Return to Transcripts main page

Legal View with Ashleigh Banfield

Former FBI Head on Rice Case; Rice Video Controversy, Boehner Reacts to Obama's ISIS Speech

Aired September 11, 2014 - 12:00   ET

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

MICHAELA PEREIRA, CNN ANCHOR: That's it for us @THIS HOUR. I'm Michaela Pereira.

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: I'm John Berman. "LEGAL VIEW" with Ashleigh Banfield starts now.

ASHLEIGH BANFIELD, CNN ANCHOR: The bombshells keep exploding in the Ray Rice scandal. The commissioner insists nobody in the NFL knew about the infamous elevator tape until Monday of this week. But did a league executive actually see his tape months ago? The NFL is promising to look into the report. But wait, now even the investigators are being investigated. Former FBI Director Robert Mueller called in to lead an independent inquiry, but people are already questioning his objectivity, pointing out his and his firm's friendly ties to the National Football League.

Also ahead, a new video obtained by CNN shedding new light in the Michael Brown shooting. Just wait until you see and hear these witnesses react when the fatal shots were fired in Ferguson, Missouri.

Hello, everyone. I'm Ashleigh Banfield. And welcome to LEGAL VIEW.

Look, we all want to believe Roger Goodell. The NFL commissioner says he didn't know about that damming Ray Rice videotape before this week. The alternative is that he's lying about what he knew and when he knew it and no one wants to believe that. The only problem is, Goodell's the one who hired the so-called independent investigator to get to the bottom of it all. He chose this man to gather evidence and pick through the league's records.

Robert Mueller, you know him as the former FBI -- or the director of the FBI. Not a bad resume, in fact, for an investigator. But is Robert Mueller coming to this potential disaster from a totally objective place? His law firm and the NFL go way back. Mueller is a partner in WilmerHale, the firm that helped the league negotiate its deal with DirecTV. His firm also represented the owner of the Washington Redskins. They helped Jerry Jones to buy the Dallas Cowboys as well. The Indianapolis Colts are on their client list. And what I'm saying is that WilmerHale is a football friendly law firm with deep interest in helping keep the NFL out of trouble. More on that in just a second.

I've got a panel of sports types and lawyers and experts chomping at the bit, but first let me set you up with this. Here is what Roger Goodell says he knew and didn't know. What he saw and says he didn't see. Here's CNN's Miguel Marquez. (BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

MIGUEL MARQUEZ, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): The NFL tapping former FBI Director Robert Mueller to lead an independent investigation looking into how the NFL handled evidence in the domestic violence case against Ray Rice. Mueller's probe will be overseen by two NFL owners and will be made public. The announcement comes hours after the Associated Press reported a law enforcement source told them the tape of Rice violently striking Janay Palmer was sent to an NFL executive five months ago. In an interview with CBS News on Tuesday, NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell maintained the league never saw the video until it went viral on Monday.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: So did anyone in the NFL see this second videotape before Monday?

ROGER GOODELL, NFL COMMISSIONER: No.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: No one in the NFL?

GOODELL: No one in the NFL to my knowledge.

MARQUEZ: The AP says their source sent a DVD of the video unsolicited because he wanted them to see it before deciding on Rice's punishment. The AP also saying the source played a 12-second voicemail message that came from an NFL office number on April 9th confirming the video had arrived with a female voice saying, "you're right, it's terrible." The NFL issued a statement following the potential bombshell.

"We have no knowledge of this. We are not aware of anyone in our office who possessed or saw the video before it was made public on Monday. We will look into it."

Baltimore Ravens owner Steve Bisciotti admitting they dropped the ball in handling the incident after seeing the initial video.

STEVE BISCIOTTI, BALTIMORE RAVENS OWNER: I was picturing her whaling on him and hip smacking her and maybe her head was this far from the wall and with her inebriation, dropped. So why did I conclude all that? Because I wanted to, because I loved him, because he had a stellar record and the cops had already seen the video, so I assumed it wasn't a forceful blow that moved her head three feet into that wall.

MARQUEZ: The league continues to insist that it reached out multiple times to police and the prosecutor's office for the video, but couldn't get it. Yet Rice's own attorney had a copy. In a letter to NFL club executives on Wednesday, Goodell says it would have been illegal for the league to get the video from either law enforcement or the casino itself once a criminal investigation begins.

Miguel Marquez, CNN, New York.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BANFIELD: A couple of other things before we get into the "what now" conversation. The Baltimore Ravens will play tonight at home minus Ray Rice, of course. And look whose music you're going to be hearing beforehand, Rihanna. Rihanna's going to sing before the game. Now we all know she has her own very public history with domestic violence and she's going to be doing the Thursday night football theme song before the game. Even though Rihanna's performance was arranged and produced long before all of this transpired, football fans, music fans are all taking to social media and marveling at the irony of this performance.

All right, Rachel Nichols you saw her in Miguel Marquez's report. She's from CNN Sports. Mel Robbins is a CNN legal analyst. Sunny Hostin is a CNN legal analyst and former federal prosecutor.

Sunny, I just want to start with you. With Roger Goodell saying, you know, we went to the casino and the truth is, we were under the impression that it wasn't legal to go and get that video from the casino.

SUNNY HOSTIN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Yes.

BANFIELD: You're a lawyer. And that's crazy.

HOSTIN: It is. And I was actually quite frankly surprised to hear that. And Rachel and I have been talking about this for -

RACHEL NICHOLS, HOST, CNN'S "UNGUARDED": We were on an e-mail chain and as soon as I heard that I e-mailed (INAUDIBLE) and said, OK, lawyers, is this this really illegal because this seemed impossible it's (ph) legal (ph).

HOSTIN: Exactly. And it just - I think it goes to show you that, one, they don't seem to know how to run an investigation into domestic violence. We know that they have dropped the ball, the proverbial ball, many, many times because of the stats, that there are so many of these DV cases that are just sort of lingering on Roger Goodell's desk.

BANFIELD: You have friends at the - you know he has loads of people at the NFL who are incredibly (INAUDIBLE).

HOSTIN: There are top-notch investigators there.

BANFIELD: Top-notch lawyers.

HOSTIN: And the suggestion, quite frankly, that they could not have gotten the tape in any way is just, I think, very, very suspect. I don't want to go so far as to say that this was willful ignorance, but it sure sounds like that to me.

BANFIELD: Well, I'll tell you what, look at this, Rachel --

NICHOLS: (INAUDIBLE) willful ignorance if it was in their offices.

HOSTIN: Yes.

BANFIELD: Look at "The Daily News" decided to do - NICHOLS: (INAUDIBLE) to me.

BANFIELD: "The Daily News" decided to - or, you know, decided to call this, the NFL, the "national football liars." Now, I know you've been very outspoken about two options here, either Roger Goodell is lying or he is grossly incompetent or negligent or maybe both.

NICHOLS: Well, grossly negligent. Yes. And, look, you know, the NFL now, it seems from an Associated Press report, where they listened to a voicemail that had that electronic stamp, and we've all seen it on our voicemail that tells you what number it's coming from and the time and the date and the Associated Press reporter saw that, that it came from the NFL offices -

BANFIELD: And heard it.

NICHOLS: And the person said on the voicemail, I got it. You're right, it's terrible. Now --

HOSTIN: And so legally an agent of the NFL had it, which in my mind means Roger Goodell had it.

MEL ROBBINS, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Yes.

NICHOLS: Well - but, and here's the thing, Roger Goodell has made a case over and over again and punished people and taken away their money and suspended them by saying the exact line, ignorance is not an excuse.

BANFIELD: Good point to make.

I want to bring you into this conversation with that exact point, Mel. That was something during bounty gate that Goodell said himself, ignorance is no excuse. So even if, and let's give him the benefit of the doubt and let's say that this is an --

ROBBINS: I'm not giving him the benefit of the doubt, sorry.

BANFIELD: Well, let's just say this is an unfair headline, he's not lying. Maybe this person never passed that tape on.

ROBBINS: Somebody's lying. That - maybe.

BANFIELD: Let's just say that DVD got buried and it never was shown to him (ph).

ROBBINS: Well, you know what though, how is it that --

BANFIELD: But it's fair when he says ignorance is no excuse.

ROBBINS: Well, it's certainly fair that you now turn it back on him to say, it's no excuse for you as a leader. And he has also said, the buck's going to stop with him. So it's going to be interesting to see as this investigation unfolds if it actually is going to stop with him being removed by the owners. I kind of doubt that that's going to happen, but I personally believe when you've got reporters from the ESPN, reporters from "Sports Illustrated" citing sources, and describing the video back in July, and describing the fact that the NFL has seen this, describing the video in July that she hits her head on railing, clearly someone inside that organization knew about it.

And frankly, this isn't just some fifth string person that's warming the bench. This is a super star in the league. And so there is no doubt in my mind that if somebody received that, they saw it, that it was terrible, that it went up the chain of command.

BANFIELD: So if this is true, there are those who say that's just it. That no owner will support Roger Goodell after this.

HOSTIN: Well, you would think that. But Rachel and I have been talking about this and it's so fascinating because Roger Goodell made, what, $44 million last year.

NICHOLS: $44.2 million.

HOSTIN: Point two.

NICHOLS: That's $200 million. Don't forget the point two.

HOSTIN: That's right. And he -- and he -

NICHOLS: And $200,000. Don't forget the point two.

HOSTIN: And he makes so much money for the league, he has so many connections and he, in my view, has been sort of the Teflon commissioner. I mean we've seen Adam Silver with the NBA be so decisive, act just sort of above reproach and we've seen Roger Goodell, quite frankly, drop the ball time and time again. I have been calling for him to step down from the minute that this story broke, but everyone saying not going to happen.

NICHOLS: If you listen to the NFL owners, the comments that they've made publicly, it seems that there is no way that they will tell him to quit his job or they will force him out unless --

BANFIELD: Not the players though. Drew Brees said everybody's accountable.

NICHOLS: Yes. But the owners are the ones who control Roger Goodell's salary.

BANFIELD: Yes.

HOSTIN: Right.

NICHOLS: They control his employment. And let's not forget that we can all be outraged, the players can be upset, but the owners are the ones who will make this decision.

ROBBINS: That's true.

NICHOLS: Goodell has said that he will not resign. And I do, guys, want to show you something. Not only has Bob Kraft, one of the most powerful owners in the NFL come out and said he thought Roger is doing a great job, but take a look at this quote from John Mara. John Mara is one of the owners, the owners of the Giants, who's going to oversee this investigation. John Mara is a high character guy, so I want to make that clear. And he said something that a lot of people liked. He said, "many of us were dissatisfied with the original two game suspension of Ray Rice. He said we have all learned a valuable lesson from this episode."

But take a look at the next part of his statement. He said, "the notion that the league should have gone around law enforcement is in my opinion misguided, and is the notion that the commissioner's job is now in jeopardy. The video is appalling but I believe the team and the league took appropriate action after they finally had the opportunity to view it."

BANFIELD: Wait. He's overseeing this thing. He's overseeing this thing.

NICHOLS: Now, again, I want to - I want to say that people who know John Mara - and I know John Mara -

HOSTIN: He's overseeing the investigation.

NICHOLS: This is a high character guy. So I'm not going sit here and then say that he's definitely going to be (INAUDIBLE).

ROBBINS: Well, and plus no sponsors have pulled out.

NICHOLS: No. But -

ROBBINS: Which is a huge, huge thing (ph).

NICHOLS: But it is disturbing to see that from the guy who is overseeing the investigation.

HOSTIN: Isn't the question though - isn't the question -

BANFIELD: I've got to wrap it there, but I have so much more that's coming.

HOSTIN: We'll be back.

BANFIELD: It's just that the speaker of the House trumps all of us. So, Rachel, Sunny and Mel hold your thoughts for a moment, if you would.

Coming up, John Boehner himself is expected to address the issue of ISIS and the president. The president's plan to defeat the terrorist organization as announced last night. The live mics are ready. The flags are set up. The podium is just awaiting the House speaker. After the break, we're going to bring you there live.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BANFIELD: As I mentioned before the break the House speaker is about to take to the live mike with a live audience in a few moments to react to the president's address last night laying out the plan for the United States to battle ISIS, ISIL, Islamic State, whatever you want to call them, those heartless, ruthless terrorists who are overtaking large swaths of land between Syria and Iraq and are causing a great threat and great consternation for a number of countries, America not the least of which, the threat now propelling the president to announce there will be air strikes.

In fact, there will be air strikes inside sovereign Syria, so the money issue is likely to become part of the problem as the House speaker comes out to make his comments regarding the president's plan.

So, as we wait for him, I certainly don't have to tell you what this date means to the history of this country and the world, but on the 13th anniversary of the terror attacks brought by al Qaeda, America is mobilizing allies for a brand new for a new but somewhat familiar enemy.

In his primetime address from the White House. President Obama says the terrorist group that calls itself the Islamic State makes a mockery of both Islamic and state, and he vowed to strike it on both sides of the Iraqi/Syrian border winning support of friendly Gulf states is critical.

And that's why Secretary of State John Kerry is in Saudi Arabia today. "The New York Times" is reporting the Saudis have agreed to play host to a program to train and equip so-called moderate fighters in Syria.

I'm joined now by CNN military analyst and retired Air Force Lieutenant Colonel Rick Francona.

Colonel, we could talk all day and not cover everything. We want to start with the threat that ISIS, ISIL, Islamic State is posing to America.

Here's what the president said about it last night.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: While we have not yet detected specific plotting against our homeland, ISIL leaders have threatened America and our all allows.

Our intelligence community believes thousands of foreigners, including Europeans and some Americans, have joined them in Syria and Iraq.

Trained and battle hardened, these fighters could try to return to their home countries and carry out deadly attacks.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BANFIELD: And quickly live now to the House speaker.

REP. JOHN BOEHNER (R-OH), SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE: Good afternoon, everyone.

Last night, the president finally began to make the case that the nation has needed him to make for quite some time -- that we must destroy and defeat this terrorist threat.

ISIL is a sophisticated and determined enemy. And in order to be successful, we must have a comprehensive strategy designed to destroy and to defeat it. I think last night the president made a compelling case for action. But as I said in my statement last night, there are still questions and concerns that remains.

For example, I support the president's plan to train and equip Iraqi security forces and the Syrian opposition. But I remain concerned that those measures could take years to fully implement, at a time when ISIL's momentum and territorial gains must be halted and reversed immediately.

We stand ready to work with the president to put in place a plan that would destroy and defeat ISIL. Members are getting briefed as we speak on a range of options that the president is contemplating. Those briefings and consultations will continue.

We delayed action on the continuing resolution yesterday to consider the president's request for authorization to train and equip the Syrian rebels that are fighting ISIL. We're doing our due diligence here and discussing all of this with our members, and, frankly, it's the right thing to do.

Yesterday, we came together to honor the fallen heroes of 9/11 with a Congressional Gold Medal, the highest honor we can bestow. And today we pay our respects to those -- their families. They never forgot them. And this is we'll never forget our responsibility to confront evil and to defeat it.

QUESTION: Mr. Speaker, you've said multiple times from that podium that the president goes it alone too much. He doesn't respect the constitutional power of Congress.

So, given that, why not be much more active and have a vote to give the president authority to have a congressional marker on this, if this is such an incredible threat?

BOEHNER: I do believe it would be in the nation's interest. I believe it's in the institution of the Congress' interest to speak on this question.

Now, normally in such a case, I've been through this a few times over the 24 years that I've been here, the president of the United States would request that support and would supply the wording of a resolution to authorize this force. And, at this point in time, we've not gotten that request and we've not seen that language.

QUESTION: But if the Congress is such an equal partner, as it is, why not write a -- write a resolution on your own?

BOEHNER: Typically in my time here in Congress, that's not how this has happened. That the president would make that request, and the president would supply the language for the resolution.

QUESTION: Do you believe the support is there? Do you believe a resolution will pass?

BOEHNER: I think that we're at the beginning stages of building of the kind of support that's necessary from the nation to carry out this plan and to carry it out successfully.

But we're at the beginning stages of this.

QUESTION: Will it be done this month period, as the president requested?

BOEHNER: You're talking about two different things.

The president's request was for Title X authorization to train and equip Syrian rebels. That's the only request that has come from the White House at this point.

And as I said, I support the president's request.

QUESTION: Mr. (inaudible) remarked last night -- and you alluded to this a moment ago -- you said that, you know, a speech is not a strategy. That implies that maybe you don't think that he has fully laid out a strategy and that you think he is all in. Is that the case?

BOEHNER: Well, the briefings are continuing with the members.

But I can tell you, in our conversations this morning, a lot of our members don't feel like the -- the campaign that was outlined last night will accomplish the mission that the president says, and that is to destroy ISIL.

And so frankly, a lot of our members think a lot more needs to be done than what was laid out last night.

But again, the members -- we've been in a briefing since 11 a.m. this morning with the president's top people to outline more of the specifics of what this plan consists of.

QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE)

BOEHNER: Pardon me?

QUESTION: What was that skepticism that was reflected in your statement last night?

BOEHNER: That I'm not sure that we're doing all that we can do to defeat this terrorist threat. And if our goal is to eliminate ISIL, there's a lot of doubt whether the plan that was outlined by the president last night is enough to accomplish that mission.

QUESTION: Mr. Speaker, there seems to be a sense up there on Capitol Hill that this is being pushed through, that -- that there's just about a week left before people go back to their midterm campaign.

Is this being rushed through too quickly? Shouldn't there be more of a debate? Is this something that you think this Congress will regret?

BOEHNER: The president, on Tuesday, while I visited the White House, made this request of -- a specific request to have the ability to train Syrian rebels. I wanted to make sure that members have ample time to have the conversation about this -- started today -- and it will continue. And we'll make a decision sometime next week on how we will proceed.

QUESTION: Chairman McKeon just told a group of reporters that the decision had been made for two votes (ph) to vote on the authorization and then a vote on the C.R. Is that true?

BOEHNER: That is not true.

QUESTION: That's not true? The chairman has it wrong?

BOEHNER: Look me in the eye. There is no decision been made on how we're going to proceed.

QUESTION: Could you tell us what your preference is? Do you believe that you can then have a separate vote on the Title 10 Authorization, apart from (inaudible). Are you OK that this embedding Title 10 Authorization within (inaudible) legislation?

BOEHNER: No decision has been made. We're going to -- it's why we had a conversation with our members today. These are serious discussions. This is a very serious issue and it ought be handled that way. And that's why these conversations are going to continue over the weekend, so that the Congress has ample time to consider the president's decision and to act on it.

QUESTION: Mr. Speaker, do you think based on all of the information you can get of that, the Syrian fighters would be a trustworthy and confident approach? Many Americans are concerned about U.S. arms going to a force that we don't know everything about. Do you think they can get that get that through (ph)?

BOEHNER: Based on all the information that I've looked at, the Free Syrian Army has, by and large, been very well vetted by our intelligence officials. Today they're in a fight against Assad, they're in a fight against ISIL, and they're in a fight against another Al Qaida affiliate in eastern Syria. And -- and they're about to get run over.

An F-16 is not a strategy. And airstrikes alone will not accomplish what we're trying to accomplish. And the president's made clear that he doesn't want U.S. boots on the ground. Well, somebody's boots have to be on the ground.

And so I do believe that what the president has asked for as the commander in chief is this authority to train these Syrian rebels, and frankly we ought to give the president what he's asking for.

QUESTION: So, if I'm hearing you correctly, it sounds like there would at a minimum be a vote to give him the authority -- the narrow authority he's been seeking. And the question is whether you'd go beyond that and the timing -- and if so, the timing of that action.

BOEHNER: That would be correct. That would be absolutely correct.

(CROSSTALK)

QUESTION: Mr. Speaker, (inaudible) how long you will let the continuing resolution sit out there (inaudible) understanding it may be (inaudible). But at some point, you'd have to decide to move the C.R. one way or the other in the next week to make sure it gets done.

BOEHNER: I would hope so. There's no reason for it to (inaudible) or be around here that much longer.

Last one.

QUESTION: Mr. Speaker, do you think that the president is wrong, then, to take U.S. combat troops on the ground in Syria off the table?

BOEHNER: Listen, we only have one commander in chief. He laid out his plan. I would never tell the enemy what I was willing to do or unwilling to do. But he is the commander in chief. He made that decision.

At this point in time, it's important we give the president what he's asking for. And -- and we've got to keep our eye on the ball. The issue here is about defeating a terrorist threat that is real and imminent.

BANFIELD: But no answer to that question. Does that mean you want to see American troops in Syria? That's a tough one. And the president said no. Definitely bombs will fall, but boots, American boots, no. It's a nonstarter for now.

So maybe the headlines out of that is that, of course, the speaker of the House saying it is important to give the president what he wants, but the criticism has been sort of couching all of his statements by saying, effectively, pretty good job last night but not exactly what we wanted.

Let me bring in Rick Francona on this. You heard the speech last night. It wasn't as though there was anything new or alarming that we found out in terms of strategy, what's being committed. We heard about troops and numbers and that sort of thing, going into Iraq.

But was there anything that you thought was missing? Because clearly the House speaker thought a lot was missing?

LIEUTENANT COLONEL RICK FRANCONA (RET), CNN MILITARY ANALYST: The president laid out what he wants to do, and I think it was important that he included Syria and Iraq.

This is one problem. He said, ISIS is the problem. They straddle that border. So we can't call it ISIS in Iraq, ISIS in Syria. And everybody seems to be looking at it like we're going to do this operation in Iraq. We're going to do something different in Syria.

I think we need to look at this as one target set, and I think the president did that.

BANFIELD: One big thing -- I looked at you the minute the House speaker said the Free Syrian Army has been very well vetted. What? Is that possible?

FRANCONA: No. It's very, very difficult. And we've seen this backfire on us in the past. We've trusted people in the Free Syrian Army only to find out a lot of the stuff has been funneled to some of the Islamist groups.

Now we don't know if it's going to ISIS, but it's going to, say, the Islamic Front, (inaudible) al-Nusra, which is nothing more than al Qaeda in Syria.

BANFIELD: What about al-Nusra?

FRANCONA: That is -- that's al-Nusra in Syria.

BANFIELD: OK.

FRANCONA: Yeah.

BANFIELD: This is one of the things that I've learned from so much of my time in a lot of different war zones and hot spots is that one week might be one philosophy and one alliance, and the next week it can completely change some.

FRANCONA: We're seeing that in Syria a lot, and that's mostly up to the local commanders, so if you've got a (inaudible) al-Nusra, the Victory Front commander who is allied temporarily with the Islamic Front commander and even sometimes with ISIS, to take on a particular regime target, or even an FSA target, Free Syrian Army target, then they'll do that.

And then when that battle is over, they'll make different alliances, so everything is so fluid up there, and I said last night there are so many moving parts in Syria, Syria is going to be the most difficult portion of this strategy.

BANFIELD: I only have time for a quick answer on this, but when the House speaker said somebody has to have boots on the ground, should it be Americans?

FRANCONA: It depends. If we really believe that this is a threat to the United States, we shouldn't outsource our fighting.

BANFIELD: All right, Colonel Rick Francona, thank you for that. Do appreciate your insight.

America's highest paid athlete has his own story of domestic abuse. Boxer Floyd Mayweather didn't pay a very big price in the court of public opinion for his domestic violence conviction in 2012. In fact, he's getting ready for a multimillion dollar fight in Las Vegas just this weekend.

And find out what he's been saying about Ray Rice and what he's saying to CNN about it all.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)