Return to Transcripts main page


Family Autopsy: Stephon Clark Shot 8 Times, Mostly in the Back; Roseanne Barr Under Fire for Embracing Conspiracy Theories; Interview with Congressman Ryan Costello of Pennsylvania. Aired on 7-8p ET

Aired March 30, 2018 - 19:00   ET


BLITZER: ... Happy Passover. Happy Easter. Erin Burnett OutFront starts right now.

BRIANNA KEILAR, SENIOR POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT, ANCHOR FOR CNN : In Out front next breaking news, the FBI detained and questioned the Trump campaign advisor. And now he is set to appear before Mueller's grand jury, plus Stephon Clark, an unarmed black man shot eight times by police, seven from behind according to a private autopsy. So what are police saying now?

And Roseanne already renewed for its second season, but will Roseanne's embrace of French conspiracy theories to rail the show's success? Let's go out front.

KEILAR: Good evening. I'm Brianna Keilar in for Erin Burnett and we begin with breaking ness. CNN is learning that the FBI detained and questioned an informal Trump campaign advisor as he landed in Boston's Logan Airport after arriving from an international flight.

Federal agents greeted Ted Malloch who was once rumored to be a candidate for U.S. ambassador to the EU at the airport as part of special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation. And now he's scheduled to appear before Mueller's grand jury next month.

Let's get to Justice Correspondent, Evan Perez on this breaking story. So, Evan, who is this man and what does Mueller want from him?

EVAN PEREZ, CNN JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: Well, Brianna, this is some pretty aggressive tactics being used by Robert Mueller's investigators. Ted Malloch was stopped as he entered the United States in Boston Airport.

He was coming in on a flight from London. And according to him he says that the FBI took his phones. They took his electronic devices and they did a search of it. And then they sat him down for about an hour. He talked to an FBI agent who tried to get information out of him.

He said they asked him about his connections to Roger Stone who as you know is a supporter of the president, a vocal supporter of the President as well as Wikileaks and they asked him if he had ever been to the Ecuadorian embassy, which is, of course, where Julian Assange, the founder of Wikileaks, has been living for the last couple of years.

So, we don't know exactly what they believe he has, what information they believe Ted Malloch has. But now, he has a date with the grand jury, the Mueller grand jury on April 13th here in the United States.

Again, he says that there's not much that he knows, but we'll see when he shows up here in Washington to meet the grand jury. We have a statement from Ted Malloch and he says, quote, "What could they want from me, a policy wonk and philosophical defender of Trump? I am not an operative, have no Russia contacts, and aside from appearing on air and in print often to defend and congratulate our president, have done nothing wrong."

Again, he's going to get his chance to talk to the grand jury on April 13th here in Washington.

KEILAR: So what does this tell us, Evan, about the Mueller investigation, where it might be headed?

PEREZ: Well, you know, Brianna, it tells us that this appears to ramping up. A lot of people, including, especially people close to the President like to say that they think this is an investigation that's winding down, that it's almost over. Certainly, I think some of the president's legal team like to assure him that this is almost over.

This doesn't tell us that. And it also sort of gives us perhaps a peek at the way the Mueller investigators are still trying to get at the central question of whether or not there was any middlemen, any people in the middle who are trying to connect the Trump campaign and Russians.

And, of course, we know that Wikileaks, according to the U.S. intelligence community, was sort of a stand-in for the Russian intelligence agencies in disseminating some of the stolen emails that were taken from the DNC and from Clinton campaign folks.

So, again, this appears to be the central focus of the Mueller investigators. They've not given up on the collusion questions. And this goes right to the middle of that.

KEILAR: All right. Evan Perez, thank you so much.

And turning now to our other top story, Trump going rogue. National security officials are now struggling to understand what the president meant when he declared that the U.S. is pulling out of Syria and very soon.


DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: We're knocking the hell out of ISIS. We'll be coming out of Syria like very soon. Let the other people take care of it now."


TRUMP: Very soon. Very soon. We're coming out.


KEILAR: Like very soon, a remark that caught White House aides, the Defense Department, the State Department, and most likely U.S. allies off guard.

The Pentagon telling CNN they haven't heard any additional details about this plan. And the Wall Street Journal just now reporting, President Trump has directed the State Department to freeze more than $200 million in recovery funds for Syria. White House Correspondent Boris Sanchez out front in West Palm Beach, Florida for us.

So Boris, the President is at Mar-a-Lago tonight and there are growing concerns and outrage over these surprise comments about a major front in the war against ISIS.

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Now, that's right, Brianna. We're still working to confirm whether the president's comments were actually part of his prepared remarks.

Keep in mind this was a speech to a union in Ohio about infrastructure. The president as he often does went off-the-cuff to talk about Roseanne Barr's sitcom ratings, trade with South Korea, Democrats, the second amendment, et cetera.

So, we're not sure if this was part of the plan, but these comments certainly the most surprising part of the president's speech yesterday in Richfield, particularly because of the reaction that we've gotten from a number of administration officials, one senior administration official telling CNN that they're still trying to figure out what the president meant by that remark.

One official at the Pentagon telling us that they were caught off guard, specifically because the United States doesn't really have a determined policy yet for the future of Syria and its leader, Bashar- al-Assad. A National Security Council spokesperson only told CNN today that the president's words speak for themselves, so read into that what you will.

Of course, this is also noteworthy because the president often has criticized other leaders for telegraphing their moves, in other words, telling their opponents what they're planning to do. The president clearly did that yesterday. And beyond that it also leads to a question of what happens next.

The president has been critical of previous administrations for the role that the United States played in Iraq and leaving that country after war there. Now, he's apparently okay with the idea of the United States creating a vacuum in Syria and leaving Russia to handle its future.


KEILAR: Boris Sanchez in West Palm Beach, thank you. Out front, we have Mark Preston, CNN's Senior Political Analyst.

April Ryan, White House correspondent with the American Urban Radio Networks and retired U.S. Army Major General Spider Marks with us.

General Marks, I want to start with you because I wonder what you make of this announcement from the president. Is this a real plan? Is it not really a plan? If it is a real plan, it seems to be one that no one in his administration seems read in on.

JAMES SPIDER MARKS, MILITARY ANALYST FOR CNN, RETIRED U.S. ARMY: Well, Brianna, it's certainly not a plan. But when the president says this is what I intend to do. This is what I'd like to try to achieve, it suddenly becomes a plan.

And I can tell you there are a lot of folks that right now are trying to put the pieces together to come back to the White House to say, "Look, if this is what you meant, this is what we can achieve. Here are some options that might be able to lead us in that direction. And most importantly, here are the risks associated with this proclamation or at least this intention that you've stated."

The key thing is the United States stands to lose tremendously if we were to very, very quickly leave Syria. We've got to take a much longer view of the conflict that's taking place there and the competition that's there and the two factors, really, that we need to consider.

Number one is Russia and our role relative to Russia, an opportunity either to cooperate or to compete with Russia and determine what some type of end state that looks like, and also Turkey. Turkish forces are in Syria right now. And we stand the very likelihood of seeing Turkey leaving NATO this year. I mean it could happen this year and that would be a long-term disaster for the United States and it would play directly into Russia's objectives.

KEILAR: April, as Boris pointed out, it's just really ironic coming from a president who has repeatedly said this.


DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: We no longer tell our enemies our plans. America's enemies must never know our plans or believe they can wait us out.

I don't want to telegraph what I'm doing or what I'm thinking. I'm not like other administrations where they say, "We're going to do this in four weeks." And that doesn't work that way.

My administration will not telegraph exactly military plans and what they are.


KEILAR: April, he's clearly not meeting his own standard there. APRIL RYAN, WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT, BUREAU CHIEF FOR AMERICAN URBAN


I mean he basically chastised the George W. Bush Administration and the Barack Obama Administration, prior administrations particularly when it came to Iraq. But this president has made this pronouncement.

He needs victories. And that's one of the reasons probably why he came out of the box saying, "Look, we're doing this" because I talked to an intelligence official who has worked in various presidential administrations on intelligence and they said, "The president basically has a win here. He's doing the right thing, winning and leaving" because the mission is unclear after this point, because already the Islamic State caliphate has been defeated and there is an attempt to keep the Kurds and the Turks away from each other, keep them separate.

So basically, after this there is a win, but what do you do? So they're saying the president is actually right here. So what he is trying to do is show that there is a win instead of faking a win or trying to embellish a win. He's got a win. And he is trying to make it clear and put it in that win column because he doesn't have that many clear wins as of yet.

KEILAR: Mark, how does this affect officials who are executing his national security agenda or trying to?

MARK PRESTON, CNN'S EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF POLITICAL PROGRAMMING, SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: Well, that's a great question. And it's probably one of the most concerning questions.

First of all, we don't know if the folks who are in the positions as we speak today will be in their positions say in two or three weeks. That's because we're going to see a new national security advisor. We expect John Bolton to go in and to clean house, to clean house from the NSC. And that in itself will determine kind of how President Trump moves forward in making his foreign policy decisions.

What I will tell you up to this point though is that there is an acknowledgement in the diplomatic corps as well as in the military that oftentimes that they have to go out and they have to clean up for what the president has said and has done.

Now, we've seen this on some very big issues such as NATO. We'll saw the likes of General Mattis having to go over and to calm the fears of our NATO allies, but we're also seeing this with the vice president. We're also seeing this with lower level aides that you don't necessarily see in the headlines every day, Brianna.

KEILAR: General Marks, how does this affect military leaders, including those out in the field who might think perhaps he actually does have some designs on a drawdown here, especially when you consider that he has really surprised them before with other announcements. It was earlier this month when the President popped into the briefing

room to announce a major development with North Korea. And some Pentagon officials told CNN they didn't have any knowledge that the president had just agreed to meet Kim Jong-un. How does this affect them?

PRESTON: Well, certainly there are plans that are on the shelf as a matter of routine. I mean this is what large military organizations do. They are routinely in the process of trying to design plans around contingencies.

So, for the president to make a proclamation like this, there are probably a few options on the shelf right now. So, at the operational level it's, I would say it's business as usual. At the strategic level, the challenge is each one of those combatant commanders, look, you've got the Central Command that owns that piece of turf in Syria.

You've got the Special Operations Command, which is doing a lot of the very precise heavy lifting in that part of the world. Then you have NATO, you got the Supreme Allied Commander Europe.

Those three American commanders have an array of networks and an array of alliances and partnerships and they have to communicate very, very clearly. This proclamation by the president makes it very difficult because there is little predictability in what the president is saying and what exists in terms of what those combatant commanders are saying to their partners.

KEILAR: April, on another note. The president who stands accused of sexual assault or misconduct by at least 15 women has just issued what is - it's really a customary proclamation which designates April as national sexual assault awareness month. No doubt this was done on a Friday night for a reason.

RYAN: Yes. Friday, big Friday. Fridays are pretty big at this White House. But you know, this president is moving head-on with this. And for them to move head-on is basically saying this is in your face. And they are trying to send a signal that we're doing this and we are not guilty of anything that they're saying.

Yes, I may have said something to Billy Bush, but we are moving forward. And they're trying to use this as a statement, this proclamation by saying, "We are not guilty, so we're doing this to show that our hands are clean."

But we are hearing from other people, we are hearing from lawyers, we are hearing from former porn stars or Playmates, what have you. So this is an attempt by this White House to say that we have not done anything wrong. And we're moving forward with this.

Now, Brianna, the big issue, will this president hold events as it relates to this proclamation? That's a whole other story because once you get into events you get into a situation where the president talks to people in town halls. He may have to Q&A answer questions and I don't think this White House wants to do that, but again they are trying to move forward and say, "Hey, we are innocent and we are doing this and we're standing with the women." That's what they're trying to say.

KEILAR: April Ryan, thank you so much.

General Marks and Mark Preston, I appreciate all of you.

Out front next, breaking news, the White House not happy tonight with Scott Pruitt over his controversial living arrangements and his security detail, is the EPA chief perhaps the next one to go?

Plus unarmed and shot in the back, the startling private autopsy on Stephon Clark sparking outrage tonight. And Stormy Daniels attorney says no amount of money will make her go away. How long can the president avoid Stormy?


KEILAR: And we have breaking news, the White House exasperated with the EPA Administrator, Scott Pruitt after scathing reports on multiple fronts. Among them CNN is learning his unprecedented 24/7 security detail has gone with him on personal trips, including a trip to the Rose Bowl, including a family vacation to Disneyland and according to Democratic senator Sheldon Whitehouse, that is why we have learned this.

Now, Pruitt also is under scrutiny for renting a DC apartment owned by the wife of an energy lobbyist. He got a pretty sweet deal on that apartment, only $50 a night. That's according to ABC News.

Could Pruitt maybe be the next to go? One source at the EPA telling CNN Pruitt's goose is cooked. Just yesterday, CNN asked the White House if shakeups were done and the ominous answer was, "I'll have to get back to you."

Rene Marsh is out front.

RENE MARSH, CNN'S GOVERNMENT REGULATION AND TRANSPORTATION CORRESPONDENT: Two days after firing on cabinet secretary, the White House is growing increasingly frustrated with another cabinet member, sources tell CNN.

The focus now on EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt following two damning stories in less than a day. First, CNN reporting that Pruitt went to the Rose Bowl, the college football semifinal featuring his home team, the Oklahoma Sooners.


SCOTT PRUITT, U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY CHIEF: The best game in college football all year long.


MARSH: Then took his family to Disneyland. Both personal trips with is EPA security detail in tow. Pruitt also used that security for trips home to Tulsa, Oklahoma. All that according to Senator Sheldon Whitehouse after the Democrat said he viewed document that backup the claim.

Whitehouse has been a fierce critic of Pruitt since his nomination to the EPA.


SHELDON WHITEHOUSE: U.S. SENATOR, AMERICAN LAWYER: ... this godawful nominee. Clearly, this is an epic ram job.


MARSH: Senator Whitehouse recently sent a letter to the EPA's inspector general laying out the new details about Pruitt's round-the- clock security detail. The letter, which CNN reviewed raises questions about the cause of Pruitt's unprecedented EPA-funded security.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Let him go on vacation, if he wants to go to Disneyland, put on a baseball cap and some sunglasses. Nobody knows who he is. He's not that famous.


MARSH: The EPA tells CNN because of the unprecedented number of threats; Administrator Pruitt follows the same security protocol whether he is in his personal or official capacity.

Pruitt is also facing scrutiny over the condo he lived in when he moved to Washington. ABC News first reported that Pruitt has been renting a condo at this Capitol Hill property, which CNN confirmed is owned by the wife of a prominent energy lobbyist whose firm represents a long list of companies that are regulated by the EPA.

Bloomberg News reports that Pruitt's arrangement allowed him to only pay $50 for the nights he actually slept there for a total of $6,100 over six months, well below market value.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It appears to be an impermissible gift. And here is why it matters. Because the owner of this condo is married to a lobbyist who seemingly has business through his firm, the lobbying firm, important client interests at the EPA.


MARSH: Well, Brianna, I should point out that the EPA does have an ethics counsel to consult with situations like this. I spoke with an EPA official with direct knowledge of the situation who says this was not an ethics issue.

The condo was not considered a gift because Pruitt paid the value for it in the form of rent. The source added that the landlord was a friend of Pruitt and that the law, quote, "Does not ban federal employees from receiving a gift."

But we spoke with several ethics experts who disagree with that line of thinking especially considering Pruitt paid below market value for the condo. I do want to point out, Brianna, that we reached out to the EPA multiple times today for an explanation about Pruitt's living arrangements, but the agency did not respond.

KEILAR: All right. Rene Marsh, thank you.

Out front now Democratic Congressman Don Beyer who is one of the first members of Congress to officially call for Pruitt's resignation. He is the vice ranking member on the Science, Space and Technology Committee.

Sir, thanks for being with us.


KEILAR: I want to play devil's advocate a little bit here because the EPA says that Pruitt has been threatened and that he needs the security. That his security needs related to his job don't stop just because he's not on the job at a given moment. What do you say that?

BEYER: Yes, except I look at all the other cabinet secretaries, secretaries of state, people like that and no one has had this kind of security now or before. I look at 435, 535 members of Congress and we have the armed guards and all the magnetometers that everyone goes home unsecured every night or every weekend.

It's really unprecedented to spend more than $2 million on the security. Not only that, to do it to the Rose Bowl or to Disneyland, places where no one knows who he is.

KEILAR: So, and on this issue of renting an apartment from an energy lobbyist's wife, you heard what the EPA is saying, the spokesman said that Administrator's Scott Pruitt's housing arrangement for both himself and family was not a gift and the lease was consistent with federal ethics regulations.

Why not letting investigation take its course before calling for his head?

BEYER: Well, this whole notion is so different from any ethics thing I've ever heard. When you get essentially that the neighboring condo next door is renting for $5,000 month, if he stayed there all three days a month, it would only be $1,500, it was a massive gift to him.

And basically from a couple that are energy lobbyists, that have business before him, Members of Congress I think we have a $15 limit on gifts we can accept. So we see politicians through the years get in trouble over taking things that don't match up with what people in the average public can get. It's the whole notion of really getting beneficial treatment because you're a public office holder. This is not the kind of deal they did with anybody else.

KEILAR: There are also questions, of course, about Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke. He has come under fire for his use of private planes, for his security detail, for a non-government trip to Europe and also most recently replacing six historical doors in his office to the tune of $139,000.

Zinke, of course, says he's gotten that figured down to a palty I guess you could say or not, $75,000. Do you think he should go too?

BEYER: Well, I want to focus on Pruitt for the minute because Zinke has made the argument that historical requirements require those expensive doors, but nothing required Pruitt to give a non-bid contract of $128,000 to a PR firm to investigate the emails and the Facebook posts of EPA employees.

Nothing required him to do $43,000 for a secret phone booth in his office when there is the same skiff that you use for confidential conversations on a different floor of the EPA. His misuse of taxpayer dollars over and over again is really what's concerning.

And that's why I think he should resign. If doesn't resign, the president should fire him. And, Brianna, the really big picture though, we look at these individual instances of ethical violations. But the real concern is that he's fought the Clean Air Act, he's fought the Clean Water Act. He's put more arsenic and mercury and carbon dioxide into our atmosphere. You have six former EPA administrators, Democratic and Republican, saying that this guy doesn't even understand what the mission of the EPA is.

KEILAR: Congressman Beyer, thank you so much out front with us tonight.

BEYER: Thank you, Brianna.

KEILAR: Out Front next, shot eight times by police, most in the back. Stunning autopsy results just announced by the family of Stephon Clark, the unarmed black man who was shot by police in his grandmother's backyard.

And Roseanne gets snatched up for a second season after record ratings. Is she like Trump on and off the air?


ROSEANNE BARR, AMERICAN ACTRESS, COMEDIAN, WRITER, TELEVISION PRODUCER: Hi, I'm running for president of the United States of America as well as Prime Minister of Israel. This is a twofer...



[19:30:08] BURNETT: Breaking news, the Sacramento Police Department facing serious questions tonight after it was revealed that Stephon Clark, the unarmed black killed by police, was shot eight times, hit from both behind and on his side. That is according to a private family autopsy. The findings contradict police accounts of the deadly confrontation.

Police video from the March 18th shooting show police approaching Clark in his grandparent's backyard last week. Police have said they believed that he was armed in advancing towards him when they fatally shot him.

Ryan Young is OUTFRONT live from Sacramento for us.

Ryan, what is the family saying about the results?

RYAN YOUNG, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, Brianna, the family really speaking through their attorney this afternoon, sort of laying out this case, trying to change the narrative. In fact, they said that several times. The fact the 22-year-old, father of two, was charging toward officers is what Sacramento police said the first two days.

But the pathologist said they believe he was shot here on the side. He pointed to a shooting that he turned the body. After that happened, he was shot six more times in the back, once in the leg. We do know that officers fired some 20 shots all together. They believe that first shot impacted him and twisted his body, which they believe now shows a difference in the conversation that was happening for the first three days.

It goes on to say that any of those shots could have been a fatal shot to Stephon Clark but he sat there three or four minutes because he died from all those compounding shots. Now, this has been a charged community after that shooting. Several people taking to the streets, letting their voices be heard because they are upset about the shooting. What we did learn, though, is there will be more protests tonight and the next few days because protesters, we want to get their voice heard, to be out there.

But this is definitely creating a different conversation. People in that room, today, when this was said. We can hear people say murder, murder, murder. So, we have to see what happens next.

The Sacramento Police Department going on to say this, of course, is under investigation. They are not going to redo this line by line, but this investigation continues -- Brianna.

KEILAR: Brian Young, thank you for that report from Sacramento.

OUTFRONT now, Marc Lamont Hill, who's a CNN political commentator and Bill Stanton with us. He's a former NYPD officer.

Mark, the details from the family's pathologist that Stephon Clark was shot eight times, six times to his back, there is one time to his side, close to his back. There was one bullet to the thigh. Police have said that Clark advanced towards officers when they opened fire. But what does this tell you about that narrative?

MARC LAMONT HILL, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well, one, it contradicts and refutes that narrative that police offer. It also reminds us that this young man was in extraordinary pain. The medical experts say he may have been laying there three to ten minutes in extraordinary, excruciating pain while this was happening. The one to his thigh suggests that he was hitting the ground when he was shot, again.

So, all these things really speak a very different story than one of an aggressive, crazy man running toward police where they had to shoot for their lives, you know, 20, 30 rounds, landing eight times. So, this really challenges the narrative.

This, lastly, is a very, very familiar story. When police are caught or at least investigated for excessive force or for a bad shoot, they always say this person was coming toward us, they were resisting, they were violent, they were running through bullets like Ferguson or Brown. There are all kind of stories that rarely co-here with the evidence.

KEILAR: Bill, what do you think?

BILL STANTON, FORMER NYPD OFFICER: Well, I'm hearing lot of rhetoric, no disrespect. You know, we are talking the Brown case in Ferguson, which the whole hands up, don't shoot narrative was done --

KEILAR: Can we focus? Let's not focus --

STANTON: Well, exactly, I didn't bring it up. Marc brought it up.

KEILAR: I'm going to focus on Stephon Clark and the results of this private autopsy.

STANTON: What would you like to address? The 20 shots? Do you want to address was he actually --

KEILAR: No, I want to ask you about how when you see this autopsy and it is a private family autopsy, how do you square what the findings are with the narrative that the police have put out?

STANTON: Well, what I'm looking at, I'm listening to the narrative, looking at the chopper footage, I'm looking at the body cam footage. What I see are the police responding to a crime. I see them chasing an alleged perpetrator and the perpetrator is not stopping.

If the alleged perpetrator stopped and listened to the commands or figured out there's a police overhead and stopped and froze, without potentially putting his hands up, now I just put my hands up with my phone. You know, with adrenaline going and a dark atmosphere, you are in fear for your life. Now, we are going to see how this turns out, the logistics, the vector of the bullets.

[19:35:00] But right now, I have more questions than answers to be quite honest.

KEILAR: There are a lot of questions. No doubt.

I do want to ask you, Bill, police were responding to reports when you talk about the adrenaline and the state of mind of the officers, they were responding to reports of a man breaking car windows. Let's listen to the 911 call.


OPERATOR: What's going on there?

CALLER: This guy's going down the street breaking windows on cars -- he busted both my truck windows out. He's in people's backyard right now across the street from my place. He busted two of my windows and he broke the car windows across the street from me.


BURNETT: So, they are responding to someone breaking windows and yet, Stephon Clark was shot eight times and very quickly after officers put eyes on him, even difficult to put eyes on him in dark conditions. Does that show they went in with a disproportionate level of heightened alert?

STANTON: Absolutely not. Some of the most deadly encounters police have is responding to arguments between husband and wife or spouses. You know, a cop never knows what he is walking into. Sometimes the most routine calls could turn out deadly. Approximately 16 police officers have died this year alone based on being shot by guns.

So, cops are on alert. At the end of the night, they want to go home. So, you are chasing someone who is not stopping and who maybe spins around with a cell phone. Now, guess what? In the dark, with something in your hand --

HILL: Is there evidence? I'm curious is there evidence or are you conjecturing?

STANTON: I'm conjecturing.

HILL: OK, let's not do that --

STANTON: Fair enough.


KEILAR: So, Marc, I want to give you a chance.

HILL: Let me jump in. One, he could have figured out these were police officers. Well, one way for him to know they were police officers is for them to say, hey, we are police officers. They did not do that.

So, again, we are talking the responsibility here. You said police want to go home, so did he. That's why he was running to his house. You identify yourself.

STANTON: He was running home from where, the gym? Where was he running home from?

HILL: You spoke for a really long time uninterrupted, just allow me to make my arguments and you can respond.

STANTON: Yes, sir.

HILL: So, then, as they are running, it seems to me, and we see it in other cases, I wont mention specific cases. But there are many times police said, hey, we don't just jump out and pull our weapons out, we duck. If we think someone has a weapon, we duck. We take cover for ourselves.

They jumped out and immediately came toward him, again, escalating a situation. Again, the question isn't, could you think a cell phone in the dark is a gun, sure you could think that under certain circumstances. That's why grow through procedure that is the police didn't do.

Finally, there seems to be a very long pattern and history, statistically, of police officers thinking that particular alleged perpetrators have guns when they are cell phones or when they have nothing in their hands. We tend to think that black victims are more guilty than they are, that they are older than they are, that they are more aggressive than they are. We have to factor that into.

I agree -- I have no doubt the police officers wanted to go home. I have no doubt the police officers involved that night didn't say let's shoot and kill somebody. I think they really think he was armed and dangerous. The problem is, it's an irrational, unnecessary expectation under many circumstances. That's my concern.

KEILAR: We'll have to leave it there, gentlemen. Bill Stanton, Marc Lamont Hill, thank you so much to both of you for that.

OUTFRONT, next, Roseanne Barr from conspiracy theories about the Parkland students to spreading lies about pizzagate, the star of a hit TV show is no stranger to dangerous fringe theories.

And the Republican lawmaker who believes that Stormy Daniels is telling the truth. What does he think of evangelicals who are standing by the president?


[19:42:31] KEILAR: Tonight, the rebooted "Roseanne" sitcom renewed for a second season by ABC. But Roseanne herself is under new fire for promoting right wing fringe conspiracy theories.

Brynn Gingras is OUTFRONT.


ROSEANNE BARR, ACTRESS: Thank you for making America great again.

BRYNN GINGRAS, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): The "Roseanne" revival drew more viewers in the demo than any comedy on television since 2014, which means more eyeballs on the lead, who is no stranger to politics and controversy. BARR: To start curing this world, I am officially announcing that I

am running for president of the United States of America, as well as prime minister of Israel, this is a twofer.

GINGRAS: Roseanne Barr is a Trump supporter who seems to already be taking a page from the president's playbook and causing controversy on Twitter. This week, Barr faced backlash for tweeting a doctored image of Parkland high school student activist, David Hogg, accusing him or giving the Nazi salute at Saturday's March for Our Lives rally.

But it wasn't far leap from fast post when Barr was focused on spreading right wing conspiracies like this one just last November engaging a deep state conspiracy, or post-election when Barr's tweets backs the pizzagate conspiracy theory, which stated some Democrats, including Hillary Clinton, were part of a sex trafficking ring in the basement of a Washington pizza restaurant.

Barr also spread the conspiracy that there was a cover up surrounding the death of DNC staffer, Seth Rich. Barr's Twitter account has since been scrubbed of these tweets.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I guess I need to imply you are a right wing jack ass. I should have tried to understand why you voted the crazy way you did.

GINGRAS: But the star's posts aren't stunning her fans who tuned in heavily for the reboot's premier, with major viewership in red states. In Tulsa, Oklahoma, which sided with Trump in 2017, 1 in 5 households watched.

And the president took notice, even calling Barr personally to congratulate her.

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Look at "Roseanne", I called her yesterday. Look at her ratings.

I got a call from Mark Burnett. He did "The Apprentice." He's a great guy. He said, Donald, I called just to say hello and tell you, did you see Roseanne's ratings? I said, Mark, how big were they? They were unbelievable, over 18 million people and it was about us.

GINGRAS: For Roseanne, both on screen and off, the feelings for the president are mutual.

BARR: Trump offended half of America and she offended the other half. So, that's great for sitcoms, we are lucky to have him as president.

GINGRAS: Conservatives around the country riding the wave of the actress' popularity. Fox host Sean Hannity begging for an interview with Barr, even offering for her to host his show.


GINGRAS: And "Roseanne" has been renewed for a second season. And since the news came out, she's changed her tune a bit, at least for now. She's been using her social media accounts to praise her fans but also give a more positive message about the current political and cultural climate -- Brianna.

KEILAR: Brynn Gingras, thank you so much for that report.

OUTFRONT next, Stormy Daniels' attorney says no amount of money can make her go away. But the scandal involving the president is enough to make one Republican congressman run away from Washington and he is my guest, next.

And could this really happen? The story behind this photo.


KEILAR: Tonight, Stormy Daniels' attorney Michael Avenatti insists there is no amount of money the President Trump or his legal team can pay Daniels to make her go away. This as Trump stays quiet on Stormy Daniels. One person he has not attacked, even on Twitter.

But the story is impacting his party. One Republican Congressman Ryan Costello of Pennsylvania who had an uphill climb to reelection says the Daniels' scandal is one reason that he's not running again.

[19:50:08] OUTFRONT now, Congressman Ryan Costello with us.

Sir, thanks so much for being with us.

REP. RYAN COSTELLO (R), PENNSYLVANIA: Nice to be with you.

KEILAR: So, you believe that Stormy Daniels is telling the truth. What do you think the president should do?

COSTELLO: Well, actually, just to clarify, there were a number of reasons why I decided to not run for re-election. This was not really in that calculus.

But you asked a specific question, I actually think he just shouldn't saying anything because it doesn't seem to be impacting his poll numbers or anything of that sort. I think back to the "Roseanne" clip that you mentioned, right about now, it seems like one third of the country is fully behind the president, one third is totally against him and then there's one third that is kind of in the middle and that doesn't know what to think at times or has strongly held opinions one way or another, depending upon what he says or does or what the policies are at issue.

KEILAR: OK. Well, so you are saying he shouldn't say anything because the polls are not dictating that he should say anything.

COSTELLO: Well, I also don't think he should say anything because I think from a legal or political perspective, I don't know what he would gain by doing so. That's just my opinion. I mean, I'm not on the inside. I'm not in the White House. I'm not his attorney.

I just -- it's -- I actually found it quite curious this is not really, it doesn't seem to be impacting him except obviously on television But again, if you look at the polling this week, it doesn't seem to be really impacting it, number one. And number two, I just think legally, just ignoring this is probably the best way to deal with this. It seems like his attorney is probably more mixing it up than anything else.

KEILAR: What about morally? Does he have an obligation?

COSTELLO: An obligation to do what? I am not defending the president on this, just to be clear.

KEILAR: OK. So you think that he should keep staying quiet as he is doing even though you believe Stormy Daniels.

I do want to ask --

COSTELLO: If you assume for a moment that the conduct did occur, what would he gain by speaking out about it, right, that's my sense of it? Better off just ignore and move forward. That's -- it seems to me that is what he is doing.

KEILAR: I want to ask you about for instance, specifically Jerry Falwell Jr., he was on OUTFRONT this week and here is what he said.


JERRY FALWELL JR., PRESIDENT OF LIBERTY UNIVERSITY: When the "Access Hollywood" video came out, I was one of the few that said that I believe Donald Trump is a different person than he was in 2005 when that -- I really do believe that. I think he's had a change of heart. I think he's changed in the positive way. I don't think there is any chance of anything like this happening in the White House like Bill Clinton was accused of or John Kennedy was accused of.


KEILAR: I guess what I was getting too with the question of moral obligation, is your party has tried to brand itself is more representative of family values. Do you think this scandal hurts your party? Not just the president, or it's not hurting him really in polls. Does this hurt the brand?

COSTELLO: Well, President Trump makes these questions very difficult because of the past comment, because of comment conduct. I do think in my case, I was asked a simple question, do you believe her or not and I answered the question.

This stuff becomes very problematic, right? It truly does because it puts lawmakers in a bind who number one don't want to talk about this at all, let's be totally honest. And number two, no matter what they say, they are going to get the ire of certain voters out there.

I do think if you lead with policy, and I think a question I would anticipate you asking is, how can evangelical voters still support the president if they assume that this is true? And I think many, would look at what the policies are not the conduct. And you could go back to President Clinton and some of the conduct that happened there. And a lot of women's rights groups hang by him, one of the reasons may have been because of the policies that he was promoting. This gets to be very contradictory or even worse, hypocritical, right?

I am not here to defend it. But ultimately, voters look at this different ways depending upon who the voter is. And I'm here to say, I don't -- I don't -- what happened, I believe it to be true. I don't like it. But it's a very -- it's a very difficult political decision that lawmakers have to make if they're going to be asked about this.

KEILAR: All right. Congressman Ryan Costello, we really appreciate your time. Thank you this evening.

COSTELLO: Thank you.

[19:55:00] KEILAR: Now, next, is Kim Jong-un synonymous with making America great again?


COSTELLO: Tonight, Dennis Rodman, the diplomat. Rodman, the ex-NBA star-turned-Kim Jong-un whisperer, is hoping that his, quote, friends, President Trump and North Korea's Kim Jong-un will like each other as much as he likes them.

Today, Rodman tweeting his endorsement with planned talks between the two with this image of Kim with a Trump hat and writing, quote: Hoping for this after my two friends and leaders meet next month.

Some people maybe rolling their eyes, but Rodman is in the unique position to have a relationship with both Trump and Kim.


TRUMP: Dennis, you're fired.


KEIALR: Trump once fired Rodman on "The Apprentice" ironically for a spelling mistake.

As for North Korea, Rodman gets the red carpet treatment unlike any other American. He has visited five times. He calls Kim a friend for life. And this isn't the first time that Rodman has tried to unite the two nations. Rodman gave a North Korean minister "The Art of the Deal" as a gift last year, and then there is this.


STEPHEN COLBERT, COMEDIAN: You got a picture of -- you in the middle with Donald Trump pushed out of his place. You on the middle, with Donald Trump on one side and Kim Jong-un on the other that says unite.


COLBERT: You must be high.


KEILAR: That does it for us tonight. Thank you so much for joining us.

"AC360" starts now.