the allegations.
And we're seeing people take sides. NBC taking Brokaw's side for now, saying the facts do not merit action. Dozens of women have signed a letter at NBC supporting Brokaw. In fact, the number of women has more than doubled in the past 24 hours. But there are others taking Vester's side, saying there are concerns about Brokaw's behavior in the past.
This is more than six months into the "Me Too" movement, another case of allegations against a prominent man in the media industry.
CABRERA: And on top of all of this, former "Today" show anchor, Ann Curry, is also coming with some new information about Matt Lauer, who was terminated back in November. Who is she saying?
STELTER: That's right, Ann Curry, who, of course, was a co-host of the "Today" show with Matt Lauer in the early 2010, she lost her job in 2012, she feels partly because of Matt Lauer.
Here's a part of what she is saying in an interview with "The Washington Post," describing concerns about a broader culture of harassment that has been existing at NBC in the past. She talked about this in an interview with Sarah Ellison of "The Washington Post." And we can put on screen part of what she said. But she clearly feels that there is -- there was a problem at NBC that was bigger than just Lauer.
She does reveal in the interview with "The Washington Post" that she went to two people in management in 2012 and said that they needed to be concerned about Lauer's behavior with women. She won't name the people that she said that to, but she did say she tried to alert management. That's significant, because there's an internal investigation going on
right now at NBC, into who knew what when. This investigation started back in December, but it still has not been released. There's questions about when it will come out, and NBC says it could come out as soon as next week.
CABRERA: Guys, do we have the still with Ann Curry's response or what she's saying, specifically? We don't have it? OK.
Let me ask you about the fallout since that verdict came down against Bill Cosby in his sexual assault trial. Guilty on three counts. He could spend up to 30 years in prison. His sentencing date still yet to be determined. But this was the guy everybody said was America's dad. And now some broadcasters don't even want to air his old shows. Give us an update.
STELTER: This is a notable development in the wake of a guilty verdict. A cable channel called Bounce TV that was still re- broadcasting "The Cosby Show" has taken those episodes off the air. This is an example of that old line that you may be about to separate the art from the artist, you can look at someone's art separately from the person. Not in this case. Episodes of "The Cosby Show" have been so tarnished or tainted, it seems, that viewers don't want to see the episodes anymore and channels don't want to broadcast them. Of course, Cosby convicted in the court of public opinion, it seems, years ago, but now convicted in a court of law. And this was the first trial in the wake of the "Me Too" movement involving a major celebrity.
[15:54:37] CABRERA: All right. Thank you, Brian Stelter. You'll be back with me in a bit to talk White House Correspondents Dinner.
And as always, don't forget about Brian's show tomorrow, "RELIABLE SOURCES," at 11:00 a.m. right here on CNN.
We'll be right back.
CABRERA: According to the Centers for Disease Control, homicide is the number-one cause of death for black men, ages 15 to 34. This is a grim statistic. But for this week's "CNN Hero," an emergency doctor in Brooklyn, New York, it was a reality that pushed him to take action, both in and out of the hospital. Meet Dr. Bob Gore.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DR. BOB GORE, CNN HERO: I don't like pronouncing people dead. It's probably the worst thing that I've ever had to do.
I want to preserve life. When I see patients that are coming in with violent injuries, when somebody looks like you, from your neighborhood, a lot of the stuff really hits home. You realize, I don't want this to happen anymore. What do we do about it?
(END VIDEO CLIP) [15:59:54] CABRERA: Find out more about Dr. Gore's mission. Head to CNNheroes.com. And while you're there, nominate someone you think should be a CNN Hero.
Hello, on this Saturday. You are in the CNN NEWSROOM. You made it to the weekend. I'm Ana Cabrera, in New York. Great to have you with me.
President Trump --