Return to Transcripts main page

New Day

Chicago Police Saying That Jussie Smollett Filed A False Police Report; Brothers Testified Before A Grand Jury On Wednesday For Two And Half Hours; Democrats May Want The Full Report To Go Public On The Mueller Investigation. Aired 7-7:30a ET

Aired February 21, 2019 - 07:00   ET

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

[07:00:00]

UNKNOWN MALE: Possible felony, with Chicago police saying that the "Empire" actor filed a false police report when he claimed these two men attacked him last month while hurling racist and homophobic slurs.

JUSSIE SMOLLETT, ACTOR: I don't have any doubt in my mind that that's them, never did.

YOUNG: Well authorities say the brothers testified before a grand jury on Wednesday for two and a half hours, their lawyers telling reporters that the men were paid by Smollett to carry out the attack.

GLORIA SCHMIDT, ATTORNEY FOR OSUNDAIRO BROTHERS: There was a point where this story needed to be told and they manned up and they said you know what, we're going to correct this.

YOUNG: One police source telling CNN investigators are working to obtain Smollett's financial records to corroborate the claim. This surveillance video shows the two men inside a beauty supply store just one day before the alleged attack, purchasing items including a ski mask and a red hat.

One source telling CNN Smollett missed a scheduled meeting with police on Wednesday. He denied any involvement in the attack in an interview last week.

SMOLLETT: Who the (inaudible) would make something like this up or add something to it or - or whatever it may be. I can't - I can't even - I'm an advocate.

YOUNG: His attorney saying in a statement Wednesday night, like any other citizen, Mr. Smollett enjoys the presumption of innocence. John, I'm actually told this turning (ph) was uneventful, he showed up with his attorneys, turned himself in again, detectives will talk to him first before he comes here.

This whole thing has been very interesting as the 12 detectives have been working this non-stop. We saw them walk past us yesterday as they went upstairs to the grand jury, who knew this was going to be the ending.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BERMAN: All right, Ryan Young for us in Chicago. Ryan thank you very much. Joining me now is CNN Legal Analyst Joey Jackson, a criminal defense attorney. Joey the breaking news is Jessie Smollett is now in custody, he turned himself in, so what's happening at this moment?

JOEY JACKSON, LEGAL ANALYST, CNN: Well what happens is is that now you're processed, now he went from victim to a criminal defendant, and as a criminal defendant, he'll - you know, just like you see on TV, the mug shots, the finger prints, et cetera.

My understanding is that he was not indicted, I spoke with his attorney last night. My indication is is that they did a felony complaint. Not to get too much in the weeds, but what they do is they lay out what the probably cause is to believe that you committed this offense, that offense being allegedly filing a false report.

He'll have a bail hearing at which time a judge will make a determination whether he's released on bail, I would suspect he would be. The purpose of bail is to ensure you return to court.

And the process will formally begin in terms of him being a defendant and him being held accountable for the accusation of filing the report.

BERMAN: This will be the first chance for detectives to have contact with Smollett from when he went to an assumption to being a victim to a suspect here. Do you expect they will try to ask questions?

Do you have any expectation that he would ever answer them?

JACKSON: They will not, what happens is is when you surrender yourself as his attorney surrendered himself today, now that's a good look I should say because it goes to the issue of custody. If you're responsible enough to surrender yourself, you're certainly responsible enough to be released on an appropriate amount of bail.

To the issue of speaking to the police, he has a 5th Amendment right against self incrimination. And so I suspect that his attorneys will say you're saying no more. They already have, John, everything that he said on "Good Morning America".

We've seen the interview over and over, what else does he have to add? At this point he is accused of a crime, speaking will do him no good. His attorneys will not let him say anything to detectives, not withstanding him being in their custody.

BERMAN: One of the pieces of evidence that has come to light is the video of these brothers buying supplies at this store here. Why in your mind, Joey, is this video incriminating to Smollett?

JACKSON: It's damning and incriminating because what happens is is you had two brothers, John, and you remember going in and cooperating with authorities. Anyone could give allegations or give an accounting or a statement about what occurred. Their statement is is that this was all set up, that he told them to

get these supplies, that they practiced this beforehand. It was rehearsed, and they said chapter and verse. What that surveillance video does is it provides corroboration as to their story.

In addition to that, let's not forget a compelling piece of evidence that is the noose he had around his neck, apparently the police are saying they have a receipt for that that the brothers have.

And so, you know, that is very significant in terms of piecing together what happened.

BERMAN: If he is going to change his story, and we don't know that he is, and we should note that he's innocent until proven guilty -

JACKSON: Always.

BERMAN: -- he's only accused of this right now, but if he is going to change his story and say I did this, is it important for him to do it quickly?

JACKSON: Well listen, there will be a process and there's nothing to be rushed in the criminal process. He'll have, you know, the best of council, they will advise him accordingly, there'll be negotiations if a plea or settlement makes sense, then that's what they'll do.

There's always the probability that it'll come from a felony to a misdemeanor, that they could, you know, talk about no jail time, he deserves a presumption of innocence, whether he goes to trial, enters a plea, that'll be up to him (ph).

BERMAN: All right, Joey Jackson giving us real time analysis now that Jussie Smollett in custody in Chicago. Thank you.

JACKSON: Thank you John.

CAMEROTA: All right, John, Jussie Smollett's puts some of the 2020 candidates in a tough spot after they came to his defense before all the facts in the case were known. So joining us now is CNN's Senior Political Reporter Nia-Malika Henderson with the political ramifications of this.

So there was a rush to judgment, OK Nia, I mean most all of the Democratic candidates weighed in on Twitter before they knew all of the facts of the case. Here's one example, here's Cory Booker, "the vicious attack on actor Jussie Smollett was an attempted modern day lynching. I'm glad he's safe. To those in Congress who don't feel the urgency to pass our anti-lynching bill, designating lynching as a federal hate crime, I urge you to pay attention."

It wasn't the alleged vicious attack, I mean even that could have helped. And so what's the fallout from this?

NIA-MALIKA HENDERSON, SENIOR POLITICAL REPORTER, CNN NEWS: I Think that's right, and you see from him as well as Kamala Harris who used a very similar language, this idea of an attempted, modern day lynching, you see them now essentially saying they don't really want to comment at this point until all the facts of this case are known.

You definitely had lots of Democrats basically come out and take Jussie Smollett's side of the case without saying this was an alleged or this is reported to have happened. And part of it is they are in this kind of I think environment where it's expected that people kind of come out and rush to judgment.

Certainly if you think about what the narrative around this was, the narrative of being that this was basically prompted by people who were Trump supporters, it was meant to send a message to this gay, black, famous man, that this was MAGA country.

So yes, I mean I think they played into that narrative and I think they're going to have to learn from this. Remember, I mean at least Kamala Harris and Cory Booker, they are lawyers, right, so they should know -

CAMEROTA: She said - but wait a minute, she's a former prosecutor.

HENDERSON: That's - yes -

CAMEROTA: Former A.G., of anyone - I mean frankly, Kamala Harris should have exercised some (inaudible).

HENDERSON: I think that's exactly right, I think that's right, they're lawyers and they should have known not to speak more carefully and more judiciously about such a case without all the facts being known.

And of course the facts at some point we'll still have them - we'll have more facts and we'll see what they say, but they're certainly tempering their speech, so lesson learned I think for Kamala Harris as well as Cory Booker.

You rightfully point out that these are both folks who have law degrees and should have known to weigh the facts more carefully before jumping out and making - going to such a harsh conclusion about what might have happened.

CAMEROTA: Nia-Malika Henderson, thank you very much.

[07:05:00]

BERMAN: All right, you know there's a ton of news in a morning when this is our second story. The other big story, CNN has learned that Attorney General William Barr is getting ready to announce the completion of Special Council Robert Mueller's investigation as early as next week.

Back with us Nia-Malika Henderson, also joining us David Gregory a CNN political analyst and Laura Jarrett, a CNN justice reporter who was part of the team that broke this story.

So Laura, just once again, tell us how this is going to work.

LAURA JARRETT, CORRESPONDENT, CNN NEWS: Well basically what we expect to happen in the next week, John, is for the Justice Department to be preparing to receive the confidential report from the Special Council's office.

Under the Special Council regulations, Bill Barr the attorney general, all he has to say to Congress is I have it, it's done, it's concluded. He doesn't have to say anything else. So the big question is what more will he say if anything?

We know that he's tried to say at least to lawmakers before that he's in favor of transparency, he wants to do as much as he can to be having a full airing of this - of this report.

But we also know he hasn't committed to releasing the full report. It has classified information. It has potentially derogatory information about uncharged individuals. And so that's the line we're going to see him walk for the next few weeks.

CAMEROTA: And in fact, David Gregory, as we've been talking about in our last hour, it's that derogatory information that is not supposed to ever be released. There are regulations that stipulate what he - Bill Barr can and cannot release.

And so it sounds like there'll be more redacted than certainly journalists are hoping for, and it sounds like that is totally within his purview to do less is more.

DAVID GREGORY, POLITICAL ANALYST, CNN: And that's what he asserted in his confirmation hearing, and it's what's giving so much heartburn to Democrats who want as much information as possible.

But I think there are just so many questions. As Laura suggests, are there indictments to be unsealed that we don't know about? That would be huge. What - what is Mueller's approach to this going to be?

The template we have for this is the Ken Starr report on the impeachment process against President Clinton, where it was this compelling narrative. But maybe Mueller does something different, maybe he gives a more slimmed down report.

Maybe it's more like a bibliography, maybe it's simply information that's communicated to the attorney general and - and certain findings. What we know is clear is that it's so unlikely that Mueller is going to charge the president of the United States with anything, because there's - there's precedent for not doing that.

If he provides fodder in a report for Democrats to initiate impeachment proceedings and articles of impeachment, that's something else. It depends how forward leaning he is, which have then of course gets to the question of what the attorney general decides to release.

There's no question - it's not - obviously journalists and so much national interests, Democrats are going to push very hard for as much release of information as possible, and as Joe Lockhart pointed out last hour, there's also going to be information that potentially clears the president or those around him of any questions about collusion, and that would be something that would be in the interest of the attorney general to point out as well.

BERMAN: David Gregory points out that Democrats may want the full report to go public. The fact of the matter is that Americans by and large, vast majority seem to want the report to go public. Eighty- seven percent say they want the findings of the Mueller report to be made public.

And David brings up another point here, which is the conundrum, the catch 22, maybe even the glitch in the system here, which is that Justice Department guidelines say that a sitting president cannot be indicted.

William Barr says that we don't release information on people who aren't charged with crimes. Well if he can't be charged with a crime, how is anyone to know if there is anything perhaps that is untoward that the president did?

That's a real problem here, Nia, and one that Congress may need to get involved in.

[07:10:00]

HENDERSON: And they are already signaling at least the House Democrats on the Judiciary Committee, signaling that they are interested in subpoenaing the report is -- as well as possibly Bob Mueller.

He'd be a private citizen at some point, they could issue a subpoena whether or not he - he would comply is a whole different issue, but they feel like - and this is Jerry Nadler who's - who's the chairman of the House Judiciary, he's essentially said the public has a right to know.

You could tell after the Bob Barr hearing that they didn't necessarily trust Bob Barr. Here he is, this new attorney general who's going to be balancing not only these DOJ regulations, but also being in this new position with the president who obviously values loyalty.

Bob Barr is somebody who definitely wants to exercise his independence, but also has to keep in mind those two factors. So we'll see. We heard the president obviously is saying wonderful things about Bob Barr, that he's a great person and that he's going to be a wonderful A.G. and saying that it's going to be all up to Bob Barr.

But listen, the Congress is certainly going to get involved in this. And again, you look at those polls across the board, Republicans, Independents and Democrats want to see the findings of this report.

So we'll see, I mean this is going to be a real political battle.

GREGORY: Can I just add, you know, here the president has talked - we go back to the e-mail investigation and, you know, he's calling on the Russians to find missing e-mails from Hilary Clinton's server, so is he standing up for transparency or is he the guy who says well, you know, it'll be - Attorney General Barr, he's a fine man, he'll decide what happens to the report.

You know this president and his legal team is - TV legal team led by Rudy Giuliani want to - want to make a counter argument to everything that comes out. It is in their interest to take the good, the bad and the ugly because there's nothing - there's no - not going to be any hiding from it.

This stuff is going to leak, it's going to be subpoenaed, it's going to be part of an impeachment hearing. I think it's going to be very hard to keep this under wraps.

CAMEROTA: Laura, you know, Andrew McCabe is on this book tour and so on some of his - in some of his appearances, I think it might have been with - with Anderson, he was asked about whether Trump's - President Trump's family is being investigated and he was coy.

Andrew McCabe did not give a really sort of thorough answer about what he knew about that. But if the Mueller report is going to come out as early as next week, does that suggest to us that Roger Stone was the last indictment there from the Mueller (inaudible)?

JARRETT: I think that's certainly a possibility that we should entertain, but also recognizing that the Mueller team has been staffing up with regular old prosecutors from the Justice Department who will take these cases on.

So they will live on even if Mueller's shop is all closed. So even on the Stone case and on others, they have either farmed them out, referred them for prosecution, or in Stone's particular case that's being handled by D.C. prosecutors here.

So if there's a superseding indictment where they add additional charges in addition to the lying charges that we've already seen against Stone, that would all be naturally handled by the D.C. U.S. Attorney's Office.

But the point of McCabe is interesting because he has been saying so much on this vast media tour that he's on, and remember he is the one who started the obstruction of justice and counter intelligence investigations.

And so I think that's part of why you've seen President Trump and his allies go after McCabe so hard since what McCabe did laid the ground work for Bob Mueller's work. I mean McCabe makes it very clear, everything that they had went right over to Bob Mueller.

And so I think that's part of why they weren't able to just let this go this week with McCabe, it's that he is sort of the impetus for all of it. And it's also why you see McCabe saying I was fired for political reasons, I wasn't fired because the inspector general found that I had mislead investigators about a totally unrelated issue.

[07:15:00]

JARRETT: I was fired because the president wanted me fired and he reveals for the first time yesterday that in the original letter that the president wrote about the firing of James Comey, he said to Comey the -- part of the reason you're being fired is because you didn't fire McCabe.

BERMAN: I have to say, it's a stunning confluence of events on the calendar with McCabe out on there on this tour with the knowledge that this report will be delivered next week and with Michael Cohen, Nia, showing up for public testimony before house oversight. What will that look like?

HENDERSON: You know a lot of eyeballs on that hearing, right? This is a hearing that had been scheduled then it was scuttled. You heard Michael Cohen essentially saying he was nervous about coming forward because of the things that the president said. You heard Nancy Pelosi, of course, comment on that more recently and basically saying those sorts of threats won't be tolerated. But this is one of the people who has been closest to Donald Trump and Donald Trump's family for over a decade.

He has been known as the fixer; self-proclaimed fixer. There's going to be a lot of questions obviously about what he was fixing. The Mueller probe by that time will be nearing an end, so maybe he would have a sort of wider purview in terms of what he's able to talk about. The SDNY stuff obviously still going on in some ways, but my goodness, this is going to be a much-viewed hearing and it will come as the president is, you know, meeting with Kim Jong-Un, right?

In some ways this might be a bigger blockbuster hearing for Michael Cohen than seeing the president side by side with Kim Jong-Un because that's a bit of a rerun. We haven't heard at length from Michael Cohen and so I think the public is going to be very interested in what he has to say.

GREGORY: There are these two tracks to these investigations, right? Michael Cohen is going to testify not about those areas that Mueller is investigating, about his interactions with Donald Trump, personal interactions, business interactions, but not something related to Russia, which is why Mueller's piece is so important. If there isn't a clean resolution, there is going to be the specter of all these different strands of investigation that the president will keep attacking as politically motivated.

BERMAN: All right, David, Nia, Laura, thank you very much.

"The Washington Post" reports that the Trump Administration may appoint climate change skeptic William Happer to lead a committee that will study whether climate change poses a national security threat. Really? CNN's Joe Johns is live at the White House with the latest here. Joe.

JOE JOHNS, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Good morning, John. We've known for a long time that the president is a climate change skeptic, a critic. He's called it a hoax during the campaign and we also know that the intelligence committee, the defense department, others are quite concerned about it. The president, by the way, was on twitter very recently deriding the idea of climate change. But that's not all he's doing. "The Washington Post" reports that he's

also considering setting up a committee to oversee climate change policy in the government and one of the people he's considering heading up that committee is a guy named William Happer, an atomic physicist, not a climatologist; a physicist.

So why William Happer? Well you have to look at some of the things he said and one of the things he's very famous for talking about is how he sees carbon dioxide, which is the greenhouse gas that traps all kinds of energy inside the atmosphere leading to global warming. He says it's misunderstood. He says it gets a bad rap and he's also been quoted repeatedly for saying that there's, if you will, a bit of a connection between this greenhouse gas, carbon dioxide, and the way Jewish people were treated during World War II. Listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO)

WILLIAM HAPPER, TRUMP NOMINEE FOR CLIMATE CHANGE PANEL: The demonization of carbon dioxide is just like the demonization of the poor Jews under Hitler. Carbon dioxide is actually a benefit to the world and so were the Jews.

(END VIDEO)

JOHNS: Benefit to the world. "The Washington Post" says it got a hold of planning documents for this new committee and that is how it reported this story. Alisyn, back to you.

CAMEROTA: This is going to be a doozy, Joe. Thank you very much for showing us that.

Our next guest has a message for new Attorney General William Barr. Quote, "Buckle in because it's going to be a wild ride." Mr. Barr ...

BERMAN: Which was my favorite ride at Disney World.

CAMEROTA: Me too - "Mr. Barr's wild ride, you ain't seen nothing yet," end quote. We ask Senator Richard Blumenthal what he means by that next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[07:20:00]

CAMEROTA: CNN has learned that Attorney General Bill Barr is preparing to announce the completion of the special counsel investigation as early as next week. Barr will then submit his own summary of the Mueller report to Congress. During his confirmation hearing, Senator Richard Blumenthal asked Barr what lawmakers can expect to see in that report.

(BEGIN VIDEO)

SEN. RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, (D) CONNECTICUT: Will you commit that you will explain to us any changes or deletions that you make to the special counsel report that's submitted to you in whatever you present to us?

WILLIAM BARR, U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL: I -- I will commit to - to providing as much information as I can consistent with the regulations.

(END VIDEO)

CAMEROTA: Joining us now is Senator Richard Blumenthal, he's a member of the Judiciary Committee. Senator, great to have you here in studio. Were you satisfied with that response?

BLUMENTHAL: Nowhere near satisfied, Alisyn, and that's why I joined with Senator Grassley in legislation that will compel a report, not just an explanation of why Mueller has brought charges or not. A report submitted directly to Congress in full with facts and findings and evidence and also the American people.

CAMEROTA: But you know there are regulations against it too much being revealed, you know, derogatory information about other people can't be revealed. I mean, they're really trying to contain the vast scope of the Ken Starr report that really, you know, was 2,700 pages, really necessary for the American public to read? So they're trying to contain it and there are regulations. So he's within the letter of the law in not releasing much.

BLUMENTHAL: There are norms, not necessarily regulations, that say to prosecutors if you're not going to indict someone, bring charges, then you should not say anything.

[07:25:00]

And I live by those norms when I was a federal prosecutor, as U.S. Attorney in Connecticut. But this case is different. What we have here is a special counsel has that has been appointed because of the betrayal of public trust. It's an extraordinary situation and that's why the public deserves to know. The public paid for this report and the American people deserve to know everything that's in it.

CAMEROTA: What happens if he just does give you a thumbnail sketch that you don't think is comprehensive enough?

BLUMENTHAL: There will be subpoenas from Congress, including I hope from the Senate Judiciary Committee where I sit. But there will also be a public perception of cover-up. Because if William Barr believes, I think he does, that a sitting president can't be indicted, I disagree with him, and he brings no charges that Mueller says can't be brought and if there are also no public disclosures, the public rightly will feel that there is a cover-up.

CAMEROTA: Subpoenas of who? Robert Mueller?

BLUMENTHAL: I asked William Barr whether he would allow Robert Mueller to testify, he was noncommittal. I asked William Barr whether he would object to a subpoena for the Mueller report; he was noncommittal. But I think there will be subpoenas. But...

CAMEROTA: Can you subpoena Robert Mueller? Can your committee subpoena Robert Mueller?

BLUMENTHAL: A Senate or House committee can subpoena anyone. The Department of Justice may resist it, but here's the really important point. The American public, and you showed it a couple of times already this morning, 87 percent believe they have a right to know. And I think Congress will be hard put to resist the outpouring of public support for this bill that Senator Grassley and I have submitted. It's bipartisan. I've been absolutely amazed by the interests on the part of my colleagues in it and I think you'll find a lot of support.

CAMEROTA: Our CNN reporting is that the Mueller report could come as early as next week. Is that what you were hearing?

BLUMENTHAL: Only Mueller knows, number one. Number two, there is still a lot of work to be done on this investigation, in my view. The Gates/Manafort and Flynn sentencing, the grand jury has been extended, the Roger Stone trial and the evidence that was seized from him has to be digested and analyzed. But equally important, the investigations that have been spawned and strategically spun off by Robert Mueller in Southern District of New York, Eastern District of Virginia. So Donald Trump's legal exposure is far from over.

CAMEROTA: You told "The Washington Post" this week, "Buckle in because it's going to be a wild ride, Mr. Barr. You ain't seen nothing yet." What does that mean?

BLUMENTHAL: That means that he has to make a decision. Is he going to be the people's lawyer or is he going to be the president's lawyer? Clearly this president regards the attorney general as one of his minions. He has no respect for the rule of law. In fact utter contempt for judges and the judicial process and he has denounced relentlessly the FBI and other law enforcement; absolutely unprecedented, shattering all the norms. William Barr is a professional, or at least he should be, and he's going to have to stand up and speak out for the Department of Justice and the rule of law and that will make his ride a pretty wild one.

CAMEROTA: I'm going to ask you about a another stunning bit of news and that we have this morning and that is this mass murder plot by an active U.S. Coast Guard who authorities tell us was a white supremacist. He had stockpiled an arsenal. We have a picture of some of the things that he had -- the weapons that he had gotten together in order to try to perpetrate this attack and he had a hit list of people that he had planned to kill. You were on that hit list and I'm just wondering how you found out and what your thoughts were when you found out that you were on his hit list.

BLUMENTHAL: I found out from the news when I heard about it last night. But, you know, I'm very grateful and respectful of the FBI and other law enforcement agencies for protecting public officials and the public in general. I was the Attorney General for the State of Connecticut as well as a federal prosecutor for most of my career. There were threats along the way. And I found that law enforcement was pretty reliable and very, very vigilant in the way it protected us and the public in general which is why I am really so regretful about the president's disrespect for law enforcement because we depend on these dedicated professionals who go to work every day and do the critical work that this country in law enforcement and the president is undermining their credibility and morale.

CAMEROTA: I mean all you have to do is imagine if they hadn't caught him, if they hadn't done such great police work what might have happened. But I must say I'm a tad troubled that you had to hear it on the news.

[07:30:00]

END