Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Actor Jussie Smollett Under Arrest, Faces Felony Charge; Roger Stone Faces Judge Over Inflammatory Instagram Post; DOJ Prepares for Mueller Report as Early as Next Week; Alleged Terror Schemer to Make First Court Appearance in the U.S.; High-Level Trade Talks Start Up Again Between U.S. and China. Aired 9-9:30a ET

Aired February 21, 2019 - 09:00   ET

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

[09:00:00] CAMEROTA: Yes, he said that.

BERMAN: Every once in a while.

CAMEROTA: All right. Thanks so much for being with us. Time now for "NEWSROOM" with Poppy Harlow and Jim Sciutto.

POPPY HARLOW, CNN ANCHOR: Good morning, everyone. Top of the hour. I'm Poppy Harlow.

JIM SCIUTTO, CNN ANCHOR: And Jim Sciutto.

The breaking news this morning. Some serious breaking news we've been covering.

HARLOW: Yes.

SCIUTTO: "Empire" actor Jussie Smollett is under arrest and in police custody. He turned himself in at 6:00 a.m. Eastern Time this morning. Chicago Police will give us an update on this one hour from now. We will be live for that update.

HARLOW: He faces a felony charge for allegedly filing a false police report. Of course you know by now he claimed that two masked men attacked him last month while hurling racist and homophobic insults right at him. He will be in court later this afternoon for a bail hearing.

Let's go straight to our Ryan Young who is outside the courthouse in Chicago.

Ryan, you've been all over this story since the beginning. What is the latest this morning?

RYAN YOUNG, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, the latest is here around 5:00 this morning Central Time he turned himself in with lawyers. Apparently he had a phone call between his lawyers and police. They wanted him to turn himself in somewhere or maybe he can get some privacy. That did happen. A deal was struck, he turned himself in this morning. First he has to talk to detectives. And then after he talked to detectives he'll be brought to the courthouse that's just right behind me, 26th & California here in Chicago. He'll be booked. He'll have a mug shot taken, and then he will have a

bond hearing. But they still didn't answer all the questions that so many people here have across the country about how and why this happened. And so many people want to figure out exactly what the details were to this. We know that Ola and Abel Osundairo have been talking to detectives. Those are the two men that police believe the actor paid to orchestrate this attack.

And in fact we have video of the two men at a beauty supply store buying some of these supplies. I mean, this really played out like a bad episode in some sort of movie. Because of this, and not only do they do that, I have been talking to detectives. When the men arrived back from Nigeria and they were met by Chicago police officers they were quite surprised. And when they got them into the interrogation room they started talking to them. They started singing.

They gave up all the information about exactly what happened. They turned over their cell phones. They started detailing to detectives exactly how this went step by step by step. We still don't have a motive yet for why this happened. And then we go back to the fact there was a letter that was delivered to the "Empire" set just a week before this attack.

Now not sure yet if it points toward the actor but it was really crudely done with magazine cutouts and also stick figures drawn on it. What we know from there, there was some white powder on the inside. A hazmat team was called to that set. When the hazmat team arrived they were able to determined there was crushed aspirin on the inside.

So now you have all these facts that sort of played out. You have a real rush to judgment to a certain extent because so many people started giving him so much support on those coming days after this attack. And then the next thing you know, police were able to break this down bit by bit.

Something else I'll share with you as well that I've learned, when police arrived initially after this attack, the officers responding had body cameras on. And they were told actually -- the actor actually asked them to turn those off as they arrive. So it's quite interesting some of the details we are already starting to learn about this case.

SCIUTTO: Ryan Young, good to have you on the story.

Let's discuss now with Charles Ramsey. He's the former commissioner of police for D.C. and Philadelphia and Joey Jackson, criminal defense attorney.

Joey, first of all, let's look at the charges here. Filing a false police report would be under disorderly conduct in the state of Illinois. First of all, how serious a crime and jail time, potential jail time?

JOEY JACKSON, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: So it's troubling in terms of how serious a crime, Jim, Poppy. It's serious. It's a felony. What a felony means is it's more than one year in jail and it's about a fact it's up to three years in jail in accordance with the statute. And so that's what he's looking at. As to whether he'll get it, you know, we should say, hasten to add that everyone deserves and is entitled to -- his attorneys will tell you to the presumption of evidence.

HARLOW: Yes.

JACKSON: But as the evidence is unfolding it certainly does not look good. And I think that there would be a real imperative and to prosecute to moving forward and in the judge, in the event he's convicted, in sentencing to give him jail time because there's so many aggravating factors behind this. You can look at the dialogue and the tone that it sets. We are in troubling times in this country in terms of the rhetoric, assailing immigrants, assailing, you know, blackface, you know, so many things happening that are divisive. This is one. So to inject this is a problem.

As I'm sure the chief will get into, issues of resources that are being diverted. Right? When you have serious issues in this community and you have 12 detectives that are assigned.

HARLOW: Yes.

JACKSON: Taking away from that. And then, of course, you have issues with people who are really victims of hate crimes now who, you know, what about the justice for them? And what does it do to their narrative? So I think while we're worlds away from this there's an imperative to put him in jail, to send the message that this is just not the proper way.

HARLOW: Even though I had read that DAs often don't prosecute false police reports, this is different. You're saying because it's so high profile.

JACKSON: It's different not only the high profile nature of it, but just in every way.

[09:05:01] The fact is, is that, you know, it injects it into the narrative of what we're talking about now. You have 12 detectives assigned. In the normal course, Poppy, you have 12 people executing searches warrants and doing other things. And I just think you cannot have this. It sends the wrong message. Innocent until proven guilty, but if guilty, I think it's a long road.

SCIUTTO: Commissioner Ramsey, as someone who led the police departments in D.C. and in Philadelphia, 1,000 policeman hours in the city of Chicago which has genuine crime issues, a spate of murders. Tell me how the police force reacts to something like this and how serious a loss this would be to have a thousand police hours wasted on a crime that apparently didn't happen.

CHARLES RAMSEY, FORMER WASHINGTON, D.C. POLICE CHIEF: It's a tremendous loss. I mean, as Joey mentioned, there are other cases out there that are not being investigated while you're tied up working on this. And you certainly don't have the luxury of being able to put a dozen detectives on a case only to find out later it turned out to be totally false.

I also think that if found guilty, that he ought to reimburse the city for some of the expenditure in resources during the course of this investigation. This just makes absolutely no sense. This is a guy that may have thrown away an entire career for what reason, who knows? I think he also underestimated the ability of the police to put together the facts of this case to be able to actually come up with exactly what took place.

And I spoke to somebody -- you know, I'm from Chicago. I spent 30 years in Chicago Police Department, who's high ranking, involved in this case and believe me they've got very, very strong evidence that this was just a made-up story.

HARLOW: Wow.

SCIUTTO: Wow. Wow.

HARLOW: You know --

SCIUTTO: That's quite a revelation.

HARLOW: Yes, it is. Let's just take a moment and listen to Jussie Smollett in this interview he did, you know, just a little over a week ago with Robin Roberts on ABC.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JUSSIE SMOLLETT, ACTOR, "EMPIRE": I was talking to a friend and I said, I just want them to find them. And she said, sweetie, they're not going to find them. Who the (EXPLETIVE DELETED) would make something like this up or add something to it or whatever it may be? I can't -- I can't even -- I'm an advocate.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HARLOW: You know, Commissioner, just makes me think that the ultimate price here and the cost of this may be much larger than the cost of police resources wasted which is horrific in Chicago if that's it, or any jail sentence he may face if found guilty. It's the message that he sent to the LGBTQ community, to the African-American community. What he said at the end of that interview was I just want people to know -- you know, young black boys and members of the LGBTQ community that they can fight back. And if this was all a lie, isn't that damaged perhaps the most?

RAMSEY: Well, he can get that message across without falsifying a report and without the hoax that took place. I mean, I don't disagree that he needs to -- as a person of his stature to get out there and be a role model for others. But this is not how you do it.

HARLOW: Right.

RAMSEY: And I think Joey mentioned earlier just how that takes away from people who are legitimate victims of hate crimes and also it is a reality. The environment we're in right now is very toxic. And to add not only to the fact that maybe you were beaten up because you're gay or what have you, they not only had -- they had to be wearing MAGA hats, they had to put a noose around the neck, which obviously brings things to a whole different level because of the history of lynching in the United States.

I mean, it just went on and on and on. And I don't know how you -- at the end of the trial or end of the plea if he doesn't do some jail time. I think a message has to be sent. And just as an aside in talking to that law enforcement official today, they -- actually at the time he did that interview they pretty much knew this was not a legitimate case. But they didn't say anything because they didn't want to wire him up that they actually were on a whole different path.

SCIUTTO: That had to be a tough interview for them to watch in light of what they apparently knew already at that point.

HARLOW: Yes.

RAMSEY: Yes.

SCIUTTO: Joey, before we go.

JACKSON: Yes. Just one other issue and that's on the issue of motive. Everyone is asking why, why, why. And it's important to point out we may never know why. And in doing so, look, prosecutors don't have to establish motive. Inquiring minds always want to know. And so in the event it went to trial you want to lay out for the jury what would have precipitated this but at the end of the day it's not something that's necessary for them to prove.

SCIUTTO: To get a conviction. You would not have to establish motive.

JACKSON: Get a conviction.

SCIUTTO: That's a key point.

HARLOW: Yes. And I do wonder would his sentence be longer, worse, if he fights this continually and is still found guilty or if he admits --

JACKSON: In practical terms, what happens is, is that look, if you are wasting the resources of a court, I don't want to say wasting resources because everyone is entitled to have a trial, but that's what plea bargains are all about.

[09:10:11] It's an incentive in the event this will play, and again he's innocent until proven guilty. Who knows if he's going to plea -- has to plea or maybe there is other evidence we haven't gotten to yet.

HARLOW: Yes.

JACKSON: But the fact is, is that they offer you a plea as an incentive so that you can plea.

SCIUTTO: To cooperate. JACKSON: And so you better believe at the end of the day if you take

them to their proof that you're looking at a harsher sentence.

SCIUTTO: Well, this looks like what his accomplices did. They seemed to cooperate early.

Charles Ramsey, Joey Jackson, thanks very much.

HARLOW: Thanks, guys.

SCIUTTO: Of course another big question this morning is how will Democratic presidential candidates respond. You may remember that when this story first broke the reaction fast, fierce, many throwing their support immediately behind Smollett. Among them, Kamala Harris, Cory Booker, both calling it using this phrasing, "a modern-day lynching."

HARLOW: But as the story has unraveled we've heard another message from some of those same candidates. They want to wait for the facts.

Toluse Olorunnipa is with us, of course reporter for "Washington Post."

So now I mean you have seen both Senators Cory Booker and Kamala Harris say I'm not going to say anything more until the facts come out. How do you see them continuing the narrative on this?

TOLUSE OLORUNNIPA, WHITE HOUSE REPORTER, WASHINGTON POST: Yes, I don't think that answer will hold up over the test of time. I think they will continue to be asked about this, they'll continue to be asked about the difference between their response after this was revealed to be sort of a hoax and their response right after the first initial reports came out. They've sort of leaned in fully and not only believing the reports but dialing it up to saying this was a modern-day lynching.

Obviously within the Democratic primary, there's going to be a race to be the most progressive on racial and justice issues so you're going to see Democrats try to get out in front of this very large field and be the most progressive. And that's what we saw when these statements came out right after the reports, just within hours of the reports, when things were still murky.

And now when the facts start to clear out, we're hearing from a number of different candidates that we have to wait for the facts. I think there's going to be a call for all of these various senators that are running that have spoken out on this to have a more specific statement to talk about sort of whether or not they made a mistake in jumping to a conclusion and really dialing things to the extreme when they did not yet have all the facts, when the facts were still being gathered.

I think there's going to be pressure on them to say more than just we'll have to just wait and see for all the facts to come out.

SCIUTTO: Right. Right. Something clear. Because the statements, those tweets were very clear. I mean, modern-day lynching, something clear whether it be a tweet or an official statement to, in effect, turn it around, right, and say, here was something that didn't take place. I mean, is this already being asked of these candidates?

OLORUNNIPA: Yes. I think there is a hunger for a more clear statement, for more clarity from a number of these candidates. I think one thing that you might expect to hear from them is that even though this particular case didn't end up being true, there is still an issue when it comes to hate crimes, when it comes to anti-black action, anti-LGBT crimes that are taking place. They will point to facts that show that a number of different hate crime categories are up over the past couple of years. So they will say that you don't want to detract from the broader message.

But I think they will still be pressed to explain why they decided to come out so hard when all the facts were still being gathered. And you obviously will hear that pressure from President Trump's conservative allies who have been eating this up and saying, you know, this is just another example of fake news, another example of Democrats jumping to conclusions and trying to use anything out there just to smear the president.

HARLOW: OK. Toluse, thank you very much for weighing in on this. We appreciate it.

Again the presser is going to be in less than an hour. We'll bring that to you live as Chicago police brief reporters on what they know at this point.

SCIUTTO: Plus, he said he was dreaming of a way to kill every last person on earth. Today, the Coast Guard lieutenant accused of plotting a mass terror attack will be in court. See the evidence there. This was no fake threat.

Also, an Alabama woman who joined ISIS, even married ISIS fighters there, now wants to return home to the U.S. President Trump says no way. Now her family plans to sue. Her lawyer will join us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:15:00] JIM SCIUTTO, CO-HOST, NEWSROOM: Roger Stone arriving, as we speak, in Arlington in Virginia. This video here just from moments ago, the Trump associate, long-time friend set to face Judge Amy Berman Jackson, find out if he violated the terms of his bail.

POPPY HARLOW, CO-HOST, NEWSROOM: This court hearing comes just days after someone posted this picture, take a look of Jackson, pull it up for you, OK, there we go, of Judge Jackson, and it appeared to be gun crosshairs. There you see them, right? Behind her, that looks like a target to the upper left there.

Kara Scannell joins us from Washington. A rare apology from Stone on this one, right? I mean, his lawyers knew this could early get him in hot water.

KARA SCANNELL, CNN REPORTER: Yes, I mean, Poppy, as soon as he posted that image with those apparent crosshairs behind he judge, it became a process of walking that back very quickly. He had taken it down again, he had said he didn't mean it, he blamed it on a volunteer, and then eventually, he issued an apology to the judge and actually filed it with the court.

But the judge said, you know, you've got to come to court today and we're going to talk about this. She's going to decide if he violated the terms of his bail, if he's violated those terms which, you know, include not intimidating witnesses, not intimidating court officers or the judge.

And that's going to be what he's going to have to face here and answer questions about why did he post this, what was his intention behind it.

[09:20:00] And you know, if the judge decides -- you know, she should decide a number of things here. She could impose a stricter gag order on him. I mean, she's only really restricted him from speaking outside the courthouse steps. She could say, you know, no, now it's too late, now, you can't speak any more about the case or address it in any way, you know, further on social media.

And Stone has really argued that this is his livelihood, he needs to be able to do interviews, he needs to be able to go on "Info Wars" and she could really restrict that for him. I mean, if -- she could even throw him in jail today if she decided that it was, you know, a real threat that was aimed at her.

I mean, these things have consequences, people are prosecuted for intimidating judges, and it will likely beef up security around this judge. She did also oversee Paul Manafort's case, and she put him in prison after he was alleged to have engaged in witness-tampering and charged by the special counsel's office with that.

So the stakes are very high for Roger Stone today when he shows up in court. You know, and we'll see what happens here if the judge says that he's, you know, gone one step step too far, Poppy, Jim.

HARLOW: OK, Kara, thanks very much for the reporting.

SCIUTTO: Lots to discuss here. Let's speak now to Jack Quinn, former White House counsel for the Clinton administration. Jack, always good to have you on. So Kara there mapping out that this judge has some big options here, a range of options from a relative slap on the wrist, perhaps changing the terms of his bail agreement right up to putting him behind bars for this.

Given those options, how seriously is a judge like this likely to respond?

JACK QUINN, FORMER WHITE HOUSE COUNSEL FOR THE CLINTON ADMINISTRATION: Well, he's going to, at a minimum, get a tongue lashing. The judge is not going to be amused by this, she's going to be very unhappy. If -- I said earlier, if stupidity were a crime, Roger would be in jail for the rest of his life.

This was just monumentally dumb on his part. Kara outlined the possible courses of action the judge might take. I think she might be mindful of Stone's desire to sort of set up a situation in which he appears to be persecuted. And so my guess would be -- and it's only a guess that she will not put him in jail.

I think he will -- the gag order will be significantly tightened to his displeasure. But who cares about that? But I don't think she'll put him in jail.

HARLOW: Jack, on the Barr report, some phenomenal reporting by our colleagues here at CNN --

SCIUTTO: Yes --

HARLOW: The Mueller report, I should say, that, that goes to the new Attorney General William Barr, that, that is likely to be handed over to Barr as soon as next week. And now, he has a lot of power, right? In terms of what he will turn over to Congress and ultimately to the American public.

QUINN: Yes --

HARLOW: If you think about what he said in that congressional hearing in his confirmation hearing, he said he'd be as transparent as he could. But he also said this, "I believe there may be discretion about what the Attorney General can put in the report." How do you see this playing out?

QUINN: So, and I think circumstances have changed a little bit since his congressional testimony. Let's run through quickly what is required of him, what's permitted and what are the practical necessities? The only thing he's required really to report about is any action taken to stop the special counsel from, for example, bringing a prosecution in a particular situation or against a particular individual.

He is permitted to reveal almost everything if he deems it to be in the public interest to reveal it. The exceptions, of course, are classified material, material relating to ongoing investigations, material that would implicate significant privacy interests on the part of people not being indicted.

So those things -- you know, those are the sort of the limitations, that's the framework around this. When I say the circumstances have changed, let's remember that Andrew McCabe is out on a book tour.

We have had a ton of publicity recently, about the fact that the FBI opened an investigation --

SCIUTTO: Yes --

QUINN: As to whether or not the president of the United States was serving as an asset of a foreign adversary. Now, I think that if William Barr tries to play it cute and hold back answers to the fundamental questions of the investigation, was there coordination? Was the president implicated in that coordination? There will be a hue and cry, it will just be -- it will be more than they could bear. I can't imagine, he's got to answer these core questions that

initiated the Mueller investigation, specifically, involving coordination and now in the light of the McCabe report, whether or not the president was personally or anyone close to him involved --

[09:25:00] SCIUTTO: Yes --

QUINN: In that. So --

SCIUTTO: It's a good point, Jack, because you can argue that there is an incentive for this president, for this administration to make that information public -- to -- if this is the case, to exonerate him from that. But you know, with your experience --

QUINN: Yes --

SCIUTTO: Given your experience in the Clinton White House, particularly during the Lewinsky issue, I mean, there are the legal issues here and there are the politics of this. And this is of course wrapped up --

QUINN: Absolutely --

SCIUTTO: In an enormous politics. Let's look at what the public says about releasing this report publicly, what people say in polls, 87 percent say it should be made public, 9 percent say no. What's interesting about this, unusual is that this is across the board.

Democrats, independents, Republicans, 80 percent of Republicans also agree this report should be made public. So it's very similar to Democrats and independents. Given that public support and the politics, does that put added pressure on the new Attorney General to be as forthcoming as possible?

QUINN: Absolutely, and that's why I say, you can't just have lawyers on here analyzing what's required and what's permitted. There are some practical necessities here that are dramatized by those polling results. Let me tell you what I would be doing if I were William Barr.

I would be trying to make sure that Robert Mueller is fully on board with what I do. Because if there's daylight between them, this is going to be a world of trouble for the administration, for the president, for the department of justice. So I think that whatever he's going to do, that needs to be taken into account.

The other thing I will say is, I have -- I don't obviously have any basis to dispute the reporting. But I think that in light of these recent developments, including for example the report that the Roger Stone indictment which raised as many questions as it answered, was directed by a senior official of the campaign to reach out to WikiLeaks about getting in touch and finding what else they were going to reveal.

WikiLeaks of course was acting as an agent of Russia in that undertaking. It's hard for me to believe that all of these questions will be answered next week. So, I'm not suggesting that they're not going to close down some of this or resolve some of the important questions.

But it's hard for me to believe that they can wrap this thing up in very short order.

SCIUTTO: That's an interesting point, and of course, you have all the other continuing cases in the southern district of New York and elsewhere. Jack Quinn, always good to have you on, thanks very much.

QUINN: Have a great day.

SCIUTTO: A court appearance just hours from now for a coast guard lieutenant accused of stockpiling weapons -- there they are, and making a hit list that includes Democratic politicians and journalists including some of our colleagues here at CNN.

HARLOW: We're also moments away from the opening bell on Wall Street. Investors will be watching the high level talks back underway between of course, the White House and China, ahead of that March 1st deadline.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)