Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Ryan Pressured to Endorse Trump; Trump Tax Returns; Ex-Cop in Court; Fertilizer Plant Blast. Aired 2-2:30p ET

Aired May 11, 2016 - 14:00   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:00:22] BROOKE BALDWIN, CNN ANCHOR: Hi there. You're watching CNN. I'm Brooke Baldwin. Thank you for being with me.

In less than - checking my clock - 24 hours from now, a meeting that could shape the future of the Republican Party. The presumed Republican nominee for president, Donald Trump, is set to sit down with House Speaker Paul Ryan at 9:00 a.m. sharp tomorrow morning. This after Speaker Ryan's bombshell last week, right here with Jake Tapper on CNN, that he was just, quote, "not ready" to back Trump.

Now, afternoon before the meetings, Speaker Ryan is feeling pressure, according to folks we're talking to on The Hill, to support the billionaire who just won primaries in both West Virginia and Nebraska. Ryan met with several of his rank and file who are urging the speaker to, if I may, get on the Trump train. Will Speaker Ryan heed their call? The speaker of the House today did disclose his prime goal for his one-on-one with Mr. Trump.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. PAUL RYAN (R-WI), HOUSE SPEAKER: To pretend we're unified as a party after coming through a very bruising primary, which just ended like a week ago, to pretend we're unified without actually unifying, then we go into the fall at half strength. This election is too important to go into an election at half strength. That means we need a real unification of our party.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BALDWIN: And as Republicans try to heal any divisions here, Democrats went on the offensive. Their House leaders held a news conference and declared there is no difference between what Trump says and what the GOP believes.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. NANCY PELOSI (D-CA), MINORITY LEADER: Our point is, what has happened in this campaign is Donald Trump has pulled back the veil. What he says is what they say. And now the people can see the connection between them. And unless the Republican leadership is going to be as, shall we say, critical of their own members for what they say, as they are of Donald Trump, it's all a show.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BALDWIN: Let's kick the hour off with MJ Lee, our CNN politics reporter.

And so as we're looking ahead to tomorrow's Trump/Ryan meeting, we have some awesome intel from inside of the House Republican conference meeting today. What was said?

MJ LEE, CNN POLITICS REPORTER: Well, I think we're seeing Paul Ryan really backed into a corner right now. Remember, Ryan is someone who really rose as a political figure by touting his conservative ideological beliefs. But when you compare Ryan's ideological beliefs and his policy agenda to Trump's, whether it's on issues like taxes, immigration or international trade, they really do not actually see eye to eye on a lot of issues. And I think this is a concern that a lot of Republicans actually share with Ryan, whether it's congressional Republicans or major Republican donors.

But at the same time, Ryan, of course, finds himself in a tricky position because as speaker of the House, he's a leader of the Republican Party that a lot of congressional Republicans are looking to for guidance on what they should do about Trump and how they should react to the fact that he has now essentially become the GOP nominee. I think heading into this meeting and, you know, sort of the readout that we get from that meeting will send a really strong message to members about whether Trump is ready to unite the party. Of course, this is a call that Ryan has been making to Trump for a very long time, especially when he came out and, you know, said to Jake Tapper, I'm not ready to go there yet. I need to hear a more, you know, unified message from Donald Trump before I can get there.

BALDWIN: So the pressure is ongoing into tomorrow's meeting. But at the same time, apparently these two don't even know each other very well either. So it's kind of like a getting to know you/let's talk conservatism 101.

LEE: Right.

BALDWIN: You mentioned taxes. Let's talk taxes as it pertains to Donald Trump because one of the big headlines out of that AP interview with him was that he's like, I'm getting audited, not releasing my taxes before Election Day.

LEE: Right.

BALDWIN: But he's not really saying why.

LEE: I mean this is really not the last time that we're going to hear about Donald Trump's tax returns. And, in fact, for as long as he says he's not ready to return them, we're going to be hearing from critics on both sides of the aisle calling -

BALDWIN: Hillary Clinton just went off in New Jersey.

LEE: Exactly.

BALDWIN: Yes.

LEE: And plenty of Republicans say that he needs to get that out there in public because this is standard procedure for a presidential nominees on both - you know, both parties to release those tax returns so that people can have access to things like the tax rate that he's been paying, you know, charitable contributions, his income. And I think especially for a candidate like Trump, who has really branded himself as this businessman, someone who has accrued a lot of wealth through his various business ventures, I think people are curious and all the more curious now that he seems so resistant to releasing those figures and that kind of data, I think giving fodder to critics to say, well, what is he even hiding in those tax returns?

[14:05:06] BALDWIN: That's what we keep hearing over and over. He says he has nothing to hide.

MJ Lee, thank you for setting all of this up for us.

Let's pivot now and, you know, if Trump's audit doesn't finish in time, he would become the first Republican presidential nominee in 40 years - 40 - not to release his tax returns.

Joining me now, Ari Fleischer, who was once the White House press secretary under President George W. Bush, now the president of Fleischer Communications.

Nice to see you, sir.

ARI FLEISCHER, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY FOR GEORGE W. BUSH: Brooke, great to be with you.

BALDWIN: OK, let me ask it to you this way. You know where I'm going, but let me flip it. Donald Trump would say, with regard to his taxes, you know what, my voters don't care, so why should you? What would your response be?

FLEISCHER: Well, you know, MJ said this is standard procedure going back for 40 years. And she's right. But I think what people like you and me and everybody who watches Washington has got to get used to is, standard procedure is over. Donald Trump won. He is the anti-standard procedure. And that's one of the reasons that he's winning. And I think you could say a little bit of the same thing about Bernie Sanders.

The voters are in such an anti-Washington mood that that's why Donald Trump was able to prevail against 16 other candidates, 15 of whom were Washington insiders.

BALDWIN: But -

FLEISCHER: So, yes, this will feed the usual, predictable fodder about what he's hiding. Hillary is probably the worst candidate you can imagine to make a (INAUDIBLE) fighting (ph) argument.

BALDWIN: Well, hang on, hang on. Before you start in on Hillary Clinton, Ari Fleischer, I mean let me just - let's look at it this way. Couldn't you see that Donald Trump is being hypocritical because he's calling, you know, Secretary Clinton crooked Hillary, he's knocking her on transparency. What about his own transparency in these tax returns?

FLEISCHER: Well, what I was about to say is that this gives fodder to those who say, you're hiding something. But Hillary is the worst person to get fodder from that because of her own inadequacies. But, look, I think the issue with Donald Trump is, we all have to resist measuring him through the standard lens of politics by which we measure traditional, political candidates. He seems to be able to defy much of it.

I think in the instance of his taxes, most Americans just assume the guy's a billionaire, he's wealthy. He's got tons of money. What's in his returns? I really don't think this is going to cut him the way it would cut a traditional candidate who has to run a new - normal political circles. Everybody knows he's a wealthy businessman.

BALDWIN: Do you think, you know, pigs would fly first or that, you know, Hillary Clinton would release a Wall Street transcript for a Donald Trump tax return?

FLEISCHER: I think they're both digging in, aren't they?

BALDWIN: Yes.

FLEISCHER: Although Hillary will be safe after she gets past Bernie Sanders to release her praise of Goldman Sachs and others. She - she won't release them now because they'll help Sanders.

BALDWIN: OK. Let me ask you - we've been talking a ton, obviously, about - ahead of this 9:00 a.m. Trump/Speaker Ryan meeting tomorrow morning.

FLEISCHER: Right.

BALDWIN: You know, they apparently really truly just don't know each other very well. Yes, as MJ just eloquently put - you know, explained, there is pressure from Republicans to endorse Mr. Trump, so they can all coalesce behind this one candidate. But, realistically, what are your expectations coming out of this meeting let's say come lunchtime tomorrow?

FLEISCHER: Yes. I sure hope that there's unity. I think it's going to be just another difficult signal about Donald Trump being able to pick up the low hanging fruit of Republicans who want to be for him if the two of them walk out of that meeting in the opposite direction. You know -

BALDWIN: And what are you looking for? They're not going to be holding hands. Like, what's the sign of unity?

FLEISCHER: Well, I hope Donald Trump walks out and says that Speaker Ryan's doing a great job and that Speaker Ryan can walk out saying that he's going to vote for and support Donald Trump. I'd like to see them on the same page. It beats being on different pages. BALDWIN: Do you think expecting any sort of endorsement tomorrow would be premature?

FLEISCHER: No, I think it's a possibility. But, look, I think what Paul Ryan is really doing is protecting the institution of the House. I think his inclination here is to make sure that the potential nominee understands that the speaker of the House represents an entire branch of the government, or half of one branch of the government, and that the speaker of the House is not going to be somebody who just falls into line. And I think that's to his credit. Donald Trump is also taking positions that are opposite of many Republicans. And Speaker Ryan has helped a lot of Republicans who are hedging about what to do about Donald Trump. So I think Ryan played - is doing the right thing for himself. He's not a candidate who ran on a pledge that he'd support Donald Trump. I just hope he can get there and get there comfortably.

BALDWIN: What about these VP picks? Do you - you know, I just was curious to pick your brain on who you'd like to see on the Trump ticket?

FLEISCHER: You know, Brooke, I - experience shows that unless you make a bad choice for vice president, it's a temporary blip. People focus on it because it's something new and different and it lasts a week, maybe 10 days. This election's going to be about the two people at the top. I don't know anybody in 2004, for example, who voted for John Kerry because of John Edwards, or voted for Al Gore because of Joe Lieberman. So it can work in reserve. You can hurt yourself with your pick -

BALDWIN: Yes, but there was not a Donald Trump at the top of the ticket in 2004.

FLEISCHER: That's my point, though. People will vote for the person at the top of the ticket. Whoever it is at the second part of the ticket is notable for a week or ten days and then all the focus returns on the person at the top.

BALDWIN: I got ya.

FLEISCHER: So it will be interesting to see who he picks. It won't change the trajectory of the race unless it's a bad pick. Same thing for Hillary.

[14:10:03] BALDWIN: OK. Final question. Sort of a fun question. We know that Donald Trump has talked a lot about, you know, this Cleveland convention. He told the AP he wants some great entertainment. He wants a great singer, a great group to break things up. You know, you love music. Which band would you put your money on to play in Cleveland on that stage?

FLEISCHER: Well, I would always pick Robert Earl Keen. I'm a country music guy. So I'll take Robert Earl Keen from Austin any day.

BALDWIN: All right. Ari Fleischer, thank you so much. I could see some country in Cleveland. Just ahead here - thank you.

Just ahead, Hillary Clinton moving to the left on a big issue as Bernie Sanders picks up another win.

Plus, have you heard what Vice President Joe Biden has just said about who he's confident will win the White House? And that other thing he said about himself about being president.

And, breaking news in the shooting death of an unarmed black man. The former police officer charged with his murder is now facing new charges. This is monumental in the face of the law here. We'll explain what's happened in South Carolina, coming up.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:15:06] BALDWIN: You're watching CNN. I'm Brooke Baldwin.

Some big breaking news today involving the high profile police shooting of a black man by a white officer. Michael Slager, a former police officer in North Charleston, South Carolina, is being arraigned in federal court right now on a three count indictment for last year's shooting death of Walter Scott. Slager is charged with obstruction of justice, unlawful use of a firearm and depriving Scott of his civil rights. Charges that could have him spending the rest of his life in prison.

Now, this indictment alleges Slager used excessive force when he shot Scott from behind five times as Scott ran away after a traffic stop. A bystander, you'll recall this story, captured the shooting, shocked the nation. We're about to show you the video again, but I have to warn you, it is very difficult to watch.

CNN senior legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin and CNN legal analyst Laura Coates are both joining me now. They're both former federal prosecutors. Laura is also a former attorney with the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department.

So welcome to both of you.

Obviously this is huge, huge news. We're talking with a family member of Water Scott's next hour. But, Jeff Toobin, just for you, how rare is this, this civil rights charge here?

JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: Well, it is rare, but I think people need to be reminded, he is already facing charges in South Carolina -

BALDWIN: Murder.

TOOBIN: Straight up murder charges. So it's not like he was going to go free if this case didn't proceed. But what makes this case unusual is that in so many of these police shootings so far - or police deaths caused by police, whether it's Eric Garner in Staten Island, Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri, there has not been a federal charge. Here, the federal government has intervened as well. You know, he is in a world of trouble already under state (ph), but I think it is significant that the federal government has said this is also a violation of federal law.

BALDWIN: Laura, on that point, I mean do you see this as a turning point? Do you see this as the feds, you know, sending some sort of message?

LAURA COATES, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Absolutely. I mean not only is Jeff correct about this being an early intervention by the federal government that usually doesn't happen. More importantly, you have an obstruction of justice charge that's based on the fact that the officer misled authorities in a way that was most, you know, surprising to everybody in the nation. He said that Walter Scott actually approached him and came towards him when he tried to implement a Taser. And so we have a changing of the course where you have the federal government intervening any time an officer is misleading the public and sticking to a story that no one actually believes.

BALDWIN: We know that Slager has been out of bond for his murder charge at (ph) state court, although I read today the judge was signing off on an arrest warrant federal. We know, Toobin, as you point out, you know, he's already facing the murder charge. But in both of these, you know, it's all about intent, is it not? But how do you - how do you prove that he purposefully violated Walter Scott's civil rights?

TOOBIN: Well, that's always the challenge in these federal cases. In the state case, all they have to prove is that he shot him and it was unjustified. There is really a very minimum intent requirement under state law. Under federal law, you do have to prove here an abuse of office. Again, what makes this case kind of challenging for the federal government is usually in these sorts of circumstances the government alleges some sort of racial motive. And that may be implicit here but it's not explicit. And so proving intent to violate civil rights certainly will be difficult if this case goes to trial.

BALDWIN: And the other sort of, you know, tricky part, or the twist or the difficulty, Laura, is the fact that I think this was - I want to say April, and then in June you had that mad man walk into the church in Charleston and murder those nine people. That trial has been delayed. That delay is apparently affecting this trial. It could be pushed back. It could - you know, they're asking for a change of venue. How often does that happen?

COATES: Well, you know, you have the same prosecutor who's prosecuting both of these major cases -

BALDWIN: There you go.

COATES: Which is really an anomaly in and of itself. And you have that prosecutor, who already has the supreme court in South Carolina say he doesn't have to try these cases back to back. And, frankly, what this tells you is that there is a vested public interest in having these both cases, they're very distinct, but resolved by somebody who is the most powerful of the law in South Carolina. What you see here is a vested interest that's playing out in the court of law in South Carolina. And I think that they're going to push both trials back to allow that attorney time to prepare for what's going to be a very difficult season.

BALDWIN: Again, like I mentioned, we're -

TOOBIN: And -

BALDWIN: Yes, go ahead, Toobin.

[14:20:00] TOOBIN: Well, I just - you know, the thing that is so haunting about this case, and so awful, is, how likely is it this case would have been brought at all if there wasn't that video?

BALDWIN: If there wasn't a cell video.

TOOBIN: How many people have been killed or shot by the police and the circumstances are unclear, and the police get the benefit of the doubt. Usually, of course, the police are correct. But I have to say, I would be very skeptical that this case would have gotten any attention at all had that cell phone video not existed.

BALDWIN: I'm with you.

COATES: And -

BALDWIN: It's precisely one of the questions I was going to ask of this family member next hour. Jeff Toobin and Laura Coates, I appreciate you both.

COATES: Thank you.

BALDWIN: We'll loop back, obviously, when we know that this will go to trial.

Meantime, breaking news. A breaking development into that three year mystery. You remember this? What caused a massive explosion at a fertilizer plant in Texas? It killed 15 people. Officials now telling us this was no accident. What investigators have uncovered. We'll have a live report, next.

Also, a search warrant offers new clues into Prince's death. We now know the name of the doctor who was treating the star in the days before he died, but for what? More on that after a quick break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:25:35] ANNOUNCER: This is CNN breaking news.

BALDWIN: Let's get to that breaking news here. A stunning revelation today prompting a brand new search for answers in that deadly explosion in Texas. This was back - this was three years ago, that massive blast at a fertilizer plant in west Texas. That happened days after the Boston Marathon bombing happened as well, when the nation was on edge as the hunt for the terrorists near Boston unfolded. So thousands of miles away, that very week, in west Texas, a deafening boom echoed for miles. The blast was so powerful it registered as a 2.1 earthquake. Twelve first responders and three others were killed. And now, here we are, three years later and authorities have now concluded the fire was deliberately set. It was a crime.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ROBERT ELDER, SPECIAL AGENT, BUREAU OF ALCOHOL, TOBACCO, FIREARMS: The fire has been ruled as incendiary. This means this fire was a criminal act. We have come to this conclusion through over 400 interviews.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BALDWIN: In addition to the deaths, 200 people were injured, 500 homes were totally destroyed.

Let's go to west Texas, to my colleague, Ed Lavandera.

And, wow, I remember that week and to know that this was a crime. How did they come to that conclusion, Ed?

ED LAVANDERA, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, a combination of a couple of things according to the ATF agents and investigators who have been working this case for the last three years. As you heard there in the sound bite from one of the lead investigators, they were able to rule out scientifically, they say, natural and accidental causes. And they have gone to great lengths to re-create a model of that fertilizer plant. They say they've been able to pinpoint exactly where that fire started, that eventually led to the explosion. They say it's one of the most costly and in depth investigations the ATF agency has ever done.

So that in combination with some 400 interviews that they have done. They say that has led them to believe confidently that they were able to rule out the accident and natural causes for the explosion, which only leaves that it was deliberately set.

So the question really becomes, you know, who would have done this. Investigators say they do not have any suspects at this time. That's why they've opened up a Crime Stoppers hotline with the Waco Crime Stoppers office, hoping that tips will continue to come in. But this has now been three years later and it's a criminal investigation.

BALDWIN: Hopefully they get some fruitful tips.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ELDER: Or hypothesized, considered, tested, and eliminated as being fire causes. The only hypothesis that could not be eliminated and was concern - and, I'm sorry, and was confirmed by extensive testing at the ATF Fire Research Laboratory is incendiary. Today I'd also like to announce that ATF is offering a reward of up to $50,000 for the information leading to the arrest of the person or persons responsible for this crime.

(END VIDEO CLIP) BALDWIN: All right, Ed Lavandera, thank you very much. West Texas waiting for those tips to come in. It has been three years, as you point out. Thank you.

Next, Mitt Romney, he has long speculated that there could be a bombshell, his word, in Donald Trump's tax returns. And now we're learning the Republican frontrunner may not release them until after the general election. Hillary Clinton just weighed in moments ago. You'll hear what she's saying about Trump's potential secrecy.

Plus, Vice President Joe Biden candidly admits what kind of president he would have been had he decided to run. In a word, "best." That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)