Return to Transcripts main page

Anderson Cooper 360 Degrees

2,000+ Former DOJ Officials Call on AG Bill Barr to Resign; President Trump's Increasingly Shrinking Circle. Aired on 8-9p ET

Aired February 17, 2020 - 20:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

[20:00:20]

ANDERSON COOPER, CNN HOST: Good evening.

Former national security adviser John Bolton today once again had the opportunity to speak out about what he saw during moments that were central to the president's impeachment. And once again, he chose not to, continuing to tease, not tell. So we begin tonight keeping 'em honest with some other public servants, who are taking their own duty more seriously. More than 2,000 former federal prosecutors and other Justice Department officials, veterans of Republican and Democratic administrations, all of them calling on Attorney General Barr to step down.

Quoting now from their statement, Mr. Barr's actions in doing the president's personal bidding, unfortunately, speak louder than his words. Those actions, the damage they've done to the Department of Justice's reputation for integrity and the rule of law, require Mr. Barr to resign.

Now, that is unprecedented. And so is this. "USA Today" reporting that a National Association of Federal Judges has called an emergency meeting for tomorrow to address growing concerns about intervention by the Justice Department and the president in politically sensitive cases. All of this in the wake of the attorney general's intervention after the president tweeted about it in the sentencing of the president's friend and fixer, Roger Stone.

As you know, four federal prosecutors quit the case in protest. One quit his job. The president congratulated Attorney General Barr, who maintains his impartiality despite recent reporting that he's also now re-visiting negotiations of some of the president's perceived enemies.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PIERRE THOMAS, ABC NEWS CORRESPONDENT: Can now ensure to the American public that the Justice Department is not going to be used as a weapon in a highly charged political season?

WILLIAM BARR, ATTORNEY GENERAL: Absolutely. And that, as you know, Pierre, one of my passions is the feeling that we have to ensure that the Department of Justice is to the used as a political football. And one of the things I'm distressed about is the increasing use of the criminal process to achieve political results. And I want to -- I want to get away from that. (END VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: Keeping 'em honest, there's no evidence of that and plenty of contrary, enough to concern 2,000 plus former Justice Department officials, enough to prompt those federal judges to call an emergency meeting. Not enough, of course, for John Bolton, who is also an attorney to speak candid.

He actually teased chapter 14 of his book today, but didn't actually say anything of substance. However, for every John Bolton, there's a Donald Ayer. Ayer served as deputy attorney general under George H.W. Bush, and there's a stinging piece in "The Atlantic" calls Barr, quote, un-American, and writes, quote, the fundamental problem is that he does not believe in the central tenet of our system of government, that no person is above the law.

He spoke this evening to CNN's Wolf Blitzer.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

WOLF BLITZER, CNN HOST, "THE SITUATION ROOM": You've known Bill Barr for about 40 years.

DONALD AYER, FORMER DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL: I have.

BLITZER: Forty years, and now, you're calling him in this article in "The Atlantic", un-American. You're saying, given our national faith and trust in the rule of law, no one can subvert. It is not too strong to say that Bill Barr is un-American. Un-American, strong words.

Has he changed over these 40 years or what?

AYER: I don't -- I don't know that he's changed, because he's always had a very strong view that the executive ought to have a great deal of power. I've never known quite how far it would go. And there was never any reason to test it, because when he was attorney general under George H.W. Bush, George H.W. Bush had no interest in being an autocrat.

So, now, we're faced with the situation where Bill Barr has won the job of attorney general under a president who apparently does want to be an autocrat.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: A moderate voice making what would be absent any evidence a pretty extreme claim.

But it's not like there's a shortage of evidence as to how the president sees his role. He's made no secret of it. He's said, as you'll recall, that article II of the Constitution gives him power to do, quote, whatever I want as president.

As to what he wants to see in the attorney general, well, he's also talked about that. He wants someone like Roy Cohn, his former mentor and personal fixer, something he did not get in the last attorney general, Jeff Sessions, who recused himself from the Russia investigation.

(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: So, Jeff Sessions takes the job, gets into the job, recuses himself. I then have -- which, frankly, I think is very unfair to the president. How do you take a job and then recuse yourself? If he would have recused himself before the job, I would have said, thanks, Jeff, but I can't -- you know, I'm not going to take it. It's extremely unfair, and that's a mild word, to the president.

(END AUDIO CLIP)

COOPER: He framed what Sessions did as being unfair to the president. In private, he was more explicit, saying this about him personally.

[20:05:03]

Reading now from the Mueller report, quote: The president opened the conversation by saying, I don't have a lawyer. The president expressed anger at McGahn about the recusal and brought up Roy Cohn, stating that he wished Cohn was his attorney.

That was nearly two years ago, long before the Senate Republicans voted to essentially give him a blank check with their votes to acquit him. He wanted someone to do his bidding. And now, he apparently has what he wants.

Joining us is CNN legal analyst and former federal prosecutor, Elie Honig, who signed this protest statement. Also, former Trump White House lawyer, Jim Schultz.

Elie, you say you didn't sign this letter lightly. What, for you, made you sign it?

ELIE HONIG, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Yes, Anderson. I don't sign letters like this light. So the best part about being a federal prosecutor is you get to just do your job. All you're about is facts, the law, and doing what's right. And politics play no part of that.

And that to me is the central tenet of the Department of Justice. It's all about two things, having your credibility and being independent. And I think over the last year, when he's been in office, Bill Barr has done serious irreparable damage to those two things, the credibility and the independence of himself and the Justice Department. He's gone too far.

Justice Department needs to stand apart and be independent. That's why I signed the letter.

COOPER: Jim, obviously, very clearly, you did not sign the letter. I want to make sure that people know that.

But it was signed by Department of Justice officials who've worked under both Republican and Democratic administrations. And they wrote in part: Governments that use the enormous power of law enforcement to punish their enemies or reward their allies are not constitutional republics, they are autocracies.

What do you think is wrong about what these officials are saying?

JIM SCHULTZ, FORMER TRUMP WHITE HOUSE LAWYER: First off, I think they had a tremendous rush to judgment on that. And the fact that Bill Barr immediately said, yes, I'll go and talk before Congress on this issue tells you all you need to know.

And in this instance, the U.S. attorney came to Bill Barr. It was not the other way around, according to the reports of the Justice Department. And also, the supervisors, the folks that are supervisors in the U.S. attorney's office called into question the decisions that were made by the line prosecutors in that case. So, let's not -- let's not be lost on that.

And secondly, you know, we keep saying, well, these folks are not partisan. The one Justice Department official who happened to leave the office was an Obama associate council to the president and held the same job that I held with President Trump. And those are inherently partisan positions. That's not to say the politics factored into his decision making.

But for everyone to say that, you know, folks don't have a partisan eye on things, or the people that are leaving were career prosecutors, they're absolutely independent. Just isn't the case.

I mean, you had Bauer out the other day, writing that "New York Times" article. Bauer happened to be an Obama White House counsel. So, you have a lot of folks that have a partisan agenda pushing this thing out, before the facts have really -- have really been discovered, as it relates to what happened.

And Barr is vehement about stating that, you know, that decision was made long before any of the tweets, long before -- and before the president made my statements on this matter. He also came out and said, look, you're not helping me out here when you make comments like that, Mr. President. And he said that publicly, because, you know, he has a job to do. And he has to have -- you know, he has to have the trust in the folks that are working below him.

So, I really think this is a jump to judgment on Bill Barr, no question.

COOPER: Elie, what about -- what about that?

HONIG: Yes, Anderson, first of all, this is not 2,000 Democrats who signed this letter. This is 2,000 former prosecutors who are allying with both parties, who served under both parties. I served more time under Republican than Democrat.

But this is no rush to judgment. Bill Barr --

SCHULTZ: Are you a Republican or a Democrat?

HONIG: Bill Barr has been --

COOPER: Let him finish.

HONIG: -- in office for a full year. Let's look at the track record here.

First of all, he misstated, he distorted Robert Mueller's finding. He tried to keep the whistleblower's complaint on Ukraine from going to Congress, even though the law is very clear that it had to go to Congress. He declined to even open an investigation of the Ukraine matter, when I think any prosecutor worth his salt would at least open an investigation and take a look.

And out of the 60,000-plus cases that the Justice Department does every year, what two cases has William Barr and the higher echelons of the Justice Department come into and overruled the trial prosecutors, the line prosecutors? Michael Flynn and Roger Stone. What do those two people have in common? They're both close political allies of Donald Trump.

You can't ignore this pattern. It's not all about Roger Stone. Roger Stone was the straw that broke the back, but it's been a full year of abuse from William Barr.

COOPER: Jim, what about that? If there are thousands of prosecutions, isn't it a little suspect that Barr weighs in on --

SCHULTZ: Look, it's not uncommon -- when you have a high-profile criminal matter such as this that involve high-profile issues, political issues, it's frequent --

COOPER: Do you know any other cases he's weighed in on to --

SCHULTZ: Up to the Justice Department, it happens time and time again in prior administrations. And Elie will tell you, that's absolutely the case.

In this instance, the fact that the U.S. attorney, according to Justice Department reports, reached up, as it relates to this case, that tells you all --

[20:10:06]

COOPER: But do you know of any other cases that Barr has weighed in on this -- ?

SCHULTZ: -- that lying prosecutors who were supervisors -- lying prosecutors who were supervisors disagreed with the decision of the folks on the case, that happened to be pretty junior lawyers as it relates to that office.

HONIG: OK, so, Anderson --

COOPER: But do you know of any other specific examples that Barr has reversed --

SCHULTZ: So, Anderson, I'm having a hard time -- I'm having a hard time hearing you, but I'll finish with this point. So -- and I'm not ignoring you, I just can't hear you very well.

COOPER: OK.

SCHULTZ: The issue here is, not only do we have young prosecutors in this case, but what happens is prosecutors sometimes grip very tight to their cases, right? They get invested in cases. Lawyers do it. Prosecutors do it.

And that's why there's this system where you go up the chain in order to get approvals as you move through a case when you're either going to resolve a case or bring a case.

HONIG: Yes, so, Anderson, what's so unusual --

COOPER: Actually -- Elie, very quickly. I've got to --

HONIG: What's so unusual about this case is that you have Donald Trump openly tweeting and urging the Justice Department to get involved and Bill Barr dutifully falls in line every time.

SCHULTZ: That's just not going to happen.

(CROSSTALK)

COOPER: Jim, I'm sorry about the sound problems on my end. Jim Schultz, thanks very much.

Coming up next, the president's reaction to all of this and reporting about his state of mind, namely his reported paranoia in the wake impeachment.

Later, problematic works from Michael Bloomberg's past. What he said and how it may affect his campaign today.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[20:15:35]

COOPER: We're talking tonight about this remarkable bipartisan protest to William Barr's conduct as attorney general and the growing concern that the president may be weaponizing the Justice Department. We're going to talk about how it's all being received.

I want to check in with CNN's Jim Acosta at the White House.

So, how is the president reacting to this criticism? Not just of the attorney general, but the way that the president fees commandeering the Justice Department to protect his interests?

JIM ACOSTA, CNN CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Yes, Anderson, we can tell you that I talked to a White House official earlier this evening, who said, the president still has confidence in the attorney general and that his mind, when it comes to Bill Barr has not changed. He still is fully confident in this attorney general and why not? He's essentially doing what the president wants for the most part. But I will tell you, Anderson, going back to that letter signed by more than 2,000 veteran officials of this Justice Department, if you go to the bottom of that letter, it encourages people inside the Justice Department, if they see something, say something. Basically urging them to engage in some of the same whistle-blowing that got under the president's skin in the Ukraine inquiry. And so, that is something that's not going to sit well with the president.

But so far, no what I think whatsoever on how this president views the attorney general.

COOPER: You know, Hope Hicks coming back to the White House, the president leaning on other kind of longtime aides, people who were there early on during the campaign or early on who had left and are now coming back, is there a sense that the president is kind of hunkering down with the people he considers most loyal before the campaign even gets more heated? There was a "Times" piece kind of alluding to that.

ACOSTA: Absolutely, Anderson. Talking to my sources, I will tell you, I talked to a Trump adviser earlier this evening who said the president is bringing back, make no question about it, some of his most trusted aides, and Hope Hicks would be near the top of that list if not at the top of the list. She's been almost like a family member to this president over the last several years.

And I will tell you, Anderson, I talked to an aide of the president late last week and asked whether or not this president is essentially going after his enemies. And this aide responded to me, would that surprise you?

So I think there's an acknowledgement inside the president's own team that he is lashing out right now at people that he perceives to be his enemies.

Now, one of the other things that we should point out moving forward -- I mean, the president, you don't have to talk to anonymous officials about this. The president has been saying this out loud as he was telling Geraldo Rivera in that interview last week, he is seriously considering the idea of cutting aides out of his foreign leader calls, the same kind of scenario that got him into trouble with the leader of Ukraine. There were aides listening into that phone call that didn't like -- who didn't like what the president was saying, and then reported it and essentially that is what spiraled into the impeachment inquiry.

And if the president considers something along those lines, that would once again, Anderson, shatter one of those Washington norms, trusted national security officials on the line with the president when he's talking to a head of state. It would really change a lot over here at the White House, Anderson.

COOPER: Yes, Jim Acosta, Jim, thanks very much.

With all of this playing out, there's reporting, as I mentioned, "The New York Times" that adds to Jim's insights into the president's state of mind and the atmosphere inside the White House since the impeachment. In a word, paranoid. In a phrase, according to the "Times'" sourcing, turning that paranoia into U.S. policy.

I want to get some perspective from someone who knows the president well, Trump biographer, Michael D'Antonio. Also, someone who knows presidential paranoia, former Nixon library director, Tim Naftali. He's currently a CNN presidential historian.

Michael, given what you know about President Trump, citizen Trump, is a whiff of paranoia all that surprising? He's written about that in books?

MICHAEL D'ANTONIO, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: Well, he has written about it, Anderson. He published a book called art of the comeback and offered three -- ten tips for an effective comeback. And he advised in number three to be paranoid.

He thinks that paranoia is an effective strategy when it comes to managing people and when it comes to doing business. And I think all of the attitudes that we see him bring into the presidency are things that evidence themselves early in his life. So, he's never trusted people very readily and is very quick to identify someone as an enemy. And then try to root out those who aren't loyal enough.

So paranoia is something that's always been a trait for the president, and the president, and he considers it a useful, even constructive thing.

[20:20:09]

COOPER: Tim, I mean, was Nixon -- I mean, from what I've heard of the tapes, there's definitely kind of strains of paranoia with Nixon.

TIM NAFTALI, CNN PRESIDENTIAL HISTORIAN: Yes, I'm afraid I've seen this movie before, and it's really ugly. Richard Nixon surrounded himself with people who understand his hates, and they would play on those hatreds.

Nixon, in the summer of 1973, he very much lost it. He was so angry at the Pentagon Papers, ultimately. And he was convinced that a Jewish conspiracy was out to get him. And he had a top aide named Charles Colson and some unfavorable, unemployment statistics came out. And Colson had one of his staff pretend to be a "Time" magazine reporter and call the Bureau of Labor Statistics to find out the family names of the economists that had worked on it.

He reported to the president. They were Jews. And this led Jew -- this led President Nixon to demand that he have a list of every Jewish person in the U.S. government, because he said on tape --

COOPER: Wow.

NAFTALI: -- that Jews are not loyal. They are disloyal to the United States. He fomented.

And this led -- I mean, fortunately, his inner circle did not allow this administrative pogrom to happen, but they did force out a few Jewish-Americans from the Bureau of Labor -- from the positions they had at Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Now, Nixon's people used -- they weaponized his hatred and took advantage of the fact that he was a conspiracist. And my fear is that the people around President Trump will play on these issues that they know he hates to trigger him. And as a result, he will use government against the American people, the way that Richard Nixon did in 1971 and '72.

COOPER: Michael, what's interesting about that whole idea is that with President Trump -- I mean, Tim was saying, you know, Nixon had people around him who wouldn't allow him to kind of go down that -- go down that road. President Trump seems to now be coalescing, you know, the people that he considers most loyal, bringing back Hope Hicks and others -- Hope Hicks and others, and, you know, kicking out the folks who were, you know, once called the adults in the room.

D'ANTONIO: Well, you've identified something very important, Anderson. One side effect of the president's paranoia is that he does get rid of a lot of folks who he might be better served keeping. So if you let go chief of staff or secretary of defense or a secretary of state who's telling you things that you might not like, but that you should know, and is really operating in your interest, although it makes you uncomfortable. Well, are you really doing yourself a favor by getting rid of those folks and bringing in only those who will play to your fears? I think that is a serious concern going forward.

COOPER: It's interesting, though, Michael. And I've heard you talk about this before, that with paranoia, it breeds more paranoia, and it kind of creates sometimes the very thing that you're most afraid of, which is, you know, betrayal or, you know, it turns people away and -- have you seen that throughout Trump's life?

D'ANTONIO: Oh, yes. I think that if you -- just generally speaking, as a general proposition, paranoid people make others behave in ways that confirm their paranoia. Because everyone gets nervous, and everyone starts acting unnaturally, and then they feel betrayed.

But in his own life, you can see, I think, two days before he was married, he demanded his first wife sign a prenuptial agreement, because he was paranoid about her. That seeded mistrust in their relationship and ultimately he felt betrayed. So this is not a functional quality, even though he would advertise it as such.

COOPER: Yes. Michael D'Antonio, Tim Naftali -- thanks so much. Appreciate it.

Just ahead, Democratic presidential candidate Michael Bloomberg clearly on the minds of his opponents, as many spent the weekend bringing up controversies from his past and alarming statements from his past. The details, when we continue.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[20:29:01] COOPER: He's not been on any ballot so far. Won't be for the upcoming votes in Nevada and South Carolina, but that certainly has not stopped Democratic presidential hopefuls from going after former New York City mayor, Michael Bloomberg.

As Bloomberg sinks hundreds of millions of dollars into his campaign, his opponents are criticizing him for trying to buy the election and some of his previous support of stop and frisk police tactics. But stop and frisk isn't the only controversial issue from Bloomberg's past that he's facing.

Our Randi Kaye tonight takes a deeper look.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

MICHAEL BLOOMBERG (D), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: I want you to know they realize that back then, I was wrong. And I'm sorry.

RANDI KAYE, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): That was Michael Bloomberg in November last year, offering up a mea culpa for the controversial policing policy he encouraged, known as stop and frisk.

When Bloomberg was mayor of New York City, the stop and frisk policy allowed police officers to do just that -- stop and frisk anyone they suspected of a crime.

In 2013, an NYPD report showed African-American and Latino men were disproportionately targeted.

BLOOMBERG: We could and should have acted sooner and acted faster to cut stops. I wish we had and I'm sorry that we didn't.

KAYE: He may be sorry now, but years ago, Bloomberg was 100 percent behind stop and frisk. Listen to what he said about targeting minority populations, reportedly during a 2013 speech at the Aspen Institute.

BLOOMBERG: And the way you should get the guns out of the kids' hands is to throw them up against a wall and frisk them.

KAYE (on camera): While Bloomberg has issued numerous apologies for stop and frisk, he's also omitted key facts. He's quick to point out he eventually had a 95 percent reduction in the use of stop and frisk, but fails to mention the 605 percent spike before that during his first 10 years in office.

(voice-over) With campaign 2020 in full swing, Bloomberg now has to answer for more than just stop and frisk. "The Washington Post" reports Bloomberg made sexist comments to women at his company. In fact, the paper says an aide once presented him with a booklet of sexist comments she attributed to him.

Among them, "A good salesperson is like a man who tries to pick up women at a bar by saying, 'Do you want to f'? He gets turned down a lot, but he gets f'd a lot, too." "The Post" reports Bloomberg also allegedly said that his company's computers will do everything, including give you oral sex. I guess that puts a lot of you girls out of business." The campaign denies he ever said any of that.

That same article lays out how one of Bloomberg's saleswomen sued him can his company alleging workplace discrimination. She said when she learned she was pregnant, Bloomberg allegedly told her to "kill it." Bloomberg's campaign tells CNN he denied the claim under oath and reached a confidential settlement with the woman.

Also, according to the lawsuit unearthed by "The Post," back in 1993, Bloomberg screamed at one of his saleswoman who was having trouble finding a nanny, shouting, "It doesn't know the difference between you and anyone else. All you need is some black who doesn't even have to speak English to rescue it from a burning building."

A spokesman for Bloomberg has denied that the presidential candidate ever made any of the statements alleged in the suit. Bloomberg, who has yet to take the debate stage in campaign 2020, is sure to have a target on his back when he does.

Randi Kaye, CNN, New York.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

ANDERSON COOPER, CNN HOST: Well, fair to say, of course, that presuming Michael Bloomberg's position in the polls continues to rise, he'll hear more and more of this as the 2020 political season moves ahead.

Let's talk about it now with former Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm, a CNN Senior Political Commentator. She's not endorsed a 2020 candidate, but has helped Vice President Biden with debate preparations.

Governor Granholm, I mean, looking at the volume and the nature of the controversy surrounding Bloomberg, what kind of impact do you think this could have on his candidacy, especially because he's running against a President who, you know, who's transgressions and comment are well known and didn't stop him from becoming elected?

JENNIFER GRANHOLM, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Yes. I hate to see us have our own version of Trump on the Democratic side. He's got to answer it. You know, there's -- he has one more day to qualify for the debate on Wednesday, so we'll see. Apparently, there may be some national polls coming out tomorrow. He needs one more poll. If he is on that debate stage, he's going to have to answer for it.

And it's not just sort of a wooden apology, you need a fulsome -- in fact, it's not just on the debate stage, you have to go and meet people. You can't just soar over the top of all of these candidates that have been working for almost a year now to try to get this nomination. So he's got to answer it on the debate stage, he's got to answer it over and over again, if he has to, to real people.

But then, I think what the campaign is probably going to do and what they have been doing is to put out ads that combat each of these allegations. Certainly, the stop and frisk, he's got a series of ads that he's been putting out which has validators from the African- American community. And on the charges that women have brought, he's doing the same thing.

He's got all of these high-profile women surrogates, people who are co-chairing his campaign, like the Gina Raimondo, who's the governor of Rhode Island, Bev Perdue, the former governor of North Carolina. So, he's got -- he will have to continue to do that to take down the temperature, but you better believe that he's going to have to answer for it.

COOPER: Is it -- I mean, there are some who, you know, view -- that would say he's being held to, you know, a different standard than President Trump was certainly held to, and that Democrats are looking for sort of a purity test for their candidates. Obviously, the flip side of that is voters, in many cases, want somebody who represents their values and represents, you know, common decency.

[20:35:00]

GRANHOLM: Yes. It's interesting that you say this, Anderson, because there is -- I mean, you can feel the anxiety out there among Democrats. They want to take Trump out so badly that they're willing to sort of plug their ears and close their eyes to somebody's transgressions, perhaps, in order to be able to achieve the ultimate victory, because people feel physically insecure, as well as, you know, inequality and all of that.

So the bottom line is, there is a sense of, gee, do we forgive more or do we demand that everybody be pure. Well, whichever way you go on it, everybody has got to be vetted. And he has not been vetted yet, by either the people or by the other campaigns. That's just starting to come out now, so he has got to answer for it. And that will make him a better candidate down the road when it comes to a general election if he gets there.

COOPER: Yes. Bloomberg's not on the ballot until Super Tuesday, two weeks from tomorrow. How likely do you think this is going to be a prolonged primary, whether it's Bloomberg and Sanders or someone else taking this all the way to a brokered convention?

GRANHOLM: I hate to say it. I just -- I fear for the Democrats that it will be a brokered convention and that's difficult to unite once that happens.

COOPER: And just explain what that -- how that works, because a lot of people don't -- I mean, haven't seen it.

GRANHOLM: Yes, so -- right. So you have to get 1,991 delegates in order to be the nominee. If you go into a convention with nobody having that amount, but a couple of people having, you know, some amount less than that, then there is going to be votes at the convention about which way we go. And so does somebody go in with a plurality, more delegates than others?

You have a first vote, which does not include superdelegates, but the second vote includes superdelegates and that means more establishment Democrats have to vote. So, it's just -- it's very divisive. But I worry that because of the amount of money that Bloomberg is spending, $400 million now, it may very well be a brokered convention.

COOPER: Yes. Governor Granholm, appreciate it. Thanks very much.

GRANHOLM: You bet.

COOPER: Thousands of Nevada Democrats are lining up to vote early in next Saturday's caucus there. There is concern tonight about a replay of the Iowa voting debacle. Straight ahead, I'll talk to Democratic National Committee Chair Tom Perez about his views of what lies ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[20:40:54]

COOPER: With the Nevada caucus just days away, some volunteers there are voicing concerns that they may have a replay of the Iowa voting debacle in their own state. At issue, worries that volunteers not have enough training on the technology that's going to be used or how the process will actually work.

Joining me now is the man who's got all of this on his plate and more, Democratic National Committee Chairman Tom Perez. Chairman, thanks for being with us. How concerned are you that volunteers in Nevada are saying -- at least some are saying, look, the process is confusing, could be a disaster, according to one of them that talked to Politico.

TOM PEREZ, CHAIR, DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE: Well, let's look at what happened over the last two days, Anderson. We had 26,000 people participating in early vote. The first day, over half were first-time caucus goers. We've conducted a thousand -- the Nevada Democratic Party has conducted a thousand trainings in the run-up. I participated in one of them three or four months ago. Anyone who has concerns, we will reach out to, to make sure that everybody is ready.

We have more training scheduled for this week in the run-up. We've seen lines, but we've seen lines in 2018 and 2016 in general elections. And the lines are a function of the fact that there's a lot of enthusiasm out there for people to participate. There were 84,000 people who participated in the 2016 caucus, and we're already at 26,000 voters here in 2020.

And so our job is to make sure that we create a process that is as low tech as humanly possible, while still being efficient. We're using paper ballots that takes longer. When you have first-time caucus goers, and many of them were first-time caucus goers, that takes longer.

We have same-day registration in Nevada, thanks to the leadership of Democrats in Nevada who put forth these reforms that enhance participation. So a lot of people who are going in there are registering to vote for the first time or changing from independent to Democrat, because they want to throw Donald Trump out and elect Democrats. That also takes time. And so, these are all good thing --

COOPER: Is there a backup plan?

PEREZ: Well, sure, of course. We have paper ballot --

COOPER: I mean, in case -- I know originally they were going to use the same app that was such a mess in Iowa.

PEREZ: That app is not being used. We've said that very clearly. There's no app being used to tabulate that was a problem in Iowa. And again, I think one of the lessons I learned from Iowa is we're redoubling our efforts to make sure that people are ready for Saturday. We've already seen, again, I think some really good results the first two days of early vote. I'm looking forward tomorrow.

I'm in Arizona now. I'm looking forward to moving from here to Nevada to participate in the last day of early voting tomorrow. And the first day and the last day tend to be the most attended days of early vote in other contexts. And we're going to make sure. Our goal is to get this right, obviously. We've learned a lot from Iowa. We've taken those lessons to bear. Again, no app is being used.

COOPER: OK, so --

PEREZ: The, again, paper ballots are being used and so we have the backup system in place.

COOPER: What's it going to -- is Mike Bloomberg, you think, going to be on that debate stage in Las Vegas?

PEREZ: We'll find out in the next couple of days. It's my understanding that there are more polls out. The criteria that we set up at the DNC was that you had to have at least 10 percent in four qualifying polls or 12 percent in the individual polls in either Nevada -- in two polls in Nevada and South Carolina.

He has not met the threshold yet. There are a couple of days left and there are more polls. And whoever makes the debate stage will be on the debate stage. I'm looking forward to the debate.

Clearly the last debate, voters were watching and the number of voters in New Hampshire, which had record turnout, exceeding 2008, said that those debates helped them make up their mind. And I'm confident that Nevada will be the same way. I have great confidence in the party and Harry Reid, what he's built.

[20:45:02]

The reason we have so many Democrats elected office in Nevada is because there's such a strong party. And that infrastructure is helping us and the thousands of volunteers make sure that there's a successful caucus experience, not only for the early vote, but this Saturday.

COOPER: We just talked to Governor Granholm. Very briefly, do you think this is going to go to -- all the way to the convention? Do you think it will be a brokered convention?

PEREZ: Oh, this is way too early to tell. I actually think we're going to know who our nominee is before the convention. And the reason I feel that is, you know, politics is often the game of momentum. You look at the '92 campaign, this feels somewhat similar to that. We had a number of candidates still in the race.

We didn't know after the first four states exactly who that nominee would be and we got one. And we got one and we got one on the first ballot. Anyone who is the nominee is well positioned to beat Donald Trump and that's the key for me.

COOPER: Tom Perez, appreciate your time. Thank you very much.

PEREZ: My pleasure.

COOPER: Coming up, a rare look at families racing to escape the war in Syria as the Assad regime tries to crush the last resistance. Arwa Damon shares an emotional story of struggle, mothers, and fathers trying to save their remaining children amid the bombs. That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[20:50:33]

COOPER: Syria's last rebel-held territory is facing new attacks from the Assad regime. The Syrian president today vowed to continue fierce air and ground assaults in the northwest part of the country and to rub his enemies "noses in the dirt". According to the U.N., 850,000 civilians have been scrambling to escape the bloodshed since December, most are women and children.

CNN's Arwa Damon is the only western journalist reporting from inside Syria, meeting some of the families caught in the horror. We want to warn you, her report includes some disturbing images, but we think it's very important for you to see.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

ARWA DAMON, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): There is barely enough light to see as we head towards Samia's (ph) tent, in one of Idlib's sprawling camps. A couple nights ago, temperatures dropped well below zero and the family didn't have enough to burn.

I fed my baby and he went to sleep, Samia tells us, still in shock. At 6:37, the children woke me up screaming. I touched them and he was icy. The doctors told them he froze to death. Her husband walks out before he breaks down.

She doesn't have a photograph of Abdul Wahhab (ph) alive, just this image as they said their final goodbyes. She can't forgive herself. She can't understand how life can be so cruel. A few people here can.

We have made multiple trips into Idlib province, none like this. Roads throughout the province are clogged with the traffic of those on the run, unending ways. Many have been displaced multiple times before, but this time, it's different. They feel like no matter what they do, they won't be able to outrun the war.

These children walked for seven hours in the middle of the night to get away from the bombing near their village, but it's not far enough.

(on camera) They want to leave from here, but they need to try to figure out transport or something, because if they try to go walk, it would just be impossible.

(voice-over) Down the road, Dima (ph) and Baktuli (ph) clutch their stuffed animals for the last time, for theirs is a world where toys are not considered essential. Survival is. They don't cry or complain as they are loaded into the truck. There is a sense of finality, claustrophobia compounded by the collective misery of those trapped here, with the regime rapidly closing in and emptying out entire areas.

One village settled down among these third-century ruins two weeks ago. A little boy shows us a picture in his father's phone of the bombing overnight.

(on camera) This is Mohannad (ph) and he's 10. And he said that he was very scared the last night because this entire area, the hillsides, all around it were being bombed.

(voice-over) They almost took off walking in the dark. I would rather die than not be able to protect my children, Sefidin (ph) vows. He used to be the village's elementary school director. His tent is considered a palace by this wretched existence's standards.

(on camera) Two of his kids have fallen over into the stove. Her face was burnt.

(voice-over) His children are too young to know anything but war and hardship. Let Trump get a bit angry and send a couple tomahawks, Sefidin says, half joking. For those here know too well that in the world's view, they are dispensable. The last nine years have taught them that.

Obet's (ph) tent is perched on a hilltop away from the countless other makeshift camps.

(FOREIGN LANGUAGE)

UNIDENTIFID MALE (through translation): Warning, Russian fighter jet in the air.

DAMON: Our conversation is broken up by warnings from an app he has on his phone, about where the planes are flying and bombing. His elderly mother lies in the corner. She's been that way ever since they found out that his brother died in a regime prison. And the regime is getting closer.

(on camera) Yes, you can hear that. This is his brother who was detained in 2012 when he was part of the protests. And then in 2015, they got notification that he was dead. This is the photograph they got of him dead in prison.

[20:55:20] (voice-over) All I have is this photo, just this memory, he says, haunted by his pain. Even if the regime tried to reconcile, it's impossible, he swears, you can't trust them. Nothing in this forsaken place is guaranteed.

Gone is the schoolyard laughter and crowded classrooms. They have been converted into shelters and smoke-filled living spaces. But even as new families arrive, some of those here are getting ready to flee again. Sefidin who we met at the camp in the ruins, sends me a distressing voice message.

(on camera) He's saying that the bombing was all around them overnight and that the aircraft are flying over the camps.

(voice-over) When we arrive, the sounds of the violence closing in echo through the hills. Sefidin's children are playing in the mud, seemingly oblivious to the encroaching danger or just used to it.

(on camera) They've called for a truck, but they're being told that there's no one who can come here that quickly because it's so -- the roads are so crowded and clogged up with other people fleeing.

(voice-over) Those who managed to get transport are packing up. They still cling to a hope that someone, something, will save them. That the world will realize it can no longer turn away, that they won't be abandoned to desperately search for a lifeline that doesn't exist.

Arwa Damon, CNN, Idlib province, Syria.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

COOPER: What do you do when the world has turned away? Reminder, don't miss "Full Circle," our digital news show that gives us a chance to dig in to some important topics and have in-depth conversations. You can catch it streaming live weekdays 5:00 p.m. Easter at cnn.com/fullcircle or watch it there any time on demand.

Coming up ahead, criticism of William Barr coming from the federal bench now. Judges expressing their displeasure with the attorney general's intervention in politically sensitive cases. That story, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)