Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Haley Robson is Interviewed about the Epstein Files; Polls on Elections; September Jobs Report; Pete Seat is Interviewed about New Polls on the Economy; Sarah Krissoff is Interviewed about the Comey Indictment; Nvidia Beats Earnings Expectations. Aired 8:30-9a ET

Aired November 20, 2025 - 08:30   ET

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

[08:30:00]

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: Ongoing investigations.

With us now is Haley Robson. She is a survivor of Jeffrey Epstein's abuse.

We saw you speaking at the Capitol the other day. And I was standing here with Kate and Sara watching you speak. And we were just so moved by the power of your words when you talked about what you had been through and everything you've seen in these decades, really, of pain and trying to get this story out. So, we do appreciate you being with us.

What was it like for you to wake up to the news that the president signed the bill?

HALEY ROBSON, JEFFREY EPSTEIN ABUSE SURVIVOR: It's a relief to see him do the right thing by signing the bill. It feels incredible. It feels like, surreal.

But, you know, of course there's a part of me that wants to be full on happy. But I am -- I do have reservations because, you know, he's very -- he's become very unpredictable, especially with the Epstein files.

So, I want to celebrate, but I want to kind of wait and see what unfolds in the next couple of days.

BERMAN: What do you mean, unpredictable?

ROBSON: Well, just the fact that he was so resistant on originally exposing the Epstein files. And he gave us a lot of pushback. And then, out of the blue, he kind of said, all right, let's pass this in the Senate. I'll sign it. Let's move this along.

So, you know, I have a little -- I have a little reservations. I'm a little skeptical. But I'm extremely happy that he did the right thing. And, you know, I'm excited to see what the next step is.

BERMAN: He didn't have TV cameras. There were no pictures of it happening, which is unusual for this president who does most of his signings very, very publicly. But he did put out a release on social media. And in it he said, "this latest hoax will backfire on the Democrats, just as all of the rest have".

So, what do you think about that statement being part of the announcement that he signed the bill?

ROBSON: Well, I guess I'm a hoax then. I think it's appalling that he keeps referring to all this as a hoax when him and I both know this is not a hoax.

You know, if it's a hoax then why did Jeffrey Epstein get 13 months in jail? You know, why is Ghislaine in a summer camp in Texas? You know, I certainly would like to move on. I'm not choosing to stay in the chaos. But in order to move on, we have to be transparent. So, he knows this is not a hoax. And if he wants to take accountability and he wants to take credit for passing this bill, and, you know, I'll let him have his flowers, whatever. Let's just move on, you know. It's ridiculous at this point.

BERMAN: Yes, you know, and you're a Republican, as you do mention at these news conferences that we see here. What role should partizan politics have in any of this?

ROBSON: You know, a lot of people say that I should run for Congress or I should be in politics. I have no interest in doing so. I feel bad for the members of Congress. I think it's very, very simple. Morality should come before politics. And you should stand by your core beliefs and your morals.

And, in this case, we didn't see that. In this case, for the last several decades, we saw morality hidden behind agendas, weaponization of politics and trauma, and just a bunch of unnecessary theatrics that just didn't need to happen or didn't need to play out.

BERMAN: So, let's fast forward 30 days from now, which is this deadline for the Department of Justice to release the information. Thirty days from now, you know, look into your crystal ball, what do you think we will have learned?

ROBSON: I think it will be confirmation for what a lot of people already feel. I think it's not going to be necessary -- necessarily the people that are involved. And I think a lot of people are hung up on the people that are involved. And don't get me wrong, I do think that's important because those people should be held accountable. But the impact is what you're going to see. The impact of the diabolical abuse of children through using coercive control and sexual abuse. And think of it this way, if you haven't read Virginia Giuffre's book, or you don't know what the book is about, think about Virginia Giuffre's book and multiply that by the hundreds.

[08:35:10]

That is what we're looking at.

BERMAN: Hayley Robson, again, we applaud your strength in speaking out. We appreciate you being with us this morning. We look forward to checking back in with you 30 days from now to see what we have learned and talk about it. So, thank you very much.

Sara.

SARA SIDNER, CNN ANCHOR: All right, thank you so much, John.

This morning, what new polling is showing when it comes to which party might come out on top in next year's midterms. CNN chief --

HARRY ENTEN, CNN CHIEF DATA ANALYST: Oh, you got it.

SIDNER: Chief --

ENTEN: Nice.

SIDNER: Data reporter Harry Enten is here with us.

ENTEN: Analyst.

SIDNER: Oh, analyst.

ENTEN: Analyst, please, please, please.

SIDNER: My bad. My bad. OK. This is getting real picky this morning, but I see you.

ENTEN: Thank you. And I see you.

SIDNER: That's where -- a good place to start when we're doing television.

ENTEN: Yes.

SIDNER: All right, so, one party may have an advantage going into the -- into the midterms. What does this -- what does this look like? What are these polling numbers telling us?

ENTEN: You know, this is a poll that came out yesterday. A Marquette University Law School poll. And I don't think it picked up enough coverage that it should have, because these numbers should be truly frightening to Republicans.

Why do I point it out? Why do I say that? OK, Dems versus Republicans on the generic congressional ballot. If you look at all voters, this matches the average. You see Democrats up by five points. OK, that's not a bad position, but it's not as strong as they were in the 2018 cycle at this point.

But come over to this side of the screen. This is where it gets truly frightening for the GOP. Because among those certain to vote, look at this, the Democratic advantage nearly doubles. We're talking about a nine point advantage. Going from five to nine points. And this matches with what we're seeing in other polls, which is huge Democratic enthusiasm. Huge.

And more than that, remember, elections are not just about persuasion. They're about turnout as well. And what this suggests is, Democrats are far more likely to turn out at this point. A nine point advantage going from five to nine, that is A plus, two thumbs up, great news for Democrats.

SIDNER: I do want to ask, historically, is it unusual at this point in early polling for Democrats to be this enthusiastic?

ENTEN: Yes, this is why I think this number was surprising to me. The reason it was surprising to me was, I went back through the history books. I went back, OK, party more certain to vote by party identification. Early cycle midterm polls. Look at this. In 2006, Republicans said they were more likely to turn out. 2010, 2014, 2018, 2022. And then all of a sudden in 2000 -- the 2026 cycle, look at this, Democrats are the ones who say they are more likely to turn out and vote. So, this does not match what we see historically. The idea that Democrats are more certain to vote is a new phenomenon and matches with what we have generally seen the Democratic coalition sort of evolving, becoming more highly educated. This matches with that because more highly educated people are more likely to turn out and vote. And again, this is historically unusual and suggests that there's a hidden Democratic advantage in the polls right now.

You look at those polls, you look at those average of the generic ballot and you see Democrats up by five. That, in my opinion, based upon the Marquette University Law School poll, and what we know about this Democratic coalition, may be, in fact, underestimating the Democratic strength going into next year's midterm elections.

SIDNER: This is quite stark what you are showing here. I do -- the historical look back.

Is there any other reason to think that registered voter polling that we're seeing right now might be underestimating Democrats?

ENTEN: Yes. This is not the only reason why I think that the registered voter polling might be underestimating Democrats because we just had a test. We just had a test a few weeks ago in Virginia and New Jersey. These were likely voter polls as well. Polls underestimated the Democrats. In New Jersey they underestimated the Democrat Mikie Sherrill by eight. In Virginia, they underestimated the Democrat Abigail Spanberger by five. And that, in fact, was the biggest miss average in Virginia and New Jersey in an off year election this century. You combine that with the generic ballot poll that we saw from our Marquette University poll. Republicans should be running scared. Democrats should be ecstatic because if this polling holds, it will be a huge November 2026 for Democrats.

SIDNER: We have quite a bit of time.

ENTEN: We do.

SIDNER: This is a moment in time, but it does tell you a lot about what's going on in people's minds, voters' minds.

ENTEN: Absolutely, Sara Sidner.

SIDNER: All right, Harry Enten, it is a pleasure, Mr. Analyst, chief, sir.

ENTEN: Chief sir to an anchor.

John.

BERMAN: All right, breaking news. Just a few minutes ago, the jobs report for September was released. This had been held back because of the government shutdown, the longest shutdown in history. But now we know what the job situation was in September. And the news is, better than expected.

Let's get to Matt Egan on this. What are we seeing?

MATT EGAN, CNN SENIOR REPORTER: Well, John, look, we had to wait a very long time for this report. And it's painting a mixed picture about the state of the job market entering the government shutdown.

Here's the good news. The good news is the U.S. economy added 119,000 jobs during the month of September.

[08:40:06]

That is well ahead of expectations, which were for around 50,000. It's also well ahead of what's needed to keep the job market on a stable footing. So, that is good news.

The bad news, though, is the unemployment rate. It goes up from 4.3 percent, unexpectedly rising to 4.4 percent. That is a fresh four year high. So, pretty mixed there.

We also got some disappointing news in terms of revisions to prior months. Now, as you know, sometimes when new information comes in, they revise the numbers. And so what we saw was that August -- and you can see it on this chart -- August was revised from slightly positive, it was a weak number of 22,000, now it's negative 4,000. You see it on that chart, going below zero. So, that is the second month of the last four where the U.S. economy actually lost jobs. So, the summer, we knew it was weak. It was actually weaker than we realized. July was also revised a little bit lower. So, you can see why people have been concerned, because the U.S. economy has -- had been gaining a lot of jobs each month, and that has really slowed down.

But again, the good news, though, is that September was a bigger rebound than anticipated. And digging into some of the sectors here, manufacturing, which is that key sector that the president is trying to prop up with sky high tariffs, it lost jobs again. Another 6,000 jobs were lost in manufacturing during the month of September. That continues a trend there.

However, construction, which had been under some pressure because of immigration, because of tariffs, because of interest rates, gained jobs. And that is an improvement. Health care, that's been a go-to sector as far as jobs, also gaining jobs there.

One last point here, John, because we found out that the October jobs report is not getting released. This number is extra important because it's the last full jobs report that the Federal Reserve has before making its last interest rate decision of the year next month.

BERMAN: Do you think this makes it more likely they cut this? This shows an economy that's OK. In September it was OK.

EGAN: I think it probably doesn't move the needle much right now, which is leaning against an interest rate cut. The odds have been falling for an interest rate cut in recent days, and it's probably going to stay kind of where it is because this is pretty mixed.

BERMAN: Pretty mixed. You see the unemployment rate going up even with OK number of jobs added. And those downward revisions really, really interesting.

EGAN: Yes.

BERMAN: So, now we have two months of negative growth this summer (ph).

EGAN: Yes, after four years of none.

BERMAN: All right, Matt Egan, thank you very much for that.

EGAN: Thanks, John.

BERMAN: Kate.

KATE BOLDUAN, CNN ANCHOR: All right, joining us right now is Pete Seat, former White House spokesperson for President George W. Bush, and a former spokesperson for the Indiana Republican Party.

So, there's a lot of mixed going on. We've got this new jobs report coming out, Pete. But also, you've got these numbers from a Fox News poll of how people are feeling about the economy. And talk about kind of the -- this mixed bag. Some 76 percent of voters in this Fox News poll view the economy negatively. And that is worse than it was over the summer. And by a two -- nearly two to one margin, voters say that Donald Trump, that President Trump is more responsible for the current economy than Joe Biden.

So, you've got economic data, and you've got how people feel about it. What level of alarm should this be raising inside the White House right now about how people are feeling about the economy?

PETE SEAT, FORMER WHITE HOUSE SPOKESPERSON FOR PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH: Well, the 2024 election was about vibes, and that was to the benefit of Donald J. Trump. And the 2026 election will likely also be about those very same vibes, namely affordability. People are not looking at big ticket items that are rarely purchased, like cars and homes. They're looking at consumer staples. They're looking at the cost of goods when they go to their local grocery store and when they pump gas at the station.

Now, some of those numbers are going down, but aren't necessarily being felt yet. It takes time. And I do think that a mistake that the administration made, that the campaign made, was promising overnight success. Getting these numbers to go down and for Americans to feel that in their pocketbooks takes time. And the administration needs to be realistic about that.

BOLDUAN: Yes. And because, you know, set Trump aside, this can -- this will, as you're saying, is going to have a real impact on how people are feeling when it comes to the midterms.

And on that point, when it comes to the midterms, this relates to a situation actually that's playing out in Indiana right now, our wonderfully loved, shared state, which is that the president is now threatening, Pete, to back primary challengers against Indiana Republicans over the push to redistrict and bring the redistricting fight to Indiana and rewrite congressional maps more in the -- in Republicans' favor.

Republicans in the state senate in Indiana, they've just announced that they're not going to. They can't do it because they don't have the votes.

[08:45:02]

And the president saying now he's going to back primary challengers against Republicans over this. What is going on there?

SEAT: What you have going on here is the tension between fidelity to principle and flirtations with politics. The political argument is an easy one to make. You want more seats for Republicans in the U.S. House of Representatives. So, rather than win on the merits, you go redraw the lines to make them easier to win.

The principle argument, on the other hand, is harder to make. It's harder for people to grasp because it's so antiquated in this environment for politicians to be principled, that it's now a novelty. Yet you have a majority of the Indiana Republican state senate caucus that believes firmly that the lines that they drew in 2021 and passed into law in 2021 were done correctly, they were not gerrymandered, and there's no reason to go back on that to score short-term political points that could ultimately result in long-term pain for the party.

BOLDUAN: And what we're looking at here is it's seven -- it's a seven- two split, if you will. Republicans, right now, have seven of the congressional seats. Check me if I'm wrong on this because I think I'm remembering this right. Democrats had two of the seats. And what they were hoping to do when they redraw this, of course, is to have all nine be Republican.

But the fact that you've got a federal judge that just told Texas, which was the -- kind of the center of the universe on this one, telling Texas that it cannot use the new maps that it drew for the midterms. That decision is being appealed. But still, if it holds, does that play, or is that playing into the hesitation from Indiana Republicans on this?

SEAT: I think that does play into it. But again, it comes back to a principled argument. We, for 20 years, Republicans, have said, we don't gerrymander. That we draw congressional districts and state house and senate districts that respect communities of -- BOLDUAN: Right. But, Pete, this entire environment is fighting fire with fire. There is no fidelity to principle anymore. And how is it only happening in the Hoosier state?

SEAT: Well, you should know better than anyone, Kate, because we stand on principle. We are good, hearty people in the Hoosier state.

But that's why this story is so fascinating to people who live outside of Indiana. All the noise in favor of re-redistricting is coming from Washington and small social media echo chambers. When these state senators hear from their constituents, they are hearing overwhelming opposition. I hear this privately, and I've read this publicly. They've talked about this. When they run into constituents in the grocery store or at church or getting a haircut, they're hearing people say, don't do this. Indiana does it right. We don't see why we should change that.

BOLDUAN: I'm now -- I'm now realizing the mistake of the segment, which is, you've got two people who are so biased in favor of just the entire state of Indiana. I don't know how we can publicly possibly speak about this in a fair way.

It's good to see you, Pete.

I will say this, though. Pete does know what's going on when it comes to Indiana, especially Republican politics. So, it's great to see you, buddy. Thank you so much. Really appreciate it.

John.

Oh, Sara. So sorry, baby.

SIDNER: It is me. No worries.

BOLDUAN: So sorry, baby.

SIDNER: Good to see you.

All right, ahead, the indictment against former FBI Director James Comey is now in jeopardy. The revelation that could lead a judge to potentially throw the case out.

And the TSA is now proposing people pay up if they show up at the airport without the right identification.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[08:53:00]

SIDNER: A prosecutorial decision may have put the case against former FBI Director James Comey in serious legal jeopardy. The U.S. district attorney, and former personal Trump attorney, Lindsey Halligan, who was handpicked by the president for the prosecutor job, admitted to a judge yesterday that she did not present the Justice Department's final indictment against Comey to the full grand jury.

With me now is Sarah Krissoff. She is a former U.S. prosecutor with the Southern District of New York.

All right, let's start with this. Prosecutors confirm that the entire grand jury did not see the final indictment. Only the foreperson and one other juror did. Could this be enough to have the judge say, we cannot go forward with this case and throw it out?

SARAH KRISSOFF, FORMER U.S. PROSECUTOR, SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK: Yes, Sara, I'm not a gambling woman, but I think this is fatal to the indictment. And this is only one of many mistakes that were made. But I think this mistake and others are going to be fatal and this indictment is going to be dismissed.

SIDNER: I do want to ask you about a couple of the other things that came up as well during the same hearing. Instead of presenting a new indictment to the grand jury after it declined to approve one of the three charges against Comey, U.S. Attorney Halligan gave them an altered version that left out the count that they had rejected. Is this just simply a procedural error, or does this sort of pile on to the other issues in this case?

KRISSOFF: I mean, this was just an error. Halligan is just not experienced. She got a crash course in how to do this, and she didn't do it right. I mean it's pretty simple. So, any time a change is made to the indictment that's presented to the grand jury, it has to be presented to the full grand jury. So, even if a prosecutor is reading an indictment out loud and they see a typographical error in the indictment, they need to pause the grand jury, hold them there, go fix that typographical error, bring the revised indictment back to the grand jury and have them consider it.

[08:55:02]

And that just wasn't done here. And I think that is sort of one of a full series of problems that's going to be a huge issue for the Department of Justice in this case.

SIDNER: I am sort of interested in one of the things that happened where a -- one of the prosecutors told the judge that he couldn't reveal whether a career attorney's initial recommendation against charging the former FBI director could be talked about in court, could be revealed in court. Is that unusual?

KRISSOFF: Yes, I mean, he was clearly under direction from those above not to talk about this, not to sort of answer these factual questions regarding the machinations that had gone on at the U.S. attorney's office about whether to bring charges or whether or not to bring charges. The judge was -- the judge was not happy about that, right? I mean he is conducting a hearing to figure out what happened, to conduct this factual inquiry. So, he was clearly -- the judge was displeased about the Department of Justice's refusal to answer those types of questions.

But ultimately, I think there were so many procedural errors here from Halligan mishandling questions posed by the grand jury, to the -- this -- the issues with the use of the materials, the search warrant materials that the government relied on to bring this case, that the court may not even have to reach that issue of selective prosecution or, you know, address that issue because the court will have lots of other reasons to dismiss this indictment.

SIDNER: Yes, so you think basically this case is cooked, not even on the main issue that they initially put forth from the Comey camp?

Sarah Krissoff, thank you for your analysis this morning. I do appreciate it.

Kate.

BOLDUAN: So, there's new video out this morning showing a man robbing a Vegas casino with an AR-style rifle, and a security guard is right beside him. Video shows the suspect, decked out in fake security uniform, a black mask and a ballistic helmet, walk up to the cashiers cage, take out the gun, demand cash. After he gets the money, he just slips out through the parking garage and gets away. He is still on the run this morning.

Also this morning, nine dogs are safe thanks to fire crews who rushed into a burning home to save them. You got to see this video. This is footage shared by the San Bernardino County Fire Department. They say the people who live in that home, they were able to get -- they were already outside when first responders arrived, and that is when they found out about the animals trapped inside. Firefighters used a saw to cut through the roof. They eventually found three dogs and six puppies, carried them to safety. One of the dogs, though, did not survive.

So, no real I.D.? No passport? You may still be able to get through airport security, but it will cost you. Under a new proposed rule, passengers without those forms of I.D. may be able to use an alternate biometric system and pay $18 to get through security. Unclear, though, when this new system will roll out.

John.

BERMAN: Nothing like a biometric system.

All right, so the markets open on Wall Street in just a few minutes. There's this new jobs report to digest. Better news than expected. But also word overnight that chipmaker Nvidia's sales grew 62 percent year over year. That's almost $2 billion more than Wall Street projected. This as seen -- is seen, I should say, as hugely important.

So, why? CNN's Clare Duffy is with us now to explain.

Everyone was watching Nvidia.

CLARE DUFFY, CNN TECH REPORTER: Yes, just to put into context for folks why this report was so important. The market rally this year has largely been driven by the A.I. boom. And Nvidia is considered to be at the heart of that because it provides the chips that power this technology. Nvidia comprises about eight percent of the total value of the S&P 500. So, whatever happens to this company has ripple effects that impact nearly every investor, every 401(k) holder. And so, I think Wall Street really breathed a sigh of relief here when Nvidia posted, yet again, stronger than expected sales and profits because there had been these questions leading into this report about whether the A.I. market was a bubble ready to burst. These growing questions about whether the returns from A.I. could keep pace with the massive spending that we're seeing on A.I. data centers.

And really importantly here, Nvidia also told investors that it's expecting stronger than expected sales in the current quarter, the fourth quarter. So, all of this indicating that the A.I. boom is not slowing down. Demand for Nvidia's chips is not slowing down.

And all of that, of course, is driving Nvidia's shares up. Shares are trading up about five percent in premarket trading. And I expect that we'll see a lot of other tech stocks in the green today on the back of this report.

And I really think the takeaway from Nvidia, especially its earnings call last night, was this idea that A.I. is driving real returns for the companies that adopt it. It took the sort of unusual step of ticking through some of its customers and their results on its earnings call. Companies like Meta, OpenAI, Anthropic, Palantir, talking about the benefits that those companies are seeing from A.I.

[09:00:04]

So, a positive report both for Nvidia and really for the larger tech market last night.