Return to Transcripts main page

New Day

Betsy DeVos Proposes $18 Million In Cuts To Special Olympics; Rep. Joe Kennedy III (D) Massachusetts Is Interviewed About Special Olympics Funding Cuts, Military Transgender Ban, And Obamacare; President Trump Announces FBI And Department of Justice Probe Of Jussie Smollett; Facebook To Ban White Nationalist Content; CNN Reality Check: Why It Matters When Trump Calls Opponents Evil. Aired 7:30-8a ET

Aired March 28, 2019 - 07:30   ET

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


[07:30:00] (BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

STEPHANIE ELAM, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): -- proposed budget for 2020 would eliminate all grant money for the nonprofit, dropping it from more than $17.5 million to zero.

Education Sec. Betsy DeVos took heat from Congress as she defended the cuts.

REP. MARK POCAN (D), WISCONSIN: Do you know how many kids are going to be affected by that cut, Madame Secretary?

BETSY DEVOS, SECRETARY OF EDUCATION: Mr. Pocan, let me just say again we had to make -- we had to make some --

POCAN: OK --

DEVOS: -- decisions with this budget and --

POCAN: OK, and this is a question of how many kids, not about the budget.

DEVOS: I don't know the number of kids. I also know that I --

POCAN: OK, it's 272,000 kids. I'll answer it for you. That's OK, no problem. It's 272,000 kids that are affected.

DEVOS: Let me just say that I think Special Olympics is an --

ELAM: In response, DeVos released a statement saying, quote, "The Special Olympics is not a federal program. It's a private organization. I love its work and I have personally supported its mission. Because of its important work, it is able to raise more than $100 million every year.

There are dozens of worthy nonprofits that support students and adults with disabilities that don't get a dime of federal grant money. But given our current budget realities, the federal government cannot fund every worthy program, particularly ones that enjoy robust support from private donations."

A spokeswoman confirmed to CNN that DeVos does support the nonprofit privately and did donate part of her salary to the Special Olympics after proposing a cut in funding to the organization in her first budget.

TIMOTHY SHRIVER, CHAIRMAN, SPECIAL OLYMPICS: This is the third year in which the administration has proposed eliminating the funding for our movement -- our education work -- so it's not a complete surprise.

ELAM: And the organization's bipartisan support has helped protect its funding.

SHRIVER: If this funding were removed, our programs in over 6,000 schools would be sadly devastated. But we have no expectation that that will happen and we are firmly committed to ensuring that it will not.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

ELAM: Now, there's reason for Mr. Shriver to have some confidence on this because in previous years, the Trump administration has tried to cut the Department of Education's budget but it hasn't worked out that way, even when both the House and Senate have been controlled by Republicans. So in those years, we've even seen that the budget numbers for the Department of Education have actually increased as well -- John.

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: All right. Stephanie Elam, thank you so much.

I want to pick on that last point that Stephanie was just making.

Joining me now is Congressman Joe Kennedy from Massachusetts. His great aunt, Eunice Shriver, founded the Special Olympics. Congressman, thanks so much for being with us.

REP. JOE KENNEDY III (D-MA) MEMBER, ENERGY AND COMMERCE COMMITTEE: Good morning.

BERMAN: In reaction to this move from the administration and Betsy DeVos you, yourself, said this will never happen. So given that it will never happen, why are you so upset about it?

KENNEDY: So, a couple of things.

One, this will never happen because of the work that Special Olympics does because of the impacts in our communities, because of the athletes that it serves, because of the communities, the students, the coaches that come around and embrace those athletes, and what it then gives back to our communities.

This is not the same organization that my great aunt started over 50 years ago. This is, as my cousin said, over 6,000 different schools across the country. They host World Games that were just in the Middle East last week or so. This is -- this is an international movement to try to make sure that everyone counts. That's what this is. That's what it does.

And the fact is that the American public are so convinced about it that it has broad-based bipartisan support here.

I ran into a Republican colleague this morning who said that he is a huge supporter of the Special Olympics and asked that I keep him apprised of anything that he could do to try to help the organization.

So you saw Republican appropriations -- a senior appropriations officials and Sen. Roy Blunt come out and say that he would restore full funding to it.

This has little to do with the organization or obviously, any sort of family connection, and just the fact that it does such good work to so many kids across our country. That's why I'm confident it will never happen.

The second point to your question is I have no idea why we would then try to cut this -- make these cuts. And to try to blame it on budget cuts and strict budget environment -- Republicans just passed a tax cut that reduced funding into our coffers. And then to say that you don't have the money for Special Olympics or autism funding, it's cruel, it's misguided, and it's outrageous.

BERMAN: What do you make of the argument that the Education secretary makes -- and we showed her statement in the piece, but the end of it is, "Given our current budget realities, the federal government cannot fund every worthy program, particularly ones that enjoy robust support from private donations."

KENNEDY: John --

BERMAN: She says the Special Olympics gets a lot of private money. Why should the federal government be involved?

KENNEDY: John, so think about that for -- on two levels.

One, that was a reflection of a policy choice. The Republicans passed on a purely partisan basis a new tax code that provided generous tax deductions and tax credits for private jets, and are now saying that you don't have money -- $17 million -- to fund the Special Olympics, all right? That is a reflection of their choice and that can't get lost in this debate.

[07:35:01] The fact is that -- the second part -- when you talk about an organization that has robust community support that is now expanded to over 6,000 schools and serves nearly three million people across the United States -- not just the athletes, but the coaches, the other students, the other high school students that comes around in communities that embrace those athletes -- because they've done that well means the federal government shouldn't support them?

This is the exact example of a -- of a program that between a nonprofit community support and government is able to lift up those that historically have been left in the shadows throughout our country's history. Why would the federal government not want to raise those folks up and celebrate them? That's the whole point.

BERMAN: What did you make of the statement from the Department of Education that the secretary supports the Special Olympics privately and has donated part of her salary to the Special Olympics?

KENNEDY: Look, I very much appreciate that. I'm glad that she is a supporter and I hope she will continue to be.

I think there's a couple of ways of reading it. I don't want to speculate too hard, but it could be that the secretary is a strong supporter of the program but that administration officials have decided that they're going to cut it and it puts the secretary in a very awkward position of having to implement a budget she doesn't believe in.

BERMAN: You have a bill you wrote -- a nonbinding resolution that will be voted on by the House today that rejects the Trump administration's ban on transgender individuals serving in the military.

Why is this issue important to you?

KENNEDY: It's important for some of the similar -- same reasons for the Special Olympics. This country stands on a basic premise and a promise that everyone counts.

And what you have in a ban put forth by tweet by the President of the United States -- by the commander in chief of our military -- is to say that for some of our men and women in uniform your service doesn't count. Our military doesn't want you.

And that's stunning on so many levels but it gets to the core of what I believe our country was founded on, is that here, everyone is worthy and if you are willing and able to wear that uniform we celebrate your service and your government's got your back. And that's the message we're trying to send to not just all transgender Americans but to every single American whether you wear the uniform or you defend our country in other ways.

BERMAN: So that will be voted on today in the House. Something that will not be voted on is any kind of White House or Republican plan to replace Obamacare.

The president, as you know, has signed onto this lawsuit which would strike down Obamacare. And we are told by the White House they have no current plan -- no immediate plan to replace it.

Your reaction?

KENNEDY: They have no plan. They haven't had a plan. Republican colleagues will concede that they have no plan. There's -- there is no concrete decision from any Republican in Congress that if the Supreme -- or if this court case is successful what would happen next. And look, understand that if the Affordable Care Act in its entirety is struck down, this will affect almost every single American. Folks that will lose insurance -- tens of millions. Funding for addiction in the midst of an opioid crisis will be devastated. Medicaid expansion will be devastated.

Other aspects of the Affordable Care Act that very little to do with health insurance subsidies -- calories on menus, protections put in for nursing moms to be able to have a space and break time to be able to nurse their babies -- that's gone. The idea that anyone would think, again, that this is a good policy or a good way to try to set policy is absurd.

We -- I was in a markup yesterday -- a legislative hearing yesterday for over about 10 hours debating and passing a series of health care bills.

And yes, there's some disagreements between Democrats and Republicans on this, but the basic premise is that -- at least for Democrats -- is that we want to make sure that everyone in this country gets access to the health care that you need when you need it at a price you can afford.

And our job, 100 percent, once again, is to make sure that every single American gets access to that coverage. And, Republicans are taking a direct shot at it, once again.

BERMAN: The White House says we will see a plan before the end of the year. We will wait to see what that is.

Congressman Joe Kennedy from Massachusetts. Opening day -- go Red Sox. Thanks for being with us today.

KENNEDY: You got it. Thanks so much.

BERMAN: Alisyn --

ALISYN CAMEROTA, CNN ANCHOR: All right.

Moments ago, President Trump announced that the FBI and the Justice Department will investigate the Jussie Smollett case. We get reaction from Chicago's Fraternal Order of Police, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[07:43:00] CAMEROTA: President Trump tweeting about Jussie Smollett just moments ago. The president announcing, quote, "The FBI and Justice Department to review the outrageous Jussie Smollett case in Chicago. It is an embarrassment to our nation!"

Joining us now is Kevin Graham. He's the president of the Fraternal Order of Police, Chicago. Mr. Graham, thanks so much for being here.

How do you hear that tweet? Do you think that that is --

KEVIN GRAHAM, PRESIDENT, FRATERNAL ORDER OF POLICE, CHICAGO, ILLINOIS: Thanks for having me.

CAMEROTA: Is it your understanding that the FBI and the DOJ have launched an investigation or the president is calling for that?

GRAHAM: You know, the FBI and the Department of Justice has not notified me of this. I have heard rumors that they are going to do an investigation but they have not told us that. So I'm hopeful that President Trump's encouragement into this will launch an investigation. That's what we asked for more than a week ago.

We had serious misgivings about what was going on two weeks ago and it seemed when -- two days ago when the -- when the charges were dropped for an unknown reason we certainly knew that we were on the right track. And we're grateful that if the FBI does do the investigation -- and it appears that they are -- that we're going to have some resolution to this and find out what exactly happened.

CAMEROTA: Just connect the dots for us as best you can. And I know that there's so much confusion about this. But from what your detectives are saying and from what people in Chicago are saying, why do you think the prosecutor dropped these charges?

GRAHAM: You know -- and I appreciate you asking me to try and connect the dots but really we're at a loss, which is why the investigation is going on -- or why we asked for an investigation.

But as we know it, we had a rock-solid case. We do not -- there was rumors that the case was falling apart. That is completely untrue.

[07:45:00] We knew that we had a tremendous amount of evidence. We knew that a grand jury indicted Mr. Smollett on some of what the evidence was and there was a lot more evidence to be seen. And we were certainly ready for a trial. And so, we were shocked when they said they were going to divert the case.

Now, certainly, I've seen cases diverted when people are in need of mental treatment and so they feel that hospitalization and mental court is a better way to go. We also have seen cases that have been sealed because of protecting juveniles' identity.

But we've -- I have never seen is a case where it has been diverted and then sealed. Why -- how in the world do you do that and why?

CAMEROTA: Well --

GRAHAM: And so these questions need to be answered.

CAMEROTA: Yes. And so, Mr. Graham -- I mean, do your police officers, detectives, the police department -- do they have a relationship with the prosecutors in the Cook County office? I mean, can you call them and ask what happened?

GRAHAM: We haven't gotten a satisfactory answer. We do have a relationship. We do know that the superintendent has tried to keep open lines of communication. I spoke with Kim Foxx, the prosecutor, last week and she was very

upset that I had called for an investigation. And I told her -- look, we're at a loss as to the text messages that you sent to a private attorney and we don't feel that was proper.

CAMEROTA: And what did she say?

GRAHAM: And we had said that a special prosecutor -- I really can't repeat what she said. She was -- it was -- it was not pleasant.

CAMEROTA: But I mean -- I guess, I'm -- I mean, I'm not trying to get you to say any of your sort of personal exchange with her, but I'm trying to say was --

GRAHAM: No.

CAMEROTA: -- is there any adequate explanation where some -- where the charges would be dropped --

GRAHAM: No.

CAMEROTA: -- and somebody wouldn't be exonerated?

GRAHAM: Not that I'm aware of. I just -- I'm baffled as -- and I think that's one of the reasons the story keeps growing is because there doesn't seem to be any reasonable explanation for what they did.

And so, I certainly commend my staff at FOP for making sure we stayed on top of this -- making sure we called for an investigation long before the rest of it came out.

CAMEROTA: As you know --

GRAHAM: So, you know -- go ahead.

CAMEROTA: Sorry to interrupt you.

As you know, the former chief of staff to the first lady Michelle Obama called the prosecutor, I think on behalf of the Smollett family, to try to, she says, make sure that this case wasn't being tried in the court of public opinion, which it did seem to be when the police came forward and publicly stated so much of the case and so much of their evidence.

Do you think that that's what ended up swaying this conclusion?

GRAHAM: You know, I don't believe so.

Certainly, the crime that was alleged was horrible. You talk about going after somebody, not only because of the color of their skin but also because of their sexual orientation. You know, I think Chicago prides itself on being understanding to all groups and that it's a place to live for everyone.

And so, this took on -- as a hate crime, it took on a life of its own. And certainly, we had to make sure that we either found somebody who committed this crime or found out -- find out what happened. And we certainly did find out what happened and what we found out was that this wasn't true.

CAMEROTA: Well, I mean, we didn't go to court. We didn't -- we didn't find out conclusively because there was no trial and that's part of what is so baffling to everyone. But, Mr. Graham, we appreciate you coming on and sharing your confusion about all of this with us.

GRAHAM: I will -- I will say this, that our detectives are some of the finest in the world and they worked extremely hard on this case.

CAMEROTA: That is a good reminder. We appreciate that. We've heard something like 1,000 man-hours to work on this.

So, thank you very much. Obviously, we will talk again as this proceeds -- John.

GRAHAM: Thank you.

BERMAN: All right.

President Trump is repeatedly using the word "evil" to describe his political opponents. We will look at the evils of politicians using the word "evil" in our reality check, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[07:54:03] BERMAN: It is time for "CNN Business Now" and this is an interesting headline. Facebook tells us it is taking a stand against white nationalism and white separatism on its social media platforms.

CNN business correspondent Alison Kosik joins us now with more. It's always interesting when a company tells us that it's taking a stand against white nationalism.

ALISON KOSIK, CNN BUSINESS CORRESPONDENT: Right. You'd think they would have done this before, right?

Well, now Facebook is announcing it's banning all content that in any way glorifies white nationalism. The decision comes less than two weeks after the suspect in the New Zealand mosque attacks streamed the massacre live on Facebook.

The social network says it has long-prohibited hateful treatment of people based on race but had not applied the same standard to white nationalism. Facebook has come under fire for hate speech spreading on the platform before, especially following the rally and protest in Charlottesville in 2017.

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg said Facebook would pay closer attention to its content and remove posts connected to specific groups and events.

[07:55:03] In a blog post, Facebook said this. That it's now going to ban content that includes praise, support, and representation of white nationalism and separatism. Facebook also said, "It's clear that these concepts are deeply linked to organized hate groups and have no place on our services."

Civil rights groups applauded this move. The president of the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law said, "While Facebook's new policies are one step forward in the fight against white supremacist movements, much work remains to be done."

Facebook will begin directing people who search for terms associated with white supremacy to organizations that help people leave hate groups. The new policy also will be applied to Instagram -- Alisyn.

CAMEROTA: A very interesting development, Alison. Thank you --

KOSIK: You got it.

CAMEROTA: -- very much.

All right. So we can disagree.

BERMAN: We can?

CAMEROTA: We can and we do, occasionally, but should we be calling each other evil? Should we call our fellow Americans evil?

President Trump does that a lot -- more than past presidents. Are there consequences to that rhetoric?

John Avlon has our answer in his reality check. Hello, John.

JOHN AVLON, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: Hello, Ali.

So look, in the wake of the Barr memo summarizing the Mueller report, President Trump is turning the rhetoric up to 11 and is even resorting to using a four-letter word.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Evil things, very bad things. I would say treasonous things, many of them. You know who they are. They've done so many evil things.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

AVLON: Trump then threatened these alleged evildoers saying they would be, quote, "looked at."

So let's talk about evil and the very different way presidents use the word. These are primarily to describe things like terrorism, mass shootings, and the Holocaust.

George W. Bush used it constantly after 9/11.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GEORGE W. BUSH (R), FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: It stood in defiance of evil. Either you support evil or you support good. An act of kindness in the face of evil.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

AVLON: In fact, Bush used the term at more than 400 events during his presidency. Here's a scroll to give you a sense of the sheer tonnage of it. But again, most often to describe foreign terrorists, their ideologies, and their acts.

President Obama used the word evil a lot less -- about 90 times -- from his Nobel Peace Prize speech to last time he spoke to the press.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BARACK OBAMA (D), FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: And I think there's evil in the world. But I think that at the end of the day if we work hard the world gets a little better each time.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

AVLON: But with the rise of Donald Trump, the word "evil" is making a comeback. In two years, he's almost matched Obama's mention of evil in two terms. And yes, much of the time he's condemned actually evil things like terrorism, the Holocaust, and sex trafficking.

But that's why President Trump's repeated descriptions of his political opponents is evil is so noteworthy and why it should be nothing that we normalize.

Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: These are very, very bad and evil people.

That Washington, D.C. -- they've got a lot of evil there. A lot of evil. A lot of bad people.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

AVLON: He called John McCain's handover of the Steele dossier to the FBI evil and hit Democrats with the same term.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: There's some very evil people. Some of them are Democrats, I must say.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

AVLON: When Brett Kavanaugh was accused of a high school sexual assault it was the accusers who were evil.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: It was a disgraceful situation brought about by people that are evil. (END VIDEO CLIP)

AVLON: Of course, he's railed against journalists as evil, from calling "The New York Times," quote "so evil and so bad" to his favorite term "fake news" and "how evil it can be" now echoed by autocrats around the globe.

Look, this should concern all Americans because tone comes from the top, and here's some troubling evidence of its effect. A recent study found that more than 40 percent of people in both parties believe the opposition isn't just wrong, they're, quote, "downright evil." Think about that for a second.

This ratcheting up of rhetoric has a real cost to our country because democracy depends upon an assumption of goodwill between fellow citizens, even and especially those who disagree.

That's why Trump's threat to look into these alleged evil people behind the Mueller report is so dangerous. Trump's bluster is being amplified by allies in Congress and in conservative media where phrases like "investigate the investigators" are being repeatedly blasted on Fox News.

We're in danger of defining deviancy down and setting up an election where both sides are calling for the imprisonment of their political opponents. This is more suited to a banana republic than the United States of America.

And that's your reality check.

CAMEROTA: Yes, it would be helpful to expand the vocabulary --

AVLON: Yes.

CAMEROTA: -- of insults so that we can just move away from the evil one.

John, thank you.

BERMAN: Words matter. I mean, words absolutely matter and I think it's great that you pointed out how people have used that word in the past compared to how it's being used now, John. Thank you for that.

CAMEROTA: All right, we do have some breaking news in the Jussie Smollett case. NEW DAY continues right now.

ANNOUNCER: This is CNN breaking news.

BERMAN: All right, good morning and welcome to your NEW DAY. It is Thursday, March 28th, 8:00 in the east and we do have breaking news.

President Trump announced an FBI and Justice Department investigation into the controversial Jussie Smollett case.

CAMEROTA: It comes as the Illinois attorney general has been asked to review why Chicago's top prosecutor abruptly decided to drop all charges against the actor who was accused of staging a hate crime attack on himself.

END