Return to Transcripts main page

New Day

Second Parkland Student Dies of Apparent Suicide; Mueller Finds No Trump-Russia Conspiracy; Mueller Stops Short of Exonerating Trump on Obstruction; Duke Barely Survives against UCF. Aired 6:30-7a ET

Aired March 25, 2019 - 06:30   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[06:32:03] ALISYN CAMEROTA, CNN ANCHOR: Police in Florida are investigating the death of a second Parkland student who survived the massacre at their high school last year. Police believe this student died of an apparent suicide.

CNN's Dianne Gallagher in live in Parkland, Florida, with more.

This is just crushing news, Dianne.

DIANNE GALLAGHER, CNN CORRESPONDENT: It is, Alisyn. And, of course, this happens all within one week's time. And so the community here is working together now to figure out what they can do about mental health issues, trauma that continues to exist here in the Parkland area and at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School.

Now, the kids are on spring break right now, which has added additional concern because they're sort of spread out just about everywhere. They want to make sure that they are aware that resources are available. You mentioned the apparent suicide of a current student. There was also the suicide of a former student, a survivor, she graduated last year, Sydney Aiello, just last weekend.

And they've been working together to sort of -- to let these kids know that they are there for them. And the teachers and the parents as well. The victims who were killed in the shooting, their parents gathered with other members of this community to talk about this yesterday and make sure that people knew what resources were there and also what to do if you notice signs in your child.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

RYAN PETTY, FATHER OF SLAIN PARKLAND STUDENT: I think we knew that some of our students were suffering. But sometimes we don't know which ones are suffering because they -- they pretend things are OK. Whether or not you believe your child's at risk, they are at risk. Take it seriously. Ask them the -- ask them the questions. Understand how they're feeling and then get them the help they need.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GALLAGHER: They mentioned those questions, very direct questions, asking if someone has ever thought of killing themselves, Alisyn. They say that people feel uncomfortable talking about this, but being direct is the best way to go about it. There are respite centers, there are places here available for people to talk about it in Parkland. And, of course, there are number and counselors around the entire country if you, yourself, are feeling suicidal.

CAMEROTA: Yes, Dianne, I mean I think we've learned time and again that the stigma around depression and around suicidal thoughts doesn't help. But talking about it directly with people that you're worried about can help. So, Diane, thank you very much for that report.

And we just want to remind you, if you are thinking about suicide or you're worried about a friend or a loved one or a child, there is help. Please call the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline. It is 1- 800-273-8255, that spells talk, 273-TALK. It's free. It is confidential. It's available 24 hours a day, seven days a week.

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: And that's important not just for the individual but people around. If you see something, if you have any questions about someone you love or know, do not hesitate to ask questions.

[06:35:02] The attorney general's summary of the Mueller report, that leaves so many questions unanswered this morning. We're going to speak to people who have been involved with some of these questions from the very beginning. That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BERMAN: All right, this appears to be a direct quote from the Mueller report. The investigation did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russia government in its election interference activities.

What does that mean? What direct questions does that answer? Maggie Haberman is back with us. Also joining us, James Clapper, the former director of national intelligence and a CNN national security analyst. And Lisa Monaco. She was once Robert Mueller's chief of staff and the FBI and is a CNN national security analyst.

Director Clapper, I want to start with you, because you were director of national intelligence when some of the first questions were starting to be raised about Trump campaign officials and campaign operatives, their activities, what were they doing, why were they talking to Russian? Now that Robert Mueller has come out and said that they will not be charged with any crimes for conspiracy of coordination, that they saw no evidence that crimes were committed there, are you surprised?

[06:40:07] JAMES CLAPPER, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: Actually not, John. As -- and as Lisa can attest, all of us in the administration that were in a position to observe this were concerned about numerous meetings from members -- with members -- between members of the Trump camp -- Trump campaign and the Russians.

But I do want to point out that in our intelligence community assessment, that we rendered on the 6th of January, 2017, and briefed then President-elect Trump at Trump Tower, we did not address anything about collusion because we simply didn't have any evidence of it at the time.

So this is not terribly surprising. Again, that, you know, it's kind of like hanging chad in Florida, it leaves you with some unanswered questions, though, about the rational for coming to that conclusion. But to answer your question, John, no, it doesn't surprise me.

BERMAN: And, Lisa Monaco, what's your first read?

LISA MONACO, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: Well, good morning, John. Look, I think Barr's letter gives us a whole lot of questions, a whole lot more questions than, frankly, it answers. And it's all the more reason why we need to see the full report. Right now what we have is Attorney General Barr's conclusions of what the conclusions are. We have essentially his take on it. We don't have the special counsel's conclusions.

So we need to see that. We need to understand what is the underlying -- what are the underlying facts, what are the underlying legal analysis? And to the question you asked Jim, I mean, based on Barr's summary, we understand that Mueller and his team said that they did not establish that there was any American or individual associated with the Trump campaign who conspired with the Russians. As a former prosecutor, and I was for years a career prosecutor, I read that as they did not amount -- amass evidence sufficient to meet the legal bar, not that there was no evidence.

So, again, we need to take a step back, take a breath, and be even a little bit more patient and wait for the full report.

BERMAN: And precise with our language. You bring up a good point. Not enough evidence to prosecute for coordination or conspiracy. That is all we know here, Maggie, correct?

MAGGIE HABERMAN, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: It is, except I do think it's -- I'm obviously not a prosecutor, so I defer to those who are. But I would say that the legal standard that generally we have -- we have followed in this country is, if somebody is prosecuted, then we are -- there is enough evidence they are charged. And in this case there wasn't a charge. So -- and while I do think -- the Mueller report was always going to be absent a charge and I think the DOJ guidelines made clear the president was not going to be charged personally.

Absent that, this was always going to be a political document. It has become perhaps more politicized after going through the lens of an attorney general who wrote a memo suggesting he thought this was the right outcome before he even had the job. And I think there are going to be understandable questions about that. But I don't think that it is ambiguous, at least in my reading of this letter. I agree, we have not seen the full report yet. But as it pertains to Russian contacts, it seems pretty unambiguous. Where it is ambiguous is about obstruction of justice, at least in terms of what Barr says Mueller determined. BERMAN: But, to Lisa's point, and, Lisa, you can weigh in on this, there are possibilities for activities and talks and communications with people from Russia or connected to Russia that wouldn't be criminal, that wouldn't be criminal or be able to be charged criminally but might still be questionable politically.

MONACO: Well, that's certainly correct, John. And -- but what I think is important is, we see the full report, we see all the facts underlying what the investigation -- this was by all accounts an extremely thorough, comprehensive investigation. And, most importantly, I think, the reason we, the American people, the Congress and others need to see this full report on this point in particular is so we can understand how best to protect ourselves in the future.

BERMAN: And to that point --

MONACO: The intelligence community has continued to say that this is ongoing activity. We need to be prepared in the future.

BERMAN: And that's a great point. And to that point, William Barr, in this four-page memo, not a lot of words here, so we chose them very carefully, made crystal clear that the Mueller report did find two large areas where the Russian did try to influence the election, Director Clapper, which is something that I know while you were in the job of DNI were most concerned about.

CLAPPER: Well, yes, and we cited those very activities, both in the misinformation, the huge social media campaign that the Russians mounted, as well as the hacking. And so the Mueller -- the Barr memo, as brief as it is, I think very clearly reaffirms that finding of January 2017. And, of course, as usual, President Trump chose not to call that out as -- and which has been consistent since -- when we briefed him, which I think is still a great -- a grave concern to this country from a national security standpoint.

[06:45:18] BERMAN: All right, when we come back, Lisa Monaco, James Clapper and Maggie Haberman are sticking around. Lisa Monaco, who worked so long with Director Mueller, former FBI Director Mueller, I want to ask you the question, Lisa, if you are surprised that Robert Mueller chose not weigh in on obstruction specifically. That when we come back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BERMAN: All right, we're back with Maggie Haberman, James Clapper, the former director of national intelligence, and Lisa Monaco, she was once Robert Mueller's chief of staff at the FBI.

And, Lisa, on that front I want to start with you on William Barr's claim. William Barr writes that Robert Mueller ultimately determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment on the issue of obstruction of justice.

Knowing Robert Mueller as you do, any thoughts about why he may have chosen not to tell us whether or not he believed the president broke the law and criminally obstructed justice? [06:50:06] MONACO: So, here again, John, I think it's going to be

important really, really important to see what the special counsel's report says on this subject. What we know from Barr's letter is that the special counsel and his team laid out what may well be a substantial record, a substantial set of facts regarding obstruction and Barr's letter says that was done on both sides of the obstruction question. And then goes on to say, as you noted, that the special counsel declined to make a traditional prosecutive judgment. That is very interesting language and I'd like to see the report on this piece.

But we also know that the Justice Department guidelines and policy in this matter say that you cannot indict a sitting president. So that does -- it does not surprise me at all that Bob Mueller would hue to that guidance and would follow that policy. But what I think is quite striking is the attorney general's decision to weigh in, to kind of insert himself into this and make his own judgment along with Rod Rosenstein. It seems to me that what may be the case is that Bob Mueller and his team laid out a substantial record, a roadmap, if you will, for the next phase in this process, for Congress, which the Constitution and DOJ policy all indicate are the ones who are best positioned to make a judgment about conduct, whether or not it arises as to the level of high crimes and misdemeanors of a sitting president. But rather than just leave that for Congress, it seems the attorney general has inserted himself in this, and that was a surprising decision to my mind.

BERMAN: He absolutely did insert himself. And we don't know whether Robert Mueller asked him to do so. We do know that Mueller was not involved with the drafting of this four-page letter, which was put together by Barr and the Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein.

James Clapper, Robert Mueller, now that you look back on these last 20 months, and knowing the limited amount that we do know from the investigation, how do you feel that he comported himself?

CLAPPER: Well, I think he comported himself as we all -- anyone that knows him -- and Lisa knows him better certainly than I do -- but I think he comported himself very professionally and very discretely. It was clear that this was a very, very thoroughly done, meticulously done report.

But I have to say that for me, as a layman, not as an attorney, that it should looked like obstruction was committed to me. And so I think just to emphasize the point that Lisa makes, it's the importance of -- as full revelation of the Mueller report as possible so, you know, we can all make that kind of judgment. And I think the intense interest in this demands that.

A little sided aspect of the -- of the letter is that its conclusion, which, to me, kind of laid out a rational for not sharing much of what is in the Mueller report, at least it could, and that is -- it is of concern to me.

BERMAN: You know, Maggie Haberman, as a political matter for William Barr to say that Robert Mueller presented evidence of obstruction of justice and then not to release it would be very difficult. And you can see why Democrats and journalists and the public might ask serious questions about it.

HABERMAN: Sure. It's difficult but not impossible because, to be clear, we have seen this president resist all kinds of things that any other president would have agreed to, including answering questions from a prosecutor who as seeking them. This is now going to open up a politically explosive debate about what exactly this means, what are the other instances that are -- appear to be referred to in this letter where, according to Barr's reading of it, Mueller found that most of these instances related to the obstruction of justice question were done publically. That indicates very -- that jumped out of the page to me because we've written extensively about these public instances. And there have been many of them. So what arguments Mueller had on both sides, I think, would be worth hearing.

I also think it's important, to go back to something that Mr. Clapper said in our last block, that this report is unambiguous that Russian did interfere in the election. And that is something that we have heard the president talk about, not only almost not at all, but pretty disparagingly when he has. And it -- there is no indication from the intelligence community that Russia is done trying to do that. Russia and other countries.

So what the president does with this over the next 18 months will likely be consistent with what he's done in the past. But he has an opportunity here to do something different.

BERMAN: Maggie Haberman, Lisa Monaco, James Clapper, thank you very much. Really appreciate it.

[06:55:01] CAMEROTA: All right, John, let's try to sneak in some sports.

A fantastic finish sending top seeded Duke to the NCAA tournament's sweet 16, but only just barely, John. I even watched this whole game. And we have a "Bleacher Report," next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CAMEROTA: Well, millions of brackets were almost busted last night. Top seed Duke narrowly escaped being upset by Central Florida.

Andy Scholes has more in the "Bleacher Report."

This was a nail biter, Andy.

ANDY SCHOLES, CNN SPORTS CORRESPONDENT: It certainly was, Alisyn. Game of the tournament hands down thus far. And Duke was this close to being knocked out. But when they needed their stars, Zion Williamson and RJ Barrett the most, both of them coming through in the clutch.

Now, the matchup everyone wanted to see in this one, 7'6" Tacko Fall versus Zion. And Central Florida was up by three, 20 seconds left. Zion, to the basket, he's going to climb the giant, get the bucket, plus the foul. Just incredible strength there. That was Tacko's fifth, so he fouled out of the game. Zion would miss the free-throw, but Barrett there to get the rebound, puts it back in, puts Duke up by one.

In the final seconds, UCF going for the win. BJ Taylor's shot is no good. But Andre Dawkins comes flying in. His put-back somehow rolls off the rim. Duke survives. They advance to the sweet 16. They're now going to play Virginia Tech on Friday.

So, guys, all the people who had Duke winning their bracket, which is the majority of people, letting out a big sigh of relief yesterday.

BERMAN: Two unbelievable looks that Central Florida had, both missed.

SCHOLES: Couldn't believe they didn't go down.

[07:00:02] BERMAN: Andy Scholes, thank you very much.

SCHOLES: All right.

BERMAN: And, of course, the lead story, Rob Gronkowski retiring. We have uncovered what is the biggest story on earth today.

END