this last night. [ siren ] you know, a warning, in that particular case of ballistic missiles in the middle of the night. the air force advice that came with it, do not ignore the alarm, take shelter. and then more warnings of drone attacks. every single night. and missiles hit these kids' hometown. and they are now too young to know any other way of life. many children here in kyiv sleep in apartment buildings so they don't need to wake them up and move them to shelters. we couldn't stop thinking about their small little sleeping bodies as we stayed up through the night for our broadcasts. we looked out on this, an absolute pitch darkness. just not a pitch darkness that you want at night, peace and rest and comfort. it was one of worry and waiting and in some moments, fear.

thank you so much for joining us. "ac 360" starts now. the ruling is seismic. now come the aftershocks. john berman here for anderson. tonight what happens now that the supreme court has gutted affirmative action in a decision that could profoundly change college admissions and more broadly reshape life for millions in this country. also, what we are learning about the arrest in the washington neighborhood where the obamas live of a heavily armed man with materials to make a molotov cocktail who is also wanted in connection with january 6th. plus, what we're learning about a new cooperating witness in the january 6th probe of the former president, and why he could be in a position to now say a lot. first, the supreme court's history-making decision today, dismantling a pillar of affirmative action. specifically, college admissions. in it, the court ruled by a 6-3 margin that race conscious policies at harvard and the

university of north carolina violate the 14th amendment. in his majority opinion, the chief justice writes that the program's, quote, unavoidably employ race in a negative manner, involve racial stereotyping and lack meaningful end points. those omissions cannot be reconciled with the guarantees of the equal protection laws. justices gorsuch and kavanaugh and thomas wrote separate occurrences. justice sotomayor wrote a blistering dissent, and justice ketanji brown jackson, who recused herself from the harvard case because of ties to the school wrote this in dissent on north carolina, "with let them eat cake obliviousness today, the court pulls the ripcord and announces blind by all legal fiat, but erasing it so in law does not make it so in life." president biden, meantime, offered this. >> we cannot let this decision be the last word. we cannot let this decision be the last word. while the court can render a decision, it cannot change what

america stands for. >> he also said this is not a normal court, but later restated that saying this court has done more to unravel basic rights and basic decisions than any court in recent history that said, the ruling leaves two back doors. one, it does not apply to military academies. and two, admissions offices can consider race as mentioned in application essays, something that justice sonia sotomayor in her dissent called a false promise to save face, in her words. no one is fooled. cnn was in the room where this opinion was read and where tensions between some of the justices appeared quite high. and joan joins us now. what was it like to be in the room, joan, and what did you notice there? >> good evening, john. everything you just laid out was not unexpected, given how conservative this court has gone and given the priority of chief justice john roberts.

but yet in the room in those 50 minutes of high drama, you could really feel history being made, because of how they all laid it out. and john, i think you know that for the past four years, the justices have not taken the bench to announce decisions. so just seeing them and hearing them today with their oral dissent from the bench included was quite staggering. first chief justice john roberts says directly that these policies have to be rolled back exactly for the reason you just mentioned earlier, john, that the equal protection guarantee does not allow colleges and universities to classify students by race. chief justice john roberts used the word pernicious. he said the time had come to end them, and he brushed aside past supreme court rulings saying that the time had come to let them dissolve. then justice clarence thomas, who started his statement by

saying i rarely do this. i rarely speak aloud my separate opinion here. he started off right away complaining about the fate of asian american students who could be excluded based on these practices that have tended over history to favor blacks and hispanic students. and it's so interesting since clarence thomas of course is black. he is only the second african american who has ever sat on the supreme court. but he has always felt that the constitution is, quote, color-blind and that the equal protection clause does not allow any kind of benefit as well as harm from these programs. and finally, probably the most dramatic reading came from justice sonia sotomayor, the first hispanic on the court, who said this decision is profoundly disturbing. it's going to roll back so much progress in america. and her bottom line message, john, was race still matters,

and the court was turning a blind eye to that. >> were they looking at each other? could you feel the tension that was so evident in the back and forth in the writing? >> that's so interesting, because i'm watching all of them. i had a front row seat to see what they're doing. and justice ketanji brown jackson, the very first african american woman on the court who, you know, really lost in this dispute is looking out at spectators, tense, stone-faced, but not looking at her colleagues, trying apparently to betray any emotion. justice sotomayor incorporated some of her thoughts into her dissent from the bench, but justice jackson said nothing, looked straight ahead. now some of the other justices watched the chief and justice thomas as they read, looking over. but you could have heard a pin drop in that room, john, during, as i said, the nearly hour of reading. >> a witness to history once

again. thank you for sharing those moments with us. with us now, cnn's laura coates and van jones. and with me here, kenji oshino. justice warren wrote the unanimous opinion in brown versus board of education. van, i just want to start with you. obviously an historic day. what is your reaction to the ruling? >> look, i was born in 1968. this was the year they killed dr. king, and the year they killed bobby kennedy. apparently -- i'm the first person in my family that was born with all my rights. i'm the first person in my family that was born with a right to vote. apparently one generation is enough. after 400 years of brutality, of lynching, of discrimination, of overt discrimination, one generation of trying to at least get the kids together on the campuses is enough. it's too much for the supreme court. the supreme court seems like it's living on a different planet from the communities that i work in. these kids are doing all they

can to try to figure out a way to get ahead. and door after door gets closed on them. and the supreme court seems to be acting more like a super legislature that is shutting the door now on women's rights, on the rights of people of color. probably tomorrow on lesbian and gay rights. something is really wrong here. if you care about this country, if you care about democracy, the supreme court is supposed to be playing a role that respects precedent, that has some relationship to what's actually happening, and that's not happening here. look, if you're an asian parent tonight, you might breathe a little bit of a sigh of relief. we have to acknowledge that some asian parents have felt their kids have to be three or four times as good. i understand their pain. but to pit asian kids against black and brown kids when so many kids at campuses like yale where i went to, princeton where i taught, half the white kids are there because of legacy. they're there because their granddaddy was there. my granddaddy couldn't be there. to pit black and brown kids against asian kids is wrong.

if you want to knock down the doors of unfairness, start with more than half the white kids are there because their families were there in the past. our families couldn't have gotten there in the past and maybe now not in the future. >> when chief justice writes that race at harvard and unc was being used as a negative and as a stereotype, what's your reaction to that? >> first of all, as a yalie, leave it to harvard to screw it up for the rest of us. just because that program wasn't perfectly designed, they used that program deliberately. they picked it to knock down every other program in the country forever, in other countries where policies and other campuses were using other approaches. this is not just the wheels of justice. this was a deliberate strategy by a group of people who went forum shopping. they picked the perfect plaintiff. they picked the perfect program to knock down everything for everyone. and that's what's going on here. >> laura, richard collenburg, a

liberal georgetown professor, we had him on earlier with you, he spent decades studying this issue. and he says if colleges and universities factor things like where you grew up, your zip code, your family's wealth, class, socio-economic factors, that they may end up with as much or more he says racial diversity than the system that's been in place. do you buy that? a. and b, if there is as effective a way to diversify, could it be utilized? should it be utilized? >> well, his commentary revolves around the notion that race actually has a role in so many of our socio-economic tack or thes about geographical location, opportunities. because race has been so interwoven in all of the things he outlined, it would hold true that considering each of those factors would have an impact on diversification with race as one component. it's important to keep in mind here, i've heard a lot of things

today on packing and i'm parsing through what this opinion does. let's begin with the bare basics here. affirmative action does not begin with the premise that one is not qualified and then race makes them qualified. it begins with the premise of people who were otherwise qualified in all the varieties that are subjectively considered by admissions policy and process, and then race is part of a wholistic part of the conversation. similar to whether you're a cellist, whether you're an athlete, whether you're a legacy, whether you are a veteran. what you would bring whole listlist cally, what we want our students to learn and not to be centered about. so keep in mind that factor. and now where we are today. now they're saying that race cannot be used, but, and there is a bit of a caveat here, and the caveat is perhaps the most confusing for admissions officers across the country, and that is you cannot consider race

as a part of a factor or part of the wholistic discussion about a student, but if a student should choose to discuss their identity, their lived experience, their actual race and perhaps an admissions essay, well, then they are able to consider that. how does this quagmire work? would an emissions officer have to say hold on a second, they've talked about race or their personal experience. am i now forbidden because of what the supreme court had to say? that's apparently why the administration as spoken out about having some type of standards to use as a guide for different educators and admissions officers. but it does really open a kind of pandora's box, particularly with a footnote about the military when we know there is a correlation between the officers' ranks and that which goes to a university or college setting. and so there are a whole lot of issues here that are now going to be front and center, which will likely lead to further

litigation, but mostly, this notion of the dynamic, the hypocrisy to some, and the just overarching uncertainty of how this could be enforced, implemented and followed. >> professor, let me read the citation that laura was talking about there from the chief justice who wrote nothing in this opinion should be construed from universities from considering an applicant's discussion of how race affected his or her life be it through discrimination, inspiration, otherwise. a student must be treated based on her experiences as an individual, not on the basis of race. so that's how race can play into the admissions process, yet any sense of how that would work and what now colleges and universities will do with this issue? >> yeah, absolutely. i think it's a really big loophole. so don't get me wrong. i think this is a hugely momentous decision. but that quote that you just read i think suggests how applicants can still get their race on the table and have it

considered. so this goes all the way back to the oral argument when the council for the sffa challenging the affirmative action program was asked what if somebody wrote on their essay that they overcame an experience of racial adversity? and the council said that would be totally fine because that would go to the individual's character rather than to simple membership in the group. and chief justice roberts in his opinion gave that, and that creates a big avenue. when you think about what every university is going to do, they're all going to ask have you had any adversity in your life you would like to bring before the committee? savvy applicants will write i had this experience overcoming racial adversity and universities will be able to take this into account. >> is this the last time we'll see the issue of affirmative action before the court? >> this is just the very, very beginning of it. because even the kalenburg stuff you were mentioning earlier, i gave you some good news from the perspective of universities. the bad news is a lot of people say you can pivot to

socio-economic status or first gen. but the chief justice said you're not allowed to do through the back door what you can't do through the front door. so he created the loophole, but if you were to adopt a first gen program or a top ten texas-like program for the purpose of boosting racial diversity, that could be deemed to be a pretext on the part of the university and could be challenged in the court on that ground. there is already a case in the first circuit that is perking on this. and clearly whether or not the court will pick that up next term, they may want to stay away from this in a while. these cases are going to come thick and fast now. >> watch this space. thank you so much for being with us. laura and van, thank you so much as well. next, we do have breaking news. what we've been learning since the arrest in the washington neighborhood where the obamas live of a heavily armed man who also allegedly had the makings of a molotov cocktail. also, someone talking to jack smith's team, someone who was close to him, close to january 6th.

later, new reporting on document. s suggesting one of russia's top generals was a vip of the mercenary group who tried to march on moscow. we asked him about it, but he hasn't been seen since. when i was diagnosed with h-i-v, i didn't know who i would be. but here i am... being me. keep being you... and ask your hlthcare provider about the number one prescribed h-i-v treat. biktarvys a complete, one-pill once-a-day treatment used for h-i-v in many people whether you're 18 or 80. with one small pill, biktarvy fights h-i-v to help you get to undetectable—and stay there whether you're just starting or replacing your current treatment. research shows that taking h-i-v treatment as prescribed and getting to and staying undetectable prevents transmitting h-i-v through sex. serious side effects can occur, including kidney problems and kidney failure. rare, life-threatening side effects include a buildup of lactic acid and liver problems.

do not take biktarvy if you take dofetilide or rifampin. tell your healthcare provider about all the medicines and supplements you take, if you are pregnant or breastfeeding, or if you have kidney or liver problems, including hepatitis. if you have hepatitis b do not stop taking biktarvy without talking to your healthcare provider. common side effects were diarrhea, nausea, and headache. no matter where life takes you, biktarvy can go with you. talk to your healthcare provider today.

all right. the breaking news tonight brings a chill. word that a heavily armed man, also with materials to make a molotov cocktail, and wanted in connection with january 6th was arrested at a washington neighborhood best known today

for where former president obama and his family live. cnn's john miller shares the byline on this one. he has been working his sources until three seconds ago on the phone while i was talking here. john, what you learning right now? >> so we're learning that the individual, taylor toronto, is somebody who was on the radar, first from the january 6th case, but then live streaming at various locations in washington. and according to the u.s. capitol police, these live streams included numerous threats to members of congress and other government officials. so they put out a be on the lookout flyer, you know, for police, d.c. metro police, secret service uniformed division, and secret service uniformed division while on patrol in kalorama, which is the neighborhood where the obamas live now, spotted the individual, identified him, stopped him. he was not far from the van, which apparently he has also been living out of since he has been in washington, it appears.

they looked in the van. they called for their bomb squad people. washington metro's eod came. and what they found was the materials to make molotov cocktails, numerous empty bottles, rags, fuel, weapons, firearms. so he is taken into custody for investigation based on the threats to members of congress. that was from the capital police. the case now goes to the joint terrorism task force to figure out what were the molotov cocktails for. why was he in the neighborhood that is filled with embassies, dignitaries and a former president of the united states? and did any of these threats that he made online cross the line from first amendment protected speech into threatening government officials over interstate commerce. >> obviously, the neighborhood does stand out of where he was there. he was taken into custody based on the threats to members of congress? >> right. and this is where the concern

emerged for the u.s. capitol police, which is we've got a guy in washington who is making threatening statements to various elected officials. we need to locate this individual and deal with the threatening language, but also investigate what else is behind it. of course, when they do that, and they find a vehicle with weapons and the precursors to put together incendiary devices, that's of concern. >> but they don't know why he was there just yet. >> and here is the key. there are no papers or manifestos that mentioned former president obama or anything that contained his address or threats to him directly. this is simply because the secret service uniformed division is on patrol in that area, and they spotted him, and there is a proximity to the residents. >> thank you. we'll let you get back on the phone right now again and find out more. thank you so much, john miller. also. also a major development as well in the larger january 6th case. special counsel jack smith has a new cooperator. this one a former senior trump campaign official.

cnn's kaitlan collins, who's got some work to do later tonight, joins us now with the breaking news. so kaitlan, what have you learned? >> my colleague zach cohen and i have now learned that michael roman, who is not a household name, but he was a campaign official on the trump 2020 campaign is now cooperating with prosecutors from jack smith's team, not the team that is investigating the documents investigation, which of course we've seen playing out in miami. this is the one into january 6th and the efforts by trump and his allies to overturn the election results. and why it matters that mike roman is now cooperating is he may not have to appear before the grand jury in a formal way. he did get a subpoena earlier this year. they did seize his phone a few months ago. so two notable factors there obviously. he could speak to them in a more informal setting. it's notable because he is someone involved with a fake elector scheme. that is what jack smith's team has been zeroing in on in recent weeks, people they've brought

before the grand jury. that is something that they've been talking about. and this campaign aide is someone who was part of the coordination effort with advisers from for the campaign, attorneys for the campaign, and these seven states that trump lost where they were trying to develop this alternate set of electors. it remains to be seen what his cooperation would mean, what he could offer to jack smith's team. but it is noticeable as we've seen. we've all been talking about the documents case. there has been quite an uptick in activity when it comes to the january 6th case, raising the question of whether or not we could see indictments soon. >> right. cooperating witness in the january 6th case. it seems perhaps in the area of fake electors. what happened with mike roman, the january 6th committee wanted to talk to him, yes? >> and he was someone who plead the fifth for a lot of it. he did make some comments to them. they asked about rudy giuliani a lot. that rudy giuliani is someone they've asked a lot about in a lot of these interviews, as well as a lot of attorneys you saw on tv at the time. he is someone who said he would speak about how he did not talk

to rudy giuliani before the 2020 election. but when he was asked to speaking about giuliani after the 2020 election, he used his fifth amendment rights. >> that's interesting. a selective pleading the fifth on certain things. one you do and one you don't. >> right. >> stick around. we're going to want your take on some other big angles here. the first being a significant development, as you just touched on a moment ago, the documents case. according to a source familiar with the matter, it involves a current senior campaign official susie wiles. what the former president allegedly showed her, and just how frequently she has been talking to the feds. cnn's paula reid joins us now with the latest on that. paula, susie wiles, explain how important she is in this and what she allegedly saw. >> let's go back to the indictment. one of the most striking details in this indictment was this allegation that the former president had shown a representative from his political action committee, a classified map. that's shocking for many reasons. one of course is that he would show someone without a clearance

a classified document. but also that this was someone close to him in his inner circle. and it raised questions about whether this person could have turned on him given the information to investigators. a source tells cnn, and kaitlan worked on the story along with kristen holmes and sara murray that this representative is susie wiles. she is one of his closest aides. she is effectively running his presidential campaign, his third run for the white house. but according to our reporting, it's unclear if she is the one that revealed this information to investigators. we are told that the trump camp was blind sided by this news. and as of now, there are no plans for her to step back from her role in the campaign. >> is it possible that she could be asked to testify in a trial? >> it's certainly possible. we know she was interviewed multiple times by special counsel investigators. and we know during those interviews, she was asked if she was ever shown this map, or other documents related to, for example, general mark milley.

but what we don't know is how she answered those questions. it is unclear if they learned about this incident from her or some other way. either other evidence or another witness. certainly possible she could testify at trial. but unclear exactly what her story would be. >> all right. you also have some new reporting on the mar-a-lago grand jury, that it is still active. what more can you tell us about that? >> that's right. it's alive. our colleague katelyn polantz reports they are still working down in florida investigating. it's not unheard of for a grand jury to continue its work even after an initial set of charges has been brought. we know from our team's reporting that there were a lot of loose ends, things that we new investigators were asking about, but that didn't show up in the indictment. for example, questions about possible gaps and surveillance footage. also, a lot of outstanding questions about these classified documents when they were up in bedminster, new jersey. at this point, it's unclear if this grand jury will bring any additional charges, either

against other people or against the former president or walt nauta through a superseding indictment. but they're still at it. >> all right. paula reid, thank you very much. back now, kaitlan collins and elie honig. guys, first of all, a lot of new information all at once. can you comment, elie on kaitlan's reporting now? there is someone now working as a cooperating witness which is a term i know you know in the january 6th case. what does that tell you? is that indicative of how serious they are? >> it is. a couple of things jump out to me about the recording, first of all there is a hard way to cooperate and an easy. this the easy way, this is what we call a proffer agreement. you're going to agree to meet with prosecutors and fbi agents in a conference room. you have to tell them the truth. the only thing you can be prosecuted for if you commit perjury. the other thing, this focus on the fake elects or the scheme. you're talking about a very broad scope of conduct. some of it could get into first

amendment issues. was the president engaged in political rhetoric? but the fake elector scheme to me is the cleanest shot that prosecutors have. the argument really would be fraud essentially. you're committing a fraud by saying these people were the electors. i think it moves the ball forward on those two counts. >> all right. moving on to the susie wiles, i want investigators to understand who she is and how important she is politically in this campaign. >> she might be important to you because she is pat's daughter. >> the famous football player and commentator. >> she is a huge political figure in florida. she helped trump in his past victories there in the state. she is someone who used to be pretty close to governor desantis, but they had quite a falling out. and now she is working for trump and his campaign. she is effectively running it. she is a senior adviser. she is very close. and the reason this makes it interesting is not only is she is representative who is noted in the filing as the political action committee representative that trump showed this

classified map of a military site to, but she works with him on a day-to-day basis. >> that's my question, which is elie, in theory, she would be one of the people helping trump politically message the fact that he is under federal indictment, yet she could be a witness in the federal trial. >> it's awkward in every sense of that phrase. friends sometimes have to testify against friends. there is this i guess conception that if someone takes the stand, they've got it out for you. really, the best witness from a prosecution point of view, this person is in league with the defendant. this person has no allegiance towards us, no incentive to try to falsely incriminate the person on trial. if anything, it makes that person, if they tell the truth, even even more powerful witness. >> but on theory, this is a person on top of the list of people you cannot talk to about the case. >> there is a judge's order you cannot about the case. i'm sure the argument will be i'm not talking to her about the case. i'm talking politics.

hard to police that. >> how did the trump team take this? >> i don't think a lot of people understood that she was the person who was identified as the person that he showed the map to. there are questions who it could be. there weren't a ton of people they thought could be eligible candidates. i think some people are surprised that it's her. there is not a ton of visibility into what was known and what was not known. i think when we talk about this recording that we've all heard now, very few people even knew about that. so it's not clear there is a small circle of top political advisers and attorneys who are really kept in the loop on the day to day stuff. most other people aren't. to elie's point, pretty much everyone on that 84-person list of witnesses that was submitted to the trump team are people who work all around him when he is either in new jersey or mar-a-lago. these are people in everyday pass sets of that form. >> so the grand jury is still hearing from witnesses, elie. what does that tell you? and what complications might it cause were the special counsel to want to bring additional

charges? >> so the obvious top line is the investigation is continuing. i want to add a nuance. it is generally considered good prosecutorial process that once you've indicted a case, you can not keep going back to that grand jury to flesh out the charges that you've already brought against the people you've already charged. you've lost the grand jury for that purpose. so if they're continuing to use a grand jury, again, if they're following good practice, and they have been so far, that tells me they're looking at either additional people or additional charges. if they do bring what we call a superseding indictment, basically indictment 2.0. and if they do add people or charges, we don't know, but if they do, one of the practical consequences is they're going to reset the clock here. and they're already in a bit of a race to get in ahead of the 2024 election. i'm not sure they'll be able to do. so we have a tentative potential trial date of december. but if they do bring additional charges, that's going to basically set the clock back to zero and may eliminate any chance of getting this in before november. >> elie hoenig, kaitlan collins, our thanks to you. you have 28 minutes to get ready for your next show.

thanks for being here now. she'll be on cnn prime time talking with alex padilla about the supreme court ruling today on affirmative action, which is what we will return to next with a focus on how that policy affected students in padilla's home state of california. it ended the practice for its public universities more than 25 years ago. i am here because they revolutionized immunotherapy.

i am here because they saw how cancer adapts to different oxygen levels and starved it. i am here because they switched off egfr gene mutation and stopped the growth of tumor cells. there's a place that's making one advanced cancer discovery after another for 75 years. i am here... i am here.... because of dana-farber. what we do here changes lives everywhere. i am here.

so, you've got the power of xfinity at home. now take it outside with xfinity mobile. like speed? it's the fastest mobile service around. with the best price for two lines of unlimited. only $30 bucks a line per month. that's hundreds in savings a year when you wave bye to the other guys. save hundreds a year on your wireless bill over t-mobile, at&t and verizon. and right now, get up to $1000 off select samsung phones. switch today.

we want to talk more about tonight about the major shift in how universities will admit students after the 6-3 supreme court decision ending affirmative action in college admissions. earlier we talked about how california ended the practice for its public schools more than 25 years ago. it was the first state the do so. kyung lah has more on what that experience could mean for the rest of the nation. >> reporter: harvard, yale, columbia. the rejection letters that ended his dream. >> i'm a straight a student, 4.0 gpa, 4.6 weighted gpa. >> did you get into ivy league schools? >> i did not. >> reporter: that was zo when we met him two years ago. this is where we found him today, soon to be a junior at ucla. >> i think eliminating race in

consideration would definitely be a lot fairer? >> and help you? >> yes, in some sense it would help me. >> reporter: zo says he was accepted to every university of california school in the state that banned affirmative action in 1996. what's happened here in california could signal the future for u.s. colleges without affirmative action. ucla professor eddie cole says the impact was immediate. >> as soon as that went into effect you saw at places like berkeley and ucla, the black student enrollment among incoming freshmen dropped dramatically. >> reporter: by more than half at those schools. across the uc system, black and latino enrollment fell sharply the next year without affirmative action. but in the decades to follow, the uc system still took a progressive approach to improve the numbers to mid-90s levels, though black student enrollment still lags at uc berkeley, and ucla ontario regionally returned to mid-'90s level.

>> if this decision is made in 1996, and nearly three decades later to say the numbers have finally improved with the exception of berkeley, imagine what this is going to look like on the national level. you have to think about the legacy and impact across racial groups and why there are disparities decade after decade despite policies. >> i could easily walk to classroom and feel like i'm someone who doesn't belong here, when that's not the truth, right. >> reporter: in nia mcclinton graduated from ucla two years ago and now works in black student outreach. without such outreach and funding, sees this. do you feel like a lot of doors were closed for black students in this country? >> i'm worried that they will. so it's important to reach out and say this is something that is attainable for you. >> reporter: wesley zhou will soon be applying for medical school. he still believes affirmative action doesn't help him, but doesn't see the impact beyond his own academic life. >> i will say this, right. a fear of action will harm asian

americans, but without it will harm all minorities in the understand. >>. that's where i stand right now. >> kyung lah joins us now. california voters rejected that would have repealed a law that prevents public universities from considering race in admissions. what was the discussion then. why did it fail? >> really fascinating because you think california is such a progressive state. but, you know, if you talk to the people who are behind this proposal in 2020, they'll say maybe voters didn't quite understand, that the money spent in voter outreach and education may not have been enough, and that the ballot, frankly, has a lot of these proposition. it is pages long. that could have been a factor. but in talking to professor cole that you saw in our story all this amounts to really a missed opportunity. california, in his opinion, is simply not as progressive as the rest of the country. yes, there are san francisco and los angeles, but this is a big diverse state. and one other thing, john, there

is a rising population in this state, one that increasingly votes and very divided on the issue of affirmative action. john? >> kyung lah, thank you so much for that report. coming up, cnn has exclusively obtained documents about a russian general who has not been seen in public since saturday's failed revolt. they suggest he was far closer to the mercenary wagner group than than previously known. our matthew chance is in moscow tonight and will join us with the details. i see irritated gums and weak enamel. sensodyne sensitivity gum & enamel relieves sensitivity, helps restore gum health, and rerdens enamel. i'm a big advocatef recommending things tha.

was also the first time your profits left you speechless. at the counter or on the go, save 20% with the lowest transaction fees and keep more of what you make. start saving today at godaddy.com to see my ancestors' photos was just breathtaking. wow, look at all those! what'd you find? lorraine banks, look, county of macomb, michigan? oh my goodness... this whole journey has been such a huge gift for our family. ♪♪ alex! mateo, hey how's business? great. you know that loan has really worked wonders.

that's what u.s. bank is for. and you're growing in california? -yup, socal, norcal... -monterey? -all day. -a branch in ventura? that's for sure-ah. atms in fresno? fres-yes. encinitas? yes, indeed-us. anaheim? big time. more guacamole? i'm on a roll-ay. how about you? i'm just visiting. u.s. bank. ranked #1 in customer satisfaction with retail banking in california by j.d. power.

cnn has exclusively obtained documents that suggest a top russian general, sergei surovikin, who has not been seen in public since last saturday's short-lived revolt was a secret vip member of the mercenary wagner group that led the rebellion. cnn's matthew chance joins us now from moscow for more on the man nicknamed general armageddon for his ruthless tactics. matthew, these documents, what do they tell us about general surovikin? >> well, they're pretty interesting, because they suggest, or they tell us, or they show according to the dossier zehr, which is a russian investigative organization that obtained these documents and then showed them exclusively to us, they show that there is a registration document for general surovikin that assigns

him a wagner sort of membership number, i suppose. that membership number then appears in various other lists of people who belong to the wagner mercenary organization. it's a vip member. it doesn't sort of indicate to us what vip status actually means, whether that means he is on the payroll, if there is any other kind of financial payment, any evidence of that. it does strongly imply that there is a very, very close relationship between this general and the mercenary organization that carried out that attempted military, you know, rebellion at the weekend. and of course it's not just general surovikin. the dossier center says there are about 30 other senior military and intelligence officials from russia who are also on that list and designated as vip members of wagner.

it's interesting because, you know, it was obviously the military that is accused of allowing wagner to get so far without resisting it in that military rebellion last weekend. >> what do we know about general surovikin's whereabouts? >> well, i mean, he's not been around. and one possibility of that, and it's been suggested by some media outlets, although we can't confirm it, that he's been detained for questioning. certainly it's been over five days now since general surovikin appeared in public, and that was when he was issuing an appeal, like a hostage video frankly. but he was sitting there looking very pressured, appealing to wagner not to continue with their military uprising. since then, he hasn't been seen.

there have been reports in "the new york times" in particular suggesting that general surovikin knew in advance about wagner's plans to stage this military uprising. and all that, along with these latest revelations about his close contacts and membership even of wagner has, you know, fueled suspicion that he could some way be implicated. but, again, the kremlin are not commenting on where he is, and it's not clear at this point when he will reemerge. >> matthew, as always. thank you so much for your reporting. all right. perspective now from cnn national security analyst steve hall, a former cia chief of russia operations. steve, a document with a whole lot of names, including general surovikin's on it as some kind of vip member of wagner, if you're the kremlin security forces right now, what are you doing with this list? >> well, first, i'd love to know

who is blurred out on that list. that would be fabulous to know. obviously surovikin is on the list and the svb and other security services will be focusing on him. i think it's worth stepping back and looking at context. we're not going to do a whole russian history thing, but go back to stalin's time when he did the great terror. when he thought there was stuff going on around him, he killed everybody. literally almost everybody, innocents, those plotting against him, it didn't matter. fast forward to 2023, a guy who was a very successful oligarch, not unlike prigozhin, who overstepped his bounds, became political, spent ten years in jail and was exiled. putin knows how to do this. he has the tools to do it. he puts nerve agents in people's underwear. he shoots people in parks overseas. he has the -- i think he enjoys doing it. so he knows how to do this. the big question is why did he not do it here? and i think what the real reason is ukraine. he is so -- he is in such trouble with ukraine that you've

got all the security services that you're referring to primarily at the speed which has significant wartime responsibilities, everything is focused on how badly it's going in ukraine. so focused as a matter of fact, that apparently he failed to do what stalin and even he himself 20 years ago knows very well how to do. the ukrainians should be very pleased about this. and everybody surrounding putin should be worried. >> are you saying he couldn't do a purge? and again, it was the soviets who made the phrase famous, he couldn't do a purge now if he wouldn't. >> he absolutely could. i expected we're going to see something like that. that might be why we can't find general surovikin at why ente prigozhin went to belarus. behind the scenes there is lots going on sort of like stalin's time, people trying to figure out am i next? >> is that why we don't see

surovikin or prigozhin to leave that sense of mystery, danger even? >> yeah, i think there is a lot of that double, triple think where one guy thinks he might be next, but it turns out that was simply a ruse to cause him to talk about the guy sitting next to him. it's just amazing the level of, you know, byzantine politics that go on behind the scenes. that's the way it's always been in russia, soviet times, czarist times and putin time as well. >> dangerous times. steve hall, thank you so much for helping us understand them. >> sure. >> so how much of the titan submersible has been recovered from the sea floor, and where the investigation stands now as they try to determine why it imploded, killing five deep sea explorers as they descended to the "titanic" wreckage. we have a live report from canada, next. zed by ai. so r researchers can help life underwater flourish. ♪

oh booking.com,

♪ i'm going to somewhere, anywhere. ♪ ♪ a beach house, a treehouse, ♪ ♪ honestly i don't care ♪ find the perfect vacation rental for you booking.com, booking. yeah.

the company that helped retrieve the titan submersible from the ocean floor will hold a news conference tomorrow. the team has been working to bring the sub parts to shore. they also found, quote, presumed human remains of the five men who were killed when the u.s. coast guard says the titan

suffered a catastrophic implosion on its way to the titanic wreck. cnn's paula newton is with us from canada tonight. paula, what more can you tell us about where exactly these human remains were found? >> given five lives were lost, this is difficult for the family, i'm sure. but also a measure of comfort in knowing that those with the u.s. coast guard are presumed human remains were found within the cabin inside that wreckage site. experts will tell you that this is consistent with a catastrophic implosion, as opposed to explosion. this is good for the investigation, in the sense that it will more materially give information about what happened in those last moments before the five lost their lives and what exactly the timeline would have been. and i add to that that here in ottawa, the transportation safety board released a statement also saying that it had the data recorder from the polar prince. john, you'll remember the "polar

prince" is the mother ship to the titan. it will add valuable information as to what went wrong when, and crucially, why this submersible never rose to the surface, as it had fairly good safety record in term of surfacing when communication went down. john? >> at this point, how much of the sub has been recovered? >> an extraordinary amount. you can see the pictures that people in st. john's saw from their windows and yet they saw this recovery team bring up very large pieces. you can see that they are very large. in fact, one, you know, the height of what we are looking at, the actual cabin height. you can also see another piece that had cables and cords. this, again, will add to the investigation and add to the accuracy of the investigation, both here in canada and in the united states. u.s. coast guard are saying their principle concern is for safety. but after that, on both sides of the border, john, there could still be a criminal

investigation. and given all of those pieces of the wreckage that you see there, this is crucial in terms of determining exactly what went wrong and if it was that carbon fiber of that submersible titan was made of that was the problem, or something else entirely. >> paula newton, thank you very much. up next, a verdict in the trial of the former school resource officer who failed to confront the parkland mass shooter, and the defendant's emotional reaction. before your asthma got in the way? get back to the things you lolove... with fasenra. fasenra is an add-on treatatment for eosinophilic asthma. having too many eosinophils, a type of white blooood cell, can cause inflammation and asthma symptoms. fasenra is designed to target and remove eosinophils and helps prevent asthma attacks. fasenra is 1 dose every 8 weeks. fasenra can help patients to breathe better. most patients did not have an asthma attack in the first year. and fasenra helps lower the use of oral steroids. fasenra is not for sudden breathing problems or other eosinophilic conditions.

allergic reactions may occur. don't stop your asthma treatments without talking with your doctor. tell your doctor if your asthma worsens. headache and sore throat may occur. tell your doctor if you have a parasitic infection. get back to better breathing. and get back to your life. ask your doctor about fasenra. if you can't afford your medication, astrazeneca may be able to help. my a1c was up here; now, it's down with rybelsus®. his a1c? my doctor told me rybelsus® it's down with rybelsus®. lowered a1c bett than a leading branded pill and that people taking rybelsus® lost more weight. i got to my a1c goal and lost some weight too. rybelsus® isn't for people with type 1 diabetes. don't take rybelsus® if you or your family ever had medullary thyroid cancer, or have multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if allergic to it. stop rybelsus® and get medical help right away if you get a lump or swelling in your neck,

severe stomach pain, or an allergic reaction. serious side effects may include pancreatitis. gallbladder problems may occur. tell your provider about vision problems or changes. taking rybelsus® with a sulfonylurea or insulin increases low blood sugar risk. side effects like nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea may lead to dehydration, which may worsen kidney problems. need to get your a1c down? you may pay as little as $10 per prescription.

a florida jury has found a former school resource officer not guilty on all counts for failing to protect students when a gunman opened fire at marjory stoneman douglas high school in 2018. scot peterson wept in court. he faced child neglect and culpable negligence. peterson stayed outside during the massacre. prosecutors accused him of ignoring the massacre and doing nothing. this is what he told reporters after the verdict. >> i got my life back. we've got our life back af fter four and a half years. >> five and a half. >> it's been an emotional roller

coaster for so long. but don't anybody ever forget this was a massacre on february 14th. the only person to blame was that monster. >> a father of one of the victims is outraged by peterson's comments after the verdict. >> i think that the right thing to do, the manly thing to do, the honest thing to do, is to walk out of that room quiet. be quiet, tory and scot peterson. keep your mouth shut, get in your car, and go to your perfect life. but don't cry in front of national tv. >> a wrenching day and a meaningful one to so many people. the news continues. "cnn primetime" with kaitlan "cnn primetime" with kaitlan collins starts right now. -- captions by vitac -- www.vitac.com