Return to Transcripts main page


Ex-Trump Campaign Adviser Papadopoulos to be Sentenced; More States Investigate Clergy Sexual Abuse Allegations; "RBG" Airs Sunday on CNN at 8:00 p.m. ET. Aired 10:30-11a ET

Aired September 7, 2018 - 10:30   ET



JOAN BISKUPIC, CNN SUPREME COURT ANALYST: -- signaled in so many ways that he has expectations for the judiciary. He wants to control the judiciary in ways. And that's why the idea of the question of how independent Brett Kavanaugh would be was so crucial.

POPPY HARLOW, CNN ANCHOR: And has said on the record in interviews, the president, I will appoint pro-life justices.

Manu, before we go, the three critical red state Democrats, Heidi Keitkamp, Joe Manchin, Joe Donnelly, they voted for Gorsuch. Does Kavanaugh get their vote, do you think?

MANU RAJU, CNN SENIOR CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: I think there's a very good chance that he does get -- pick up those three red state Democrats. I talked to Heidi Heitkamp during the questioning. She said that she had not seen any red flags at that moment, even as many Democrats were voicing their significant concerns.

Joe Manchin, I spoke to yesterday as well. He said that he was not concerned about his -- Kavanaugh's evasiveness during the hearings. And you can probably expect that Joe Donnelly in a difficult race may also vote for him.

And then, of course, it may be all moot because it all depends on those two key Republicans, Lisa Murkowski, Susan Collins. Both have not expressed any concerns at the moment either. So, very good chance he gets confirmed before the end of the month, Poppy.

HARLOW: OK. Manu, thank you. Joan, nice to have you.

BISKUPIC: Thank you.

HARLOW: Ahead for us, will George Papadopoulos, who was an adviser to the Trump campaign, is he going to go to prison? He lied to the FBI. And he will find out today if he will be behind bars.


[10:35:57] HARLOW: So, today, George Papadopoulos will find out if he is going to prison. Special Counsel Bob Mueller wants him to. Last year, the former Trump campaign foreign policy adviser pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI about contacts that he had with Russian officials. This was all during the 2016 election. Well, this week his lawyers have been asking the judge to grant him leniency. Is he going to go to prison or not?

Jennifer Rogers, our legal analyst, former federal prosecutor is here with me. Look, he would get from I think one to six months. His lawyers are contending. Look, he has served probation. You should go easy on him. I don't know why. But they're saying they should go easy on him. Does he go to jail?

JENNIFER ROGERS, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: I think he does. The guidelines range for this offense is actually 0 to 6 months. So, probation would be within the guidelines range. Typically, judges give the low end if there's no reason to deviate from that. But I think here they want to send a message. It's serious to lied to the special counsel. Special counsel made clear in their papers to the court that the lie actually did impact their investigation. And so, I think the judge here sends a message, gives him maybe somewhere in the middle, three months or so.

HARLOW: I think it's interesting that just this week, a week before his sentencing, right, earlier this week we heard from his legal team. And in this court filing they took a public swipe at the Trump administration, publicly at attorney general -- sitting Attorney General Jeff Sessions, saying that essentially, they say that Sessions is not being honest about what happened in that meeting.

Let's pull up the photo so people can remember. This is a big meeting during the campaign. It was President Trump at the table, Attorney General Jeff Sessions was there, also Papadopoulos was there.

And Papadopoulos brought up the idea of, hey, I can arrange a meeting with, you know, Russians and this was all about getting those e-mails and dirt on Hillary Clinton. And Sessions said last year, quote, "I pushed back against that suggestion." Well, now Papadopoulos' team in court in this filing are saying, no, Mr. Sessions appeared to like the idea and stated the campaign should look into it. Why is that significant?

ROGERS: Well, I think what Papadopoulos is trying to do here is to take some responsibility for what he has done. You know the judge never wants someone to sit there and say, you know, I'm -- I didn't do very much, it's not a big deal. He is saying, I was definitely on Trump -- team Trump. That's why I lied. But now I'm not. Now I'm taking responsibility for my actions.

And so, as part of that, I will tell you that in fact when I raised this issue of a meeting, they were all over it, they were into it, they were smiling and nodding. I think that's his way of trying to gain some credibility with the court to say, listen, I'm not under the thumb of Trump and Sessions anymore. I'm my own person and I regret what I did.

HARLOW: What about Roger Stone's associates? So, two men tied to Roger Stone who we know is a close and has been an adviser to the president. One of them spoke to Mueller's grand jury yesterday. One of them went into court this morning, Randy Credico, to talk to the grand jury today. And yet Roger Stone has not been subpoenaed to testify before the grand jury, which is significant, because if you are potentially a target of an investigation, you are not called to testify in that way. What do you make of these two men that have been called? You see one of them with a dog. That's Credico. I think that's his attorney next to him.

ROGERS: Yes. I mean it's pretty clear they've got Roger Stone in their sights. He appears to be a target. It looks like they're planning to indict him. They have brought -- at least spoken to ten associates of his. They're really starting to circle in on him. What these two particular men know, I don't know. I think what they are looking for is corroboration of the fact that Stone knew in advance of the "WikiLeaks" dissemination of that illegally hacked information. We know from his tweets it looks like he knew about it. But they're looking for confirmation of that, conversations he had with people and also, whether there were other people involved in this. You know Stone was obviously very close to Trump and the campaign. Who else knew about this and what were they doing with that information?

HARLOW: Jennifer, thank you for weighing in on all of that. I appreciate it.

ROGERS: Thank you.

HARLOW: Ahead, after these shocking, horrific reports of predator priests across Pennsylvania, more states now are launching investigations and subpoenaing the Catholic Church. We will talk about it ahead.


[10:44:22] HARLOW: All right. Welcome back. I'm Poppy Harlow in New York.

The scrutiny of the Catholic Church has now spread to at least nine states. This is in the wake of the grand jury report out of Pennsylvania just a few weeks ago that was stunning. Detailing horrific sexual abuse by clergy members.

Well now New York's attorney general is the latest to take action. They have issued subpoenas for all eight Catholic dioceses in the state as part of their investigation into these abuse allegations. My friend, my correspondent - our correspondent, my friend Rosa Flores is here with us. It's nice to have you in person, especially someone who has - I mean you have been with the pope. You have covered the Vatican. You know this in and out. My initial gut is, it's good that this is happening. But why has it taken so long?

[10:45:06] ROSA FLORES, CNN CORRESPONDENT: You know that's the question that we're getting from survivors as well, because they have, of course, have been talking about this for decades. And they do say, it's about time that civil authorities are doing something. So as you mentioned, New York is different, because it has issued these eight subpoenas to all the diocese in the state.

What the AG is doing, Poppy, is it's using charities bureau, which investigates charities. And we know the church gets a lot of donations. And the charities bureau investigates unscrupulous charities, because it's a consumer protection group. So that's the jurisdiction that the attorney general has.

She doesn't have jurisdiction over criminal matters. But she's working with DA's around the state to see what can be done on that front. But she does say that for most of these cases, the statute of limitations is probably run out. It's probably outside of that window. But they are looking into that.

Now here is what the archdiocese is saying. They say, quote, "The Archdiocese of New York and the other seven dioceses in the state are ready and eager to work together with her in the investigation."

And so, this is just one, like you mentioned, there's multiple states.

HARLOW: New jersey is starting something similar right now. Also, though here in New York, one thing that I read, Rosa, that was interesting is that they have set up a victim hotline for witnesses of this or victims themselves. Again, I'm surprised knowing -- we have known this has happened for so long, that that hasn't been set up before. But looks like they're trying to do what they can now.

FLORES: They are. And that is so significant for survivors. That's one of the things that they specifically told me about. Finally, there's going to be an avenue where we don't have to go through the church to talk about these things with a civil authority that is willing to listen. The attorney general has an online form where people are going to be able to go and also type in their complaints, perhaps you know submit documents as well, which is what the attorney general is going to need if she's going to hold the church accountable.

HARLOW: Seems like this is really a moment, obviously, where a lot of change needs to happen. We will see who is actually ultimately held responsible, not just for the abuse but also for coverups and how high it went, right? The allegations in Pennsylvania that this went to the Vatican.

Rosa, thank you. It's good to see you.

The Trump administration also, this week, is proposing a major change to the way that undocumented immigrant children in this country would be treated. Right now, still more than 400 children have been in government custody months after being separated from their parents at the southern border. But under that court settlement from years ago, those children can only be held legally for 20 days.

Well, the Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen is justifying this new challenge. Here is what she says. Quote, "Legal loopholes significantly hinder the department's ability to appropriately detain and promptly remove family units that have no legal basis to remain in the country."

With me now, Tal Kopan, who has been all over this reporting and every time I see, you know, your story in my inbox and another headline I'm wowed by what is happening. And I think a lot of times recently this has been flying under the radar. Why is it so significant the change this week that the administration is trying to make?

TAL KOPAN, CNN POLITICS REPORTER: Yes, Poppy. I think sometimes it flies under the radar because it's kind of complicated. But what happened this week is that there's a 20-year-old court settlement that governs how immigrant children must be treated in care. If they are by themselves and if they're with their families. And what the administration is doing is interestingly always in the settlement, it said it was pending, assuming that the government would issue regulations that would sort of codify the, you know, spirit of the settlement into formal rule making. That never happened. Within the administration in the past 20 years. This administration is doing it. And what they are hoping is they can nullify the court settlement and set their own rules for how these children are treated.

Now, we're still digging through --

HARLOW: Sorry to jump in, Tal, but haven't they already tried that? Didn't they try that like two months ago and got rejected?

KOPAN: That's a very good point, Poppy. So this is going to be a rule making. They're going to sort of call the court's bluff here. They're saying, once we propose these rules, then the court summit goes away. We can hold families longer than 20 days. We can license these facilities ourselves not worry about state licensing.

But there's a catch. The settlement says it nullifies the settlement if it is consistent with the rules of the settlement. So this is very much as you point out likely to end up before the same judge that has already rejected these arguments from the Trump administration and from the Obama administration before them.

So it's very much stay tuned. But this is a formal step that sets off a process where the government is going to try to take this out of that judge's hands entirely.

[10:50:03] HARLOW: OK. Tal, thank you for staying on this reporting. Please let us know what happens if the rule making, if this attempt by the administration works or not. Appreciate the reporting.

KOPAN: Thank you.

HARLOW: So, Republican Senator Lindsey Graham today coming to the microphone offering a theory of his about why he thinks that this new anti-Trump op-ed posted by someone in the administration to the "New York Times," why he argues his theory is that this proves there is, in the words of the president, no collusion. What? He will explain ahead.


[10:55:00] HARLOW: A self-proclaimed flaming feminist litigator. Those are her words, that's what Ruth Bader Ginsburg called herself. She would become the second woman on the high court. And she has earned countless titles and accolades during her groundbreaking legal career, even before she was a justice.

Well now the new CNN original film "RBG" takes an intimate look at her life and her legacy, including her marriage to her beloved husband Martin Ginsburg. Here's a look.


RUTH BADER GINSBURG, ASSOCIATE JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT: I have had the great good fortune to share life with a partner truly extraordinary for his generation, a man who believed at age 18, when we met, that a woman's work, whether at home or on the job, is as important as a man's. I became a lawyer in days when women were not wanted by most members of the legal profession. I became a lawyer because Marty supported that choice unreservedly.


HARLOW: It was a remarkable - a remarkable relationship. Professor Arthur Miller joins me now, a longtime friend of Justice Ginsburg and Marty. You knew them when they met at Harvard. You baby-sat their daughter.


HARLOW: In the library. And I should note, you are the nation's foremost expert on civil procedure -

MILLER: That's propaganda.

HARLOW: No, it's true. It's an honor to have you. Thanks for being here.

MILLER: Pleasure.

HARLOW: Let's talk about RBG and that relationship between this -- this love story is what strikes me most about the film. And the true equal partnership they had at a time where women, mothers and fathers did not bear an equal load. This was so extraordinary. But because of that, she was able to achieve so much.

MILLER: Yes. One of the amazing things about this, I think, marvelous love story is that at various points in their lives, one supported the other because the other needed it. When Ruth was in law school, Marty supported her. When Marty got sick, Ruth supported Marty. And that went on for the entirety of their lives together. Right down to the appointment to the Supreme Court.

HARLOW: It absolutely did. He lobbied for her, calling the White House, the President Clinton, you know my wife, my wife. She was at Harvard Law School one of nine women. That's it, nine female students in her law school class of over 100.

MILLER: No, over 500.

HARLOW: Excuse me, yes, over 500. She had to justify to the dean at the time why a woman would take the spot that a man would hold. What was the attitude at Harvard at the time when she was there towards women?

MILLER: It ranged. It ranged from indifference to resentment. You are taking a man's place. To acceptance. Ruth, in a way, was fortunate. She had Marty and Marty's on community, my classmates. So she would be part of us and then when she made the law review.

HARLOW: And it's so hard to make the law review. And she made it. And Marty would brag about how brilliant his wife was. But it was you that helped her and frankly had to help her when she got out of law school, because the law firms would not hire her because she was a woman. And when you use the pronoun she, what did these law firms say to you?

MILLER: I was simply telling the managing partner, there's this marvelous woman in the class behind me. And as soon as I used the she, he looked at me and said, you don't understand this law firm doesn't hire women.


MILLER: Those were the bad old days.

HARLOW: Wow. But obviously, she was hired. She went on to work for the ACLU women's rights project, argued six cases before the high court, won five of them. What do you think her legacy will be? When the history books are written, Arthur, what is the most important thing they will say about Justice Ginsburg?

MILLER: Number one, that she did fight as no one else was fighting in those days for women equality. Second, that she was a very powerful intellect on the court. Sandra Day O'Connor stepped out, she was the personification of women.

HARLOW: And let me ask you, for someone who is a liberal to be confirmed like she was, 96-3, look at what just happened this week with Kavanaugh.

MILLER: It tells you how our society has changed and how polarized we are and how we're all yelling at each other. She could not possibly have been criticized or voted against except for those three. She was a jewel.

HARLOW: That was a different time.

MILLER: That was a different time.

HARLOW: This is now.


HARLOW: Thank you very much. You star in the film. Everyone should watch it. It airs on CNN Sunday night 8:00 p.m. Thank you.

MILLER: It's a beautiful film.

HARLOW: It is a beautiful film. Thank you for being here. And thank you all for being with me this week. I'm Poppy Harlow in New York. Have a great weekend.