Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

President Trump Gives Commencement Speech to Cadets Graduating from West Point; Judge Temporarily Halts Federal Ban on Harvard's Ability to Enroll International Students; President Trump Threatens to Impose 50 Percent Tariffs on Goods from European Union Starting June 1st; President Trump Threatens Tariffs on Apple Unless Company Moves Production to America; Iranian Officials Reportedly Do Not Believe Nuclear Deal Likely with U.S.; Rapper Kid Cudi Testifies in Sean "Diddy" Combs Trial that He Believes Combs Blew Up His Car When Combs Discovered He Was Dating Comb's Ex-Girlfriend Cassie Ventura; National Transportation Safety Board Investigating Small Plane that Crashed into San Diego Neighborhood. Aired 2-3p ET.

Aired May 24, 2025 - 14:00   ET

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

[14:00:00]

FREDRICKA WHITFIELD, CNN ANCHOR: -- takes us to New Orleans where she explores the unique traditions and the culture there. be sure to tune in next this Sunday at 10:00 p.m. eastern and pacific only on CNN.

All right, hello again, everyone. Thank you so much for joining me this holiday weekend. I'm Fredricka Whitfield.

And we begin this hour with the nation's commander in chief saluting military graduates as the sate time he escalates his battle with one of the nation's elite and oldest universities. Today, President Trump delivered the commencement speech at West Point. He hailed the Army graduates as winners and the military and the most powerful in the world.

His commencement speech comes one day after a federal judge temporarily halted Trump's ban on international students at Harvard, which makes up more than a quarter of the school's student body. Today, the president touted his efforts to end diversity policies in the military, universities, and the nation's institutions.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, (R) U.S. PRESIDENT: We've liberated our troops from divisive and demeaning political trainings. There will be no more Critical Race Theory or transgender for everybody forced on to our brave men and women in uniform or on anybody else for that matter, in this country.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WHITFIELD: As for Harvard, the Trump administration has demanded control over what the university can teach and who they can hire. A federal judge is due to hear arguments on Thursday over whether to issue a preliminary injunction in this case, an order that would block the administration's action until a final decision is made in the lawsuit.

All right, some of the international students at Harvard tell CNN that they are concerned about their future at the prestigious university. CNN's Michael Yoshida has more on their uncertainty and the Trump administration's actions that led up to it.

(BEGIN VIDEO TAPE)

MICHAEL YOSHIDA, CNN CORRESPONDENT: A federal judge siding with Harvard university Friday in its fight with the Trump administration, temporarily halting a federal ban on the school's ability to enroll international students.

LARRY SUMMERS, PRESIDENT EMERITUS, HARVARD UNIVERSITY: This is extortion. It's a vendetta, using all powers of the government because of a political argument with Harvard.

YOSHIDA: On Thursday, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem removed the university's student and exchange visitor certification, saying Harvard refused to turn over conduct records of foreign students as requested last month.

KRISTI NOEM, HOMELAND SECURITY SECRETARY: Harvard brought these consequences upon themselves.

YOSHIDA: More than a quarter of students are impacted.

LEO GERDEN, HARVARD UNIVERSITY INTERNATIONAL STUDENT: We are being used essentially as poker chips in a battle between the White House and Harvard. And it feels, honestly, very dehumanizing.

YOSHIDA: Trump and university officials have been locked in conflict for months, battling over federal research funds as well as the school's tax exempt status. The White House demanding changes to campus programing, policies, hiring, and admissions to root out on campus antisemitism and eliminating what it calls racist diversity, equity, and inclusion practices.

DONALD TRUMP, (R) U.S. PRESIDENT: Harvard is going to have to change its ways.

YOSHIDA: Harvard has complied with some requests and did acknowledge antisemitism on its campus. Still, its fiercely defended its academic independence, calling this latest act by the administration a "clear retaliation for Harvard's exercising its First Amendment rights to reject the government's demands to control Harvard's governance, curriculum, and the ideology of its faculty and students."

In Washington, I'm Michael Yoshida, reporting.

(END VIDEO TAPE)

WHITFIELD: All right, and earlier, I spoke with one of the top constitutional law professors at Harvard University about his thoughts on this legal battle.

(BEGIN VIDEO TAPE)

WHITFIELD: All right, joining me right now to talk more about these developments is Laurence Tribe. He is a university professor of constitutional law emeritus at Harvard Law School. Professor Tribe, great to see you.

LAURENCE TRIBE, HARVARD CONSTITUTIONAL LAW PROFESSOR: Great to see you, Fredricka.

WHITFIELD: Well, I wonder, are you as perplexed as the Wesleyan President Roth about the White House's goals or motivation here?

TRIBE: I'm not perplexed at all. I agree very much with President Roth that the president's claim, President Trump's claim, that he's fighting antisemitism, is bogus. Of course, antisemitism is real. It's pervasive. But Harvard is doing its part in fighting it. The president is just using his anti antisemitism trope as a fig leaf for doing what he wants. And what he wants is to bring everyone to heel, to prove that he doesn't need the law behind him in order to crush individuals. You heard those poor students who don't know what their fate is going to be, and to crush universities, especially Harvard, as the sort of the emblem of intellectual excellence.

[14:05:01]

The fact is that these students have reason to fear. I have absolutely no doubt that Harvard will win a permanent injunction against this lawless action. I've looked at the law. There's no basis for it. But the fact that people keep winning in court against the Trump administration doesn't prevent it from inducing fear throughout the country. If you look at the cases in which the Trump administration has been involved in the month of May, it has lost more than 95 percent of them. But that doesn't stop them. It's a catch me if you can approach. That is, even though these students are going to win and Harvard is going to win, in the meantime, they have no basis other than the prediction of legal experts like me and the opinions of courts about what the law is. But they know that we now have a president who doesn't, frankly, care at all about the law. He's made it clear he simply wants people to bend the knee. And those who do, those who kowtow and kiss the ring live to regret it, because you can't make a deal with a monstrous tyrant. He won't keep his side of the bargain.

So what we are confronting, I'm afraid, is a long reign of terror. And it's a reign that can be interrupted by judicial decisions but cannot be entirely stopped.

WHITFIELD: So then, to follow up on, while you do believe Harvard has merit to win in court, even if the Trump administration loses, you are also consequently saying it wins because it is invoking fear. And we're hearing it from students. And even with this, as you put it, this continued reign of terror, what is your concern about how it will impact the student body, the institutions of learning, the pursuit of excellence?

TRIBE: It compromises them profoundly. At Harvard. We have a quarter of the students who are from abroad. They are at the very core of the intellectual enterprise. They enliven everything for everybody. They are among the people who make the key discoveries that help cure disease and that help improve our productivity. With them gone, Harvard has a much more difficult time achieving its purposes. And those are the purposes of the nation. Once he's done it to Harvard, he can do it to anybody. And if he brings everyone down, he's essentially ruining the country. There is no rational reason for any of these policies other than to prove to the world that he is boss of everyone. That's a dangerous place to be. It's not a place that our legal system tolerates, but it's not a place that the law can easily catch up with.

WHITFIELD: So you just underscored it's not just about Harvard. It's not just other Ivy League schools. But learning institutions across the country need to be, I guess, bracing for what comes next. You don't believe, I think I'm hearing you say, the White House is kind of finished here.

So under the auspices of penalizing universities for not taking a better stand, a bigger stand on antisemitism in this country, you are Jewish. You have been very outspoken. What is the feeling in your community and even on campus about whether universities should or could be doing more in response to the kind of pressure that the White House is applying?

TRIBE: Well, if by doing more you mean caving in, the feeling among all the people I know is that we are proud that Harvard has not joined those who have, basically, bowed before naked, lawless power. We know that it's going to exact a price, not only from us, but from the country. It's obvious that his lawless activity, even with respect to the tariffs, has no rational justification. It's going to make the economy weaker. It's going to make our productivity less. It's going to increase inflation and risk recession at the same time.

[14:10:01]

All of these destructive actions, which have no sufficient basis in law, that are based on claimed emergencies that don't exist, weaken the country. And it's very hard to know why anyone would look at this and say, this is what we voted for. People have a way of convincing themselves that things will be better in the long run. We've heard that before in the past.

WHITFIELD: Fear of retribution is a reason why many choose not to speak out and criticize the White House and this approach. This is now at least the second time you and I have spoken about this very issue in terms of Harvard being targeted by the White House in recent days, weeks. Why do you lack fear in speaking out? Why do you feel like it is worth speaking out and voicing your opinion?

TRIBE: Because that's the whole purpose of my life. It's to do things that improve the lot of others. My family, my friends, the country that has adopted me and that I love. What would be the point of just breathing if you do nothing to stop the powerful tyranny of a wannabe dictator? It's sort of part of my fabric. Of course I'm scared. From time to time I get threats. But I'm not going to cave in to them. And I know a lot of other people who are braver than I am. So I think that if I can be an example of doing the right thing rather than pursuing, sort of the objects of wealth and power, so be it.

WHITFIELD: Harvard University Professor Laurence Tribe, a pleasure talking to you. Thank you so much for being with us today.

TRIBE: Good to be with you.

WHITFIELD: Still to come, the trial of Sean "Diddy" Combs sex trafficking trial produced some surprising testimony this week. We'll have the highlights and tell you who is expected to take the stand next week.

And a potential new round of tariffs could cause your next smartphone purchase to skyrocket.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:17:12]

WHITFIELD: All right, President Trump is turning up the heat again in his trade war, this time targeting the E.U. and Apple. Trump, frustrated by the lack of progress on trade talks, threatened to impose 50 percent tariffs on goods from the European Union starting June 1st. He also demanded that Apple and other smartphone companies move production to the U.S. or face 25 percent tariffs.

CNN's Matt Egan explains how this could bring higher price tags.

(BEGIN VIDEO TAPE)

MATT EGAN, CNN REPORTER: This would be a major escalation in the president's trade wars. And this definitely caught investors off guard. They had been relieved about the fact that trade tensions seemed to be calming down. Now they're heating back up.

Just to remind you how we got here, last month the president briefly imposed 20 percent tariffs on the E.U. Then he lowered them to 10 percent to allow for time for negotiations. Now he's not happy about how those talks are going and he's threatening a 50 percent tariff on the E.U. Now, just to give you some context here, the E.U. is Americas biggest trading partner far and away. We're talking about almost $1 trillion worth of imports and exports between the U.S. and the E.U. last year alone. That's more than with Mexico, more than with Canada. It's actually more than with China and Japan combined.

When you look at what the U.S. gets from the E.U., were talking about more than $600 billion worth of goods last year alone. It's not just the BMWs and the Volkswagens from Germany. We're also talking about aircraft, pharmaceutical products, machinery, wine and other alcoholic beverages. And if you put a 50 percent tariff on those goods, there's obviously a risk that they're going to get expensive, more expensive, potentially a lot more expensive.

That's why economists over at Barclays, they say that they view this threat of a 50 percent tariff as a negotiating tactic. But they do caution that if these tariffs go into effect, they would weigh on both GDP growth, and they would further boost inflation. So you could have a situation where you have slower growth and higher prices.

And we don't know yet exactly how the E.U. is going to respond, but they've already set in motion potential retaliatory tariffs on more than $100 billion of goods that they buy from the United States. And it's those retaliatory tariffs that could kill U.S. jobs.

Now, it's not just the E.U. that the president is threatening with his favorite weapon. Also, it is one of Americas biggest companies, Apple. Apple joining a growing list of U.S. companies that have been attacked by the president so far this year. And the thing Apple has in common with Amazon and Mattel and Walmart is how it's linked to tariffs, right. The president is threatening at least a 25 percent tariff on Apple unless they move manufacturing back to the United States.

[14:20:00]

But the problem is the cost of labor here in the U.S. is so much higher that this is something that not only Apple couldn't do overnight, right, it would take five to 10 years, but it would make the iPhone more expensive, way more expensive. There's estimates out there that if the iPhone was made in the U.S., each one would cost $3,500 apiece. That is prohibitively expensive for many Americans, and that's why veteran analyst tech Dan Ives says that they believe this concept of Apple producing iPhones in the U.S. is a fairy tale. And he says it's one that is not feasible.

And look, even if apple found a way to somehow make it economical, it is not clear at all that they'd be able to find enough workers in the U.S. who have the skills and, frankly, the desire to build iPhones.

(END VIDEO TAPE)

WHITFIELD: All right, Matt Egan, thank you so much.

All right, still to come, new reaction to the talks between the U.S. and Iran. The latest details on nuclear negotiations, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:25:25]

WHITFIELD: All right, new today, sources are telling CNN that Iran does not believe a nuclear deal with the U.S. is likely. The comments come as a fifth round of talks between the U.S. and Iran wrapped up in Rome on Friday. The biggest sticking point remains Iran's uranium enrichment program. CNN's Fred Pleitgen is in Iranian, the Iranian capital of Tehran with this.

(BEGIN VIDEO TAPE)

FREDERIK PLEITGEN, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Iranian negotiators participating in the talks in Rome say that those talks were held in what they call a professional atmosphere. Iran's foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi, coming out afterwards and saying he believes that the U.S. side, at the very least, now has a better understanding of Iran's position. Now, of course, one of the things that still is very difficult is

uranium enrichment by the Iranians and whether or not the two sides are going to be able to come to terms over that. Here in Tehran, though, there does appear to be a lot of pessimism. I was able to speak to a senior Iranian lawmaker, and here's what he had to say.

EBRAHIM REZAEL, MEMBER OF IRANIAN PARLIAMENT (through translator): Especially given the recent statements by American officials regarding zero enrichment, I got disappointed and do not have much hope that the negotiations will lead to a deal. We are preparing for plan b.

PLEITGEN: Do you think that there is room for a way forward?

REZAEL: If the Americans are merely seeking to stop Iran from developing a nuclear weapon, a deal may be reached. But if they are seeking no enrichment, a deal will definitely not be possible.

We need 20 percent enrichment in order to provide radiological medicine for cancer patients. We have to produce it ourselves because no one provided for us. That's why, for the sake of the people, we cannot forgo 20 percent enrichment.

PLEITGEN: There are some countries in the region, like for instance, Oman, also Saudi Arabia, who talk about possibly enriching uranium together for a consortium or something that Iran would maybe work with Saudis and with others. Do you think that those could be a way forward out of this impasse?

REZAEL: We would welcome the formation of a consortium and have no problem with that. But we insist that enrichment has to take place on Iranian soil and that the material be kept on Iranian soil. This is a red line, and naturally we will not back away from it.

PLEITGEN: Now, as far as the U.S. side is concerned, there was also a statement by a source close to Steve Witkoff and the U.S. negotiating team saying that there was progress that was continuing to be achieved, but that there was also still work to be done. And the two sides have agreed to meet again in the not too distant future.

Fred Pleitgen, CNN, Tehran.

(END VIDEO TAPE)

WHITFIELD: All right, thanks so much, Fred.

Let's get more on these developments now with Vali Nasr, a professor at the School of Advanced International Studies at Johns Hopkins University. He's also written extensively on Iran, including his latest book, "Iran's Grand Strategy, A Political History." Thank you so much for joining us.

VALI NASR, AUTHOR, "IRAN'S GRAND STRATEGY": Thanks for having me.

WHITFIELD: So the U.S. says enrichment inside Iran is a red line. We just listened to Fred Pleitgen's reporting there that Iran says it has to take place inside Iran for medical reasons. So why is this issue so crucial?

NASR: Iran has held the position that the right to enrichment is a national right. It's actually enshrined in the nonproliferation treaty, which Iran is a signatory to. And that was the basis of the previous nuclear deal, which they entered with the United States. And they believed that it's essential for them to have it. Within Iranian politics, it's almost like an immovable red line. And so they entered the talks. From the very get go, the position was that they can frame a negotiations around the idea that Iran would have minimal enrichment, and that it would be supervised and would be transparent to the international community. The U.S. is now insisting to Iran to have zero enrichment. I think Iran sees that as a surrender and is not willing to go there.

WHITFIELD: Iranian officials, they're telling CNN that they are not optimistic about reaching any kind of agreement. Do you believe that's a negotiating tactic, or is that just being realistic?

NASR: I think it's being realistic, but both sides -- but Iranians in particular are trying to warn the United States that insisting on zero enrichment will ultimately cause the collapse of the talks, and the collapse of the talks would then get both countries into a situation that neither one wants.

[14:30:02]

So these are also warning shots against the U.S. But the larger issue is that at the foreign minister level, Steve Witkoff, are saying that they're going to meet again, and that the talks have been professional and positive. So it shows that neither side also wants to talks to collapse. And that's something positive.

WHITFIELD: So the two sides, they are still having talks through a mediator. Has the Trump administration underestimated the effort that is required to negotiate a plan of this magnitude?

NASR: I think so. I think even during the very first two meetings, the American team was not ready to talk details, and it was more to get to know one another. Even though they're running against the clock and President Trump had given it two months, it really took to the third or fourth meeting before the United States was ready to deal with something much more substantive. And even as we're speaking, there is no agreement on the framework. I mean, the basic the basic understanding that what the final shape of the talks would be, if you can't even have an understanding whether it's going to be zero enrichment or only 3.5 percent enrichment, you can't really be discussing details. So we're nowhere close to a deal at this point in time.

WHITFIELD: OK, let me shift gears now with you. Sources say the Trump administration has put more than 100 officials at the National Security Council on administrative leave, many of them receiving an email yesterday about 4:00 right before the holiday weekend. What kind of impact do you think this is going to have?

NASR: I think it will have a very big impact. I mean, it's true that the National Security Council had become very big over time, and it probably could use some trimming. But a cut of this magnitude would impair its ability to serve the president with data, with policy options. It's suggested that the administration really does not value this kind of bottom up policy analysis, gathering of information, and would like to make decisions top down and rely on people who would execute the decisions as opposed to the ones that would shape the decisions. But we really have to look at the details of who is being laid off, which departments are being most affected, to know what the true impact would be.

WHITFIELD: All right, we'll leave it there for now. Professor Vali Nasr, thank you so much for being with us.

NASR: Thank you.

WHITFIELD: All right, still to come, more shocking moments from the stand in the Sean "Diddy" Combs sex trafficking trial. We'll get a closer look at what to expect from the prosecution when testimony resumes next week.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:37:110]

WHITFIELD: The Sean "Diddy" Combs sex trafficking trial is now adjourned until next week. But this week we saw more shocking testimony and photo evidence presented by the prosecution against the former music mogul, including accusations of arson. CNN's Elizabeth Wagmeister has been following the developments.

(BEGIN VIDEO TAPE)

ELIZABETH WAGMEISTER, CNN ENTERTAINMENT CORRESPONDENT: As the jury enjoys a long holiday weekend, they have a lot of testimony to mull over before court is back in session on Tuesday.

The jury has heard from a number of witnesses this week, many of whom corroborated pieces of Cassie Ventura account. The jury heard from everyone from her mother to former employees of Sean Combs. In fact, we heard from two former assistants of Sean Combs. One of them took the stand on Thursday and Friday and told the jury that he had to leave Combs enterprises because he had witnessed violence from Sean Combs against Cassie Ventura and another girlfriend. He actually said that on one instance, he witnessed Sean Combs violently assaulting Cassie Ventura on his private plane, another time with another girlfriend named Gina. He said that he witnessed Sean Combs throwing apples at her and throwing them very hard.

So that was just one of the people that the jury heard from. We also heard from a hotel worker who was the manager of a luxury hotel, the L'Ermitage in Beverly Hills, which was a hotel that Sean Combs would frequent over the years. The hotel manager was shown a series of hotel logs that had notes from when Sean Combs would stay there, and I want to read a few of them to you. One of them said, "Please monitor outside his room down the hall to spray air freshener." Another one said, "Always spills candle wax on everything and uses excessive amounts of oil. Place the room out of order upon departure for deep cleaning." Another note said to authorize an extra $1,000 every time the guest stays because they have to cover room damages.

Now, why is this important? Well, because the prosecution has alleged that these so-called freak-offs, these drug-fueled sex parties where Sean Combs would allegedly coerce women like Cassie Ventura into having sex with male escorts, the prosecution alleges that these freak-offs are at the center of this criminal case, and they have gone into great detail since the trial began about some of these freak-off supplies, which would include candle wax and baby oil. So they're trying to set a scene here to show the jury that these freak-offs were happening in many locations over the years.

Now, one last witness that I want to tell you about, the jury also heard from rapper and actor Kid Cudi, who is an ex of Cassie.

[14:40:01]

They dated briefly, and he says that when Sean Combs found out that they were dating, that he was so jealous that he blew up his car and broke into his home. Now the jury was actually shown photos of his car. It had a gaping hole on the top and had a ton of smoke damage, to the point where Kid Cudi testified the car could not be repaired. He alleged that a Molotov cocktail was thrown into that car. He says he believes it was Sean Combs doing, and he believes it was intentional. Back to you.

(END VIDEO TAPE)

WHITFIELD: All right, Elizabeth Wagmeister, thank you so much.

Let's continue the conversation now with Lisa Respers France, a CNN entertainment reporter who has been covering the trial throughout. She's here with me now.

OK. So, I mean, what kind of reaction are we hearing about, especially from Kid Cudi's testimony, and, you know, his car being destroyed, and overall threats that he's alleging?

LISA RESPERS FRANCE, CNN ENTERTAINMENT REPORTER: Yes, it's really interesting because a lot of people that I see who are putting this in the context of hip hop on social media are saying, oh, he's a rat, he's a snitch. Whereas other people are saying, you know, he is coming forward just to validate what Cassie Ventura said. And he did that.

WHITFIELD: They know he's been subpoenaed.

FRANCE: Right. He has to speak, right. But he also we know that when she originally filed her suit back in November 2023, he confirmed in a statement to "The New York Times" that this absolutely happened, which she alleged, because she alleged that he threatened, that Diddy threatened violence against both her and him, and said that he was going to blow up Kid Cudi's car. So as we saw right there with those photos, there definitely was a lot of damage done to that vehicle.

WHITFIELD: And there was also a testimony from a psychologist who tried to evaluate, not necessarily anyone who was hired by a Cassie Ventura or diagnosed her, but did kind of assess the psychological damage that comes from this kind of victimization, alleged victimization. How powerful was that?

FRANCE: I think it was pretty powerful, because Dawn Hughes, first of all, she is a forensic psychologist who has testified in other high- profile trials, including R. Kelly. And while she said, you know, I have not, you know, talked to either person that is involved here, she's not, you know, forensically diagnosed, right, Diddy or Cassie Ventura. But what she could talk about is trauma bonding, because we're hearing from a lot of people saying, why didn't she just simply leave? If it was so bad, why was she with him for so many years?

Which is fascinating to me, because here at CNN, we broke the video which showed what happened one time when she tried to get away.

WHITFIELD: She tried to leave.

FRANCE: Exactly. There was violence. And so when you have this psychologist there who is speaking to this is why victims don't leave. There's a lot of victim-shaming. And we're seeing that even now. We're seeing people talk about Cassie Ventura and say, oh, she was just in it for the money, or she liked the lifestyle. And Cassie Ventura herself, in her testimony, she talked about feeling like a sex worker. And so the psychologist there, Dawn Hughes, was there to merely talk about how this all can come into play when you have this power dynamic of this very wealthy mogul and this young girl who he met when she was 19. And what a lot of people see in her allegations, they see a grooming pattern, if you will, in her allegations.

Now, of course, we have to be very clear that Sean "Diddy" Combs has denied all of this. And even his defense says he's not a great guy, that people will probably be shocked by his sex life, because we're learning a lot of things that we did not know about him and about his activities. And so she was just I think there merely to express this is why and how a person can get into this type of situation and what makes it so difficult for them to get out.

WHITFIELD: Yes, and Cassie Ventura, when she was on the stand for many, many days, actually said she tried to get away, but then also just felt like she couldn't.

FRANCE: She could not.

WHITFIELD: She couldn't.

FRANCE: Right, because she was controlled. That's the whole point. Allegedly controlled.

WHITFIELD: Right. We also learned, you know, Friday that the person identified as victim three is not expected to testify in the case. What's going on?

FRANCE: Well, what we know, sources have told CNN that victim three refers to Gina, who her name has come up quite a bit in this case. She is the woman who allegedly, Sean Combs was cheating on Cassie Ventura with throughout the more than a decade that they were together. And so her name has come up. She apparently is, according to prosecutors, in the defense, also a woman that he was involved with who, had she testified, would be able to talk about the things that she saw and the things that she endured. But we're being told that she actually is not going to take the stand.

And it's been fascinating to me to watch people respond to that, because, of course, the Internet is googling and trying to figure out who she may be, who she might be, but also people saying that -- some people said they feel sympathy for her because they understand. I mean, Cassie Ventura is being hailed for her courage in coming out and speaking on her allegations because some of it is so disturbing and so upsetting.

[14:45:00]

So I've seen people on social media saying that they don't blame whoever victim three is, because why would you want to blow your life up by going and testifying publicly to what happened to you and the things that you saw?

WHITFIELD: So what are people saying about others who worked, you know, in in the circles of Sean "Diddy" Combs, who do have like, deals, they do have, you know, kind of in exchange for their testimony, they don't have to face any charges? Is there an audience out there that is speaking about or even critical of those who are telling the truth now or telling their truth right now, but they withheld it for a very long time, being subpoenaed or this deal?

FRANCE: Absolutely. I think it depends on if you're a huge Diddy fan or not, because as is often the case, and we've seen this with other major celebrities who have been accused of wrongdoing and things like that, there's a segment of the population who is so wedded to their art and the enjoyment of their art, and Diddy was huge. And Diddy wasn't just a music person. I mean, he touched fashion. He touched -- he was an entrepreneur. He was involved in politics. So there are some people who are supporting him even now who are saying, oh, you know, the government is just blowing this case up and were not seeing the RICO. Where's the RICO? All we're seeing is talk about freak-offs.

But what they're not understanding is this is not "Law and Order." The federal government is building a case or attempting to build a case like one builds a house, brick by brick. So you have to bring in Cassie Ventura to talk about what she says that she experienced with these freak-offs, to then bring her mother in to give the testimony that her mother did, where she said that she allegedly had to take out a loan because Diddy threatened to expose her daughter or do harm to her daughter if he was not paid and if that money wasn't sent to Bad Boy, which is part of what the government is alleging, is part a big part of the RICO case.

So people's reaction to this is just based on how much they love Diddy as opposed to, you know, if they're not big fans of Diddy and they're looking at what is being presented as just simply evidence as opposed to them being a fan of him and his music.

WHITFIELD: And this is just still the tip of the iceberg.

FRANCE: It is. We've just --

WHITFIELD: -- in this trial because it's just getting started. Six to eight weeks potentially?

FRANCE: Potentially.

WHITFIELD: Right. All right, Lisa Respers France, great to see you. Thank you so much.

FRANCE: Great to see you. Thank you.

WHITFIELD: All right, still to come, new details in the investigation into the deadly plane crash in San Diego in a neighborhood. What the NTSB is now revealing about that plane.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:52:10]

WHITFIELD: All right, we're getting new details in the investigation of that small plane that crashed into a San Diego neighborhood. Four of the victims have been identified as Emma Huke, Celina Kenyon, Daniel Williams, and David Shapiro. Huke was an employee of Sound Talent Group, according to her Instagram page. Kenyon is being remembered as an amazing mother and professional photographer. The metal band The Devil Wears Prada says Williams was their former drummer and they, quote, "owe him everything." And Shapiro is a well- known music booking agent and owner of the aircraft.

The FAA said six people were on board the business jet, and authorities have yet to identify all of them, and they do not believe any survived the crash. Meanwhile, the investigation into the accident continues. Here's CNN's Pete Muntean.

(BEGIN VIDEO TAPE)

PETE MUNTEAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: The facts of this case are getting more disturbing all the time. The NTSB confirmed Friday that parts of the runway lighting at the airport were out. That would have made it even harder for the pilot to find the runway in the dark in poor weather. Air traffic control told the pilot of low clouds and bad visibility from fog. But that was the report from Miramar Marine Corps air station a few miles away from the point of intended landing, Montgomery-Gibbs Executive Airport.

The weather reporting system there had been out of order for two nights, so the pilot was coming into land at an airport where he had no idea of the actual conditions. This is what air traffic control told the pilot.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: For 0955 Zulu, with wind calm, visibility one half, and indefinite ceiling 200. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: All right, that doesn't sound great. But we'll

give it a go.

MUNTEAN: The pilot was flying something called an instrument approach. That's a path published by the FAA so flights can descend through clouds to make a landing. Approaches have limits on how low you can get without seeing the runway. This approach says you can't go below 673 feet. You never, ever go below that because there's no guarantee you can avoid the ground. The preliminary flight tracking data says this flight descended to 500 feet, so more than 150 feet below the legal lowest altitude. We don't know why the pilot was that low. There wasn't a flight data recorder in the plane. The NTSB is hoping there was a cockpit voice recorder installed, and investigators say there may have been one installed in the airplane in the past. It would hold some key clues as this investigation is just beginning.

(END VIDEO TAPE)

WHITFIELD: All right, Pete Muntean, thanks so much.

All right, still ahead, this weekend marks five years since the killing of George Floyd. And the Justice Department just announced it's ending police reform agreements in Minneapolis.

[14:55:00]

We'll have a live report next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

WHITFIELD: All right, new today, a major power outage that hit the Cannes Film Festival is being investigated as a possible arson attack. And 160,000 homes across southern France lost power this morning, snarling traffic, briefly disrupting the screenings of two films. Today is the last day of the Cannes Film Festival, which draws huge celebrity crowds. According to a French media report, the festival used generators to ensure todays screenings were held.