Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

18-year-old Taken Into Ice Custody While on Way to Volleyball Practice Saturday; Colorado Attack Suspect's Wife and Kids Taken Into Ice Custody; Ex-hotel Guard Testifies Combs Had Him Sign an NDA; Combs' Ex-finance Chief Takes Stand in Racketeering Trial; Musk Blasts Trump's Agenda Bill as a Disgusting Abomination; Trump Privately Complains About Supreme Court Justices He Nominated. Aired 2-2:30p ET

Aired June 03, 2025 - 14:00   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:00:11]

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN CO-ANCHOR OF "CNN NEWS CENTRAL": Breaking news, sources tell CNN that the family of the suspect in the Boulder anti- Semitic attack is now in ICE custody. Much more on that and the latest on the investigation still ahead.

ERICA HILL, CNN CO-ANCHOR OF "CNN NEWS CENTRAL": And in the Sean "Diddy" Combs trial, a hotel security guard testifying Combs paid $100,000 for that surveillance video of him assaulting his then girlfriend, Cassie Ventura, and protests after immigration authorities detain a high school student on his way to volleyball practice. What we know about his case and the local outrage over that arrest. We're following these major developing stories and many more, all coming in right here to "CNN News Central."

SANCHEZ: We start this hour with new details just into CNN in that horrific firebombing attack in Boulder, Colorado on a peaceful event highlighting Israeli hostages in Gaza. Sources say that ICE officials have now taken the suspect's wife and five children into custody, and they're now being processed.

Today, the suspect is being held on $10 million cash bond. He's been charged with a federal hate crime and multiple state charges as well, including 16 counts of attempted murder. Let's get straight to CNN's Priscilla Alvarez for more on that report that we've learned that his family has now been detained. Tell us what happened.

PRISCILLA ALVAREZ, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yeah, all these details are just now coming in that his family, his wife and his five children have been taken into Immigration and Customs Enforcement custody. Now, the big question in all of this is what is the legal status of his family given that we know that he was a visa overstay who later applied for asylum, who later fell out of status with his work permit. So, we're still gathering those details as well as the ages of his children.

We know, for example, as well, from some of these filings that he does have a daughter that graduated high school. That is why, according to these filings, he had not done the attack -- executed the attack earlier. But again, the ages and the legal statuses are still outstanding questions here. But as a reminder, as far as his immigration status, two big points in his immigration history. One, that he arrived in 2022 on a visa. That is a visa that has been for tourism. And when someone comes on that visa, they can stay in the United States for six months. That is generally the limit.

But while he was on that visa, he also applied for asylum and he received later a work permit that expired in March of 2023. So during that period, he was illegally present in the United States, but this is a bit of a patchwork immigration history, which can actually be quite common. Large number of visa overstayers in the United States, many of whom also apply for different forms of immigration relief when they are here. So, we are asking our sources to see whether his family was in a similar situation and what this portends for them moving forward.

SANCHEZ: Priscilla Alvarez, thank you so much for the latest there. We're joined now by former Senior FBI Profiler, Mary Ellen O'Toole. She's now the Director of the Forensic Science Program at George Mason University. Mary, thank you so much for joining us. According to the warrant, the suspect said that no one else had known about this attack, and yet he had been planning it for a year. How do investigators go about determining whether there were signs that he was planning this, if anyone else may have noticed or missed red flags?

MARY ELLEN O'TOOLE, FORMER SENIOR FBI PROFILER: That's a great question and one of the things that we look for immediately are what were the warning behaviors, which generally take place days or a few weeks before an incident like this. So, what FBI agents and law enforcement will be doing is going back in his social media to see who he communicated with, who he had contacts with, maybe one-on-one contacts in person, but they'll be looking for that kind of connection with other people.

But they'll also be looking for kind of strange behaviors. One of the things that we've seen frequently, recently is that domestic violence is oftentimes one of those warning behaviors because the individual knows what they're going to do and they're thinking about it and they've made this final decision that could even end up in their own death or the repercussions could be enormous. And so, it's usually family members that are close to the person that hears them talk about how they hate certain groups of people and so on and so forth and then, you have domestic violence. So, but if the family doesn't report that, then law enforcement is not aware of it.

SANCHEZ: I am curious to get your perspective on his level of premeditation because, as we just heard from Priscilla, the suspect according to filings waited until his daughter graduated high school to attack a group that he had been researching online. He chose to make this makeshift flamethrower and these Molotov cocktails when he couldn't get access to a gun. What does that tell you about his intent?

[14:05:00] O'TOOLE: Well, the intent was definitely there, but he's not a very good planner. Now, it was effective, that's for sure. So I -- the two can't be conflated. But, what he did was he got kind of makeshift items that enabled him to carry out this attack. Fortunately, it did not kill anyone and the number of victims has been somewhat limited. So, it's really a plan that he sort of cobbled together in order to allow him to carry something out. But it does show that this is probably someone who doesn't do a very good job of planning even in his everyday life.

SANCHEZ: Notably, he told officials, according to filings, that he was planning to die during the attack. He then surrendered after throwing two fire bombs. What might explain that shift?

O'TOOLE: It could be a shift, but it also could be trying to sort of develop or create some kind of sympathy from other people as, in other words saying, well, I was prepared to die for this and I was prepared to lose my family. So, it could be an effort to develop some kind of sympathy on the part of the investigators and that's still not known, but it doesn't necessarily mean that he fully intended to die in that attack, and it was just by happenstance that he didn't. Other -- some offenders will say that to you because after the event, they want to develop the sympathy of the investigators with the hope that maybe they can minimize the impact on themselves or even on their family.

SANCHEZ: That is so fascinating. He has now been charged with attempted murder and with a federal hate crime as well, but he's not facing terrorism charges. And convicting someone of terroristic acts that -- it carries a lot of prerequisites that investigators perhaps don't feel that they have here. What would they need to do that? What additional evidence would they need to file those kinds of charges?

O'TOOLE: Well, it's really going to be more on the state level because, right now, there are no federal charges that would equate to them being able for the federal prosecutor to be able to charge him with terror -- federal terrorism. But what they can do is that once he is convicted of these multiple charges that are pending against him, including hate crimes, and that really does involve a pretty severe sentence, they can always add onto the sentence and bring to the attention of the courts that this really was an act of terrorism. But for the fact that they don't have a specific federal law that allowed them to charge him, they still want that to be taken into consideration for the sentencing.

SANCHEZ: Mary Ellen O'Toole, thank you so much for sharing your expertise.

O'TOOLE: You're very welcome. Thank you.

SANCHEZ: Happening right now in Sean "Diddy" Combs criminal trial. Combs' former Chief Financial Officer is on the stand being questioned by the defense. Derek Ferguson said he worked for Combs Enterprises from 1998 to 2017 and he testified that he interacted with Combs pretty regularly until more professional management was brought in to run the company. HILL: Earlier, we also heard from a former Intercontinental Hotel security guard who testified Combs vowed to "Take care of him if he turned over the security footage that showed Combs dragging, kicking his then girlfriend, Cassie Ventura." Garcia said Combs seemed nervous about the video getting out, telling him it could ruin him. Garcia says Combs ultimately paid $100,000 for that footage and also made Garcia sign a non-disclosure agreement.

Combs has pleaded not guilty of the two charges against him. He is facing up to life in prison if convicted on all accounts. Joining is now his defense attorney, Misty Marris. So Misty, as we look at this, ahead of Derek Ferguson's testimony, you had said the prosecution was still a little thin when it came to putting together that argument for them on conspiracy, racketeering conspiracy. How much has Ferguson, even in just his short time on the stand today, been able to do for the prosecution?

MISTY MARRIS, DEFENSE ATTORNEY: So right now, we can see where the prosecution is going because they're linking Combs' businesses to the racketeering activity. So, we've heard testimony about how intermingled Combs and his personal affairs is with the business, and some of that has been business transactions, management of properties, and specifically employment of individuals in his security who we anticipate are going to be these alleged co-conspirators who are committing the racketeering activity or predicate crimes.

But I'll tell you, I wasn't really that moved by it. I wasn't feeling like prosecutors were really closing the loop until the most recent testimony on direct where Ferguson is now testifying about a $20,000 transaction that came in from Cassie Ventura's father.

[14:10:00]

Now, this makes us look back to Cassie Ventura's mother's testimony where she was asked by Combs for $20,000 in exchange for not putting out explicit videos of Cassie and because she thought Combs was going to hurt her if he did not receive that $20,000. So, there you have a business transaction through the company that links directly back to what would be considered illegal conduct. And that's why this might have started off a bit slow, but that type of link speak to the prosecution's case where they say Combs' businesses are really just fronts for his -- for this criminal enterprise and racketeering activity committed in furtherance of him and his desire.

So, I'm seeing that link start to come to fruition where I'm understanding more about the prosecution's case and how they're formulating it and linking his businesses back to a criminal enterprise.

SANCHEZ: And Misty, what about this testimony from Eddy Garcia? He was that employee at the Intercontinental Hotel who testified that Combs paid him $100,000 in cash to obtain that security footage that eventually leaked, of Combs beating Cassie Ventura and chasing her down a hallway. What is the importance of the cash payment and then the NDA that the security official says Combs had him sign? MARRIS: Yes. So, a couple of different reasons why his testimony was very important. First, the acceptance of the cash and what is basically a bribe and would constitute obstruction of justice. I'll pay you $100,000 to get rid of this tape. Is it the only copy? Make sure it's destroyed so it can't get into the hands of law enforcement. So, that speaks to that underlying predicate crime and racketeering activity, which prosecutors need to show that there are crimes being committed in furtherance of the criminal enterprise.

Now, here's where we close that loop and how that particular issue goes a step further, and the testimony goes a step further. That NDA was with one of Combs' organizations, one of his businesses. So again, you are seeing that link back, the racketeering activity to Combs' companies, and that's where prosecutors are focused. You see the defense on cross-examination of Garcia trying to make a distinction, looking to the language of that NDA and saying, all right, well there's an exception carved out where Garcia could violate the NDA if he were ever to be asked by law enforcement about this.

So, this is the defense trying to put a wedge and I expect to hear a lot of this on Ferguson's cross examination as well, separating Sean Combs as an individual from Sean Combs as an employee or an executive at these companies for the purposes of racketeering. But both the testimony of Garcia and the testimony of Ferguson have definitely been formulating and shaping the RICO conspiracy, which we have not really seen come to fruition as of yet.

SANCHEZ: Misty Marris, thanks so much for breaking that down for us.

MARRIS: Thank you.

SANCHEZ: This just in -- of course. This just into CNN, Elon Musk offering a fiery rebuke of President Trump's Big Beautiful Bill. He's calling the version passed by the House a disgusting abomination.

HILL: CNN's Kaitlan Collins joining us now with more so -- of course, he just left the administration, I guess officially on Friday. Very clear though that he is not happy with this bill. Kaitlan, what more do we know?

KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN ANCHOR & CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Yeah, we weren't surprised that he wasn't happy with it. The other day, he kind of jokingly said that he thought a bill could be big or beautiful, but not big and beautiful as the White House has been touting. What has passed the House and is now, which we have been seeing some pushback from Republican senators who agree with Elon, is saying that the bill is simply too big, that they are concerned about the potentially trillions of dollars that it would add to the deficit if it passed it.

And while we're sitting inside the White House press briefing with Karoline Leavitt, the Press Secretary just now, this tweet from Elon Musk came out where he called this bill an abomination. He said, it is massive, it is outrageous. He called it pork filled and said, it is a disgusting abomination. And also, that key part at the end, he said shame on those who voted for it. You know you did wrong and you know it.

Talking essentially about all of those House Republicans who voted yes to get this bill over the line, something that House Speaker Mike Johnson worked diligently on and also worked with the White House on when it came to those people who were holdouts in the House. And now, there are questions about people who are also holdouts in the Senate so far, who say that as that bill is right now, they simply cannot vote for it. And they have concerns that it'll add to the deficit. And we asked the press secretary both about concerns from these Republican Senators about just how much this bill could potentially add to the deficit, while they're maintaining it won't. Here's how Karoline Leavitt answered those questions.

[14:15:00]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

COLLINS: Two questions for you as well on the Big Beautiful Bill. You said recently that it is, "Blatantly wrong to say that it adds to the deficit." You essentially said that an estimate from the Congressional Budget Office and other scorekeepers you believe are wrong, but Republicans like Ron Johnson is saying that it will add to the deficit, that is their concern. Is the White House's position that those two Republican Senators are "blatantly wrong"?

KAROLINE LEAVITT, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: It is. Those Senators, it's not news that they disagree with this president on policy and the president has vocally called them out for it and for their not having their facts together. I would add the Congressional Budget Office has been historically wrong. In fact, they predicted the Trump tax cuts from the president's first term in 2017, that their prediction was wrong by $0.5 trillion. Those tax cuts had more -- nearly $0.5 trillion more of revenue than the Congressional Budget Office scored.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COLLINS: That was her defense of what -- the pushback against these Republican Senators. People like Rand Paul and Ron Johnson has been on this. She was also asked about Elon Musk's tweet as it came out while she was defending the bill and attacking the Congressional Budget Office is wrong. Obviously, these Republican Senators disagree and think these assessments that we've seen from these Congressional scorekeepers said they're not surprised that Elon Musk disagrees with the president.

That might be true. But for him to come out so publicly and so blatantly to say, that the bill that the president right now is encouraging Republican Senators to pass, even as it is now, does say a lot in and of itself just a few days after Elon Musk officially departed the administration.

HILL: Yeah, absolutely. Kaitlan, appreciate it. Thank you. There are growing demands for the release of a Massachusetts high school student who was detained by immigration agents on Saturday morning. Friends say the 18-year-old was on his way to volleyball practice when ICE agents approached the car they were in. CNN's Polo Sandoval joins us now with more on this. So Polo, walk us through what more we know about this story.

POLO SANDOVAL, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Erica, so Marcelo Gomes da Silva, he's 18-years-old and a student there at Milford High School in Massachusetts. Because he's 18, there are growing concerns that he could potentially be vulnerable to deportation because he does not have status -- legal status to be in the United States. It was the governor of Massachusetts that initially released a statement saying that he, along with two -- a couple of other students were on their way to volleyball practice on Saturday when ICE carried out a traffic stop. And during that traffic stop, that's when this 18-year-old student was detained by immigration officials.

Now since then, we have seen this growing outrage in the community, many people demanding answers as to why he was targeted. Well, today, I heard from the Department of Homeland Security and the information that they're providing now suggesting that this is likely, essentially, a case of a collateral arrest which is usually when somebody with no status may not be the target of an investigation, however, is in the process of an investigation, swept up by immigration authorities.

In this case, according to ICE, officials were actually targeting this young man's father, who they had received reports was not only in the country illegally, but also had been driving recklessly. I want to read you more of what DHS officials have said specifically about the case of Gomez da Silva. They say that while ICE officers were -- that they never intended to apprehend Gomez da Silva. He was found to be in the United States illegally and subject to removal proceedings. So officers made the arrest, Gomez da Silva remains in ICE custody pending removal proceedings.

Now, the attorneys for this young man, also speaking to CNN, essentially countering this, saying that their client has no criminal history. That he entered the United States on a visa when he was seven-years-old. The visa had expired, but it was his intention to file for asylum and that he was eligible, potentially eligible for said asylum. The attorney of this young man also telling CNN, describing him as deeply rooted in his community, that he was active in his church, a dedicated member of both his high school marching band and church band, and surrounded by friends, teachers, and mentors who cared deeply about him.

On that vein, his volleyball team, who's expected to play off at least for a home playoff game tonight, dedicating their game to him. But really, Erica, this is likely going to be yet another example for critics of the Trump administration's hard-line immigration policy to point to this particular case, insisting that the Trump administration is not going only after hardened criminals with precarious status, but instead an 18-year-old who by many accounts may have simply been at the wrong place at the wrong time.

HILL: Polo, appreciate it. Thank you.

Still ahead here this hour, new CNN reporting on how President Trump has privately fumed about Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett and other justices that he appointed, complaining they just haven't been loyal enough to his agenda. And could a cup of Joe a day keep the doctor away? The new findings on how coffee may help you live longer. That and much more coming up on "CNN News Central."

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:24:33]

HILL: CNN has new details about President Trump's increasing frustration with members of the Supreme Court. Sources say he is privately complaining some of his own appointed justices are not sufficiently standing behind his agenda. CNN's Kristen Holmes joins me now with her new reporting. So, not happy, what more do we know about what he's saying specifically?

KRISTEN HOLMES, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Yeah, Erica, this is not just about one ruling, but really an overarching feeling that Donald Trump has expressed for all of the three justices that he has put on the Supreme Court bench.

[14:25:00]

Essentially, that he is disappointed, as you noted, that he's not standing -- that they're not standing by his agenda. Now, one thing I was told by a number of sources was that this ire has really been focused on one justice. While he has complained about all three, he has focused on Amy Coney Barrett, his most recent appointee. And this has really been fueled by a lot of far-left allies who have claimed that she is "weak." Have said that she is not ruling the same way that she identified herself and said that she would rule when she was interviewed for this position back in 2020.

It's gone so far as some of these allies to tell Donald Trump that it's because she is afraid. She's afraid of menacing threats and security threats against her family. We know that earlier this year, there was a bomb threat against her sister. That has led Donald Trump to speculate or to even offer, should she need more security? Would that make things better? Now, I did ask the White House for an official statement on this, and here's what they said. They didn't deny these claims. They said President Trump will always stand with the Supreme Court.

The president may disagree with the court and some of its rulings, but he will always respect its foundational rule. And that was one thing that sources continued to tell me, behind the scenes as well, the part of the reason that he hasn't gone out there and blasted these appointees by name, that that was intentional. He doesn't want to throw a flamethrower, but of course, we have seen him lash out at the Supreme Court as a whole and disagree with their rulings.

HILL: Yeah, certainly, would not be the first time as we know. Kristen, appreciate the reporting. Thank you.

Just ahead here, Palestinian officials say dozens of people were killed while on their way to get aid from a distribution site in Southern Gaza. This is now the third day in a row, desperate Gazans trying to find food at the site were killed. And it's been America's water system for decades, now though Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. wants it gone out of the water. How banning fluoride from public drinking water could impact your family's health.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)