Return to Transcripts main page
Cuomo Prime Time
Trump Deems Houses Of Worship "Essential" Despite Having No Power To Reopen Them; Large Study Finds Trump-Touted Drug Linked To Greater Risk Of Death And Heart Arrhythmia In COVID-19 Treatment; GBI: Wouldn't Have Arrested Bryan If He Was Just "A Witness". Aired 9-10p ET
Aired May 22, 2020 - 21:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[21:00:00]
ERIN BURNETT, CNN HOST: And it's time now for CUOMO PRIME TIME with, of course, the only Chris Cuomo.
CHRIS CUOMO, CNN HOST: The only one on this show! Erin, thank you very much, the best to you and the family for the weekend.
BURNETT: All right.
CUOMO: I am Chris Cuomo and welcome to PRIME TIME.
As we enter into the Memorial Day weekend, to honor those who died for this country, where are we? We see a country that is really struggling with any degree of commitment to fight what our leaders all call "A war against this pandemic."
Virus is making a resurgence. And our President, instead of dealing with what he says is a "War," seems intent to divide us in some distraction of some kind of Holy War, ordering churches open.
Look, the law is clear. Trump has zero power to override governors on reopening Houses of Worship. No Governor wants to keep churches or any Place of Worship closed.
We have a Governor tonight, from his own Party, who strongly advised against filling Places of Prayer.
So, why did the President make the call to want this, this way? What power does he have? What does he think this will do for the rest of us?
Now, more importantly, why aren't we focusing on what he should be doing for the rest of us? Where is the testing? Where is the tracing? Where is the effort that he puts into the division about going to church, about making a plan to fight this virus? We're still waiting.
As we head into this holiday of remembrance of those who made the ultimate sacrifice, we have to ask ourselves, are we really fighting this war as best we can? Let's get after it.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) TEXT: CUOMO PRIME TIME.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CUOMO: "You're either on the side of liquor stores or God." This President laid out a ludicrously false choice today.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Some governors have deemed liquor stores and abortion clinics as essential, but have left out churches and other Houses of Worship. It's not right.
So, I'm correcting this injustice, and calling Houses of Worship "Essential." I call upon governors to allow our churches and Places of Worship to open right now.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CUOMO: Forget about whether or not he has the right. It's his saying it that way, even right to do. When's the last time you saw him coming out of services, by the way?
So, why is it so important to him now? I wonder if it has anything to do with the politics of division. Basic questions of what have kept our Places of Worship closed?
You heard it, if you're a Catholic, you heard it from the Catholic churches themselves. "We got to find out the safest way to do this." They discouraged us from going early-on. They encouraged teleservices, why? Because that's the safe way to worship.
This President seized on an opportunity to wrap himself in the Cloak of Righteousness. It's familiar territory for a man who once told me he gets audited so much maybe because he's such a Christian.
So, rather than stay and answer questions, he left it to Kayleigh "I shall never tell a lie" McEnany to paint any who questioned this situation as anti-God. Listen to this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KAYLEIGH MCENANY, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: Boy, it's interesting to be in a room that desperately wants to seem to see these churches and Houses of Worship stay closed.
JEFF MASON, WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT, REUTERS: Kayleigh, I object to that. I mean I go to church. I'm dying to go back to church. The question that we're asking you, and would like to have asked the President, and Dr. Birx is, is it safe?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CUOMO: Now, she went into backup mode. But you see the game they're playing. They don't want to focus on what they need to do. But boy, will they distract you with the ugliest most divisive things? Really? Accusing people who ask you about safety measures of being anti-God, who want churches to stay closed? Is that where we are now?
Look, here are the facts. Trump simply can't order churches open. And he shouldn't be doing it anyway because that is trying to make this about religion. And look, the true faith that we should have right now, and is in one another, to do what we need to do to keep ourselves and one another safe.
He didn't put the rules in place to keep anybody safe. And he doesn't get to decide when to lift them. Period! It doesn't matter how many times he stands up, and says, "I'll just override this" or "I'll defund that." He doesn't have the power. The governors do.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: I will override the governors.
I can override it if I want.
Well I have the ultimate authority.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CUOMO: He says it, and he's never been right.
"The government's ability to enforce generally applicable prohibitions of socially harmful conduct, like its ability to carry out other aspects of public policy, cannot depend on measuring the effects of a governmental action on a religious objector's spiritual development."
What does that mean? It means you can't prevent Houses of Worship from doing what a comparable secular business does, OK? It means that you've got to let them all do the same things as organizations.
[21:05:00]
So, that means if you want to close down businesses, then you can close down the churches the same way, but you can't just do it to the churches, if you're not doing it to anybody else.
It shows how much time this President actually spends in a church pew, if he thinks that liquor stores or abortion clinics are comparable to Houses of Worship, in any way, let alone under the eyes of the law.
What Scalia, Antonin Scalia, may he rest in peace, what he was saying there, no liberal right, is as long as it's the same, it's OK.
Now, while we're at it, a hardware store, a restaurant serving takeout, a theater, those places, you'd have to treat, if you treat them one way, then you can treat Houses of Worship that way.
But they're still closed in most places, why? Science. So, if anything, you see Places of Worship getting a deference that other businesses are not. We've seen example after example after example, OK?
Worshipers are doing exactly what this President is demanding, only to have it end in death, all right? God is not going to predict - protect you from making stupid choices. It's not how it works, OK? It's not how faith works. It's not how the practice of faith works.
And, most importantly, it shouldn't be how America works. We do not have the time, we do not have the strength, to be tearing each other down, and creating a dividing line, on the basis of faith, and who is anti-God.
What self-respecting Christian would even try to draw that line, which is anathema to Jesus' message? I give Trump a break. He is not a man of faith. You have no indication that he's living his faith. You've never even seen him walk out of a service.
But those around him wear their crucifixes, and say that their faith is the most important thing, they should do the same thing that all us sinners need to do, live your faith.
Most of us have it because we're trying to deal with our flaws. We believe in something bigger than ourselves because we need to, and we reflect that belief and the respect for the same by how we live our lives.
Don't use it as a weapon. Use it as a tool to make yourself better, not to divide people. Don't be ugly, not on that level, not now, as you enter Memorial Day weekend, and we need to be reminding each other of what sacrifice looks like, a true holy act.
They gave their lives. We're not even willing to wear masks.
Just so you understand how this works, one pastor whose family shared their heartbreak, about this, who said "I believe God will protect us. We should all meet," he didn't know the truth of the virus. He wasn't getting good information. Cost him his life.
You remember this?
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MAR-GERIE CRAWLEY, LOST FATHER TO COVID-19: It's been very difficult to be able to grieve or even think about all that this means for our new normal because we're all trying to just heal, and we have kids, and - and try to stay strong for our kids. So, you know, I really don't know. It's just been almost like a daydream.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CUOMO: I criticize no man or woman for taking risks to practice their faith, to believe in it. I get it. For many of the faithful, that risk is sometimes a function of their faith.
And that pastor took precaution - precautions, one that sounds a lot like the new guidelines that just came out of the CDC, things like maintaining social distancing, making sure people with symptoms stay home, or at least encouraging them to do, not sharing things like religious books.
For Catholics, you know, there's no wine right now, in terms of the blood and wine, the transubstantiation right that is so important to us, no hugging or handshakes. My favorite part of mass is the "Sign of Peace," can't do it.
Another example of where we've seen those same rules being followed. A community choir in Washington State did all that back in early March. Four days later, 45 of the 60 choir - 60 choir members were infected, two died.
So, is this really about making it OK, being fair, rewarding people of faith? No. It's about division and politics.
White Christians are not the majority in America, yet religion is a big factor for a huge chunk of Republican voters, and that's what this is about for Trump.
And if you don't want to believe that, fine, give me a better reason, show me what it's about for him. Show me that it is consistent with anything that he's done, around faith, or anything else.
It is telling how the faithful are responding to this bullhorn from the BS bully pulpit.
The Southern Baptist Convention is "Pleased" while the Council on American-Islamic Relations slammed the idea.
This President knows he doesn't have the power to follow through on this, any more than he can take away money that Congress has already allocated, because he doesn't like the way a State is using it.
[21:10:00]
He also knows that everything I'm saying right now doesn't mean a damn to his base, just like it didn't when he threatened governors with "Liberating" their States, and said that the people who went up, and spit, and yelled, in the faces of police were "Good people," or just this week, when he puffed up his chest to make a stink about mail-in voting.
He knows that it's all about being a demagogue. Don't waste the time with slapping the level - the label of being prejudiced or a bigot on this President. The truth is it's not worth the time. You're not going to change minds on that basis.
And you know what? He is arguably something worse. A bigot, prejudice, what is that usually about? Ignorance. People who're raised a certain way, don't know any better, aren't educated, or maybe they're just plain evil. But what's worse than that?
Someone who knows that it's not true, but they know that it's powerful, and they know that if you use it, you'll play on someone's animus, and prejudice, and outrage, and they will follow you. That is called a demagogue, and that is what we have to beware today with BS like what we saw today. Now, the President is making an assumption that "The governors want to keep you away from the pews."
Not only is that not the status, in a lot of states. They're already open. They just have to follow certain guidelines, just like other businesses. But governors from both party feel the same way about it.
Republican Governor, Mike DeWine, from Ohio.
Governor, it's good to see you.
GOV. MIKE DEWINE (R-OH): Chris.
CUOMO: May the legacy of any of your loved ones, who died in service to this country, be remembered. And I thank your family for their service and sacrifice.
Places of worship are open in Ohio. They follow the guidelines that you put forward for doing it safely, right?
DEWINE: Well you know Chris what we did.
Let me - let me just first start by saying my dad was in World War II.
CUOMO: I know.
DEWINE: Both my grandfathers in World War I. And Fran's uncle died in Korea. So, you know, this is an important weekend for this country, Memorial Day, and it's appropriate that you remembered, and that we all remember so.
CUOMO: And I - and I knew--
DEWINE: So thank you.
CUOMO: I knew about your family's involvement--
DEWINE: To talk about that.
CUOMO: --and sacrifice and the generational commitment, and that's why I brought it up to you.
DEWINE: Thank you.
CUOMO: And there are many families, like yours, in this country, and it is a solemn occasion.
DEWINE: We appreciate it very, very much.
CUOMO: So, this is not news for you.
DEWINE: Indeed.
CUOMO: Trump's not talking to you. Places of Worship are open in your State. But you didn't do it as a religious move. You did it as a balanced move of how you want people to come together safely. DEWINE: Well actually - actually Chris, what we did, we exempted religious services, funerals, weddings from our any orders.
But we also, of course, were very careful, and said, you know, please be very, very careful, and we recommended that, you know, churches, you know, try to do it virtually, and do it other ways.
And we had some amazing some pastors, and rabbis, and people just did some amazing things. You know, they did - used the telecommunication today.
CUOMO: Sure.
DEWINE: Some did literally kind of drive-in church, you know, the old drive-in theater. They actually used a drive-in movie theater to do it. So, people have been really, I think, very, very responsible in how they've done it.
And you're starting to see now, Catholic Church, for example, has announced that they will be starting to go back. But it's - it's starting to open the churches again. But it's important that people be careful before.
It's important that they be very careful now. As, you know, I've talked about this, as we are opening up, the danger is certainly very much out there. And, you know, we want people to be very careful.
Do the - do the distancing. If you're sick, don't go to church. If you're older, you know, you might think about maybe not going and--
CUOMO: Right.
DEWINE: --watching on TV or, you know, we have a Catholic priest, friend of ours, we worked with down in Haiti, Father Tom Hagan, and he's been doing masses.
And we've had people from all over the country, who were his friends, and have worked with him, who go in, and we what - we, you know, participate in the mass, and feel like we're participating, at least.
CUOMO: Tom Hagan, he's a Passionist.
DEWINE: So, it's people.
CUOMO: Isn't he?
DEWINE: No. No. He's an Oblate. He's down in Port-au-Prince.
CUOMO: Yes.
DEWINE: And he does great, great--
CUOMO: He is. He's in Port-au-Prince, Haiti.
DEWINE: --great work. CUOMO: I know him from our coverage in Haiti and the generosity of Catholic Charities, and obviously, Father Hagan and, of course, I'm joking because of the affiliation with the Passionists down there, and the Passionists through their own television mass.
DEWINE: I get it.
CUOMO: Look, you know, as the Priest said, at the last mass that I went to, before they stopped having the services is, he said you don't need me to tell you that you're your brother's keeper.
It's part of our faith. You're supposed to do what is in the interest of keeping those and safe around you. That's how you show the love of Mercy, which of course was Jesus' main message.
So, people of faith should be the last person you to have this discussion with, and I appreciate you talking about how it shouldn't be a political issue.
[21:15:00]
Now, what is a political issue is how you deal with the vulnerable in your State. Nursing homes are not a unique problem for Ohio. Every State that's been hit, their nursing homes, and elder care, is the hot zone, is the ground zero.
It started in Washington State, we saw - the first place that we saw an outbreak, where it was a meaningful cluster, was an elder care facility, true with your State as well.
68 percent of total Coronavirus deaths in Ohio are from long-term facilities from COVID-19, OK? So, you have a unique way to deal with the testing because it's too hard. Too many people to test, it's too hard to test that often.
You brought in the National Guard. Little bit of a risky move, little bit of risky move whenever you bring in the National Guard, why was it the right move?
DEWINE: We wanted to move. And we finally, Chris, have reached a point where we don't have enough tests. But our testing capacity is up significantly. We're up to about - the capacity is about 18,000. We're now getting about 9,000 actual tests. One day we got 10,000. But we want to push that up.
But we just kind of looked at this, and said, you know, "Where can we save the most lives?" And, as you just pointed out, the - the gut- wrenching statistics of how many people, you know, have died in our nursing homes, so we're really trying to do two things.
One is you're trying to slow the community spread, get that one-to-one ratio, which is what we have now, one person infecting somebody else. We were, at one point, at two-to-one. We've got it to one-to-one. But we got to keep it at least there.
So, working in the communities is very important. But we also want to go in to the nursing homes, and we've got a plan to do that. We're going to really kick that in hard next week, and we're going to be testing the staff because we think that's - that's a good place to start.
We're also going to let the clinicians, and the doctors, when they go into that nursing home, make the decision, how many of the - how many - how many of the folks who live there should be tested as well.
We're going to start. We've had 350 nursing homes that have tested - have a history, you know, sometime in the last two months, of having COVID in there. So, we're going to start with those 350, and then we're going to expand from there. So, this is probably going to take us a month to get all the - all the way through.
But General Harris, who heads up our National Guard, has been great. He has 14 teams that are - that are ready to go. We're also working with local hospitals.
Each Hospital in the State hospitals have taken over a nursing homes. So, every nursing home has - has a hospital that is their partner. And so, they're going to partner with us in regard to these tests as well.
So, it's - it's trying to go where we are the most vulnerable, and where we think we can save the most lives.
CUOMO: Right. And it's not easy. People are scared. They're dissatisfied. They say it took too long. That's part of being in leadership in a State that's dealing with COVID-19.
We are watching your efforts. And look, unlike the federal level, at least every time you're making a move, you are spending a lot of time figuring out how to do it safely, and explaining that to your population.
Governor Mike DeWine, you will always have a platform on this show to do exactly that.
DEWINE: Thanks, Chris.
CUOMO: All right, be well.
DEWINE: Thank you very much. Good to be with you.
CUOMO: God bless, and the best for this weekend.
DEWINE: Thank you.
CUOMO: All right, and our hope is look, this weekend--
DEWINE: Thank you.
CUOMO: --I mean, hopefully, the meaning of the weekend motivates us all to do what we can do, and enjoy doing, as safely as possible. We got to honor sacrifice and commitment this weekend. What better way to do it than taking care of what you do with yourself and others?
Now, more science tonight.
Listen, the President has put something out there that is gaining in popularity, and it has to be vetted, and the science is not there. There is no magic pill. Listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: If things don't go as planned, it's not going to kill anybody.
What do you have to lose? Take it.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CUOMO: What you'll lose is the argument, if you say what the President said in the face of anybody who knows science. Some patients could lose their lives by being treated with Hydroxychloroquine.
Now, is that a counter political argument? No. It is one of the understandings from the largest study, to date, on its effects. We have one of the lead researchers. This person has every reason to want the drug to work. That's why they tested. What is the reality? Next.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TEXT: CUOMO PRIME TIME.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
[21:20:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TEXT: LET'S GET AFTER IT.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CUOMO: The largest study, to date, of its kind, shows that Hydroxychloroquine does more bad than good for Coronavirus patients.
Now, the President is not saying that. But the President does not know what he's talking about, when it comes to science.
What he is doing is making you believe that COVID is not that bad. "There's a pill you can take that will help you. You don't really need a mask. The death tolls aren't what they thought they'd be."
This is all part of a pitch. He believes that longer we stay closed the worst it is for him. So, COVID's got to go. Science and facts be damned.
The new findings published in The Lancet medical journal span across nearly 700 hospitals, six continents, and 15,000 patients, OK?
Now, the President claims to be on the drug. Now, I don't like that, and it has nothing to do with politics. We have one President, and we need him to be at his best.
Dr. Birx of the White House Task Force responded to the study this way.
[21:25:00]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DEBORAH BIRX, WHITE HOUSE CORONAVIRUS RESPONSE COORDINATOR: I think the FDA has been very clear on their website about their concerns about Hydroxychloroquine, particularly when it's combined with a Macrolide. And I think you see that in the study.
There are still controlled trials going on, both for prophylaxis and pre-exposure prophylaxis, as well as controlled trials looking at, in a hospital setting, how these drugs do. And I think those are still pending. But I hope everyone looks at those comorbidities.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CUOMO: All right, now look, it seems to me that she's trying to tamp this down, all right? And I understand. She's in a tough position.
Let's bring in Dr. Sapan Desai. He's one of the lead researchers of the study.
Thank you for being on PRIME TIME. Help me describe everything you're about to say as if you were talking to a 7-year-old, OK, because this gets really confusing really fast.
DR. SAPAN S. DESAI, CO-RESEARCHER IN LARGEST HYDROXYCHLOROQUINE STUDY TO DATE, VASCULAR SURGEON: Yes.
CUOMO: Even what Dr. Birx just said, I followed her through.
There's still studies going on, so let's not rush to judgment, and I hope they're looking at comorbidity, which we've become a little acquainted with, meaning that they were already sick, and probably going to die anyway.
What is your sense about what people should do where this drug is involved based on the research?
DESAI: Yes. Chris, first of all, thanks for having me here tonight. Let's keep it simple. I'll pretend like I'm talking to one of my kids.
The message here is that COVID-19 is a deadly illness. We haven't seen anything like this in a 100 years since the 1918 Flu, which killed 50 million people. Now, these are desperate times. People are scared. They're looking for solutions.
And chloroquine, Hydroxychloroquine, especially when you combine them with a Macrolide, the risk of death goes up. The risk of potentially fatal--
CUOMO: What's a Macrolide? DESAI: Antibiotics, things like Azithromycin.
And the issue there is that the risk of fatal cardiac arrhythmias, a rhythm in the heart that could kill you, that risk goes up as well. The risk of death goes up by almost two-fold for some of these combinations. And--
CUOMO: So, if you take it alone, are you good, like we haven't heard that the President has taken a Z-Pak or anything like that. So, if you're just taking Hydroxychloroquine, do you have nothing to lose?
DESAI: Well I would - I would really hesitate to say that.
So, first for our study, this was done in hospitalized patients. And, as you mentioned earlier, the largest study of its kind done to date, on COVID-19, and especially for chloroquine.
And what we can tell you with, again, it's an observational study, but what we can tell you to a certain degree of certainty is that if you're taking chloroquine, Hydroxychloroquine, plus or minus an antibiotic, in the hospital, it doesn't have the impact that we think it does.
CUOMO: That's because they're too sick, and they were going to die anyway. So, if you take it the way the President does, which is before you have symptoms, it may keep you from getting too sick, or sick at all.
Is there any basis for what I just said?
DESAI: Yes. So great - great point.
So, this is the 21st Century, and I'd like to think that we live in a data-driven world, and that's - that's exactly the approach we've taken for this kind of a study. This is the difference between the pandemic today and the pandemic we had a 100 years ago.
And I think before we start making claims on medications that work, or don't work, let science do its job, let data drive this discussion.
CUOMO: Is there any data that suggests that taking it before you're sick will keep you from getting sick?
DESAI: Not yet. We need the same kind of rigor, that high bar that we were able to reach with this study in The Lancet, the bar that we reached a few weeks ago in The New England Journal of Medicine.
That's - that's the kind of evidence that needs to be generated before we can start saying, one way or another, whether a medication works or doesn't work.
CUOMO: Last question that has nothing to do with science but probably has more to do with whether people believe anything you say than anything else that we could offer them.
DESAI: Sure. CUOMO: You and I have both heard, Doctor.
People say that they took this, and it helped, and that they know people, who took it, and helped, and that people don't want Hydroxychloroquine to work because they want COVID to keep going, and that's people like you, spinning data to make people not do things that'll get us past COVID sooner.
How do you answer that allegation?
DESAI: Yes. It's a great - great point. And I would say, don't take my word for this.
Go to the literature. Go to science. Look at the study. There were 96,000 patients across six continents that participated in the study. And the numbers are black and white. They don't lie.
And so, we did a pretty advanced statistical analysis, where we looked at all of these different patients, and sliced and diced this a dozen different ways. We ended up with the same results.
Chloroquine and Hydroxychloroquine for someone who's in the hospital with COVID-19 probably not the next best step for that patient.
CUOMO: Doctor, the best for you and your family this Memorial Day weekend. Thank you for explaining this to us in a way we can understand. Appreciate it.
DESAI: Thank you for having me.
CUOMO: All right.
And listen, you know, you always pick your forums for news the way you want. When I was sick, I would try anything, OK?
[21:30:00]
If I hadn't been warned off this drug, and if I hadn't had a number of different clinicians, many of whom, by the way, support the President, saying it's - "I just don't know that it's going to help you, so it's not worth the risk. Let's try these other things," I would have tried it too, OK?
I would have taken anything. I don't even know what I was taking. I was desperate. I get the desperation. I just don't want to see anybody do anything that's going to hurt themselves. That's it, OK?
First court appearance today, for the third suspect arrested in the Arbery murder case. Prosecutors believe the man who recorded the killing was in on it, William "Roddie" Bryan. They will have the burden of proof, of course.
But Bryan's lawyer is now trying to paint him as a victim. How? Analysis is widening, so is the investigation, so is what we understand, next.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TEXT: CUOMO PRIME TIME.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TEXT: LET'S GET AFTER IT.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
[21:35:00]
CUOMO: Very quickly, thank you so much for all the messages. Yes, I'm sweaty. No, I'm not sick. Thank you. Bless you for asking me. It's very nice. It's just hot in the room. They're lowering it.
I cannot thank you guys enough for how much you've looked after me, and how much you're concerned about me and my family. Thank you. I hear you, and I appreciate you. And it drives me in a way that I never thought I'd be driven before to do this job as well as I can for you.
Now, part of that is talking about this situation in Georgia.
William "Roddie" Bryan Jr., he's the guy who recorded the awful video of the shooting of Ahmaud Arbery, you know, really probably the key piece of evidence in the case against the men accused of murdering Arbery.
He made, Roddie, his first appearance in court today. You see him right there. Murder charges, felony murder, also accused of criminal intent to commit false imprisonment. What does that mean?
That means that what the McMichaels said in the initial statement that Roddie tried to head off Ahmaud Arbery with his car, that's what that speaks to. His attorney maintains he committed no crime and bears no criminal responsibility.
The Georgia Bureau of Investigation, which took Bryan into custody, pushing back hard, listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
VIC REYNOLDS, DIRECTOR, GEORGIA BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION: I can tell you that if we believed he was a witness, we wouldn't have arrested him. You know, so there's probable cause and we're comfortable with that.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CUOMO: Joey Jackson is here. We invited Mr. Bryan's attorney on again. The invitation is open. He declined.
Joey, thank you very much for being with us. First, is the GBI telling the truth? If they think somebody is a witness, but has nothing to do with the crime, do they never arrest those people?
JOEY JACKSON, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Well that's generally how it's supposed to work, Chris. Good evening to you.
And, you know, they don't appear to have a dog in the fight. The reason the GBI, Georgia Bureau of Investigations, was brought in, in the first instance, is because they're not local to the case.
You remember the recusal of three separate District Attorneys before we are where we are now. And ultimately, people have to have faith in the process. And so, an outside entity investigating is a good step.
As to your question, I think that'll be left for a court of law. But they believe that there's probable cause to believe, reason to believe, that he was involved other than being a mere bystander that just recorded the tape.
And so, in the event that that's true, and he did try to detain Ahmaud Arbery against his will, and otherwise actively participated, and aided and abetted, then he'll be held accountable, and this was the first step with respect to announcing the charges, having him appear in court, and then a trial will be next.
CUOMO: Bad facts and circumstances for Roddie, one is they mentioned him, the McMichaels, the two accused people in this case, or two of the three now, mentioned him there, and say that he was part of it. Bad fact for him!
The second is that McMichael released the video that Roddie took. But Roddie and his lawyer, through his lawyer, said he didn't know them. If you don't know them, how'd they get your video? Bad facts!
But felony murder charge, how do you charge the guy who took the video with felony murder when he wasn't in on the shooting, as far as we know?
JACKSON: Well you don't have to be in on the shooting.
So, let's be clear about something. What happens is, under our law, a person who aids, abets, encourages and others - is otherwise involved, is equally as responsible as the person who pulled the trigger.
And so, you know the classic example, Chris, from your legal background. If you're robbing a bank, and you're outside, and you're just looking in the getaway car, and watching the neighborhood, somebody else robs the bank, they shoot and kill someone, you're responsible.
And I think that's the argument here. And so, let's be clear just about a couple of things.
Number one, people are wondering, I'm sure, what's felony murder? What's that all about? Well in the event that someone dies, while you're committing a felony, even if you don't want, or mean them to die, it's felony murder. So now the next question, Chris, is well what's the felony? Well, you know, we all have the freedom of movement. So, if you're trying to detain me against my will, that's false imprisonment. That's an underlying felony. Someone died as a result of your behavior.
The warrant describes that he apparently, that's Roddie, right, Bryan, was blocking Arbery in for 20 minutes, trying to detain him. False imprisonment felony, he died, hence felony murder.
CUOMO: Joey, from what you understand, at this point, what do you still need to know, and what - from what you know, lead you to what types of suggestions of what this case will pivot on?
JACKSON: So, I think there's a number of things. I think we have to make clear that the defense certainly will argue that mere presence is not enough.
Everyone should know and understand that you can videotape something that occurs, if a crime is in progress. That's not a crime. You could videotape it. You could look at it. You can determine what - what happened.
However, in the event that you go beyond videotaping, and you know, so what do we know in this case? Whether or not he knew the McMichaels? That's something I want to know.
What was the nature of that relationship? Did they make a plan to do anything as it related to Ahmaud Arbery? Was he asked to participate with respect to blocking Ahmaud Arbery in?
[21:40:00]
Did he engage in and, otherwise, participate in the blocking of him in? And to the extent that he might have been involved in that, and what was the course of conduct, over how long a period of time? What specifically did he do?
Those are the questions that are going to get him in the event that he's guilty convicted. If he's merely present, it will not. However, if he actively participated, he's in a world of hurt.
CUOMO: The wider implication of what the GBI seems to think it has in this case against the two principal defendants, here's a hint.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REYNOLDS: We have accumulated a number of pieces of video in the case. I'm not going to speak specifically about what we took from him, but eventually that will come out in a court of law. But suffice it to say there are a number of pieces of video that helped us get to this point.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CUOMO: Now, I don't think they're talking about the surveillance videos. I think they're talking about what we've heard from the beginning, which is there's more video than just the one we've seen of the incident.
Is that what you take from that statement? And what might they be looking for in other pieces of video?
JACKSON: So, to be clear, first, as it relates to video, there might be many out there, saying "Well wait a second. If it wasn't for him, coming up with this video, would we be in that place?" That's true.
CUOMO: True.
JACKSON: But you don't get brownie points as a result of engaging in a crime, and then producing a video, which otherwise establishes the crime. That's number one.
Number two, on the issue of what they're looking for, in the other pieces of video, they may demonstrate, when this all began, what was Roddie Bryan specifically doing?
How many times did he block him in? What was his interaction, if any, with Ahmaud Arbery? Was he trying to detain him? And if so how? What was his interaction with the McMichaels? How long was he following behind him?
All of these things could be answered by videotapes. Chris, we are in a technological world.
And so we know the video that we see, how many other people were looking, and that - and there are other videos. In addition to that, people have these home systems of surveillance, how many of those videos will play into the fact?
And the facts are that we want to know who was doing what, and when? Who participated and how? And that will get you ultimately to a conviction in the event that you were guilty in pursuing Ahmaud Arbery and otherwise the circumstances and facts that led to his death.
CUOMO: Joey Jackson, well argued, as always. Thank you brother, appreciate it.
JACKSON: Always, appreciate it, Chris.
CUOMO: My next guest, got to stay in the court environment here, she's leveling a lot of allegations about the COVID fight in Florida.
The former State Department of Health official is claiming she lost her job after being asked to manipulate data used in Florida's plan to lift stay-at-home orders. Governor Ron DeSantis has been very public in his criticism of her.
She is here to make her case. An exclusive interview, next.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TEXT: CUOMO PRIME TIME.
(END VIDEO CLIP) [21:45:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TEXT: LET'S GET AFTER IT.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CUOMO: Florida's Governor and State health officials are condemning accusations that they tried to censor public health data on COVID-19. The controversy was ignited by claims and emails from a State health employee named Rebekah Jones. She's going to join us in a moment.
Jones says - Jones says she spearheaded the launch of Florida's COVID- 19 data portal. She says she was fired after she was, quote, asked to manipulate, delete and hide data, and refused to do so.
Jones provided CNN an email she sent to her former colleagues on May 15th that reads in part, "My office is no longer managing the COVID dashboard. I would not expect the new team to continue the same level of accessibility and transparency."
This, of course, was dynamite for the situation.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TEXT: ONE ON ONE.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CUOMO: Rebekah Jones joins us now.
Thank you for taking the opportunity.
REBEKAH JONES, FORMER FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH OFFICIAL: Thank you for having me.
CUOMO: Do me two favors. One, let's keep it out of the weeds because this data stuff gets dense really fast.
JONES: Right.
CUOMO: And let's name no names because I have not had the chance to get responses from all the different players, all right, so to be fair.
JONES: Understood.
CUOMO: OK.
So, the simple question is, what exactly were you asked to do that was so unusual, and improper and, in your opinion, wrong.
JONES: Well, the first time I was asked to do something improper was in April. And when I brought basically what the results of whether or not each county could open, to superiors, they essentially told me they did not like the results. The results did not match--
CUOMO: How so? What does that mean they didn't like? Help us understand.
JONES: The results didn't match the report for reopening that had already been written, basically saying that a lot of rural counties, because of a wide range of reasons, didn't meet the criteria that the State had outlined in order to qualify for reopening whereas some more populated counties did meet that criteria.
And I was told that specifically, and this is a quote, "We can't tell Jackson and Franklin County that they can't reopen, but Broward and Miami-Dade can." And--
CUOMO: OK. So, let's stop there for a second, Rebekah, just so we give it to people in chucks, OK?
JONES: OK.
CUOMO: All right, so what they say is "No, no, no, no, no, no, this was just about dates, and different ways of organizing data. We do this all the time.
It wasn't about hiding anything because everything came out, and in fact it's still available now. So, if the data is available, we never wanted it deleted or hidden, so we did nothing improper."
Why are they wrong?
[21:50:00]
JONES: They're lying because asking me to delete data, and hide information, and make it publicly inaccessible, was a bad decision. It was a wrong decision that I stated very clearly in several email communications that I still have. I did not agree with. I actually referred to it as being the wrong call.
We had really built our reputation in Florida, and made my dashboard famous across the whole country, and even the world, because we're transparent, and we were honest about what our data was, and what it meant.
If there was an issue with the data integrity, they would have never put it back. But they did as soon as they started to get calls saying, "Why is it the same day that the press asked you about this information do you decide to delete it, and pull all the information down from the website?"
And then of course--
CUOMO: So, wait, so they're making the opposite argument, just to make it clear. They're saying "We never deleted it. So, that's how we were able to put it back. That's why it's still there." They disagree with you with why it was put back. They say it wasn't
because the media was asking. They were just organizing the data differently, and they have a 100 very deep reasons that I don't get, and neither will anybody else.
But they say it was never deleted, so we never asked you to delete it, or you just decided not to delete it, because it was never deleted, so we're OK.
JONES: It was absolutely deleted. And it's public record that it was deleted.
The data did go down. It broke all of the links across our Department of Emergency Management website, our own Department of Health website, as soon as it went down. I have the email records ordering me to take it down.
As I said, I replied "This is the wrong call," and then immediately replied. After that - that it was down, and that was it. About an hour later, I was told to put some of the data back, but not all of it.
And the next day, I was told to return all of the data in the exact same form that it had been published the day before that and for weeks before that period of time.
CUOMO: So, when you say deleted, it was something you were still able to recall. And that winds up being one of the points of discrepancy.
So now, their second point of pushback is--
JONES: Yes.
CUOMO: --"By the way, we had nothing to hide because we're doing great. We're ahead of Georgia. We're ahead of Texas. Our numbers are out there. DeSantis was late to the game in terms of opening back up.
So, we weren't trying to force anything. We were - we were late in reopening. And we're doing better than everybody else, and the numbers show it. So, why would we hide them?"
JONES: We do - we are doing well. We are doing much better than a lot of other states, and certainly a lot better than people expected Florida to do, considering that we had spring break open and, you know, as you said, we're late to the game.
And that is something that I've defended and championed for the Governor and our Health Department the entire time I was working on this project, was how well we were doing.
But now it's impossible to know how reliable that data is because they changed the way the data's calculated. They changed how they record the data, and how they publish it. And data continues to go missing from the website when the dashboard now crashes all the time.
CUOMO: How do you know - so explain this to us, as non-statistician, non-quantitative people. One, how do you - how can you explain that they are doing data in the wrong way, which is a deceptive way? And how can you prove that they do it for bad faith, and not just a good faith dispute about how to process the data?
JONES: So, when I offered good faith statistical methods to account for rural counties because the "Yes or no, this county meets this criteria" is a little strict, I offered to do a couple of different statistical methods.
You know, my background is in climatology, averaging things out with variability, to distinguish trends is kind of our, you know, bread and butter.
And they said no. They said they were going to exempt counties with a population of less than 75,000 entirely from the criteria that would be applied to every other county.
And then they decided to change the way that they calculated the number of positive or the percent positive of people, and changed it to new cases over total tests per day.
CUOMO: Why does that matter?
JONES: Which is also deceptive.
CUOMO: So, it's - why is it deceptive?
JONES: So, let's say I give you a 100 apples, right? And 50 are rotten. And I ask you what percent are rotten. You'd say 50 percent.
If I then tell you that 30 were rotten yesterday, 10 were rotten two days before that, 5 are almost completely rotten, but not quite, and I've cut the other 50 non-rotten apples into hundreds of tiny little pieces, what percent of the apples are rotten?
CUOMO: I've no--
JONES: It's still 50 percent.
CUOMO: Yes, it's still 50 percent but it's about what?
JONES: It's still 50.
CUOMO: Right.
JONES: Yes. You've just made it extremely complicated and convoluted.
So, what we used to do for percent positivity, which was one of the benchmarks that each county had to meet, in order to qualify to reopen, it had to be below 10 percent, and decreasing for two weeks.
So, normally, when people think of a percent, they think the number of positive people divided by the number of people tested. That seemed honest and fair.
[21:55:00]
They changed it to number of new cases per day over the number of negative tests per day. So, if you decide you want to get tested five times today, you count five times towards negative, if those are all your results.
CUOMO: And that's the way it still is?
JONES: Whereas if I get positive, I count once.
CUOMO: Is that still true?
JONES: Yes.
CUOMO: All right, last thing.
JONES: And it's still how they're referring to positivity.
CUOMO: Here's what they say. "Forget about the numbers. We're doing great on the numbers. We don't care what she says. But I'll tell you what we do care about, her. She didn't like how this was going, and she handled it badly."
Here's the response from the Florida Department of Health.
"Rebekah Jones exhibited a repeated course of insubordination during her time with the Department, including her unilateral decisions to modify the Department's COVID-19 dashboard without input or approval from the epidemiological team or her supervisors.
The blatant disrespect for the professionals who were working around the clock to provide important information for the COVID-19 website was harmful to the team. Having someone disruptive can't be tolerated during this public pandemic, led the Department to determine that it was best to terminate her employment."
In other words, you got a 'tude problem. You didn't like what they told you, so you handled it badly. Do you accept the criticism?
JONES: Some of it, yes, if refusing to mislead the public during a health crisis is insubordination then I will wear that badge with honor, yes.
CUOMO: The way they wanted to do it and the way you wanted to do it--
JONES: And--
CUOMO: --aren't equal in the eyes of experts?
JONES: No. None of the methodology that I was being asked to apply, which really wasn't based on any statistically-sound methodology at all, was not science.
They were asking me to manually go in and basically type "Yes or no, this county meets it" with any real risk assessment, as to whether or not that county should. There may be plenty of rural counties that were perfectly safe to reopen that we will now never know because the numbers were manipulated.
CUOMO: What's your next move?
JONES: Well, I - as you've heard, I'm out of the job. So, I'd like to get back to doing what I love, which is helping people.
CUOMO: Would you want to go back there?
JONES: No, not unless there is a change in leadership. No.
CUOMO: So you're going to figure out what you do next.
Rebekah Jones, I know a lot of this stuff is convoluted. I know this has been very hard for you to be in the spotlight. And there are a lot of big accusations coming your way.
So, thank you for taking this opportunity to help us understand what this is about, and what it means for the people of Florida. Thank you.
JONES: Thank you for letting me talk.
CUOMO: All right. We'll be right back.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TEXT: CUOMO PRIME TIME.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
