Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

TSA Security Chief Removed Amid Frustrations at the Airports; Bill Cosby Due in Court for Sexual Assault Case; Clinton & Trump Trade New Attack. Aired 9-9:30a ET

Aired May 24, 2016 - 09:00   ET

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

[09:00:09] ANNOUNCER: This is CNN Breaking News.

PAMELA BROWN, CNN ANCHOR: And we are following three big stories this Tuesday morning. The TSA's head of security out and hundreds of screeners added to speed up the line of security. But will the new moves cut down on your wait?

Plus, new clues in the crash of EgyptAir Flight 804, coming from a grim source, the morgue. What the evidence there could tell us about the flight's final moments.

And the first criminal case against Bill Cosby set to begin just moments from now. And he could come face-to-face with his accuser for the first time in a decade. We're live at the courthouse.

Well, good morning, I'm Pamela Brown, in for Carol Costello. Thanks for joining me on what's shaping up to a very busy Tuesday morning. A lot to cover, including the latest on the race for the White House.

But we begin with sky high frustrations at airports across the country. The security chief for the TSA, Kelly Hoggan is out. His removal comes after weeks of scrutiny over long security lines and accusations of mismanagement. Raising some major red flags. Why Hoggan was paid out $90,000 after a scathing report by the feds highlighting airport security failures across the country.

Let's get right to CNN aviation and government correspondent, Rene Marsh -- Rene.

RENE MARSH, CNN AVIATION AND GOVERNMENT REGULATION CORRESPONDENT: That's right, Pamela. Major leadership shake up at the TSA, this as airports, airlines and passengers complain about those painfully long airport security wait times. Now the head of TSA security operations made $90,000 in bonuses, paid to him in $10,000 increments, and that was on top of his a base salary. He received all that money despite the fact that he was in charge when TSA failed to detect fake explosives and weapons 95 percent of the time during covert testing.

On top of that, as you know, airport security lines are not getting better. A prime example, Pamela, of Washington, just not working.

The shake-up happens two weeks after members of Congress grilled the head of TSA, Peter Neffenger, about why Hoggan was getting such a handsome salary and bonuses despite his poor performance.

Within this internal memo that CNN obtained, we also learned that TSA plans on creating this command center, which would in real time monitor airports and their wait times so that they can allocate resources as needed. So clearly they have heard the calls for them to do better -- Pamela.

BROWN: And so we expect, Rene, in the wake of this TSA official being out more heads to roll with all this controversy surrounding the long lines at the airports and so forth?

MARSH: Well, at this point I think this is we were going to start. We're going to start here and see, you know, how things roll on from here. I mean, this command center shows that they really are zero focused on getting those wait times down. Again, this command center would allow them to monitor in real time what those wait times are like at airports across the country that will be reported to this command center, and if they need to reallocate resources, they'll be able to do that.

So we're getting indications here that they're trying to do what they can to cut down those lines. Of course, as I said, just two weeks ago, the head of TSA got quite a lashing from Congress so passengers are going to have to wait and see if this makes any difference.

BROWN: And we certainly all of us hope it doesn't do who fly.

MARSH: Yes.

BROWN: Rene Marsh, thank you so much.

MARSH: Sure.

BROWN: And another big story we're covering. Any minute, Bill Cosby is due in court and could come face-to-face with Andrea Constand. One of the 50 some women accusing him of sexual abuse. Cosby's attorneys will argue this case should not go to trial and prosecutors will try to peel away the image of a beloved TV dad and expose a ruthless predator.

CNN's Sara Ganim is right outside the courthouse following this story. So when do we expect Bill Cosby to arrive, Sara?

SARA GANIM, CNN INVESTIGATIONS CORRESPONDENT: Any minute now. This hearing is to begin at 9:30, Pamela. And, you know, nowhere was Bill Cosby more loved than here in his hometown, just outside of Philadelphia. And now this is the place. This is the courthouse where he is facing criminal charges. Three counts of aggravated indecent assault against a woman named Andrea Constand who was the director of the women's basketball team here at Temple University, who says that back in 2004, Cosby had her over to his house, gave her blue pill, and then sexually assaulted her.

Now Constand was the first woman to come forward and make accusations like this against Bill Cosby. That was more than 12 years ago. Since then, we know that more than 50 women have come forward and made similar allegations, but this is the only criminal case he faces.

[09:05:04] All of those other cases were barred from criminal court by the statute of limitations. They've been limited to civil lawsuits. This is different. If this hearing goes forward and he is sent to trial, he could face jail time in this case.

Now, as we wait for this hearing to begin, it's unclear if Andrea Constand will take the stand and testify against Bill Cosby. He has remained mostly silent through all of this, but it was his own words, Pamela, that shocked us all last summer when a civil deposition was made public, or at least parts of it were made public in Constand's civil case in which Bill Cosby admitted that he got a prescription for Quaaludes and had used those, giving them to women who he wanted to have sex with.

Now Bill Cosby has denied all of the allegations of sexual assault against him in this particular case, Pamela. He has said that the contact between himself and Andrea Constand was consensual.

BROWN: A lot to follow here, Sara Ganim. Of course keep us posted when Bill Cosby arrived. We'll be following the story. Thanks so much.

And in the meantime, we're going to discuss it. With me now CNN legal analyst and Joey Jackson and attorney and legal affairs commentator Areva Martin.

Thank you both for coming on. So my first question to you, Areva, is the key here after listening to Sara's report, of course, is for the prosecution to establish probable cause for this to move forward to a trial. Cosby's defense will say of course that this encounter with Constand was con essential. How can the prosecution prove it wasn't now 10 years after the fact?

AREVA MARTIN, ATTORNEY AND LEGAL AFFAIRS COMMENTATOR: Well, I think one thing to note is that this is an arraignment. So this isn't a full trial. The legal standard is much more lower, much less than what it will be in the trial. In the trial, we're going to be looking at beyond reasonable doubt. Here the prosecutor's burden is pretty low. It's by a preponderance of the evidence. All they have to show to the judge, and it's not a jury in this case, is that there is enough evidence to move forward to the next step.

And the next step in this case being an actual trial. So the prosecutor doesn't have a very heavy burden this morning with respect to what they have to establish, and in fact they can put forth evidence via affidavits. They don't have to put on witnesses to actually testify.

So I don't expect Constand to be here this morning, and even if she is here, it's not likely that she will take the witness stand. It's likely that the case by the prosecution will be made via other witnesses, and via affidavits.

BROWN: And what about that deposition, Joey, where he admitted to giving Quaaludes to women that he wanted to have sex with? How could that play into all of this today?

JOEY JACKSON, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: You know, it could be significant, but here's what it is. And good morning to you, Pamela.

BROWN: Good morning.

JACKSON: Good morning, Areva. The point is that in a generally -- in any criminal case, in any civil case, they're both separate matters, right? You have a criminal proceeding and as Areva mentioned, you have a low standard. It's a preliminary hearing. Is there reasonable cause to believe that a crime was committed and did Bill Cosby commit it.

But in this instance, remember, this case was revisited, Pamela, and it was revisited largely because of a civil deposition that Cosby gave under oath way back when in 2006, 2005, and so as a result of that, in recharging him or deciding to charge him, rather, it played big. And how did it play big? It played big I think in three ways. The first way it plays big is this. Cosby gave a statement to the police when this happened or whatever happened happened. The police interviewed him. He gave a statement. And then there was the deposition. So now the prosecutor can look at what he said to the police versus what he said in the deposition. And what is at issue. What he told the police concerning the drugs or the Benadryl or was it the herbal supplement and what he actually said in a deposition. So it comes in, the civil matter that is, in terms of any inconsistency.

Here is the second big issue. Quaaludes. He was interviewed in the deposition concerning, hey, did you give Quaaludes to other women, and what was your purpose in doing so. And so there was significant admissions there. And the third thing is that the civil aspect of it opens up this whole Pandora's box with respect to other accusers.

Now finally, whether or not those other accusers at trial because I do expect in today's proceedings, it's pro-forma, they'll establish a basic case, the defense will try to lock in certain testimony. The matter will go to trial. A big issue at trial will be the extent to which the judge allows or does not allow any of those alleged accusers to come forward and say, you know what, he did the very same thing to me. That's powerful and damming evidence. It's also prejudicial. That's what a judge has to balance.

BROWN: Yes, that's a big question. What about all of these other women, 50 plus women. But Areva, you know, back in 2005, the prosecutor had decided at that time that there wasn't enough evidence to move forward with this case to press charges. How could that impact Constand now?

MARTIN: Well, we know, Pamela, that the defense team has argued that that promise, that statement by the former prosecutor, should have been binding and that the entire trial should have been dismissed.

[09:10:04] The judge rejected that argument in early motion practice, but we should expect that argument to be renewed by Cosby's defense team. We should expect them to argue that this is a witch hunt. That the current prosecutor ran his entire campaign making a promise that he would try Bill Cosby. Not because the evidence was there to support criminal prosecution, but because he saw it as a way to bootstrap his career and to advance his career and become a prosecutor in this particular county. So this is going to be argued --

(CROSSTALK)

BROWN: And Areva, I just need to interrupt you for a second because we see Bill Cosby right here arriving there at that courthouse for that 9:30 preliminary hearing. The big question is, will he face his accuser, Andrea Constand. We know her attorneys just arrived. Bill Cosby is not expected to testify today, but he is arriving there for this preliminary hearing.

Joey, on that note, do you think that's a good strategy for Bill Cosby's defense attorneys to not have him testify in this case?

JACKSON: Absolutely. You know, generally at a preliminary hearing, Pamela, the way it works is, again, the prosecution just lays out just enough evidence to establish a prima facie case that we have enough to go forward, that we're charging you, we have a legal basis to charge you. And so I think what we'll see is them lay out enough to establish the three counts. And what are they? We know there's a count concerning you didn't consent. There is another count concerning were you unconscious or incapacitated, and then finally, the theory is that he gave her drugs to really incapacitated her so that he could have his way, you know, with her as you will.

And so I do not expect or anticipate that Bill Cosby will testify at all. It would be a poor strategy if he did so. I think the defense here is simply going to lock in their theory of the case and they're going to really try to, you know, get every witness that is there to commit to a story so that when it comes to trial, they could impeach them if there is any prior inconsistent statement. What did you say at the hearing versus what you said at the trial.

BROWN: And we're watching Bill Cosby now going through security there at the courthouse in anticipation of this hearing to get underway again at 9:30.

So what will happen next, Areva, if the judge sets a trial date after today? What's the next step? What can we expect?

MARTIN: We can expect, Pamela, to see extensive motion practice. Joey alluded to that earlier in his statement about the 50 or so other women that have come forward. So the question is, what will happen with respect to those women. We know many of them would like to testify. They would like to tell their story about their encounters with Bill Cosby, but the judge in this case will have to decide. Is any of that other testimony relevant? Does it have anything to do with the charges that have been filed against Bill Cosby in this case.

We know the prosecution would love to put on that testimony because it would like to establish some pattern of conduct with respect to Bill Cosby and women. However, the defense is going to fight very hard to keep that testimony out. To argue that it is irrelevant, that it has no basis for any of the charges in this case. So we should expect both sides to file motions as they try to define what the case will look like as they move forward to trial.

BROWN: And Joey, just putting the defense hat on for a second, how would you argue that that testimony from these other women would be irrelevant to this case?

JACKSON: Pamela, that is a huge issue in the case. And here's why. Because there's a big distinction between propensity evidence, right, and what you really did. And here's -- let me explain this. In the event, for example, that I learn if I'm a juror that you did this once, you did it twice, you did it three times, you did it four times, it doesn't become about what you did now. It becomes about your propensity to do it, and since you did it yesterday, the day before, the week before, the year before, clearly you did it here, no matter what the evidence is.

And so I'm going to argue that it's prejudicial and certainly a defendant has a right to a fair trial. If you let all of these other accusers in, the jury is not going to be focusing in assessing his current guilt. They're going to be assessing his modus operandi. The problem, though, is that technically if you establish that it goes to motive and it goes to intend it's technically admissible under the rules of evidence. The judgment is whether it is admissible but it's so prejudicial that the judge says I can't let it in. So if the judge does allow other women to testify, I would suspect it would be very, very limited and I suspect that there would not be a whole lot of that evidence that the judge would let it.

BROWN: But couldn't the defense also argue, look, these are just accusations from these women, that he has not been convicted or -- in these other cases?

JACKSON: No, absolutely they can do that. But then it becomes collateral. And that's another issue. You know, what are we here for, ladies and gentlemen? What are we here to assess? We're here to assess what if anything Bill Cosby did as it related to Andrea Constand. Not what he did as it relates to other --50 other women, 40 other women or anything else. Let's limit the issues. Let's focus the jury. Let's not confuse them, let's not allow them to speculate. Let this case be about what it is about.

[09:15:01] And that's what happened if anything to Andrea Constand.

BROWN: Let's take a look at some of the --

MARTIN: Can I --

BROWN: Go ahead, Areva.

MARTIN: I was going to say, with respect to that point, agree with Joey and the problem with allowing those 40 or 50 other women to testify, you could end up having many trials with respect to each woman. Because you raise the point, Pamela, how do we know any of the accusations are true. They haven't been vetted. At this point they're just accusations.

If the judge allows them to testify, then the defense has an opportunity to try to impeach their testimony and to bring in other witnesses and other evidence to cast doubt on the validity or the truthfulness of that testimony. And that could make for a very prolong and extended proceding in this particular case.

BROWN: Yes, absolutely. That could really open up a can of worms.

Looking at what Bill Cosby is charged with here, three counts of aggravated in decent sexual assault, which is second degree felony, Joey. What kind of punishment are we taking about here potentially for Bill Cosby?

JACKSON: Let me say this. Keep in mind, he is 78 years old. And so, if you look at this and look at the punishment being ten years, I would suspect if he is convicted, he would get, if he is convicted, you know, a long way from that, but he would get concurrent time.

What that means is three counts, I don't think the judge would give him ten, ten and ten. So I think, but even ten years for a person of his age and look at him, as he is walking into the court, Pamela, he is holding on to someone. Can he see, not see? I don't know what the nature of his health is.

So, ten years could be a life sentence for him. The judge in factoring in from that, we're along way away from that, would factor into all the good things that he's done in his life, too.

So, there's no -- even though he is facing ten, there's no indication the judge would max him out if you will on that charge.

BROWN: OK, Areva Martin, Joey Jackson, thank you for that analysis. We do appreciate it. And, of course, we're going to be keeping an eye on the story, the preliminary hearing once again starts at 9:30 Eastern Time.

Than you to you both for that. We'll be talking to you again soon.

And still ahead on this Tuesday morning, attacks and insults take center stage in the race for the White House, as Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton escalate their war of words.

And Bernie Sanders is also upping the ante, saying the Democratic could be in his words, "messy". We'll tell you why, up next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:21:15] BROWN: And turning now to presidential politics.

The primary season trudges on with voters in Washington state casting their Republican ballots today. Donald Trump, the last man standing, focusing on November and Hillary Clinton. And now, both candidates are dredging up the past as they launch new attacks on each other.

CNN's Phil Mattingly is here with more -- Phil.

PHIL MATTINGLY, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Good morning, Pam. This primary season hasn't been for the meek. No question about it.

But things are only going to escalate going forward, and there is a reason why. This is a critical moment for both Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump's campaign. This is the time you define your opponent. And that's why we're seeing attacks, plenty of attacks, very negative attacks, attacks that deal a lot with the past.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

HILLARY CLINTON (D), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: We are going to unify the Democratic Party, and stop Donald Trump!

MATTINGLY (voice-over): Hillary Clinton taking a new line of attack against Donald Trump, her campaign painting Trump as a greedy billionaire in a new ad.

DONALD TRUMP (R), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: I hope that happens, because then people like me would go in and buy.

MATTINGLY: Harkening back to Trump's comments before the 2008 housing market collapse.

TRUMP: If there is a bubble burst as they call it, you know, you could make a lot of money.

MATTINGLY: Clinton, swiping at the presumptive nominee on multiple fronts before a union crowd Monday, issuing a warning about Trump's four bankruptcies surrounding his casino holdings.

CLINTON: He could bankrupt America like he has bankrupted his companies.

MATTINGLY: And sticking with another tried and true assault -- Trump's temperament.

CLINTON: The last thing we need is a bully in the pulpit.

MATTINGLY: All, as the billionaire continues to hound Bill Clinton's past infidelity, sending one of his top advisors to swipe at Hillary Clinton.

ED BROOKOVER, DONALD TRUMP'S SENIOR ADVISER: She overregulates, she overtaxes, she overpromises and doesn't deliver.

MATTINGLY: The hostility spreading, with both candidates facing record high negatives in the most recent polls.

But Trump is getting new support from Capitol Hill. In the form of Tennessee Senator Bob Corker.

SEN. BOB CORKER (R), TENNESSEE: His approach to foreign policy, that's something I want to hear more about. I heard more about it today and I appreciated that.

MATTINGLY: Though Corker is still downplaying talk that he may be high on Trump's V.P. list. CORKER: I'm not angling for any job. I think the best way to not end

up in a position like those is to angle for it. But I have no indication whatsoever that I would even be considered.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

MATTINGLY: So, Pam, the intrigue over who will be Donald Trump's running mate, still continuing on and likely not to get a good solid answer until July, at the convention. It is important, as you keep an eye on Donald Trump heading ban on the campaign trail today in New Mexico, Hillary Clinton in California. These attacks are only going to continue to escalate.

As we mentioned, record high negatives for both of these candidates. Both candidates seeing the opportunity and driving the others negatives up going forward. So, hope, change, positivity, those are things I don't think we're going to see a lot of in the weeks ahead, Pam.

BROWN: A lot of mudslinging ahead in the next five months until the general election. Get ready. Buckle up.

All right. Thanks so much, Phil Mattingly.

And as Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump getting increasingly nastier in their attacks, will the race for the White House be centered on issues or scandal?

Here to discuss, Michael Nutter, former Philadelphia mayor and a Hillary Clinton supporter, and Gina Loudon, who is a Trump supporter.

Good morning to you both. Great to have you with us.

GINA LOUDON, DONALD TRUMP SUPPORTER: Good morning.

MICHAEL NUTTER, HILLARY CLINTON SUPPORTER: Good morning, Pam.

BROWN: So this morning, top aides for both campaigns, right here on CNN, and here is what they said. Let's listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIPS)

BRIAN FALLON, PRESS SECRETARY, HILLARY FOR AMERICA: If he wants to keep talking about these old allegations, I think it will just deprive him of the opportunity to actually make the gains he needs to with critical voting blocs, including female voters, who he is doing so poorly with.

[09:25:04] ALISYN CAMEROTA, CNN ANCHOR: And you don't have any plans to return in kind attacks, you know, obviously, he's well has had a dubious past at times with women, but you guys aren't going to go there.

FALLON: We're not interested in waging this campaign in the gutter.

MICHAEL COHEN, EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT, TRUMP ORGANIZATION: All he is doing is giving the facts.

CHRIS CUOMO, CNN ANCHOR: No, no, no.

COHEN: He is giving the facts.

CUOMO: He knew the facts in the '90s when this was all happening and he said it was all B.S.

COHEN: He was a private citizen who was friendly with the Clintons, and he was trying to protect a friend. All right, now it's a different game.

(END VIDEO CLIPS)

BROWN: All right, so there you hear from both sides.

Gina, to you first. We heard from Trump's V.P., we heard from Trump himself, controversies about the Clintons will be a central part of Trump's case against her this election season. Do people really want to hear about this instead of specifics on fixing the economy or foreign policy, in your view? Is that the right strategy?

LOUDON: Well, you know, time will tell, I guess. One thing I did observe is that Hillary Clinton started talking about how she is such a defender of women, and Donald Trump brought up the fact, hey, then, why aren't you defending the women, you know, like Juanita Broderick, who accuses your husband of rape, or Paula Jones, where you paid off $850,000 worth of hush money?

I think those are legitimate almost policy questions, if you bring up the topic of gender to begin with, which Hillary did. And you'll notice, too, it was effective, because this week, she is not talking about gender any more. So, I think Mr. Trump's strategy there at least was effective.

BROWN: But there is clearly a move to focus or maybe it's not a move, it is staying with what his strategy has been all along, to really stay focused on scandals and stay away from specifics and issues. What do you make of that? Why is that? What's behind that? It is clearly a strategy, Gina?

LOUDON: I think that Mr. Trump so far, I think, has a style. Hillary is playing by the old school establishment playbook. Donald Trump is writing a playbook of his own, that none of us, including me are completely are prepared for or could predict. So, I don't think Hillary --

BROWN: Or understand, frankly.

Or understand, but it's working for him, Michael and the old ways may not work against Donald Trump. He has completely changed the landscape. Let's be honest. What does Hillary Clinton need to do?

I mean, she is coming out and saying I'm not going to focus on certain things about him, I'm going to focus on his demeanor and his job qualifications. But then she's talking about his bankruptcies in the past.

I mean, what does she need to do to really hit home against Trump?

NUTTER: Hillary Clinton is a serious adult who is running for president of the United States of America.

Donald Trump only wants to talk about personal issues or make personal attacks, because he has no ideas. He has no plans. No specifics. And can't talk about what he would do as president of the United States of America, because he doesn't know what he would do.

He will have -- you know, he changes his position on a daily basis, multiple times a day, depending on the controversy of the moment. So, of course, he does not want to get into a policy debate, a specifics debate, a real debate about jobs, about the economy, about public safety, about children getting an education, about how to make America safe on the homeland and abroad.

Of course, he doesn't want to talk about those issues, because he has no idea. He has no idea.

BROWN: But, honestly, Michael, why does he need to --

(CROSSTALK)

NUTTER: And only attack Hillary Clinton.

BROWN: But in your view, why does he need to? He's gotten this far, keeping it vague, keeping it general, why does he need --

NUTTER: He has gotten this far with a narrow -- he is only talking to a smaller portion of the American public, Republican voters in primaries. The general election is a totally different --

(CROSSTALK)

BROWN: I talked to some well educated people who are Trump supporters, I've talked to some well-educated people whore Trump supporters and he is appealing to them too.

NUTTER: Oh, that's an interesting combination, well-educated people who are Trump supporters. That's -- I mean, that's, you know, that's an interesting combo there. There are a whole bunch of other folks who are not Trump supporters.

(CROSSTALK)

LOUDON: I'm sorry, sir, what you said about Mr. Trump supporters? What are you saying, sir, that we're not well-educated. I mean, that's a gross generalization.

NUTTER: Mr. Trump's supporters are Mr. Trump's supporters. I never said that.

(CROSSTALK)

NUTTER: That's a nice spin, Gina. That's a nice try, spin, Gina.

LOUDON: On policy differences, I was really patient during the time that you were basically bashing Mr. Trump. If I can respond, please?

The entire time, Mr. Trump has been very clear, he wants to lower taxes, especially on lower income families. Secretary Clinton has been very clear also. She is going --

(CROSSTALK)

NUTTER: He needs to release his tax returns.