[Natalie Allen, Cnn:] Syria pledges to exterminate the Jihadist group Al-Nusra in Idlib as a final showdown for the province looms. And the U.N. warms a humanitarian crisis maybe in the making.
[George Howell, Cnn:] An uncertain future. Embattled U.S. attorney general Jeff Sessions is hanging on despite some of the harshest criticism yet from his boss.
[Allen:] And yet, another star faces allegations of sexual assault. This time, it is French actor Gerard Depardieu. We are live in Paris with more about that.
[Howell:] And live from CNN world headquarters Atlanta, welcome to our viewers around the world. I'm George Howell.
[Allen:] I'm Natalie Allen, and this is CNN Newsroom.
[Howell:] And we begin this hour with the war in Syria where a final offensive on the city of Idlib it appears to be imminent. Idlib is the country's last major rebel stronghold and Russian and government troops are amassing their forces. Here's what Syria's top diplomat said in Moscow on Thursday. Listen.
[Walid Muallem, Syrian Foreign Minister:] The decision of Syrian authorities is to exterminate Al-Nusra in Idlib and we will go all the way. We say that the priority is to consolidate with any local groups that wish to do so. We will exert all efforts to avoid civilian casualties.
[Allen:] The U.S. isn't buying it. Some three million people live in Idlib province, and there are fears civilians will again be slaughtered. The U.S. says Damascus might even use chemical weapons. Russia says actually it's U.S.-backed groups planning a chemical strike. Let's go now to CNN's Fred Pleitgen. He is covering this for us from Moscow. What is the back-and-forth over chemical weapons, Fred, and why in the world would chemical weapons be used here at the end of this war?
[Frederik Pleitgen, Cnn Senior International Correspondent:] Yes. I mean why is certainly a question that I don't think any of these big, big players in the Syria conflict, Natalie, have been able to answer or really want to answer. One of the things that the Russians are saying is they believe that there are groups in Idlib province that have already begun, as the Russians say, bringing chemicals into that area. The Russians are saying they believe that these groups want to stage what they call false flag attacks to try and get the Americans or to draw the Americans into this conflict and possibly attack the Assad government. Now, the Russians are saying that to a certain extent is already happening. It's been very interesting to see the messaging coming out of Moscow over the past couple of days, really over the past couple of weeks where they keep saying an attack might be imminent. They have evidence this is going on. They now say that they've already gone to the Organization for the Prevention of Chemical Weapons and prevented them with evidence as well. But you're also, of course absolutely right to point out the U.S. in no form buying that at all. They say that while America doesn't have evidence that the Assad government may be plotting chemical attacks, it is something that the U.S. fears could be done. And the U.S. says that there will be a response to this. So really you have the whole conflict about Idlib ratcheting up on two fronts essentially. On the one hand, you obviously have the imminent, possibly imminent attack in itself, which is something that of course the international community and the U.N. is very concerned about. But then you also have this I wouldn't call this a standoff between the U.S. and Russia, but certainly a ratcheting up of the rhetoric and a back and forth in this conflict of words between the U.S. and Russia and of what might be a very, very divisive battle coming up in Syria, Natalie.
[Allen:] Right. And these civilians that could be in harm's way, they just have nowhere to go. Is that it, Fred? They're surrounded?
[Pleitgen:] Yes. I mean, they're pretty much surrounded, and they can't get out to the north through Turkey at this point either. So essentially right now, the fate of these people, if you will, are essentially in the hands of five key players. It's obviously the groups that are on the ground in Idlib province and we have heard that there are still negotiations going on between them, the Turks, possibly the Russians and the Syrian government as well. And the Syrian government itself which has been amassing troops in that area. We heard before from the Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Muallem. And then you have the three key players in that area, which is Iran, Turkey, and Russia. Of course, first and foremost, Russia because it does hold many of the cards of what might happen next. And there's a summit set to take place in Iran on September 7th when all of these key powers the presidents of these nations, Putin, Erdogan, and Rouhani are going to get together and essentially try to hammer out some way forward for Idlib. How could an offensive there start before that? Certainly that is very possible. One of the things that the Russians pointed out yesterday is they're going to hold large scale naval and military exercises in the Mediterranean Sea, which means that the Russians will have more military hardware in that area than they do anyway. This morning, the Russians came out with another statement saying that there's going to be 26 warships in the area, and they also say strategic aviation will be there as well, Natalie.
[Allen:] It is such a horror to think about. Fred Pleitgen for us in Moscow. Fred, we thank you.
[Howell:] The United Nations special envoy for Syria says that Syria has the right to want rebels and terrorists out of Idlib, but not at the cost of a humanitarian disaster. Listen.
[Staffan De Mistura, U.s. Special Envoy For Syria:] No one, no one doubts, and I don't see anyone doubting, except themselves, perhaps, that Al-Nusra and Al Qaeda are terrorists and that terrorists identified by the U.N. need to be defeated. There is and it can't be no justification in order to fight rightfully terrorists to not avoid using heavy weapons in densely populated areas.
[Howell:] Let's talk more about this now with CNN military analyst General Mark Hertling. General Hertling, it's a pleasure to have you on the show. Look, this is impending. The Syrian army backed by Russia. The signs are clear of what's to come. Are you concerned about what we could see here? Devastation at the same level or worse than what happened in Aleppo.
[Mark Hertling, Cnn Military Analyst:] You know, I'm going to say worse, George. First of all, thanks for having me on. It is there have been several warnings conducted not only by the Russian foreign minister, Mr. Lavrov, but also by the Russian ambassador to the U.N. about what might happen, how they've been preparing the world for going along with the Assad regime and the Iranians to get rid of what is considered the last problem area, and that's Idlib. But I think we've got to remember too that this is kind of a fascinating trend line because over the last year, year and a half, other immigrants from other cities throughout Syria have been somewhat herded from one city to another in terms of migration, and Idlib is the last place they've gone. So while it is a hotbed of terrorism activity, both Al Qaeda and Al- Nusra and also you could include elements of ISIS in that, an estimated 10,000 or more terrorist fighters, you also have about three million or so citizens of that city and immigrants that have migrated to that city. Knowing the Russian and Syrian way of war, they don't seem to be really precise in their attacking of terrorists. So I think we're going to see continued barrel bombings, bombings of hospitals and schools, indiscriminate use of dumb bombs, and not a whole lot of attention paid to the safeguarding of citizens. I also think unfortunately we may see the use of chemical weapons again.
[Howell:] I want to talk more about chemical weapons in a moment. But first talking about the people, the civilians there in Idlib, the U.N. special envoy for Syria trying to avert what could ultimately lead to widespread massacre of civilians there, hoping to provide the safe passages for people to escape before any offensive on Idlib. The greater question here, we're talking millions of people here. Where would they go? How would they be treated?
[Hertling:] Yes.
[Howell:] And how would safety be ensured?
[Hertling:] Well, that's the key question, isn't it, because as they've evacuated other towns throughout Syria, as the Syrian and Russian armies have gone in, they have made corridors primarily to Idlib, believe it or not. This was the last refuge. And so as you said, the U.N. envoy, de Mistura has said he wants to go there, help create corridors, but the question is where would the migrants now flee to? They've had an unbelievable humanitarian crisis in that city. Thousands of tents put up by the U.N. and other refugee agencies. So you have millions of people who have migrated there already. So it's going to be problematic.
[Howell:] At this point, Turkey seems to be the only nation calling an attack on Idlib a red line, mainly due to what would be an inevitable refugee crisis on its borders. And western powers seem to be on the sidelines unless chemical weapons are used here. What are your thoughts about the west, the United States? Should the U.S. be on standby here, or should the U.S. get involved?
[Hertling:] You know, we've received warnings from the Russian foreign minister and the Russian U.N. ambassador. They have both said, we are going to conduct this operation. Getting involved would be a very poor move on the part of the west, and specifically pointed to the United States. And I think we have to point out too that the Russians have moved somewhere intelligence estimates say between 15 and 25 ships into the Mediterranean Sea. Some of those are cruisers, cruise missile shooters, submarines that could shoot cruise missiles, and anti-air defense measures. So, if chemical weapons are used and the U.S. or western forces are looking to do a retaliatory strike against Syria's forces for the use of those weapons, I think we're going to see some real challenges in terms of the deterrence given by the Russian forces. So that sets a whole other set of parameters on this whole issue, and at the same time you're going to see that humanitarian crisis it's not only going to just affect the region, George, but it's also going to potentially affect Europe with close to a couple million more immigrants fleeing that combat zone.
[Howell:] All right. CNN military analyst General Mark Hertling, thank you so much for your time and perspective today.
[Hertling:] All right. Thank you, George.
[Allen:] We will of course keep a close eye on Syria. Well, President Trump has a warning for his own Justice Department.
[Howell:] At a campaign rally in the state of Indiana, he said that what's happening in the department of the FBI, he said it's a disgrace, and if it doesn't get straightened out, the president said that he would get involved.
[Allen:] In an interview with Bloomberg News earlier in the day, the president called the Russia investigation illegal and blasted his attorney general for not investigating Hillary Clinton.
[Howell:] Our Jim Acosta reports the day started in true Trump fashion with a Twitter tirade. JIM ACOSTA, CNN SENIOR White House
[Correspondent:] President Trump is on a rant. His latest fixation, his outgoing White House counsel Don McGahn. In a morning tweet storm, the president insisted the rigged Russia witch hunt did not come into play even a little bit with respect to my decision on Don McGahn. Mr. Trump's complaints about the coverage of McGahn's departure comes one day after he claimed he wasn't worried about what his long time aide told special counsel Robert Mueller's team in the Russia probe.
[Acosta:] Any concern about what he said to the Mueller team?
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] Not at all. I knew he was going also, you know. I had to approve it.
[Acosta:] And you're aware of what he said?
[Trump:] No, I don't have to be aware. We have we do everything straight. We do everything by the book, and Don is an excellent guy.
[Acosta:] The president tried to knock down reports about McGahn's exit, tweeting, "I like Don, but he was not responsible for me not firing Bob Mueller or Jeff Sessions. And Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner had nothing to do with the so-called pushing out of Don McGahn.
[Trump:] We're doing record business.
[Acosta:] The president who is suddenly running low on West Wing lawyers during a critical time in the Russia probe is widely expected to tap White House attorney Emmet Flood to replace McGahn. One sign that the president is feeling the pressure, his attacks on the news media. Mr. Trump tweeted, "I just cannot state strongly enough how totally dishonest much of the media is and the other people."
[Trump:] This was an excuse.
[Acosta:] The president is falsely accusing NBC of fudging an interview with Mr. Trump from last year when he admitted that he fired former FBI director James Comey because of the Russia investigation.
[Trump:] In fact, when I decided to just do it, I said to myself, I said, you know, this Russia thing with Trump and Russia is a made-up story.
[Acosta:] The next firing for the president could be Attorney General Jeff Sessions. Not only is Mr. Trump discussing that prospect behind the scenes, his allies are talking up the idea.
[Sen. Lindsey Graham , South Carolina:] I think he wants an attorney general that he has a better working relationship with. I like Jeff Sessions. But I mean, how smart do you have to be to understand this, this is not working?
[Acosta:] Adding to the sense of angst, sources close to the White House tell CNN some of the president's advisers have explained to him that Democrats are champing at the bit to hold hearings and possibly impeachment proceedings should they win control of the House of Representatives in the midterms. Every news story is going to instigate a subpoena. It would be really miserable said one source. A perfect storm said another. But it seems Attorney General Jeff Sessions will be staying at his post at least for now. President Trump told Bloomberg News that Sessions won't be leaving the administration until at least the November midterm elections. Jim Acosta, CNN, the White House.
[Allen:] Much to sort through here. Peter Mathews is again with us. Political analyst and professor of political science at Cyprus College. He's in Long Beach, California. Peter, thank you as always for being with us. So the president continues to be on a tirade of sorts against his own Justice Department. Let's listen to what he just said.
[Trump:] But our Justice Department and our FBI have to start doing their job and doing it right and doing it now. And at some point I wanted to stay out, but at some point if it doesn't straighten out properly, I want them to do their job. I will get involved, and I'll get in there if I have to.
[Allen:] What's he talking about there, Peter, do you think?
[Peter Mathews, Professor Of Political Science, Cyprus College:] He wants them to lay off of the investigations on him, and it's just unconscionable because I've never heard a president talk so condescendingly and such dictatorial fashion to his own Justice Department and the FBI. It's very remarkable, Natalie, and I think he's very paranoid about what's going on with the Mueller investigation and what they're finding out and he wants to stop them one way or the other. He might even fire Jeff Sessions after the election. If he does that, I think it's going to have a lot of repercussions in a negative way because obstruction of justice is what he's facing in many ways. And if any kind of corrupt intent is established, that's a problem for him. I think Mr. McGahn was part of the interview process where he could have revealed information to Mr. Mueller that establishes corrupt intent to obstruct justice on the part of the president.
[Allen:] Yes. And you mentioned Mr. McGahn, his White House counsel, who spent 30 hours with the special counsel. What do you make of the announcement that he will be leaving?
[Mathews:] Isn't that crazy? I mean look at this. One after the other, and it looks more and more like the president is determined to get rid of people who in any way tell the truth about him and his campaign and what might have happened during the White House couple of years that could implicate the president. He wants to wipe them off the picture completely, and I think it's going to backfire on him. Certainly his hard core supporters will love it as they are. You saw at the rally in Indiana today. But the majority of Americans will not put up with this and they're going to hopefully influence Congress in the right way, and I think there's going to be an attempt to elect a Congress that will do the right thing and pursue investigations on this matter.
[Allen:] With Mr. Trump's former fixer cooperating, that's his attorney Michael Cohen, with the head of the National Enquirer, Mr. Trump's top financial official getting immunity here, what might happen next? What will you be watching for as this just continues to march on?
[Mathews:] I'll be waiting primarily till right after the election when I think Mr. Mueller will probably wrap up his inquiry and finally make a report and a judgment and then take it to Congress. And it will be up to Congress to decide whether or not to act on those accusations if they're there and true and valid. And then perhaps put Trump through impeachment and then finally removal. But for that you have to have enough members of Congress who will do the right thing regardless of party. Right now we know the Republican Party and the members in the House and Senate are in lockstep with each other and don't want to in any way do what Congress is supposed to do. So I'm looking for that. It will probably be after the election when we can really see what might break loose.
[Allen:] Yes. And meantime, we have the president going on the attack with that NBC tape that everyone has seen for months and months. Of course he always attacks the media. And his base loves him despite his baseless claims. Do you think that they will stick by this president no matter what he says and does? At some point will people start to break from him?
[Mathews:] I think the vast majority of his base, maybe even 95 percent will stick with him. But his base is fairly narrow. It's only about 35 percent solid support among the electorate. And it's still going to stay with him, I believe, all the way to the end. But there will be enough, 5 percent or 10 percent will peel away perhaps if something really egregious is revealed, like some sort of real not collusion but actual corrupt investigate corrupt action by the president might have had in the campaign with Russian help. If that becomes revealed completely, then he might see a larger chunk of his base pull away. But I think the vast majority will stick with him to the end. But we'll see. We know what happened to Richard Nixon. Many of his people that supported him left him toward the end as well.
[Allen:] All right. Peter Mathews, we always appreciate your analysis. Thank you for joining us.
[Mathews:] My pleasure, Natalie. Thank you.
[Howell:] Allegations of cover-up by of sexual abuse by priests is front and center for the Vatican. Now abuse survivors are demanding the U.S. government investigate.
[Allen:] Also the Catholic Church of Australia says it will not require priests to report child abuse if they learn about it during confessions. Why one top Catholic leader says it will not make children safer. We'll look into that as well, coming up here on CNN Newsroom.