Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

No Charges Recommended for Clinton. Aired 2-2:30p ET

Aired July 05, 2016 - 14:00   ET

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

[14:00:00] RICHARD QUEST, CNN AVIATION CORRESPONDENT: Out of the water that there is sooting and smoke damage. So, yes, there was a fire on EgyptAir 804.

WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: All right, Richard Quest reporting the very latest. We'll stay on top of it. Thanks very much

That's it from me. The news continues right now, right here on CNN.

ANNOUNCER: This is CNN breaking news.

BROOKE BALDWIN, CNN ANCHOR: All right, Wolf, thank you so much. Great to be with all of you on this Tuesday. I'm Brooke Baldwin. You're watching CNN.

Breaking news today. Wow. Hillary Clinton. We have learned from the FBI, Hillary Clinton exposed top-secret information to hackers, was extremely careless in her use of personal e-mail servers, personal devices. This is what we heard today from the FBI.

But that is not the headline. The headline is this, that the FBI is not recommending charges for what she did. FBI Director James Comey, today, giving a scornful assessment of Secretary Clinton's actions while she served as secretary of state. But ultimately saying it falls short of criminal intent. Here is Director Comey just a short time ago.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JAMES COMEY, FBI DIRECTOR: From the group of 30,000 e-mails returned to the State Department in 2014, 110 e-mails in 52 e-mail chains have been determined by the owning agency to contain classified information at the time they were sent or received. Eight of those chains contained information that was top secret at the time they were sent, 36 of those chains contained secret information at the time, and eight contained confidential information at the time.

Although we did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information, there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information. Although there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case.

Prosecutors necessarily weigh a number of factors before deciding whether to bring charges. There are obvious considerations, like the strength of the evidence, especially regarding intent, responsible decisions also consider the context of a person's actions and how similar situations have been handled in the past.

In looking back at our investigations into the mishandling or removal of classified information, we cannot find a case that would support bringing criminal charges on these facts. All the cases prosecuted involved some combination of clearly intentional and willful mishandling of classified information or vast quantities of information exposed in such a way as to support inference of intentional misconduct or indications of disloyalty to the United States or efforts to obstruct justice. We do not see those things here. Although the Department of Justice makes final decisions on matters like this, we are expressing to Justice our view that no charges are appropriate in this case.

I know there will be intense public debate in the wake of this recommendation, as there was throughout the investigation. What I can assure the American people is that this investigation was done honestly, competently and independently. No outside influence of any kind was brought to bear.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BALDWIN: Unsurprisingly, Donald Trump wasting no time, tweeting his disdain here, quoting him, he says "the system is rigged. General Petraeus got in trouble for far less. Very, very unfair, As usual, bad judgment." And another, "FBI director said crooked Hillary compromised our national security. No charges. Wow. #riggedsystem."

Meantime, Hillary Clinton's campaign ready to lay all of this to rest with this statement. "As the secretary has long said, it was a mistake to use her personal e-mail and she would not do it again. We are glad that this matter is now resolved."

All of this as we are just an hour away from a campaign first this year. The president of the United States hitting the trail with the presumed Democratic nominee in the state of North Carolina. We'll take you there.

But first, Evan Perez kicks things off, our CNN justice correspondent.

You know, Comey said, while there may be some evidence of violations, no reasonable prosecutor would bring a case. Since DOJ said it would follow the recommendation of the FBI, does this mean this is a fait accompli?

EVAN PEREZ, CNN JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: We do expect, Brooke, that this will be the decision that the Justice department announced. Obviously they're going to take a little time to review what the FBI sends over. And my understanding is that the FBI is sending over a report - a voluminous report that will detail all the people that they've talked to, all the people - all of the evidence and the testimony that people have provided in this case that now lasts - has lasted about a year - a year of investigation. [14:05:04] But as Director Comey said, at this point, looking at all

the totality of evidence and including Hillary Clinton's own interview with the FBI over the weekend on Saturday, three and a half hours of interview, they've decided that there's not enough evidence of willful or intentional behavior here that would support bringing charges. Obviously as you noted at the top, there's plenty here to find fault with what she did, not least of which is he mentions that there's seven e-mail chains in which Hillary Clinton participates in the conversation that had direct information about classified or special access programs.

Now, that's problematic for one reason, politically at least, because we've heard now for the last few months from Mrs. Clinton's campaign that, you know, that she did not send or receive any classified information that was marked as such. And, obviously, she's using that very legalese type of language. But what the FBI director is saying is essentially, this stuff was classified and, given her position, she should have known it's classified. It had no business on this home- brewed server that she's been using - that she was using when she was secretary of state, Brooke.

BALDWIN: OK, Evan, thank you. You know, in one of the most stinging indictments, Comey laid out the escalated threat of Clinton's e-mail usage while on foreign soil and expressed his shock at just how unsecure Clinton's server was.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

COMEY: None of these e-mails should have been on any kind of unclassified system. But their presence is especially concerning because all of these e-mails were housed on unclassified personal servers, not even supported by full-time security staff like those found at agencies and departments of the United States government, or even with a commercial e-mail service like g-mail.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BALDWIN: So with me now, CNN's senior legal analyst, Jeffrey Toobin, senior Washington correspondent Jeff Zeleny, Trump surrogate Boris Epshteyn, and Hilary Rosen, CNN political commentator and Hillary Clinton supporter.

Welcome to all of you.

Jeff Toobin, I'm turning to you off the bat. Hello. On the law - and I know Trump mentioned Petraeus. And in your response, I want you to distinguish the difference here.

JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: OK.

BALDWIN: This is all about intent, right?

TOOBIN: Correct.

BALDWIN: So explain to me, you know, connecting the dots, why Comey is saying she did not intend to intentionally disclose. TOOBIN: Some crimes are what are known as specific intent crimes, and

some are known as strict liability crimes. If you are drunk driving and you're caught going too fast and you pass the breath - you fail the breathalyzer and you say to you police officer, but I didn't intend to drive too fast, they don't care. It doesn't - you intent is irrelevant. But this crime, disclosure - improper disclosure of classified information is a specific intent crime. And that means it's not enough that you improperly disclose classified information. You have to know that you are breaking the law and do it anyway. And that's the difference between this case and the Petraeus case because the Petraeus case, General Petraeus -

BALDWIN: Which is what Trump points out in the tweet.

TOOBIN: Right. He disclosed notes and papers to his biographer and girlfriend and he later admitted he knew it was classified. Hillary Clinton has said from the beginning that she thought she was not disclosing classified information. Now, it turns out she was wrong. But in terms of her intent, there is nothing that the FBI has discovered that contradicts her claim that she thought she was dealing with unclassified information.

And that's why - there's one part of Comey's statement we haven't talked about that I think is very important. He looked at - the FBI looked at, did they make any attempt, Hillary Clinton or her people, to sort of cover up what she did, to destroy documents? Because that's usually a sign of a guilty conscience, of criminal intent. And they didn't find anything like that. And I think that's very significant in the ultimate conclusion.

BALDWIN: OK. OK. So, again, you know, the headline, this is the fact that she did not do any of this intentionally. Huge burden off of her back. But still, Jeff Zeleny, you know, you hear the word "careless" mentioned over and over. And so here are my two things because for months we know she has said over and over that she never sent or received anything that was classified at the time, and, two, that she handed over every work related e-mail. When you listen to, you know, Director Comey today, that's not entirely true.

Jeff.

JEFF ZELENY, CNN SENIOR WASHINGTON CORRESPONDENT: It's not entirely true, Brooke. And that is one of the reasons that Hillary Clinton is going to have to re-litigate all of this all over again. She is going to have to apologize again. She's going to have to say, look, it was not my best use of judgment. But now if anyone was not paying attention over the last year or so to this, this is coming directly when people are paying attention. And this is a problem for Hillary Clinton. She's been trying to improve her trust numbers. She's been trying to improve her credibility numbers. This is going to erode that and make that more difficult.

[14:10:09] So, yes, they are very happy that there are no criminal charges recommended. Obviously that would have been nothing short of a disaster for her campaign. But this is hardly a clean bill of health, if you will. There's plenty in here, in the director's very long press conference, for Donald Trump to pick over. And he already is. And plenty in here for anyone who is skeptical of the Clintons, skeptical of her (INAUDIBLE) this.

So she is going to have to address this directly. I'm not sure if she will here today in North Carolina. But, Brooke, in the coming days and weeks she is going to have to try and prepare once again, you know, an answer, questions of people who wonder why she did this in the first place? It goes right to her judgment and right to the fact that, you know, the rules don't always seem to apply to the Clintons. That's something that is really a problem for her.

BALDWIN: I mean Hilary Rosen, to all of Jeff's points, you even look at a recent, you know, CNN poll, 66 percent of Americans think her personal use of e-mail on a private server were wrong. And so even if, you know, she won't face any sort of criminal charges, which is huge, huge, huge for her, still, how do you - or how does the Clinton camp tell the American voter, no, we don't think she's above the law, no, she can't, you know, skirt around the rules, you need to trust her?

HILARY ROSEN, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well, two things. First, I go back to the point that Jeffrey Toobin and Jeff Zeleny just made, which is that the FBI, after this thorough investigation, found that actually this wasn't a trust issue. This was just a bad judgment issue. And so - but, you know, when - when asked by the FBI to hand everything over, to do everything, she did. There's no - there's no finding that said that she did - made any attempt to hide anything from the government when they looked into this.

So I go back to this larger point, which is, this may seem like the worst thing possible. In context, it's kind of the one dark stain on Hillary Clinton's record here in terms of judgment. But elections will end up being about choices. And Donald Trump has 400 lawsuits against him of, you know, unethical business behavior, against, you know, failure to pay taxes, against cheating construction workers out of pay, against, you know, cheating former business colleagues and the middle class.

BALDWIN: OK.

ROSEN: And so what I think ends up happening is, the Clinton campaign has to find a way to have this not be the only conversation about Hillary Clinton, and will end up being sort of one thing that gets a lot of attention versus Trump's hundreds of things that get a little bit of attention.

BALDWIN: All right -

ROSEN: That's going to be a challenge going forward.

BALDWIN: On that, I know, Boris, you're, you know, I'm sure you're chomping at the bit to get on this and I know I heard Hilary say, you know, this isn't a trust issue, it's a judgment issue, which is what I know that, you know, Donald Trump has pointed out before. And I imagine that, you know, the Trump campaign is en route to the editing house to cut the ad, you know, where you have Comey saying "careless" over and over. BORIS EPSHTEYN, TRUMP SURROGATE: We'd love for Hilary Rosen to go out

there and say over and over again that her candidate has bad judgment. Yes, that is the truth. She does have bad judgment. Hillary Clinton is somebody who would have been fired from her job as secretary of state, according to FBI Director Comey. He said that this should not go unpunished. If this was someone else, they would have been reprimanded in termed of security, in terms of administrative sanctions. So Hillary Clinton, again, if she was still secretary of state, would have to have been fired by who? Barack Obama. And now he's stumping for her.

ROSEN: He - he didn't say that. Comey didn't say that.

EPSHTEYN: So - yes, that's absolutely what he said.

ROSEN: No, he didn't.

EPSHTEYN: And now Barack Obama is going to be stumping for Hillary Clinton today.

And in terms of her history of bad judgement -

BALDWIN: No. Hilary, jump back in.

EPSHTEYN: In terms of her history of bad judgment, let's not forget the Clinton Foundation and Benghazi. This is one of a million instances of bad judgment by Hillary Clinton. But it's a pretty severe one. Any time you celebrate not being indicted by the FBI as a major candidate for president, it's a pretty bad day for you.

BALDWIN: Hilary, respond to that.

ROSEN: Well, first of all, Comey did not say what he just said. That - Comey simply said that were somebody still in office around this, that there would be some administrative sanctions being -

EPSHTEYN: Right.

ROSEN: And that is a very different thing. And - but he also said that the broader State Department had a lax of security and so -

EPSHTEYN: Under their boss, Hillary Clinton.

ROSEN: This - having this one case - for many years and that that is not been necessarily a Hillary Clinton issue.

EPSHTEYN: Oh, come on, Hilary, that's an unfair and untrue.

ROSEN: So I think what you have to -

EPSHTEYN: It was under Hillary Clinton. She was the one who put that server in place.

ROSEN: I think what you have to look at -

BALDWIN: Let her finish. Let her finish. ROSEN: You know, I'm - I'm looking for the time when a Donald Trump is as forthright about a mistake that he made as Hillary Clinton has been about this mistake that she made. The American people are very forgiving when you're honest about them. And that's what Comey said today, Hillary Clinton was honest about her mistakes.

EPSHTEYN: No, he did not say that. Absolutely not.

BALDWIN: OK. OK. OK. OK, hold on a second.

ROSEN: He did say that.

[14:15:01] BALDWIN: Let me - let me - let me hit pause on this conversation. We're keeping all of you around.

Again, just a reminder, where Jeff is standing, Charlotte, North Carolina, we are an hour away from seeing for the first time this, you know, this general election cycle, the president of the United States on the trail with Hillary Clinton all the while, all of what we've discussed, sort of, you know, hanging over them or a burden off of her back, depending on where you're coming from.

We also have just learned what the White House has just said moments ago about the major announcement from the FBI today. Will President Obama touch this at all when he steps on that stage in Charlotte? More on that with my panel, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BALDWIN: All right, you're watching CNN. I'm Brooke Baldwin.

Back to the breaking news here. The FBI recommendation that no charges should be filed against Hillary Clinton comes on the very day of a major high point for her campaign. The president of the United States returning to the trail, and this time on her behalf. Eight years ago, when then-Senator Barack Obama was in North Carolina, Hillary Clinton was his rival as they vied for that Democratic nomination.

Flash forward to today, President Obama is hoping to make Secretary Clinton his successor. Minutes from now, he will do his first Clinton campaign event there in Charlotte, North Carolina, and the presumptive nominee will be by his side.

[14:20:06] It is happening a mere four hours before and 150 miles from Donald Trump's event, also in North Carolina, just a hop, skip and a jump away in Raleigh. The southern showdown underscores how much the tar heel state is in play in 2016.

Now, Democrats want North Carolina after seeing Mitt Romney take it in 2012. Let's go to CNN's senior political correspondent Brianna Keilar, who is there in Charlotte where that event is set to take place.

My friend, we have just learned from the White House that President Obama specifically will not touch or will not make any mention of what Director Comey did earlier today in the FBI news. Do we have any kind of indication that Hillary Clinton might say anything about it? BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: I don't think that

we're expecting that she's going to, Brooke. I don't think they want to bring that up in what is really an attempt to build a lot of enthusiasm here in North Carolina. So you heard the Clinton campaign saying that they are pleased and highlighting that these are career professionals at the FBI, trying to downplay some of the politics. And so certainly those charges coming from Donald Trump and those on the right.

But what we're really seeing here is Hillary Clinton trying to get a little push from President Obama. His approval ratings are significantly higher than hers. More than ten points higher. And this has a lot to do with this state in particular. You said it, 2012, President Obama wasn't able to get enough support to win North Carolina like he did in 2008. He's hoping, Hillary Clinton is hoping that that can change for her in 2016. And what they're hoping is that this is a must-win state for Donald Trump and that they can deprive him of that. They think that if they can build some enthusiasm and also highlight him as the alternative, that she's going to have a shot.

But, Brooke, with all of this FBI, with this investigation, even though it seems to have come to an end without charges, you had the FBI Director Comey saying that she was still - and her aides were still extremely careless. So there is this issue of judgment and trustworthiness. And President Obama, I think what the Clinton campaign is hoping, is that he's going to help her dispense with some of that today as he tries to vouch for her character and for her fitness to govern.

BALDWIN: So as the FBI news, as you pointed out though, is still swirling, Donald Trump, who's not only, you know, tweeted about this, he's also just been blasting how President Obama and Hillary Clinton, traveling together, Air Force One, calling out, you know, this is your tax dollars at play. Can you talk a little about that?

KEILAR: I can. And this is something that you will hear certainly - I think you heard allegations like this - or people bringing this up when President Obama was running, too, because it does resonate with taxpayers, the idea that their money could be used for campaigning. The Clinton campaign is saying - and this is the case, they do reimburse for what is really the comparable cost of a plane similar to Air Force One to fly. This would be the case if Hillary Clinton were on plane or not. So there is a reimbursement from the campaign.

Of course there are costs associated when the president is flying on Air Force One. That's what happens. It's just more expensive than flying a normal Boeing plane. That is just the case. But they are being very careful to push back on what Donald Trump is saying and saying that they are working within the guidelines for how they do this. It is of a considerable expense to Hillary Clinton and her - or her campaign is putting forward, Brooke.

BALDWIN: All right, Brianna Keilar, thank you very much, my friend.

Let me bring my panel back to talk about the politics of all of this today. Jeffrey Toobin is back. Hilary Rosen, a Hillary Clinton supporter. Boris Epshteyn, Trump surrogate. And potentially, momentarily, Jeff Zeleny will pop back in front of that camera there in Charlotte.

So, Hilary Rosen, to you, just on how the politics will fall today. You know, the president's approval rating is at, you know, 52 percent. That's massive. Obviously the Clinton campaign wanting some of that magic dust to sprinkle around her. But, still, today, you know, the headline swirling is Comey's announcement.

ROSEN: Yes. And what I think you have is closure for a lot of voters who wanted to support Hillary Clinton, who don't like what Donald Trump has to offer, but might have been a little bit worried that maybe she would get in further trouble. That's not going to happen. And so I think - you know, look, this isn't going to satisfy everybody. It's going to keep conspiracy theorists busy for the rest of the campaign. And, of course, as Jeff Zeleny said, the media is going to continue to pick at, you know, her answers versus what the FBI said. But for the majority of voters, I think that they will let Hillary Clinton move on and talk about what she's going to do for the country and what, you know, her concerns are for the middle class. I do think that this represents a significant closure here.

[14:25:12] BALDWIN: Boris, would you agree - and, you know, I know how you feel about all of this, but would you agree that the FBI did an independent, impartial investigation?

EPSHTEYN: Yes, I do agree that they did an independent investigation. And there's no issue with the investigation as far as I'm concerned. I do have an issue with the result. As a matter of fact -

BALDWIN: Actually, forgive me, Boris. Let me hit pause. Let's go to the State Department. They are talking right now about the FBI news and the e-mails.

QUESTION: E-mails to determine that it's a lax culture. But clearly the FBI found enough, you know, Secretary Clinton's intent or whatever notwithstanding, that generally that there were a lot of officials that they came across in the scope of this investigation which led them to believe that the culture is not taken as seriously as it could be.

JOHN KIRBY, STATE DEPARTMENT SPOKESMAN: Well, I'll let the FBI director speak to their findings and recommendations and his investigation, as he should. The question was, do I share - do we share the assessment of the culture at the - for the - at the institution of the State Department to be lax. And we do not share that assessment. We take it very seriously.

QUESTION: So you think - well, clearly he found it in this previous administration, in the previous term. So you're saying that maybe that there was a lax culture that doesn't exist anymore?

KIRBY: No, I'm not saying that. I'm not saying that at all. I'm not parsing words here. I'm saying that the State Department has, in the past, and does today, take the treatment of classified information very seriously. And when we - and when we have -

QUESTION: So was this just bad apples?

KIRBY: Pardon?

QUESTION: It was just a few people that did not take enough care?

KIRBY: I'm not - I'm not going to speak to - any more specifically about the findings and recommendations that the FBI made and announced today. What I can tell you is, we don't share the broad assessment that there is a lax culture here at the State Department when it comes to dealing with classified information. Quite the contrary, we take it very seriously.

QUESTION: I have - I have one more. I have one more. Can you - the FBI director said that had some of these people still been in office, that they would have been subject - or could have been subject to administrative penalties. Is anybody that's currently employed by the State Department going to have any notes in their files as a result of anything that their e-mails uncovered in terms of their communications? And then also, some of the previous employees that worked for Secretary Clinton that were found to have exchanged what is now believed to be classified information, are they going to have kind of posthumous notes put in their file should they ever seek to be employed by the U.S. government again, and does the State Department do that or does the FBI do that? And is that through a PM (ph)? Like what's the process there?

KIRBY: So let me answer it this way. And I think I alluded to this at the top. We're going to determine the appropriate next steps following a decision by the Department of Justice. And that's where this really lays right now. We have, as you know, and I've said, we have an administrative process to evaluate cases where information may have been mishandled. And as I've said previously, at the request of the FBI, we didn't move forward with that process so as not to interfere with their investigation.

We also don't believe that it's appropriate at this time, given that there are - that the matter is now before the Department of Justice to determine their next step, to make decisions or not to make decisions. We don't think it's appropriate for us to move forward on that at this time. So I just don't have an update for you on any possible timing or scope of that review process.

QUESTION: So what would be the - so once the Department of Justice makes their recommendation, then you would determine what administrative processes you want to move forward with?

KIRBY: I think we need to wait to see what the Justice Department decides to do now in the wake of the FBI investigation before we move forward one way or the other. And we want to allow the proper time and space for that before we decide anything further with respect to those issues.

QUESTION: (INAUDIBLE) on this and if you don't have the answers if you could undertake to take them. As it's been explained to me, there are two separate processes that can be undertaken here. One of them is an administrative process, and the other is a security clearance related process. As it's been explained to me - but I'd like to confirm - the administrative process governs solely people who are currently employed by the Department of State. So can you confirm that that's the case, that administrative processes or sanctions don't apply to people who are no longer employed by State?

[14:30:03] Second, as it's been explained to me, it is possible for people who are no longer employed at State, but who retain a security clearance.