Return to Transcripts main page

CNN NEWSROOM

Protestors Demand Justice for Stephon Clark's Death; Trump and The White House; Amazon Stocks Negatively Effected; South Africa; Asylum Seekers; Winnie Madikizela-Mandela. Aired 2-3a ET

Aired April 3, 2018 - 02:00   ET

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


[02:00:00] ISHA SESAY, CNN ANCHOR: Hello everyone. You're watching CNN Newsroom live from Los Angeles. Ahead this hour, the U.S. President's words and actions trigger a tech sell-off and trade war jitters. My conversation with the civil rights attorney representing the family of Stefan Clark, the young father who was shot and killed by police in California.

Plus, remembering an anti-party crusader, we look back at the life and legacy of Winnie Madikizela-Mandela. Hello and welcome to our viewers around the world. I'm Isha Sesay. This is Newsroom L.A.

Well, Donald Trump plays an attack on Amazon, plus renewed fears of a trade war with China now are taking the toll on world financial markets. Right now, investors in Asia are bearing the brunt, Tokyo, Hong Kong, Shanghai, and Sydney, all in negative territory. The big drop, him on Wall Street, where the blue chips lost 459 points on Monday, shares of Amazon, well, they were down more than five percent.

Let's go to CNN's Anna Stewart who joins me now from Tokyo with some perspective on the numbers. Anna how is this session -- how is it going.

ANNA STEWART, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Asia is still very much in the red following on from yesterday. A terrible day for Wall Street and really kicked off the second course on the back first. Let's have a look at those Asia embassies. We bring them up. We do have Hang Seng down half a percentage point. The Nikkei down, not quite four percent now, now that was down a lot further when it first opened this morning.

It was down minus one point four percent. The Shanghai is leading the losses now. That's got worse over the day. That's down one percent. And Australia is still fairly flat. Now this was really one about investors giving Donald Trump a message, the first being to stop this trade war from escalating any further. Yesterday, we had China coming out with their retaliatory tariffs against the steel in adding a million tariffs that Donald Trump slapped on earlier last month.

But this could be one -- well, Isha, we might have round two because if Donald Trump does what he has said he will do, which is slap on way more tariffs to the tune some $50 billion. We should better believe that China will do a tit for tat measure in return, and that would really worry investors. Secondly, as you mentioned, Amazon. Now, Donald Trump has attacked Amazon consistently, actually even

before he was inaugurated as President. And yesterday, he took to Twitter to do so again. And it's really spooked investors who are wondering whether he's about to introduce a new regulation against Amazon or whether tech stocks are going to take a big hit. So a lot of selling going on there and that dragged down U.S. stocks.

Less so on age, maybe that was a big influence there, but we have the U.S. opening just a few hours so we have to see whether that continues into today.

SESAY: Yeah, absolutely. And as we look to China and the tariffs they impose on more than 100 American products. As we talk about a rule to trade dispute, I mean, what would that mean for the global economy.

STEWART: Well, it had far reaching implications and not least for the U.S. because if China were to have more retaliatory tariffs, you could be looking at serious impact for U.S. farmers. Think about soybeans. Think about U.S. agriculture that really relies on China as a key trading partner. And China could take other measures too.

They could look at corporate that they might want to punish like Boeing. What if China stops ordering Boeing planes and maybe even chose you know Airbus, one of their major rivals. There are all sorts of things China can do going forward, but where does America but business, the economy, and lots of knock on effects for other countries around the world.

SESAY: Yeah, absolutely. That's something for us to watch very closely. Anna Stewart joining us there from Tokyo, we really appreciate it. Thank you. And joining me now Democratic Strategist Caroline Heldman, CNN Political Commentator and Republican Consultant John Thomas, and Global Business Executive Ryan Patel. Welcome to you all, Ryan Patel, to you first.

So as you Anna's breakdown, and as you well know, U.S. markets went down, spooked by the President's tweets on Amazon and those fears over a trade war with China. President Trump breeding uncertainty and we know that the one thing markets hate is uncertainty.

RYAN PATEL, GLOBAL BUSINESS EXECUTIVE: Well, yes, especially when you started this thing with a tweet from the President causing this kind of uncertainty. You know when you really go after Amazon like he's done, you know you really -- one of the leaders in that tech stock, tech -- you know the blue chip you know companies. It's going to take a whole effect on a whole market. And when you mess with margins and people's bottom line, and what he's doing, he's saying that we're going to attack them more.

[02:05:00] He's got an easy, cheaper deal, that will get the market to react. It doesn't matter if it was Trump or any President that steps in and gets into the corporate governance side and tries to meddle themselves in the middle of this, markets going to react to the way it is. You know I wish it would not, but you know since he -- I think March 28th, 29th when there is a report that he came out and said -- there was a report that he always had a vendetta against Amazon, they lost almost $60 billion in market cap.

SESAY: Yeah, I heard it was a billion. Ryan, to focus on China for a moment, Monday, China imposed tariffs on more than 100 American products. Talk to me about how much this is going to hurt the U.S. and as you look at the landscape right now, are we heading toward a broader trade dispute.

PATEL: Yeah, I mean first off, you've seen a lot of the Wall Street, from Goldman Sachs, to General Electric, a lot of the agricultural companies come out and say you know we cannot get into this. The biggest thing I take away from this is that China didn't put tax on soybeans. And so that's a pretty you know -- being the U.S., being one of the biggest exporters to China on this. To me, that's an olive branch.

This is round one like she -- like you know we were talking earlier. But this is an opportunity for the U.S. government to come to the table. China's obviously holding something back to be able to retaliate furthermore. And if I'm the U.S., this is the time to come to the table because China is asking to come to the table to make a better deal. So you know I think when they slapped them tariffs they didn't have much of a choice.

I think any country put in this position would have to but they only did about $3 billion. When I say only, they could've done more.

SESAY: How much of a drag would a U.S.-China trade war be on the global economy?

PATEL: Huge. It would mess with the entire global supply chain. And think about when I say that. When you mess with the supply chain, you mess with cost, profit margins to all the countries. And China, if they really want to go after certain supply chains where the U.S. isn't the importer exporter, they can then go to other countries that would benefit, but then again, we're going to be seeing different kind of charges from Asia, Middle East, and Europe, really having a global economy crisis potentially.

SESAY: Ryan Patel, we appreciate the insights, standby for us. I want to bring it back to our guests here in the studio, bring them in to the conversation. So guys, we talked a little bit about China but I also want to talk about Amazon, specifically the lay of the land here on that front. The President hate-tweeting all weekend, specifically on Amazon and many other things besides, clearly no love lost for the e-commerce giant.

This could be a small taste of what he had to say. Let's put this up on screen. He said that only fools or worse are saying that our money-losing post office makes money with Amazon. They lose a fortune, and this will be changed. Also, our fully taxpaying retailers are closing stores all over the country, not a level playing field.

John Thomas, the President deliberately ignoring the facts. Amazon does pay state taxes. They pay in fact, the same taxes as other bulk shippers. The post office has said this is a good deal. They don't feel like they're Amazon's errand boy, so why the President deliberately misstating the truth.

JOHN THOMAS, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well, this war between bricks and clicks has been going on for the better part of a decade now between mom-and-pop retailers, saying Amazon has an -- and e-retailers have an unfair advantage over them. So the fact that Donald Trump is standing up for the mom-and-pop retailers, I think is a good thing. But in terms of the post office, the President is wrong on that fact, but it does beg the question as to why the government helps to facilitate a giant like Amazon.

Why not force them to use FedEx, to use the non-government resources to get their product out.

(CROSSTALK)

THOMAS: Right, but it causes to reevaluate the -- in my opinion reevaluate the institution, post office. Why do we have it in a modern era when we have these other for-profit enterprises that could probably do it for less, do it better. But look, I like the idea that he's going to war with Amazon to make sure that is a level playing field. I think that's going to turn out well for the small guy in the long-term.

SESAY: So Caroline Heldman, you heard John Thomas say that this is about the little guy. That it is about the mom-and-pop shop. That is why believe that this is nothing more than a personal right on the part of the President. This is really about Amazon's owner Jeff Bezos who also owns the Washington Post. The President seems to be conflating the two, making -- he has tweeted that basically Amazon is a lobbyist for the Washington Post and the like. Those in the Washington Post say that isn't true.

[02:10:00] I want to read you what Gabriel Sherman wrote. He has a little bit more insight as he has done his reporting. Take a look at this. This is what he says as he gives us some insight as to what's motivating the President. He says this. He's off the hook on this. It's war, one source told me. He gets obsessed with something and now he's obsessed with Bezos, says another source.

Trump is like how can I F with him. Surely this is a gross abuse of the Presidential bully pulpit. He's talking about bringing about changes, which would potentially be crossing all kinds of lines.

CAROLINE HELDMAN, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: Well, it is not entirely sure what changes he would bring about because as you pointed out, it is not factually correct, right. Amazon is getting the same bulk rate as other big retailers. It is paying state taxes. It is not getting some sort of special benefit. And John, as you pointed out, this has been going on for decades, and global online shopping has one. That is a ship that has sailed.

It's not an issue of bringing back bricks and mortar. It's an issue of dealing with the new economy. This has nothing to do with that. It has nothing to do with the little person. And in fact, he just cost many investors $36 billion just today in his personal vendetta. So this is a shockingly un-Presidential act. THOMAS: This must be a long-running personal vendetta because he's

been complaining about this for years and years.

SESAY: The President is known...

(CROSSTALK)

THOMAS: He has had an axe to grind politically with Jeff Bezos before he ever ran for office. This is something as a real estate developer that he understands.

HELDMAN: He's been attacking Jeff Bezos since before -- yes.

(CROSSTALK)

THOMAS: But President Trump understands as a real estate owner the advantages, the unfair advantages that e-commerce has over the brick and mortar stuff.

SESAY: I just want to bring Ryan Patel and bring you in here as we talk about this. The President is going off to Amazon and is saying that effectively, they're not paying taxes as they should be. That basically seems to be the gripe that effectively it's affecting mom- and-pop small businesses. This is the same President, correct me if I'm wrong, this is the same President who has made a great deal of the fact that he has managed to not pay all the taxes that he is liable for, and that makes him smart.

So is it that that's good for him but not good for Amazon as saying if where to go down that line exactly the same thing.

PATEL: Listen, if the shoe -- if he -- if they were to replace situations right now, Trump would be saying he got the best deal known to man. You know what I don't agree with is that you know that this blame on Amazon is Amazon's fault that retailers are closing stores. If Amazon wasn't here, it would've been some other -- another company.

E-commerce is here. And the mom-and-pop, they are e-commerce as well as stores. So I think the protection here is you evolve as an industry as the retail industry is doing. And you know you talk about taxes -- as Walmart and these other big companies that are in e- commerce, are they going to be affected too. I rarely heard other companies get into this play. And as Caroline said, other companies -- they're just doing -- they're not doing anything illegal to my knowledge that the Amazon is -- they're just doing the same deal.

USPS, the CFO came out and they're not allowed to do negative bad deal losses. So they are making a profit on this Amazon deal.

SESAY: OK. So we thank you, look forward to digging to this a lot deeper in the hours ahead. Back to my guests here in the studio, the President's Twitter storm included many subjects. I mean it was kind of exhausting to keep track of it all. I mean in one tweet it was DACA. It was immigration. It was the wall. It was crime. In case you don't know, the one I'm talking about, let's put it up. Let's read it for our viewers. Here's what the President tweeted. DACA is dead because the Democrats didn't care or act, and now

everyone wants to get onto the DACA bandwagon. No longer works. Must build Wall and secure our borders with proper Border legislation. Democrats want no borders, hence drugs and crime, Caroline.

HELDMAN: Well, there are two things that are factually incorrect here. One is that the Democrats did this to DACA. No, Donald Trump did this to DACA.

(CROSSTALK)

SESAY: He could've gotten a deal. Is that right?

HELDMAN: He's the one who rescinded it and he's the one who could've gotten a deal.

(CROSSTALK)

THOMAS: He attempted to make a deal and the Democrats wouldn't accept the deal.

HELDMAN: He rescinded it in the first place. He can't blame this on the Democrats. He just can't see that.

(CROSSTALK)

HELDMAN: Factually incorrect. Well, it's not factually correct. The second factually incorrect thing is that he's claiming or insinuating that immigrants have higher rates of crime. They don't. They have lower rates of crime.

(CROSSTALK)

THOMAS: OK. First of all, they're criminals. We're nation of laws. We have -- what set off this tweet storm was the thousands of illegal's that are on their way to try to cross the border to get through the tax release program...

(CROSSTALK)

THOMAS: Are they illegal? Are they breaking the law?

(CROSSTALK)

THOMAS: -- promise was building the wall and getting border security.

HELDMAN: To keep brown people out using fear and threat tactics.

(CROSSTALK)

[02:15:00] HELDMAN: He referred to Mexicans as rapists, did he not? He used racialized rhetoric throughout his campaign.

(CROSSTALK)

THOMAS: Are there people breaking through borders right now. Thousands of them, I think they'll be able to legally stay here or perhaps get to a DACA chain migration deal.

(CROSSTALK)

SESAY: -- come across the border. Isn't that number down?

(CROSSTALK)

SESAY: So what is this?

(CROSSTALK)

THOMAS: It's because people say oh, he's sitting there just having a tweet storm. No, it's because it was topical in the news that Mexico was helping these illegal migrants -- that was prior to President Trump...

(CROSSTALK)

SESAY: Let's put up the graphic very quickly and show who the President dined with on the weekend. Because that, some people say may point some -- give some insight. Could it be that it was because he was dining with Sean Hannity, Jeanine Pirro, Bill Shine, Steven Miller, and Don King? I'm not sure about Don King's position on all of this. But the other four, about Fox, about conservative, could that have been a little bit...

(CROSSTALK)

THOMAS: I'm sure that was an additional spark but it was also in the news. It was top of the drudge report.

(CROSSTALK)

HELDMAN: -- right wing rags.

(CROSSTALK)

THOMAS: The drudge report focused on this and the President reads that. The President also watches Fox.

HELDMAN: Which is unfortunate.

(CROSSTALK)

HELDMAN: -- to get it better source because he's responding to these fear tactics that Fox is putting out...

(CROSSTALK)

HELDMAN: It's not factually correct.

(CROSSTALK)

THOMAS: As you could see, this isn't an easy issue.

SESAY: Thankfully, we have two more hours. Caroline Heldman and John Thomas, appreciate it, thank you, and Ryan Patel as well.

Well, facing political pressure Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is suspending a deal he called a proper solution to relocate thousands of African migrants. The agreement with the U.N. calls for 16,000 asylum seekers to be resettled in western countries. Israel would then allowed the same amount of migrants remain in a country with temporary President's permits.

But members of Netanyahu's right-wing coalition heavily criticized the deal, and hours after announcing the agreement, the Prime Minister said he would put it on hold. CNN's Ian Lee is following the story for us from Jerusalem. Ian, I mean the basic question is how could this have happened. Did the Prime Minister not speak to his colleagues and other coalition members?

IAN LEE, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Isha, this is a dramatic about-face. And you're exactly right. That's what it sounds like happened to the Prime Minister along with the Minister of Interior. They gave this conference, talking about this plan that they were able to come up with, with the UNHCR about how to relocate about half of the migrants that are in Israel and to give the other half temporary residency.

But in a Twitter storm really that came out after this announcement was made, we were hearing from different coalition members as well as members within his own party that said we never heard about this plan. We didn't agree to this, and so then we saw the Prime Minister backtrack, saying he'd going to suspend it, he is going to talk with his coalition partners. Also, he talked about South Tel Aviv, where lot of these migrants live.

He said that this is a plan that's going to be better for those people, and they're going to invest money. But one of the campaigners who have been against the migrants in Israel came out and rejected this plan too. One member, Naftali Bennett, of the Jewish Home Party basically said that this would create a paradise for infiltrators in Israel. So there were a lot of strong condemnations.

So the Prime Minister said today he's going to be talking with people. He is going to be informing them about this plan. May be a bit too late at this point, but this also puts in the roughly 39,000 people who are migrants who are in Israel whose status is in limbo. The Supreme Court here suspended the plan that Israel initially had, which was to give them $3500 and a one-way flight to one of two African countries as the portion measure or could come out, but that plan was suspended. So now really they're back to square one.

SESAY: Ian, I was struck by what Naftali Bennett said. You know a lie and stay would be creating an infiltrated paradise. Talk of these African migrants mainly hailing from Sudan, described them as infiltrators. They seem to be a lightning rod. Why is that? What is that that makes them so divisive there in Israel that you know it would put them -- the fences that you could have by some account 54,600 people apply for asylum and only 33 have their petitions accepted over the course of many, many years. Why are they so unwelcome? [02:20:00] LEE: Yeah, and just to add to that, you look at the E.U.

at the same time and about 90 percent of asylum seekers are granted asylum. You know there is this prejudice that the activists that Israel has against these people that they came over illegally, they they're viewed as unwanted. And when you talk to people, activists who deal with this on a daily basis, you know they say that it's pretty simple, but the fact that these people aren't Jewish they are not part of this community.

They would have a difficult time integrating into this community, and that's the real reason why they aren't being accepted. But then if the government would say we have many faiths in this country. It doesn't deal with -- it doesn't have to do with that. These people are illegal and they should be dealt with accordingly.

So you do have these two narratives and really which one is accurate this is up to the viewer, up to the people who are looking at this. But what the real issue is here you have 39,000 people who -- they're status right now is in limbo. You know with this plan, the Prime Minister said it was a good plan. And that actually in fact, according to the Prime Minister this plan is better than the previous plan because more people would have found -- been resettled in other western countries.

The Prime Minister said like Italy, Germany, and Canada, then would actually have stayed here and then he would've said they would have been -- he said dispersed to other places in the country where there is work, where they could find housing, and take the load off South Tel Aviv. He said this was a better plan.

But even that, even what is presumed to be a better plan was not palpable to his coalition partners and his own party, which is going to be difficult than moving forward.

SESAY: It certainly is. We'll be watching closely to see what happens next. Ian Lee, we appreciate it. Thank you.

Quick break here, still to come on CNN Newsroom, a look back on the life of one of South Africa's most iconic figures, Winnie Madikizela- Mandela.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Winnie Mandela largely leaves a huge legacy. And as we say in African culture, a gigantic tree has fallen.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SESAY: (Inaudible) - the group's Human Rights Watch is accusing the Israeli forces of using excessive and unlawful military force. At least 18 Palestinians were killed and many more wounded during clashes with Israeli forces at the Gaza border on Friday. In a new report, Human Rights Watch says there is no evidence that the Palestinian demonstrators pose an imminent threat to Israeli lives. [02:25:00] The group says that Israeli soldiers were given leeway to

use force that "all but ensured a bloody military response." Before this report was released, a spokesman for the Israeli Prime Minister said demonstrators tried to storm across the border and that Israeli soldiers responded after facing gunshots and firebombs.

The spokesman adds "Israel did what any country around the world would have done, it defended its citizens." Well, Winnie Madikizela- Mandela, one of South Africa's foremost icons in the struggle against Apartheid has died. Her family said she passed away after a long illness. She was 81 years old. CNN's Robyn Curnow gives us a look on Winnie Madikizela-Mandela's life.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ROBYN CURNOW, CNN, CORRESPONDENT: Winnie Madikizela-Mandela considered herself a warrior. She was a powerful, yet controversial figure in the anti-Apartheid movement.

WINNIE MADIKIZELA-MANDELA, SOUTH AFRICAN ANTI-APARTHEID ACTIVIST: We not only fought on political platforms. I was one of those who, with the people, fighting physically, anti-Apartheid to resume.

CURNOW: While her husband, Nelson Mandela was incarcerated, she became the face of Mandela's fight against oppression. When he was released from prison after 27 years, she was right by his side. She told CNN what was going through her mind at the time.

MADIKIZELA-MANDELA: I was thinking about the liberation of my country and that was the culmination of bitter years of (Inaudible).

CURNOW: While their marriage withstood the battle against Apartheid, it couldn't withstand of pressure of freedom. They divorced in 1996, 2 years after Mandela was elected the first black President of South Africa.

MADIKIZELA-MANDELA: It's very difficult to revisit that period even for me.

CURNOW: In the years after the fall of Apartheid, the woman who was once revered as the mother of a nation fell sharply in the public's esteem. She was convicted of theft and fraud, and the truth commission accused her of gross human rights violations, allegations she denied. When Nelson Mandela died in 2013, Winnie was at his funeral, grieving alongside his widow, Graca Machel.

The scars of Apartheid wounded Madikizela-Mandela deeply, right until the end. She remained disappointed with the South Africa she had fought so hard to liberate. Nevertheless, she says it was well worth the sacrifice.

MADIKIZELA-MANDELA: We were free.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SESAY: Thanks, Robyn Curnow there for that look back of Winnie Mandela's life. Well, next here on CNN Newsroom L.A., the shooting death of an unarmed black man in California sparks protests. And the family says an autopsy contradicts the account from police. We'll hear from one of their lawyers.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[02:30:00]

SESAY: Well, protestors in Sacramento, California are demanding justice of the killing of Stephon Clark. Police safely (ph) shot him more than two weeks ago in his grandmother's back yard. Officers said they thought he had a gun. Only his cell phone was found at the scene. An independent autopsy shows Sacramento police shot Clark eight times, six of the wounds were in his back.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BENNET OMALU, AMERICAN-NIGERIAN PHYSICIAN: The core (ph) position that has been presented that he was (INAUDIBLE) the officers, meaning he was facing the officers, is inconsistent with the (INAUDIBLE) forensic evidence as documented at autopsy.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SESAY: Joining us now, a civil rights attorney, Benjamin Crump. Mr. Crump is currently representing the family of Stephon Clark. Mr. Crump has also represented a number of families, the families of Michael Brown, and Trayvon Martin. Two African American teenagers who were also unarmed, shot and killed here in the United States. Benjamin Crump, welcome.

BENJAMIN CRUMP, AMERICAN CIVIL RIGHTS ATTORNEY: Thank you, thank you for having me, Isha.

SESAY: Why did Stephon Clark's family feel it was necessary to conduct a private, independent autopsy?

CRUMP: Well, one of the things that was a problem to the family of Stephon Clark was after he was shot at by the police 20 times, he was executed in the backyard of his grandmother's house. They asked, why did you shoot him? Why did you do this? And the response from the police was, we had to do this because he had a gun. That's what they said the next morning.

But then, they had to walk that back and then they came up with this allegation that he had a crowbar or some kind of toolbar and then they had to walk that back. And then, finally, they came clean and said, he didn't have any weapons at all, all he had was a cell phone. And it was at that point that when they retained me, I - they wanted me to do an independent investigation, independent autopsy because they no longer trusted the Sacrament Police Department to tell them the truth.

SESAY: According to Dr. Omlau who conducted the independent autopsy, Stephon Clark was shot eight times, clearly six times from the back. What does that say to you? CRUMP: Well, Dr. Bennet Omalu, one of the most renowned pathologists, not only in America, but in the World. He conducted the independent, private autopsy on behalf of the family. And his conclusions completely contradicted the narrative that the police was putting forward that they had to shoot unarmed Stephon Clark because he was coming at them.

Well, all the bullets are from behind and if the bullets are from behind, then how's he coming at you at the time you had to fire your weapons? What we believe is that these were not the actions of reasonable, well trained officers who use unnecessary and unjustifiable force, yet again, on a unarmed black man.

SESAY: You know, one of the outstanding questions in this, as you raise the questions about if he was coming at them, why was he shot in the back? Another question out there is why did the officers involved mute their body cameras at a certain point in all of this after Stephon had been shot? What are your thoughts on that?

CRUMP: Isha, let me say this, just so your international audience will understand why we are so frustrated here in America, many of us civil rights lawyers, because this continues to happen over and over again where this (INAUDIBLE) in Oklahoma where this Philando Castile in Minneapolis, where this Alton Sterling in Baton Rouge, Louisiana and the list goes on and on.

But in this instance, Stephon Clark, had no gun, he had no weapon. The police gave him no warning. The police gave him no identification of themselves. And after they executed him and shot at him 20 times as he's laying - dying on the ground they offer him no humanity. They don't come and assist him or offer him aid.

After six minutes of him lying on the ground, they then walk over and, looks like from the video, they put handcuffs on him.

[02:35:00] And as they're doing that, somebody, we don't know who some - we believe some superior officer tells them to make sure you mute your mic. Well, that's not being transparent and that's what Stephon Clark believes is the beginning of the conspiracy to cover up this unjustified shooting of this unarmed black man, yet again, in America.

SESAY: Do you see these killing of unarmed black men by law enforcement, something we've seen time and time again, as you made clear. Do you see this as a training issue?

CRUMP: I think it's a part - I think it's partly a training issue, but also, I think it's an issue of implicit bias. There's something that is a disconnect why the police feel where there's minorities, black or brown people, they shoot first and ask questions later.

What we want for our children is the same consideration that you give to everybody else. You know, there was a young white man who went into a school and shot 34 people, killing 17 of them. The police followed him for hours. They did not shoot one bullet. But yet, this unarmed, African American, with a cell a phone - they shoot at him 20 times. There was a young white man in Austin, Texas who was bombing homes. The police followed him for hours. They didn't shoot, not one bullet, but yet, this unarmed black man they shoot at 20 times.

I illustrate that point to say that we have to give the same consideration to minorities in America that we give to everybody in America because as a American citizens, we all want due process of the law. We all want equal justice, nothing more and nothing less. We just want our children to come home to us as well.

SESAY: In this highlight you go, Mr. Crump, how is the - the family of Stephon Clark doing? It must be so difficult at a moment like this, but I know a lot of people have rallied around. A lot of people have shown support. How are they doing right now?

CRUMP: Well, they're still grieving and they're still in shock. The thing that really makes this not like many of the other ones. He was killed in his grandmother's backyard, less than five feet from where her bedroom window is. So, everyday she wakes up, she is reminded of where her grandson was executed.

And it's very hard for her, but a lot of people - a lot of young people have been standing up and rallying, black lives matter, a lot of the National Basketball Association players have been coming and saying that we have to solve this problem. So, I do believe - I am still optimistic that people united and for a greater purpose will solve this problem.

SESAY: Benjamin Crump, we thank you for your time this evening. Thank you, so much, for speaking to us.

CRUMP: Thank you, so much, for having me.

SESAY: Well, still to come on CNN Newsroom. They say music soothes the savage beast, but how about tensions between neighboring countries? A story ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[02:40:00]

SESAY: Well we've already seen Olympic diplomacy between North and South Korea. Now there's musical diplomacy.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SESAY: This is a historical performance in Pyongyang by South Korean art group. The group included the Korean pop group Red Velvet, Red Velvet rather and the singer (inaudible) in the audience was hundreds of North Koreans and one leader Kim Jong-un, Al is in the field joins us from Seoul with the details.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SESAY: Alexandra, it looks like it was very well received and there is another performance due to start.

ALEXANDRA FIELD, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yes, and this is really a major departure I show because typically when you hear South Korean k-pop in North Korea is because South Korea is blaring it over the loud speaker of the DMZ as propaganda broadcast often in response to provocative measures to North Korea.

That is not at all the tone, for these two concerts. The first one happened over the weekend, you had a packed house Kim Jong-un himself in the audience. He's said to taken a keen interest in the South Korean performers you see him applauding along, he asked a number of questions apparently about those performers congratulated them, met with them back stage and suggested there should be another exchange where North Korean artist traveled to Seoul perhaps in the autumn to continue this tradition.

This is something that hasn't been done for more than 10 years. That was the last time that South Korean artist performed in Pyongyang. But they're getting a second chance this week to do it this week that should start really any moment now.

This concert will be a much larger concert. Some 12,000 people expected to be in the audience. They will hear not just from the South Korean performers but also from North Korean artist and we're told they'll be playing some North Korean songs that are actually popular and known to South Koreans.

So, very careful selection of the music that was performed at this concert and also the last one. A lot of the themes of the songs that are being played about unity. Performers on both sides have said that they hope to win hearts by putting up these performances.

And of course Isha we can't say enough that these performances are happening at such a critical time on the (inaudible) where you're seeing this incredible thaw (ph) intentions that was really unthinkable just six months or a year ago.

One in a series of really rapid diplomatic developments, the next major development that of course we're all watching will be the North Korean, South Korean summit now set to take place at the end of this month. But for now all eyes on the stage and those singers the kind of performers that aren't typically seen throughout North Korea. Isha.

SESAY: Fascinating, I really want to know what they think of the North Koreans. How much they enjoy it. That's really interesting. Alexandra on the field joining us there from Seoul, very much appreciated thank you. And thank you for watching CNN newsroom live from Los Angeles I'm Isha Sesay, well sports is up next and we'll have much more news at the top of the hour. You're watching CNN the world's news leader.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[02:45:00]

VINCE CELLINI, CNN SPORTS: Hello and welcome to world's sports I'm Vince Cellini at CNN center, the annual month long college basketball tournament in the USA gave us plenty of upsets, but no surprise teams in Monday's championship game in San Antonio Texas. Villanova was the best team. Michigan the hottest team but in the end the relentless Villanova offense and depth ended the wolverines run. So we can crown the cats' champions again. Andy Scholes will join us now from deep in the heart of Texas. Andy offers a recap.

ANDY SCHOLES, CNN SPORTS ANCHOR: Hey Vince, how's it going? I'll tell you what winning this college basketball tournament was called the NCAA tournament. It's arguably the hardest thing to do in all American sports.

They start with 68 teams, its single elimination until it gets down to two and then one champion. And I spoke with both coaches in tonight's game they told me of course you have to have a good team to win this tournament but you also need some luck along the way.

Villanova had a little luck, and they were definitely one of the most dominant teams we've seen in a very long time. Now Michigan, they hung with Villanova Monday night in this game for quite a while.

Thanks to their star Mo Wagner the 20 year old out of Berlin Germany was fabulous to start this game. He scored Michigan nine of Michigan's first 11 points and they were leading for much of the first half, and that was until Dante Divincenzo came off the bench for Villanova and he could not miss.

He scored 18 points in the first half alone, he finished with 31 for the game which was a record for most points from a player off the bench in a championship game. Villanova would roll through the second half with their high potent offense winning this game 79 to 62.

Their second championship in a three year span, Divincenzo was named the most outstanding player in the tournament and I caught up with him on the floor after the big win.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SCHOLES: How amazing is this moment right here?

DONTE DIVINCENZO, VILLANOVA PLAYER: Undescribable honestly, because we've been through so much this team. A lot of up and downs this year, and we've competed every single day in practice. And just sharing that-- we're going share this for the rest of our life.

SCHOLES: What was going through your mind when you got off the bench and just couldn't miss?

DIVINCENZO: I was trying to bring energy defensively honest. I was trying to rebound and defend. And Jaylynn and Michael did a great job of finding me and (inaudible) set amazing strings for me, and Eric just did everything he could just try to get me open shots.

SCHOLES: Is this the moment you dreamt of since you were a kid?

DIVINCENZO: Yes, since I was born honestly. Yes and the biggest thing for me is just sharing it with these guys.

SCHOLES: Two out of three is Villanova a college basketball dynasty now?

DIVINCENZO: I mean people can say so, I know that no matter what going forward everybody who comes in this program is going to play Villanova basketball.

SCHOLES: Blake Griffin tweeted that noticed you holding it down for the reddish haired people out there, what do you think about that?

DIVINCENZO: That's awesome, that's awesome thank you very much.

SCHOLES: Congrats man.

CELLINI: Put a little ginger in your life for sure. Andy, a little perspective here big picture. 136 wins, in a four year span that's the most by a division one team. Villanova did that. Smaller picture their performance in this tournament how good were they?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHOLES: They were just dominating Vince, I mean they won all six of their games by double digits, you never see that happen in this tournament you usually see many close games. And you usually have some ones you have to squeak by in order to get this far and win a championship. And you know Villanova two championships in three years only they're now the fourth team in the past 40 years to accomplish that joining the like of Duke, Kentucky and Florida and those are your college powerhouse schools.

CELLINI: Jay Wright joining Roy Williams and Mike Chechefski multiple NCAA titles for active coaches, great job. Andy thank you very much appreciate the report. All right much more to come on Worlds sports it could continue to be a big week for cats, Villanova and maybe tiger. The four time masters winner a headliner and his return already has Augusta national golf club buzzing with excitement. Our Don Riddel helping to kick off masters week next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(SPORTS)