Return to Transcripts main page

CNN This Morning

GOP Braces for Epstein Vote; Border Patrol to go to Charlotte; Comey and James Challenge Legality of Indictments; Congress Enacts Hemp Ban. Aired 6:30-7a ET

Aired November 14, 2025 - 06:30   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[06:31:42]

ERICA HILL, CNN ANCHOR: A very good Friday morning to you. I'm Erica Hill. Thanks so much for starting your day with us here on CNN THIS MORNING.

It is 6:31 on the East Coast. Here's what's happening right now.

Some federal workers could receive their back pay today after the nation's longest government shutdown. Federal agencies are slowly reopening. The Smithsonian expects all 19 of its museums and the National Zoo will be able to welcome visitors by Monday.

Three Chinese astronauts now back on earth after more -- more than a week later than originally planned. Their journey home from China's space station delayed by tiny debris in orbit which is suspected to have cracked a window on their spacecraft. Definitely want that fixed before you go. That forced them to wait an additional nine days before returning home.

Some frightening moments at the "Wicked: For Good" premiere in Singapore. A fan rushing Ariana Grande. New video from social media shows the moment he breached security. You can also see Grande's co- star, Cynthia Erivo, proving she was not that girl to mess with, rushing in to protect her costar. The man has been charged with committing a public nuisance.

Well, we are one day closer now to the House taking up that full vote on a release of the Epstein files, and that is causing a full split across the Republican Party. When the discharge petition was finalized this week, just four Republicans joined all 214 Democrats to force a vote on the House floor. Now, though, GOP leaders are bracing for mass defections in spite of a White House effort to squash Republicans voting in favor of the release of those files. If the vote is big enough, Senate Republicans may be forced to follow suit.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. JOHN KENNEDY (R-LA): I just don't think this issue is going to go away until that issue is addressed and answered to the American people's satisfaction. And I may end up with a sombrero on my head for saying that, but that's -- that's the way I see it.

I think he -- he'll -- he ought to put it on the floor. I think this is -- this issue has got to be resolved one way or the other.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HILL: Well, some of the most outspoken voices on the right are also giving us a better sense of the split in real time. Here's some comments.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. THOMAS MASSIE (R-KY): The deal for Republicans on this vote is that Trump will protect you if you vote the wrong way. In other words, if you vote to cover up for pedophiles, you've got cover in Republican primary.

MEGYN KELLY, HOST, "THE MEGYN KELLY SHOW": Jeffrey Epstein, in this person's view, was not a pedophile. This is this person's view, who was there for a lot of this, but that he was into the barely legal type. Like he liked 15-year-old girls.

You can say that's a distinction without a difference.

BATYA UNGAR-SARGON, JOURNALIST AND AUTHOR: No, it's not. It's not. I was --

KELLY: I think there is a difference.

UNGAR-SARGON: Yes.

KELLY: There's a difference between a 15-year-old and a five-year-old.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HILL: Joining me now in the group chat, Noel King co-host and editorial director of the "Today, Explained" podcast, Bradley Devlin, politics editor at "The Daily Signal," and Ashley Etienne, former communications director for Vice President Kamala Harris.

Good to have all of you with us.

I just want to start where the -- where those Megyn Kelly comments. She did add, all of this is disgusting. I have to be honest, I'm not sure what adding that changes. The thought of it and the thought of this person who she's discussing somehow seeming to make the case that it's OK if a girl is 15 versus eight.

Bradley, why even raise that point?

BRADLEY DEVLIN, POLITICS EDITOR, "THE DAILY SIGNAL": I don't know. But there is a comedian who has this exact bit where he goes through the different medical distinctions that the experts have determined and says, but if you mention any of this, you sound like a creep and you sound like a weirdo, and you probably shouldn't be talking about it.

[06:35:10]

I understand what Megyn was trying to do there. I just don't think that -- as she said, a distinction out -- without a difference.

HILL: Wait, I'm going to stop you there because I don't. What was she -- no, I'm going to stop you, but what was -- in all seriousness, right. This is not a comedy sketch. This is not -- what was she trying to do? What is the point that you believe she was trying to make in that moment?

DEVLIN: I think she was trying to say that these types of interactions, like the network that Jeffrey Epstein had created, was not the type of child sex trafficking that we had talked -- that we talk about when we talk about young children overseas, et cetera, et cetera. Now, again, distinction without difference, as she pointed out.

HILL: Noel, when you look at that, that this is now a line of discussion, what does that tell you about where we have landed?

NOEL KING, CO-HOST AND EDITORIAL DIRECTOR, "TODAY, EXPLAINED" PODCAST: Well, I have a 15-year-old niece. And what I would say is, I don't think Megyn Kelly needs to articulate every single thing that crosses her mind. It was an appalling thing to say.

I think what's really interesting about the revelations this week is that they didn't really tell us anything that new, Erica. It was a lot of what we knew. Trump and Epstein were friends for a long time. They had a split. After that they were not friends and they didn't talk.

What's really interesting is, again, even though people are seeing, there doesn't appear to be much new here, the pressure still is, OK, but we want all of it because we want to make absolutely sure that things are not being hidden from the American public. I guess the long and short of it is, this is just not going away.

HILL: It's not going away. I mean it's also -- let's be transparent here, this is an issue that the president himself created by initially promising to release these documents. And it's an excellent point. The president has not been accused of any criminal wrongdoing. These emails don't really change a whole lot in that -- in that respect when we're talking about the president.

What I think is really interesting, though, is that we are starting to hear more about Republicans and where they will land. I just want to listen a little bit more to some of what we heard from Thomas Massie.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: If this comes on the floor, I will vote for it. I want transparency.

MANU RAJU, CNN CORRESPONDENT: (INAUDIBLE) Epstein votes coming to the floor. Are you going to vote for it, this bill?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes, (INAUDIBLE). Yes. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I'm going to vote for it if it comes up because --

RAJU: You'll vote for the bill?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: We do need to know. We do need to know everything about Epstein.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HILL: We need to know. That's on the heels of Massie thinking (ph) there would be a snowball effect.

Ashley, the -- on the broader point here, right, this makes it to the floor. Let's say more Republicans vote for it. We move forward. What happens then? What do Democrats do with this?

ASHLEY ETIENNE, FORMER COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR, VICE PRESIDENT KAMALA HARRIS: Well, I mean, here's the issue is if there's nothing there, then why all the shenanigans? Why is Donald Trump, President Trump, you know, asserting a pressure campaign on Republicans to switch their vote or to vote against the bill when it comes to the floor? Why -- why delay it for six weeks if there is nothing there? They should just rip the band aid off and release the documents. But we don't know what we don't know. And so that's really the challenge, what are they hiding? That's the question that Democrats have to keep pushing.

But, you know, I would caution sort of everyone's exuberance about this particular issue because it's got to go through the process. It's got to go to the floor, be voted out of the House, then to the Senate, and then to the president's desk. Donald Trump is never going to give himself up. So, I can't imagine that he actually signs this.

But my advice to the Democratic Party is, and the House Democrats is, is that we -- this needs to not be an isolated event. We need to message this as part of Donald Trump's culture of corruption. The fact that he's covering all of this up really is how we should message it. It should ladder up to corruption. And that's what we're seeing in full, plain sight.

HILL: All right. We'll watch this space. We'll see how it all plays out in the coming days in Washington.

I also want to get your take, so stay with me for this next one, as we look at the Trump administration's push for its immigration crackdown. We now know the next focus. It is Charlotte, North Carolina. Border Patrol agents reportedly surging there as soon as this weekend. The local sheriff telling CNN federal officials hadn't actually shared those details of their plans. In fact, a number of officials who were contacted by CNN said CNN contacting them was the first that they had heard about the plan. But, based on what we have seen in other cities, it does give an idea of what perhaps may be to come.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

(CROSS TALK)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Hey. Hey! Hey!

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Get back or I'm going to shoot you.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You're going to -- you're going to what?

(CROSS TALK)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Get (INAUDIBLE) back! All right.

(CROSS TALK)

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HILL: Some of those scenes you see, these are from Evanston, Illinois. A number of scenes like this playing out almost daily in Chicago and surrounding areas. Federal agents grabbing people off the streets, protesters armed with whistles also on alert, warning their neighborhoods of incoming raids.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SAVANNA ESSIG-FOX, ACTIVIST: Everything they're doing around the -- the way that they're deporting people, the way that they're terrorizing communities, is -- is hurting families. It's hurting the people who are literally getting taken away, and it's hurting the, like, safety of our communities, the safety in our schools, the way that our kids feel.

[06:40:03]

Like, our kids are scared. Even the kids who aren't directly threatened, they're scared.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HILL: The group chat is back.

So, when we look at specifically Charlotte, right, like so this move into Charlotte, I just want to put up the latest numbers that we have from the Charlotte -- from Charlotte police.

So, according to Charlotte police, homicides, down 24 percent this year, aggravated assaults down 19 percent, robberies down 22 percent. Well, we've been told in a number of these instances, this is -- this is also about fighting crime.

Noel, when we have those stats there, what do you make of this push into Charlotte?

KING: This is something that has happened in city after city, right? Crime is down, assaults are down, robberies are down, violent crime is down, and still the administration says there is a crime problem there. Now, sometimes in these cities, Washington, D.C., Chicago, Los Angeles, New York, residents do view crime as being too high, that's pretty standard, even as the numbers are dropping.

What's really interesting about Charlotte is that nobody was actually really paying very much attention to Charlotte. There was a very, very sad incident, as you know, a couple of months ago where a young woman was killed on a light rail train. Absolutely devastating. And the city of Charlotte went sort of viral in conservative circles. It was like, look at the crime in this city.

And so, what this may be is kind of an attempt to capitalize on some momentum around crime that we were seeing a couple of months ago. But what I would say the administration should think about, in all honesty, is the polling data that says Americans do not like this. Americans wanted less illegal immigration. Americans wanted criminals removed from the country. But then you start seeing videos of mothers being separated from their children, grandmothers being taken away from their families, people just driving along being rammed by ICE agents. The polling is telling the White House, this kind of stuff needs to stop. And so maybe what we'll see in Charlotte is a recalibration, or maybe what we'll see is the administration just continues to go ham.

HILL: So, you raise an interesting point about potentially there being a recalibration. So, we just saw this federal judge's order in Chicago ordering more than 600 people who have been detained by ICE in Chicago saying they have to be released next week if they don't pose a threat to public safety. And, of course, the federal judge accusing the CBP chief of lying in court over the use of force.

I mean, Bradley, do you think this could actually lead to a change in tactics because it's not just perhaps polling and how people feel, which is -- which is important, right, and what they're seeing on the ground, but also, I mean, the courts.

DEVLIN: The courts, indeed. And this is going to be something that the Trump administration wants to take the end of the line. They don't care how far these court cases go, because this is the constant tension between the courts and the executive branch in this country. The Trump administration is going to say, we have a mandate, not only electorally, but from Congress to enforce these federal laws on the books. And we have a responsibility to the taxpayer that lives in Charlotte, North Carolina. In the state of North Carolina, illegal immigration cost the taxpayer about $3 billion a year. And we're going to fulfill that duty.

And so, there's going to be this give and take between the courts and the executive branch. It's not always going to be ho-hum between the branches. That's what the checks and balances system actually results in. It's going to result in friction. But I think, at the end of the day, it's going to prove durable.

HILL: Ashley, what's your take on all of this?

ETIENNE: I mean, I think it's a sad state of affairs that we're living in where the president utilizes, you know, taxpayer dollars, taxpayer forces to terrorize communities. I mean that's what we're seeing. You know, the judge not only ruled against the excessive force, but also ruled and said that the administration is lying about justification going into these cities.

You know, we've pointed out the fact that this is not -- this has nothing to do with crime, because crime is actually down. It actually has nothing to do with immigration either. It's all about terrorizing these communities. We've seen footage of priests being pepper sprayed, and children, and the assaults that are taking place. I mean, it just really is a sad commentary on where we are as a nation.

And, you know, and so the question is, where does this all end? How do we stop this? What's the next city? You know, and whether or not some of these forces will leave some of these cities. That -- that's really my take on it. It's just a sad commentary of where we are in a president that's, you know, utilizing American forces to terrorize our communities.

HILL: It is certainly a conversation we will be continuing, and perhaps not just when it comes to Charlotte, as we watch this continue to play out.

If you did miss any of this conversation, folks just joining us at home or any part of the show, just a reminder, CNN THIS MORNING is also a podcast. You can scan the QR code on your screen to find it anywhere you get your podcasts.

Still ahead on the show, a surprise provision in the shutdown deal that could wipe out a multibillion dollar industry.

Plus --

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. ERIC SWALWELL (D-CA): The aim is to make us shrink. It's not going to work.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HILL: Another Trump critic now facing a potential criminal inquiry.

[06:45:03]

We're going to lawyer up, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. ERIC SWALWELL (D-CA): I am one of the most vocal critics against Donald Trump. I have the only lawsuit that survived him becoming president, me and the January 6th officers. I'm a little surprised, frankly, that it took him this long to get to me, but it's not going to shake me.

So, if the aim is to make us shrink, it's not going to work.

(END VIDEO CLIP) HILL: Congressman Eric Swalwell there responding to the news on CNN that he is potentially the latest political adversary being targeted by President Trump's Department of Justice. He calls the allegations nonsense. A source telling CNN, a Trump administration official is accusing the congressman of mortgage fraud, similar to the allegations made against New Yorks Attorney General Letitia James.

[06:50:07]

She's been indicted. Those charges, though, are currently being challenged. During a high-stakes hearing on Thursday, James' attorneys claimed the prosecutor appointed by the president, Lindsey Halligan, was illegally put into office, making the indictment null and void. Former FBI Director James Comey is making a similar argument. The attorney general, though, is standing by Halligan.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PAM BONDI, ATTORNEY GENERAL: We will ultimately win, of course. But, yes, they're attempting to remove many of President Trump's U.S. attorneys around the country. The Comey indictment is going to be just fine. I've also signed on to that, backing up what Lindsey Halligan did, because they're coming after her. I read all the transcripts. She's doing a great job.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HILL: Former federal prosecutor and CNN legal analyst Elliot Williams is here as we lawyer up this morning.

OK, so is the attorney general right, Lindsey Halligan doing a great job, she's going to survive this?

ELLIOT WILLIAMS, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Well, I don't know, and I don't know. She might be doing a great job. You know, but let's give her space to do her work.

Now, the question of whether she survives it really hinges around what judges ultimately find about how she was appointed. There are questions about whether she is properly in her role. And you teased this a little bit, Erica. There are a few U.S. attorneys around the country, Virginia, where she is, New Jersey, central California, which is Los Angeles. In each of these instances, the Trump administration, when they could not get a nominee properly confirmed through the United States Senate, installed somebody on a -- on a temporary basis that might have run afoul of the law. Judges are looking into that. And we'll see what happens with Lindsey Halligan. But it's not this straightforward slam dunk that she stays in the role forever just because there are serious questions about the whole process they followed.

HILL: Yes, absolutely. So, as we watch all of that, former White House lawyer Ty Cobb was on CNN last night. He says -- he's predicting there could be a big change in the status of some of these cases. Here's what he said.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ERIN BURNETT, CNN HOST, "ERIN BURNETT OUTFRONT": Will Halligan be disqualified and her indictments tossed out?

TY COBB, FORMER TRUMP WHITE HOUSE LAWYER: She will be disqualified. The Comey indictment will be tossed out. The -- and may not be able to be rebrought because the statute of limitations has -- has lapsed. The James indictment is likely to be tossed out as well, but it can be brought, as Abbe Lowell conceded, that -- today, that, in her situation, that some -- somebody may reactivate that case.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HILL: So, I think that's a lot of what has come out of what we heard in court, right, this week is -- is not only, you know, could there be issues initially, but also whether these cases could come back.

WILLIAMS: Yes. And he's right, largely, in his analysis. A case can come back if somebody else files it. If the court were to say that the case were invalidated, but there are other prosecutors in the office that could bring it, perhaps, you know, that they could move forward that way. The tricky thing with the Jim Comey case, as Ty Cobb noted, is that you're now past the five year statute of limitations on it. You can't bring a case after a certain number of years past the time the crime was committed. So, if that one is ultimately invalidated, then that one probably goes away.

But certainly the other ones, if a court is to find that the prosecutor who brought it shouldn't have brought it or shouldn't have had the job, then, yes, other folks in the office can probably move forward.

HILL: Elliot, always good to see you. Thank you.

WILLIAMS: Thanks, Erica.

HILL: Perhaps just another reminder for you on this Friday morning, you should read the fine print. A provision buried in the just signed government shutdown deal could wipe out the $28 billion hemp industry. It's tucked away on page 163 of the bill. It calls for a cap on the THC content. And it would effectively ban most hemp products, things like edibles and beverages.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BOB GALLIGAN, DIRECTOR OF GOVERNMENT AND INDUSTRY RELATIONS, MINNESOTA CRAFT BREWERS GUILD: A lot of the success that we've seen through those beverages is partly due because of the low potency. Having said that, 0.4 is not a potency. So, that's not -- no one is going to be buying that because nobody would buy that. No one would be making that.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HILL: This is not just about retailers. It's not just about customers. It's also been devastating news for struggling farmers. It has been a difficult year, as we know already.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. RAND PAUL (R-KY): For many farmers, hemp has proved to be a lifeline. A new cash crop. Farmers turned to growing hemp to mitigate the losses they've endured during this season of hardship. But that lifeline may soon be extinguished by this very legislation.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HILL: So, the group chat is back with us.

There's been a lot made over this, and the attempts to not have it in there, we should -- we should point out by Rand Paul. Senator Mitch McConnell inserted this into the federal spending bill. Here's why he says it's there.

[06:54:56]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. MITCH MCCONNELL (R-KY): Unfortunately, companies have exploited a loophole in the 2018 legislation by taking legal amounts of THC from hemp and turning it into intoxicating substances, and then marketing it to children in candy-like packaging and selling it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HILL: There are a lot of questions about what he is putting forth there in terms of how widespread it is. It's important to note, though, too, his home state of Kentucky has more hemp farmers than just about any other state.

Bradley, do you worry about the blowback here that Republicans could be facing at this point?

DEVLIN: I don't know if Republicans are going to be facing blowback for the hemp industry. I think it's interesting to see some Kentucky on Kentucky violence between Rand Paul and Senator Mitch McConnell, because Mitch McConnell was one of the proponents for a provision in the 2018 agricultural bill -- farm bill that would have provided farmers this leeway to pursue hemp. And what we've seen since is medical experts have been concerned that these types of products that Mitch McConnell are talking about have led to hospitalizations of young children because the regulatory framework really wasn't there to bolster the hemp industry. It wasn't there on the federal level after we took it off the Controlled Substances Act, and it wasn't there on the state level as well, where in several states there are no ages restricting what these children can consume. So, I think what everybody needs now is regulatory clarity moving forward so that this hemp industry can continue and farmers can use it for textiles and things like that.

HILL: We'll see if we get the regulatory clarity.

I was also struck by this provision in the Senate -- in the Senate bill, and frankly, that, you know, Speaker Johnson is now moving to remove, that senators could sue the DOJ for half a million dollars, Ashley. This is over phone records that were part of -- part of Jack Smith's investigation.

The fact that you now have, in the House, House Republicans just aghast at -- that this would be put in there. Democrats as well, Ashley. This is actually a good uniting moment, perhaps, for something that I think would make more Americans once again say, what are our lawmakers doing?

ETIENNE: Yes, I mean, I agree with you. This is an opportunity for bipartisanship on something that is incredibly ridiculous on so many different levels. I mean, you know, any American watching and reading about this particular news, even the hemp news, has to be asking themselves, what is government and our elected officials focused on? Why are we electing these people when the reality is people are suffering and hurting every day? You know, our pocketbooks are tightening, prices are getting -- are increasing, inflation is going up and unemployment's going up. These should be the priority of our elected leaders. And regrettably, it's actually not.

But I will say one thing about the hemp situation. It's -- it really makes an argument for, you know, a new, younger leadership within the Senate. I mean the reality is, people need a bit of a fix. These are hard times. We're in chaotic times. Like, give the people their hemp, you know what I mean?

HILL: All right, well, we'll see if they -- we'll see if they hear your cry.

I do want to move on to the group chat. And, Noel, I'm going to start with you because I am really into your group chat. I will let you share it with the viewers.

KING: OK. So, basically the deal is, you guys, and I hate to tell you this, but leggings, wearing leggings to the gym is now a sign that you are an old American. Generation z, gen z, the zoomers say you got to wear big, baggy pants to the gym. That makes you young and hip and cool. And if you are spotted in leggings, you are hopelessly out of touch.

HILL: It's remarkable to me because this gen xer loves her leggings at the gym, especially since they suck you right in.

KING: This millennial does too.

HILL: My 19-year-old son wears his baggy pants.

I don't know anybody -- anybody impacted by the millennials and the gen zers trying to tell us how to dress at this point? Ashley and Bradley?

ETIENNE: You know, this is a throwback to the '90s. You know, all of these kids are obsessed with the '90s. That's when baggy clothes and shorts came into style. So, you know, I don't take any advice from these young kids, especially when they're biding (ph) for my generation, you know what I mean?

HILL: A hundred percent. I wore those in the '90s. In the '80s I wore the stirrup pants. So, I am -- I am here to bring it all back.

ETIENNE: Exactly. Like, we've done all that. We've been -- right, exactly.

HILL: Ashley, what's in your group chat?

ETIENNE: You know, questions about whether or not, you know, Democratic leaders on both sides of the chamber should step down. This is, you know, a nagging sort of issue for the Democratic Party right now. You came off of a major win on Tuesday. And, you know, in a matter of days, now we're defleated (ph) and feeling defeated, I should say, and at our own -- at our own hands. So, that's the question right now, what should happen with leadership?

HILL: I think that's going to stay in the chat for some time.

Bradley, last one to you. What's in your group chat?

DEVLIN: A group chat that I've got says, dad jokes from John Fetterman are, in fact, funny as Fetterman falls, he's hospitalized. Good to hear that he's OK. Of course, we wish him the best as he recovers.

[07:00:01]

But his response was, when this news broke, if you thought my face was -- looked bad before, wait until you see it now. So, best of wishes to Senator John Fetterman and keep up the dad jokes.

HILL: OK, so what I take away from this is, questions about Democratic leadership, dad jokes in, leggings out, baggy pants in, or choose what you want to wear yourself.

ETIENNE: Thank you (INAUDIBLE).

HILL: Thank you all for being here. Happy Friday. Happy weekend. Stay tuned. "CNN NEWS CENTRAL" starts right now.