Return to Transcripts main page

New Day

Smollett Insists He's Innocent of Staging Attack; Roger Stone Barred from Speaking about Criminal Case; Michael Cohen to Testify Before Congress Next Week. Aired 7-7:30a ET

Aired February 22, 2019 - 07:00   ET

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

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: NEW DAY continues right now.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

[07:00:05] EDDIE JOHNSON, CHICAGO POLICE SUPERINTENDENT: He was dissatisfied for his salary, so he concocted a story about being attacked.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I have never known him to misrepresent himself. If he lied, it's a gut punch.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What he said happened is not the character of our city. We should take a pause, get the facts.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It just shows sometimes there's more to something. We just have to see what happens.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: This is way beyond "I accidentally stepped over the line." This was a dangerous attack on the judge.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Putting a gag order on his social media makes sense. She handled it right.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: If he screws up again, she's going to yank his bail and throw him in jail.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

ANNOUNCER: This is NEW DAY with Alisyn Camerota and John Berman.

BERMAN: Good morning, everyone, welcome to your NEW DAY. We do have breaking news from overnight.

Jussie Smollett, he insists he is innocent. 20th Century FOX confirms the actor went to the set of "Empire" late last night. CNN has learned he called a meeting with the cast and crew. One person who attended says, to the surprise of everyone there, Smollett defiantly stuck to his story of innocence.

The star is facing a felony charge for filing a false police report.

ALISYN CAMEROTA, CNN ANCHOR: Now this meeting coming just hours after prosecutors laid out a timeline that they say shows Smollett orchestrated his own attack. Authorities say that he paid two brothers $3,500 to stage an assault

in order to advance his own career. Chicago's police superintendent was angry, and he's calling on Smollett to apologize to the city.

CNN's Ryan Young has been covering this story for us since it broke. He joins us live now with the latest. All of these developments, it seems like, by the hour, Ryan.

RYAN YOUNG, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yes, every day it plays on like another sitcom, to a certain extent. He went to court yesterday, then walked out and then went to work, we're told by FOX. Now his shooting's going to be put on hold. But you can tell the city is ready to punch back.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Make room.

NOBLES (voice-over): "Empire" actor Jussie Smollett digging in after being charged with reporting a fake assault to police.

JOHNSON: He was dissatisfied with his salary, so he concocted a story about being attacked.

NOBLES: Smollett's legal team insisting he maintains his innocence, writing in a defiant statement, "Today we witnessed an organized law enforcement spectacle. The presumption of innocence was trampled upon at the expense of Mr. Smollett."

A source tells CNN that Smollett was on the set to film at the "Empire" studio Thursday afternoon and called a meeting with cast and crew, who were said to be expecting him to come clean. But after apologizing for any embarrassment caused by the incident, the source says Smollett asked the show team for their support and, again, insisted that he's innocent.

JUSSIE SMOLLETT, ACTOR: I am now one of those people who have been attacked.

NOBLES: The visit coming after Chicago police laid out their case against the actor, saying Smollett paid the Osundairo brothers $3,500 to stage the attack, and prosecutors say that police have a copy of the check to prove it.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: He wanted Abel to attack him but not hurt him too badly and to give him a chance to appear to fight back. Defendant Smollett also included that he wanted Ola to place a rope around his neck, pour gasoline on him and yell, "This is MAGA country."

YOUNG: Police say Smollett gave the brothers $100 in cash to buy supplies they later bought at this beauty supply store and that the three men even scoped out a location for the attack.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Smollett directed the brothers' attention towards a surveillance camera on the corner, which he believed would capture the incident. YOUNG: The injuries seen in this photo, allegedly self-inflicted.

Police say Smollett came up with the plan after this threatening letter he allegedly sent to himself failed to garner significant attention.

JOHNSON: Jussie Smollett took advantage of the pain and anger of racism to promote his career.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

YOUNG: The actor got $100,000 bond, which means he basically put down $10,000 to get released. Just to think about this, though, all the man-hours that the police department put into this, over 1,000 man- hours were put into this investigation. Detectives still not done yet. And you think about all of the interviews they've done, over 100 witnesses talked to. This just doesn't end just yet -- guys.

CAMEROTA: All right. Ryan, stand by. Obviously, we will come back you to for more developments.

But here to talk about this at the moment is Tiffany Cross. She is the cofounder and managing editor of "The Beat D.C." We also have Nischelle Turner. She hosts "Entertainment Tonight." And Van Jones, host of CNN's "THE VAN JONES SHOW."

Tiffany, I just want to start with you, because I feel like the pendulum has now swung back the other way so far. So three weeks ago, I think people were wrong to believe Jussie Smollett in such a wholesale way, to dismiss any skepticism that they had about this story and jump on the bandwagon and believe him and so publicly be on his side.

And now, are we making the same mistake of believing the police chief in such a wholesale way? Jussie Smollett hasn't been convicted yet. He hasn't going to trial. And now to say that, yes, he's guilty of this. I've never seen anything like it, this kind of rush to judgment in such a short period of time.

TIFFANY CROSS, CO-FOUNDER AND MANAGING EDITOR, "THE BEAT DC": You know, I think, honestly, this story is getting a little bit too much attention. I know that it's, you know, has all the elements of television and click bait and things that we love.

[07:05:10] But I feel like, you know, there was a member of the United States government who had a stockpile of weapons that was ready to attack, you know, some of our colleagues and people we know and people on Capitol Hill. And here we are talking about Jussie Smollett.

I know there were a lot of people who thought the story sounded strange when it first happened, despite all this -- you know, public declarations of support. And, you know, people are asking politicians about it, and it's just -- it feels a little bit misguided at this point that it has all of our attention.

I think, you know, it almost feels like this pendulum to swing, like, "Oh, we're so sorry, MAGA supporters, that you know, we falsely identified these people." And, you know, there are a lot of evidence of violent incidents that happen at these MAGA rallies, and I just don't want -- you know, have Jussie Smollett distract from that.

I mean, a few weeks ago, a cameraman was attacked by [SIC] the BBC rally support. In 2016, remember, the older white gentleman punched the young black kid --

CAMEROTA: Of course. Yes, yes.

CROSS: -- who was there protesting. They had to call off a MAGA rally in Chicago.

And so when we have all of this attention on Jussie Smollett, it almost feels like there's this effort to extend this mea culpa to people who are, in fact, saying very deplorable and ugly things at MAGA rallies.

CAMEROTA: Not at all. I hear you. When it becomes political --

CROSS: A majority. Maybe not all. A majority.

CAMEROTA: I don't know about that. I mean, I just don't know. I think that President Trump when he tweets, "Jussie Smollett, what about what MAGA and the tens of millions of people you insulted with your racist and dangerous comments?" It was too broad of a brush stroke to denigrate all MAGA supporters.

CROSS: I don't know. I mean, I've seen a lot of the -- what happens at these MAGA rallies. I don't know if you've seen some of the signs and comments that they say.

I think, look, the Jussie Smollett thing has a lot of holes in that story, for sure. I don't think this is the -- the time for everybody to say, "Oh, my gosh, so sorry, you guys. Who would ever think that of the MAGA crowd?" Like, there is reason. There's -- where there's smoke there's fire. There was smoke there at these things.

So I'm not giving him a pass. I'm just saying there's a reason why people were willing to believe it.

BERMAN: Van, go ahead.

VAN JONES, HOST, "THE VAN JONES SHOW": Well, I think I see it slightly differently in that the one thing you want, if you are going to have a justice movement that is credible, is not to lump everyone in the same category and say, well your whole category, your whole class of suspect.

So therefore, even if somebody says something that's not true, it's not that big a deal, because your whole class is suspect. That's what they do to black people. And I just -- I don't believe that.

I have huge criticisms and problems with this rise of hatred in the country. I think the president too often aids and abets that by things he says and does not say, and that's a big problem. That is a separate matter from any individual incident and any individual person who's being accused or who's making the accusation. We have to be able to separate those things.

It is, in fact, the case that liberals and progressives, you know, like myself, called attention to this when we thought that it was the MAGA crowd. We put up videos. We tweeted. We talked about it. So we can't now say it's not a story when it turns out it aps it's almost certainly to be a hoax. And so, you know, you've got to eat the whole hamburger when stuff like this happens, and I think everybody needs to take a step back.

What I want to say about where we are now is, yes, I said yesterday let's not just ride this pendulum back and forth and back and forth. There seems to be overwhelming evidence that what Jussie said is not true. The police have made their case.

We still have not heard publicly yet from Jussie Smollett. I want to hear from him. I want us to move forward, but I do think -- I do think that is a story. It's not like liberals and progressives said, "It's not that big a deal. Everybody be quiet. We don't want any attention on this.: We said it's a story. And I think if it's a story when it's on one side, it's got to be a story on the other, too.

CROSS: Can I can just say, though, really quickly, because it almost sounds like you're comparing the plight of MAGA people to black people, and I don't think that's necessary --

JONES: That's not what I said at all.

CROSS: Well, you said this is what they do to black people. I think that's a bit -- that's a bit of a false equivalency.

JONES: Listen, here's what I'm trying to say. We're in a world now where, you know, people want to jump on any one thing and whatever. We don't have to be in these camps.

I think that you're somebody who believes in justice, and I don't think you're somebody who believes in justice only for one group. I think you're somebody -- I've read your stuff. You believe in justice, period. And when you're talking about justice, period, there's a standard. And that standard is basic procedural fairness. That standard is being -- is actually looking at facts and evidence.

And what I'm saying is we hate it when people don't give us that benefit. So it makes, I think, African-Americans especially sensitive to these questions in justice. And I think we should extend that to everybody. And then when we do that, 99 times out of 100 we come out on top.

So I'm not advancing any standard that's bad for black people. The standard I'm advancing is great for black people, because 99 times out of 100 we come out on top, but maybe not this time.

BERMAN: There's been a lot of talk, obviously, about the long-term impact of this. Does it make it less likely that people believe accusations of hate crimes, which are on the rise in this country going forward. [07:10:01] Nischelle, I'm fascinated by what's happened in just the

last 12 hours with Jussie Smollett apparently going to the set, maintaining his innocence, asking for support as people are having these discussions. As we hear from Van and Tiffany, raising real questions.

NISCHELLE TURNER, HOST, "ENTERTAINMENT TONIGHT": Yes.

BERMAN: About the impact of this going forward. What is his declaration of innocence due to that? How does that impact how people are talking about this?

TURNER: Yes, you know, this is really interesting. I almost hate to interject, because I think that the discussion Van and Tiffany were having is a very important one. It's one that is going on right now. I think it gets to the heart of what everybody is talking about.

But a couple things. You know, Alisyn mentioned earlier that everybody was quick to believe him and whatnot. You know what? I don't begrudge people for believing somebody they care about, they respect, they do not believe is -- I don't begrudge people for doing that and stepping up and standing up for that person.

I do believe, as Van said, that if you see the change of events, then you have to say, "OK, I was wrong."

But I don't see a problem with believing someone that you care about.

Now, Van said he wanted to hear from Jussie. We did hear from Jussie. His legal team put out a statement last night, maintaining his innocence. His family put it up on social media.

He is still saying 100 percent that he did not to do this. He's doubling, tripling, quadrupling down. I don't know what's going to happen with this. All I know is that Jussie Smollett's team has decided we're going to go through with this.

I mean, he went to his cast last night and tearfully, our reporting says, that he tearfully asked them, you know, said, "You know this isn't me. You know, you know this is not who I am. I did not to do this." So he is still saying, "I didn't do it." I think he's going to, you know, let the public make up their mind.

Everyone's right. There's a whole lot of evidence that suggests that he did. Now we have to see the legal situation play out. I'm still kind of gobsmacked by the whole thing.

CAMEROTA: Everybody is. Everybody is. And you know him personally, so of course --

TURNER: I do.

CAMEROTA: -- you have a different take on it. But everybody is.

I mean, to watch all this play out so publicly, like this morality play. Tiffany, so look, obviously, we have to reserve judgment on whether or not we convict him right now in the media.

However, if -- if in order to file a false claim, if he -- it turns out that he is guilty of this. I do think it's worth a little bit of exploration as to what possesses somebody and why would somebody who is so successful do this?

And I thought it was very interesting what Columbia Professor John McWhorter tweeted about this. And I just want to dive into this for a second. He says, "We're at a peculiar sociohistorical stage, where someone could think being black and jumped by white thugs makes them more interesting than being a star on a hit TV show. And sadly he's right."

This thirst for relevance that we see among people right now. And the idea that being a victim makes you more interesting than being a star. That's kind of mind-blowing.

CROSS: Well, again, I think this is -- you know, if he did do these things, it's definitely, you know, sociopathic behavior if he created this attack. I don't know that he is representative of some large group of society.

I think we have to be honest about what the MAGA hat has come to represent, what the MAGA symbol has come to represent. I don't know that I would conflate these two. This is an actor who was, you know, allegedly feigning this whole attack, trying to get more money for his salary.

That's a separate conversation from what's happening in society at large, and the divide is happening in this country with, as John said, hate crimes being on the rise. They rose 30 percent, again, recently seven percent in 2018 alone. And most of these groups are white supremacist groups, as evidenced by a member of the United States government who amassed a huge amount of weapons, claiming --

CAMEROTA: There's all sorts of stats.

TURNER: But if had is true, didn't Jussie conflate the two?

CROSS: He did, Nischelle.

TURNER: Didn't he bring the intersection together and force people to have this conversation? And if it is true, didn't he, in fact, attempt to paint MAGA supporters as these racist and homophobic people?

CROSS: I have to disagree with you there.

TURNER: If the story's true, that --

CROSS: But, Nischelle, I have to respectfully disagree. I think MAGA supporters have painted themselves as that. I mean, when you look at footage, when you hear things they say, these are -- this is the honest to goodness truth, and we have to be bold enough to call that out.

BERMAN: Can I just say --

CAMEROTA: Why the extreme at the rally?

CROSS: I'm sorry.

CAMEROTA: the extreme. The extremes at the rally. I mean, you -- you, I think, are using a broad brushstroke, as well. But the extremes of the rally have been violent, not the -- most of the thousands there.

CROSS: Well, the fact that most of the thousands of people aren't shouting, you know, ridiculous, hateful, racist rhetoric; but it still has -- you have aligned yourself with a group of people who does. And if we want to pretend that, you know, the MAGA symbol hasn't come to represent that, I just think that -- that's false.

BERMAN: Can I just say one thing? We need to make crystal-clear, though, if the Chicago police are right, no one in a MAGA hat did this.

CROSS: No, right, I agree. Yes.

BERMAN: Jussie Smollett made this up. It's on him. This is on him, if the police are right here. The bigger implications might be on him also, but we're going to feel them, Van.

JONES: I think we're -- I'm concerned about where we're headed --

BERMAN: Right.

JONES: -- as a country.

TURNER: Me, too.

[07:15:04] JONES: Because we have a president who doesn't care about facts, who doesn't care about, you know, data, as long as he's basically making his point, as long as he's basically sticking up for his side, he's good.

There's a danger that begins to infect the entire society, and everybody just starts having no standards, no whatever. It's all about, you know, whataboutism and "your side sucks." And we just can't actually say, "Listen, sometimes my team is right."

I think my team is right 99 percent of the time, but the 1 percent time we're wrong, done. That doesn't mean I'm an apologist for the MAGA crowd. Nobody's been tougher on hate crimes or racism than me. But I'm also not going to be -- I'm not going to let our movements for justice become tools for people who are up to no good. And I'm not going to let us become apologists for ways of thinking that are just, you know, not sound when we're trying to make society work for everybody.

CROSS: I'm just saying Jussie was not on our team.

JONES: He was a week ago, according to everybody that I know. CROSS: Maybe. But I've had different conversations, and I never

publicly talked about Jussie. I never tweeted out.

JONES: Jussie hasn't been an activist for two or three years. He hasn't been --

CROSS: He's -- I'm saying his actions -- but Van, his actions are not representative of what's happening on the left.

JONES: Well, that's -- that's for sure.

CROSS: I think that's an individual -- an individual and narcissistic problem. And to take ownership of that and to then say, oh, well, the MAGA crowd may be bad but then look at what Jussie Smollett did. I think that's a false equivalency. I'm not saying you're making that, but I think this is a part of the media conversation that's happening.

JONES: How would you have us discuss it? How would you have us discuss it?

TURNER: Isn't this the problem? Isn't this the problem, that this whole thing has become political when it started as, you know, a hate crime? It quickly became political and now we're talking about the right and the left. And I just think we should be talking about the right and the wrong.

JONES: I think that's right. But I do have a question.

I hear this a lot from my progressive friends, that when you try to have a nuanced conversation, immediately, you're accused of false equivalence. I'm saying 99 percent of the time we're right. One percent of the time maybe this is a case you're wrong. That's not a false equivalent. I'm giving it its proper balance, but it can't be 100 to zero. When you try to make it not 100 to zero, then you get accused of false equivalence.

How can we have a conversation that's nuanced without, on the one hand, letting racists off the hook and, on the other hand, being accused of false equivalence?

CAMEROTA: Guys, thank you very much for having this conversation. Obviously, we are just at the start of what all of this means in a larger sense. But Tiffany, Van, Nischelle, thank you, guys, very much for the candor and sharing your personal thoughts.

CROSS: Thank you guys.

CAMEROTA: Tune into "THE VAN JONES SHOW" tomorrow. Van sits down with Congressman Joe Kennedy and comedian Hasan Minhaj. It's tomorrow at 7 Eastern, right on here on CNN. That will be a great show.

JONES: It's hilarious!

BERMAN: In falsetto, the entire show.

This morning, Roger Stone can't say anything about his case. The judge's stern message to Stone and the drama inside that courtroom next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CAMEROTA: A federal judge has silenced longtime Trump associate Roger Stone, tightening the gag order in his criminal case after a dramatic day in court.

CNN's Sara Murray joins us with more. What happened yesterday?

SARA MURRAY, CNN POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, look, Roger Stone took the stand in his own defense. He said he was kicking himself for his own stupidity, but the judge just not -- was just not buying his explanation for this inflammatory post. She said he was purposely choosing an image that he knew could incite others.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

MURRAY (voice-over): President Trump's former adviser, Roger Stone, leaving court Thursday after federal Judge Amy Berman Jackson placed him under a strict gag order for posting this picture of her on Instagram, appearing to show the crosshairs of a gun behind her head.

Stone insisting he is heartfully sorry but repeatedly contradicting his own explanations for the post. First, saying an unnamed volunteer selected the picture, then that he picked it out himself. Stone initially describing the crosshairs as the logo of an organization, then a Celtic symbol.

Jackson rejecting Stone's explanation, saying, "There's nothing ambiguous about crosshairs," noting "Mr. Stone could not even keep his story straight on the stand, much less from one day to another."

The judge also questioning Stone's sincerity, saying his "apology rings quite hollow" after he's repeatedly defended the post, despite removing it from Instagram and signing his lawyer's letter to the judge apologizing.

ROGER STONE, LONGTIME ADVISOR TO DONALD TRUMP: I threatened no one. I intended to threaten no one. I never disrespected the judge or the court.

BROWN: Judge Jackson stating, "I have serious doubts about whether you've learned any lesson at all."

Last month, Stone was arrested as part of the special counsel's Russia investigation.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: FBI! Open the door!

MURRAY: And charged with seven felony counts of obstruction, making false statements and witness tampering.

Judge Jackson warning Stone that if he violates her order, she'll have him thrown in jail, noting, "This is not baseball. There will not be a third chance."

(END VIDEOTAPE)

MURRAY: Now, Roger Stone is allow to talk about pretty much literally anything else. He can talk about current events. He can talk about the news, but you saw the judge's warning there. No talking about the case or she's not afraid to throw him behind bars.

Back to you, John.

BERMAN: All right. Sara Murray, thank you very much.

Joining me now is Jeffrey Toobin, CNN chief legal analyst. He was inside the courtroom during yesterday's hearing and just wrote a profile on Stone for "The New Yorker."

You use florid language in "The New Yorker" every day, every week. Jeffrey, describe that scene inside the courtroom yesterday.

JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN CHIEF LEGAL ANALYST: Well, floridly, Berman, it was a wild scene. No one really knew that -- that Stone was going to testify, but his lawyer, Bruce Rogow, said, "No, no, he wants to apologize." And he did apologize profusely to the judge.

But then the judge asked, "Well, what happened? How did this post get, you know, get up there?"

And that's when the trouble began. Because Roger Stone could not really tell, or chose not, to tell how that post got up there. He said there were volunteers who had his phone, and they put up the -- they put up the photograph and they found the crosshairs. Which wasn't really a crosshairs; it was a Celtic symbol.

[07:25:12] But the judge said understandably, "Well, if you had nothing to do with it, why did you apologize?"

He says, "Well, I did look at it, but I don't remember looking at it." I mean, his -- his explanation of this Instagram post was truly incomprehensible.

BERMAN: And contradictory.

TOOBIN: And the judge was getting more and more angry. And eventually, the judge called this recess and said, "I'm taking 15 minutes."

And, I mean, it seemed possible at that point that she was going to lock him up right then. But she came back with this very organized, very thoughtful opinion where she said, "Look, I am not letting you talk about the case anymore. I'm letting you continue to make your living as a pundit. You can talk about other things." But she thought his testimony was really, really bad.

BERMAN: And you noted that her mood, in some ways, went from somewhat moderate to worse. I mean, she got angrier as it went on. He probably made his situation worse.

Alisyn has been wondering all morning about why the judge, then, didn't go even further than she did. Why didn't she throw him in jail? And does it send the wrong message by not doing so?

TOOBIN: Well, I mean, I think the judge took a reasonable course. You know, as bad as this post was, you know, he was allowed to talk about the case outside the area of the courtroom. So it was arguably within his -- his -- his rights to, at least, talk about the case. So I think it probably would have been excessive to -- to throw him in jail.

But remember also, I mean, there's some bad strategy here. This judge is going to preside over a trial for false statements by Roger Stone. She has now already seen him, in her opinion, make false statements to her in person. She, if he's convicted, is going to be the one sentencing him.

So to say he made a poor impression on the judge is an understatement. So I -- even though he was not locked up, this was not a positive day for Roger Stone.

BERMAN: And one more point here: to quote Apollo Creed, the judge made, "There ain't going to be no rematch here." If Roger Stone does this again, he is going to jail. The exact quote is "I want to be clear today. I gave you a second chance. But this is not baseball. There will not be a third chance."

You know Roger Stone, Jeffrey. You've profiled him. You've talked to him over the years. Do you think he'll be able to stay quiet?

TOOBIN: Well, he doesn't have to stay quiet. He just has to stay quiet about this case.

I -- I am positive that his attorneys, metaphorically, are beating him with rubber hoses, saying, "Do not do this again." Their frustration was evident in the courtroom, as well.

I do think that Roger is sufficiently in touch with reality to shut up about the case. But this is going to be months he's going to have to be quiet on the case, because the volume of discovery in this case is so great that there probably won't be a trial until the fall. That means he's going to have to hold his tongue for quite a few months, and he's on -- he's on "Info Wars" every day. It will be a challenge, but I think he will actually manage to hold it together.

BERMAN: So that was a spectacle that was not open to the cameras yesterday.

TOOBIN: Correct.

BERMAN: Just to Jeffrey Toobin, who was sitting in the courtroom. There will be a spectacle next week that will be on camera. That's Michael Cohen testifying before Congress.

Talk to me about what legal questions you think he might answer in public before the House Oversight Committee and what the political atmosphere will be.

TOOBIN: Well, the -- just in terms of what he will talk about, as I understand the deal that's been worked out between the Intelligence Committee, which will take his testimony in private -- the two Senate and House Intelligence Committees -- and the Oversight Committee, which will hold it in public, is that the public testimony will concern his relationship with Donald Trump, his history with Donald Trump, his business dealings with Donald Trump, and anything related to Russia, Trump Tower, Moscow, that will be in private.

But I think the public testimony will certainly touch on the hush- money deals for the -- the two women, the Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougal. So I think that's going to be -- that's going to be division (ph).

In terms of the politics, I think, you know, you're going to see Democrats trying to draw out as much improper behavior from Trump -- about Trump as possible. And the Republicans pointing out that Cohen is a convicted felon, that he's lied under oath before, and we shouldn't believe any bad things she -- he says about Trump.

BERMAN: I mean, it could be as simple for the Democrats as saying, "What did Donald Trump tell you to do in terms of the hush money?"

TOOBIN: Exactly. Which is a story we have not heard.