Return to Transcripts main page

S.E. Cupp Unfiltered

Trump Undermines National Emergency; Interview with California Democratic Rep. John Garamendi; GOP Using Progressive Proposals to Paint Dems as "Radicals"; Interview with Former Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell, former DNC Chair; Amazon's Ditched HQ Deal; Evidence Suggests Jussie Smollett Orchestrated Attack. Aired 6-7p ET

Aired February 16, 2019 - 18:00   ET

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

[18:00:00]

(MUSIC PLAYING)

S.E. CUPP, CNN HOST (voice-over): Welcome to UNFILTERED. A lot of big stories to unpack tonight. There is the fallout from the president's non emergency-national emergency. There is news that the former campaign chairman may never see the outside of a jail cell again.

I'll talk to the former chairman of DNC about Democratic infighting as Amazon busts out of New York and the latest details in the Jussie Smollett case.

First, constitution meet crisis. When you hear the word emergency, a number of things probably come to mind. Urgency, for one. A real and imminent threat. Danger around the corner. A need to act now, to avert disaster.

Does this sound like a guy with an emergency?

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP (R), PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I want to do it faster. I could do the wall over a longer period of time. I didn't need to do this. But I'd rather do it much faster. And I don't have to do it for the election. I have already done a lot of wall for the election. 2020. I just want to get it done faster, that's all.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CUPP: By the way, the faint screams you heard are the president's lawyers who know they'll have to find a way to defend the emergency he just admitted he didn't have to declare in court.

So let's be clear about what just happened. The president used an executive action meant for real emergencies that Congress literally doesn't have time to vote on to fund a political vanity project that Congress did vote on and already denied him.

What you saw yesterday in the Rose Garden was a presidential temper tantrum. Trump took $6 billion from the United States military. Here's how he weighed the seriousness of that decision.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: Some of the generals think that this is more important. I was speaking to a couple of them. They think it this is far more important than what they were going to use it for.

I said what were you going to use it for I won't go into details. But didn't sound too important to me.

CUPP: All right then. Here's the deal. Knock-knock, Republicans, anybody home?

Any Republicans in Washington have a problem with this?

Remember conservatism?

Limited government?

You know, the principles?

You think at least a few of them would remember how much executive overreach offended them. It was over the same exact issue, immigration. The other part of this that is baffling, for all of the talk about job creation, the president just killed a bunch of them. By taking over the pursestrings he just rendered the jobs of all 535 members of Congress obsolete.

If the president can now just override Congress on spending, they may as well all pack up and go home.

So what will happen next week when Republican lawmakers say no to this?

I tried to ask a Republican lawmaker but none that we invited would come on the show. So here with me tonight is Democratic congressman from California John Garamendi.

Congressman, thanks so much for joining me. I appreciate it.

REP. JOHN GARAMENDI (D), CALIFORNIA: Thank you. Good to be with you.

CUPP: You're leading an effort to block Trump.

What does that entail?

GARAMENDI: Well, up until just last couple of days, the president has said he would go after the civil works program in the Army Corps of Engineers. These are levee improvements, disaster relief programs around the nation, California, Texas, Puerto Rico.

We went after that. We pointed out to anybody that would care to listen and apparently a lot of folks did that it would really put the question of the safety of American citizens across the nation up against his vanity wall. He seems to have backed away from. Nevertheless, we introduced

legislation that we'll try to move ahead. The other issue is one you laid out so very, very well, the constitutional issue. And the third issue is, if you're going after the military money, what military money are you going after?

And there is a huge and very important question.

CUPP: So the president clearly expects this to end up in the courts. Here's a little reminder of how that played yesterday. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: They will sue us in the 9th Circuit, even though it shouldn't be there and we'll possible get a bad ruling and then another bad ruling and then we'll end up in the Supreme Court and hopefully we'll get a fair shake.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CUPP: So Congressman, how do you expect this to go in the courts?

[18:05:00]

GARAMENDI: Well, I think there is a very fundamental question any conservative, any judge that considers himself to be a constitutionalist and pays attention to the letters rather than an intervening interpretation will say this doesn't work.

Let's remember that the Congress of the United States debated the issue of a border wall in the context of an emergency for over a year, actually 14 months, came to the conclusion that we would spend $1.37 billion. And that's it. And limit it.

Now the president didn't like that. So he said notwithstanding all of the debate and notwithstanding Article I, Section Nine, we're going to go ahead -- he'll go ahead and simply appropriate money on his own. Cannot do it. It is a fundamental question. Congress has to fight back vigorously on this.

CUPP: Well, I hear a lot of folks pointing out that Republicans are setting a dangerous precedent for sure. And that the next Democratic president will use national emergencies on climate change or gun control, et cetera. But my question, is will Democrats oppose that?

Will you, if the next Democrat, you know, Democratic president does that, will you oppose it?

GARAMENDI: Absolutely. I've been in Congress a few years and I remember in the fifth grade we were talking about the separation of power, checks and balances. This is fundamental. This is the fundamental point.

Now if we want to have an imperial president, Democrat or Republican, good times or bad times, this is how it's done. This is exactly how. You allow one president to call for a phony baloney emergency basically usurp the power of Congress and the written in the country. We have to fight back if you're a Democrat, Republican, you care about the way in which our constitutional government works.

This is the fight that we must have. There are a lot of other fights. The issue of the military construction money, I'm the chairman of the Readiness Subcommittee and we oversee all of that.

And we're going, no, Mr. President, your wall is not more important than family housing, not more important than an installation of an anti-ballistic missile system in Alaska or rebuilding the air base in Florida or the Marine base at Camp Lejeune. These are all critical issues.

Finally, there is one other thing that I don't understand what the president is thinking at all. He's going after the Department of Defense counter narcotics funding, some $2.5 billion potentially there. This is money that the U.S. military uses to send troops and advisors to Colombia to, guess what?

Stop the trade. Deal with the narcos. And also in Central America and work cooperatively with governments there to stop the drug trade.

Finally with the U.S. Coast Guard, it is nonsense. It is backward, it is stupid but it is so much President Trump. Give us a break.

CUPP: I really appreciate you coming on, Congressman. Thanks a lot.

GARAMENDI: Thank you. Bye-bye.

CUPP: So there might not be much courage among Republican lawmakers to oppose this. But plenty of conservatives are angry. One of them joins me. Tom Nichols, national security expert, former Republican Senate staff member.

Tom, I don't even know where to begin.

How bad is this?

TOM NICHOLS, NATIONAL SECURITY EXPERT: It's remarkable. And one thing that is really dispiriting is to see Republicans now resorting to what-aboutism and Obama did it, too, and this isn't so bad.

The Republicans were once the party of limited government, including limited executive power. And to see them contorting themselves and twisting themselves in pretzels to rationalize this shows you how much President Trump has really captured the party and turned it into something else that is, I think, neither Republican nor conservative.

CUPP: Well, so is this ultimately Congress' fault?

Do you think there was anything they could have done to keep him from doing this?

You know, it seems like his mind was made up on this, you know, weeks ago. NICHOLS: Congress has been letting powers in this area, as in so many other areas, slip away for years. I mean we have something like 30 existing national emergencies which itself is ridiculous. Congress needed -- yes active. You know, at some point, you know, it's almost like the joke from "Caddyshack." This is just another routine emergency.

And, you know, 30 emergencies is ridiculous. And Congress simply lets this go on. But Congress has been letting its powers drift into the executive branch for years, particularly in foreign policy, which is what these other emergencies were about.

This is really a remarkable moment where a president says I'm declaring an emergency --

[18:10:00]

NICHOLS: -- because I can't get my way and you just have to go along with me.

CUPP: Right. As just earlier, Trump is raiding the Pentagon's budget. I already have a friend in the national reserves deployed to the border.

What does this mean to our military?

NICHOLS: Well, we don't know yet. Because we don't know what programs and what money the president wants to shift around. So it's not clear where any of this is coming from.

I would even hazard a guess to say the president himself doesn't know because this was an instinct. I don't think the president understands what he did. I don't think he understands the nature of the legislation he signed.

And so I don't think that conversation has gotten that far. I think it may actually be a relief to some of the Republicans in Congress that this will be challenged in court. They don't want to have to live with the outcome of what this is going to be.

CUPP: Right. Yes. Kind of lets them off the hook, too.

NICHOLS: It's almost like that's the safety valve. We'll let this state of emergency go through. The president will feel like he did something important. The courts will take care of it. Again, that's Congress kicking the can down the road and Republicans uncharacteristically relying on the courts to do the things they don't have the nerve to do.

CUPP: Tom, thanks for joining us.

NICHOLS: Thanks for having me.

CUPP: Coming up, the president served up this political mess, how will Republicans and Democrats make it palatable to the voters?

And are Democrats on the brink of all but guaranteeing Trump a second term with the leftward drift?

Former DNC chair says maybe. I'll ask him about that. Stay right here.

(MUSIC PLAYING)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:15:00]

(MUSIC PLAYING)

CUPP: I didn't know it got more liberal than Andrew Cuomo and Bill de Blasio. The two New York lawmakers just got outlefted by the leftiest leftist of the left. Congresswoman Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez. Her opposition to keeping Amazon and tens of thousands of well-paying jobs out of New York City seemed to have worked. We'll talk about Amazon's switch in a bit.

But the seeming progressive takeover or at the very least its rise within the Democratic Party has proven to be something of a blessing and a curse.

On the one hand, progressives are where the energy is, it's with AOC and Bernie and Beto. Not with the moderates, if you can find any. It is also giving some Democratic leaders a real headache. If they thought defending single payer health care was challenging, try defending the sweeping, outrageously expensive, totally impractical Green New Deal, which promises to do everything but find the lost city of Atlantis or try being a Democrat in West Virginia when progressives in Washington are promising to abolish ICE or imagine being a Democrat in New York or Florida when two progressive congresswomen are tweeting anti-Semitic tropes.

Is this the new Democratic Party?

Is there any real estate left for moderate Democrats?

Let me ask former governor of Pennsylvania, former DNC chair, Ed Rendell.

Welcome, Governor.

ED RENDELL, FORMER DNC CHAIR: Welcome, S.E..

CUPP: You look great. Don't worry about it. If you would do me the favor of looking back at Bill Clinton's presidency, where I'll remind you, you had work fair, the 1994 crime bill, the Defense of Marriage Act, , "don't ask, don't tell." I could go on and on.

That Democratic Party is unrecognizable today. It's not just a different century. It's like another epoch. It's like the cretaceous period of the Democratic Party.

Is there a place for someone like Joe Biden anymore in this new Democratic Party? RENDELL: I think the media is making a mistake. I think the media plays up these comments by progressives. I think the media thinks that the Democratic Party swung way to the Left. Look at the '18 election results; of the 41 new congressmen, 35 of them were moderate centrists. They ran in moderate districts. They won in moderate districts.

Of the seven Democratic governors who took Republican states, all seven would be described as Democratic left of center centrists.

So I think the moderate wing of the Democratic Party, the sensible wing of the Democratic Party not only still exists but it still represents a vast majority of Democratic voters.

And by the way, they're just as enthusiastic about getting rid of President Trump as the most left-leaning progressive. The enthusiasm in our party comes from one, two-word phrase, Donald Trump.

(CROSSTALK)

CUPP: No, I don't disagree with. It's the United States, your party for sure, where it divides our party. I don't disagree at all. But when you got people, rock stars of the party, like Beto O'Rourke talking about taking down existing border walls, Kirsten Gillibrand running to get behind him on that and every Democratic candidate we just had news, dying for Ocasio-Cortez's endorsement in 2020, I mean, it's hard to argue that there is a lot of energy on the far left in your party.

RENDELL: There is energy. The question is, is the energy focused on a broader swath of Democratic voters?

I don't think it is. I think if the election were held today with the field as it is today, Amy Klobuchar would win the election. And she would win because she's a common sense left of center centrist, who has a great record of get things done, who is the only Democratic performed well during the Kavanaugh hearings, the only Democrat I think who covered herself with glory and dignity.

So I think the media is blowing this up a little bit. But here's the danger. The danger is Donald Trump is smart enough to know he can't win re-election. Democrats have to lose it. So he has to make the Democratic candidate the issue.

Even if the candidate turns out to be Joe Biden, Donald Trump is going to say socialist, socialist, socialist. I said this in an article about two weeks before the State of the Union address.

What did Donald Trump say in the State of the Union address?

Socialist Democrats.

[18:20:00]

RENDELL: He's going to take one or two statements out of context and say socialist, socialist, socialist. (CROSSTALK)

CUPP: -- when you have certain candidates talk about socialism. It doesn't make sense with a Joe Biden. You're absolutely right. Amy Klobuchar would have the best chance of defeating Donald Trump. I have said that already. I don't know that she can get through the primary.

RENDELL: I was going say, don't be dismayed. I don't know if you are. But don't be dismayed by that. We have Democratic voters are not represented by the far left. They're represented more by what Joe Biden is for.

By the way, who is going to bring back the Democrats that voted for Trump in Wisconsin and Pennsylvania?

CUPP: Not Elizabeth Warren. Right. I couldn't agree with you more. No, I agree with you. I'm just not sure the party is completely sorted out on that. It seems like a lot of Democrats, even moderate Democrats, are rushing to where AOC is on the Green New Deal, on things that I think turn off the vast majority of Democratic voters.

RENDELL: Look, Amy Klobuchar and Sherrod Brown have come out clearly and said that they weren't for abolishing ICE. You can't abolish ICE. We need to reform it. You can't abolish it. It's like saying we're going to abolish the police because they act poorly.

No, we have to reform them. The Green New Deal, we're all in favor of the goals that Green New Deal talks about. But we have to give voters a plan that's not going to raise taxes for the middle class families and it's workable and I think it can be done in 10 years.

We can't promise people the sky. We can't overpromise and we can't promise things that will cause middle class taxes to go up. I can just see Donald Trump with a calculator, here's promise number one, promise number two, number three. You know what that means if you earn $60,000 a year?

That means you're going to pay $4,000 more in income taxes.

CUPP: I think you give him a lot of credit for doing that much work, frankly.

(LAUGHTER)

RENDELL: Someone will do it for him.

CUPP: I hear you. Governor Ed Rendell, I really appreciate you coming on tonight. Thanks.

RENDELL: My pleasure.

CUPP: All right. Next, I'll look at how Trump's emergency declaration will play with voters of both parties.

(MUSIC PLAYING) (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(MUSIC PLAYING)

CUPP: Special counsel prosecutors say that former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort deserves a maximum of 24.5 years in prison for his financial crimes. They argue he was driven by greed and spent years stockpiling millions in secret income. Adding, "Manafort acted for more than a decade as if he were above the law and deprived the federal government and various financial institutions of millions of dollars."

[18:25:00]

CUPP: Manafort was convicted last year of bank fraud, tax fraud and other financial crimes. He's already spent eight months behind bars. He pleaded guilty to witness tampering. A judge this week certified that he intentionally lied after striking a cooperation deal with prosecutors.

So to recap, there is a very real chance that the man Trump handpicked to run his campaign will spend the rest of his living days in prison. We'll be back in two minutes.

(MUSIC PLAYING)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(MUSIC PLAYING)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: I was a little new to the job and a little new the profession. We had a little disappointment for the first year and a half. People that should have stepped up did not step up. They didn't step up. They should have. It would have been easy.

I'm very disappointed at certain people, a particular one, for not having pushed this faster.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Are you referring to --

TRUMP: But I've learned -- who?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: -- Speaker Ryan?

TRUMP: Let's not talk about it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CUPP: So there was President Trump spitting some excuses and shifting the blame for why he didn't get the wall deal back when the party controlled both chambers of Congress.

Spin has become a central part of this ongoing border tug of war on both sides of the aisle. Starting all the way back to the campaign, when Trump said Mexico would pay for the wall. Right until last month when Nancy Pelosi said she wouldn't give Trump $1 for it.

You may notice neither of those proclamations ended up becoming true. Here to wade through all of the bull, Republican strategist, former Romney campaign spokesperson Kevin Madden and Democratic strategist Basil Smikle.

Kevin?

KEVIN MADDEN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: It's a lot of bull.

CUPP: How will Republicans spin the bull next week when they have to face their constituents?

MADDEN: Well, look, you know, one thing that I think helped Trump prosper in Republican politics is that I think he's realized the base Republican voter out there is not as driven by purity of limited government and constitutional --

CUPP: I'm getting that.

MADDEN: And as a result, they're more driven and what he realizes is they're more driven by vanquishing their opponents. That they believe is the liberal left.

(CROSSTALK)

MADDEN: One of the ways that Trump is going to continue to push this is this is me versus Democrats who won't let me fulfill the promise that I made to the American people while building a wall. In large part, congressional Republicans are going to follow suit with him and arguing in his favor and defense.

CUPP: I did see -- there was one of the stronger statements. He did a long thread. One of the tweets said --

[18:30:00]

CUPP: -- this congressman from Michigan, by the way, he tweeted a national emergency declaration for a nonemergency is void. A prerequisite for declaring an emergency is that the situation requires immediate action and Congress doesn't have an opportunity to act.

POTUS is attempting to circumvent our constitutional system. Will there be others?

MADDEN: There will be a few but outnumbered by those particularly in the conservative media that do everything they can. He's not as important to Donald Trump as Sean Hannity or Lou Dobbs.

CUPP: Obviously.

Basil, some of the Democrats in the 2020 conversation are swinging way to the left. Beto O'Rourke says not only would he push back on this new border wall, he would take down the existing wall. And Kirsten Gillibrand ran up behind him to jump on that bandwagon, too.

Are Democrats going to overplay this?

BASIL SMIKLE, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: I don't think so. I don't think Nancy Pelosi is there. And that's what's really important here. And Chuck Schumer is not there, either. That's what's really important here.

So I think that if the presidential candidates, that's what they're going to say. We can expect more like that. Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez, I expect her to say similarly. So as long as Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer hold it down and bring us a little more to the middle, they've talked about border security and some elements of a wall or fence over time.

So I think that gives us a bit of cover. But again, as you talked about, as we get deeper and deeper into this presidential campaign cycle, how much does -- how much do the presidential candidates then start to dictate what members of Congress are going to be talking about?

We're not quite there yet. But I expect that's coming.

MADDEN: To this point, it feels like all the 2020 candidates are reacting to new congressional Republicans like Ocasio-Cortez.

CUPP: Yes.

MADDEN: It's usually the exact opposite. They go out and they're defining the profile the party on the campaign trail in Iowa and New Hampshire. It's really no longer the case.

CUPP: No. Here's a premise I want to lay out before both of you. I heard it all week for weeks, Trump had to do this to please his base. I don't buy this. His base is nothing if not loyal. He could justify not doing this. He could blame other people for not doing this. He can even get up at a rally and say he already did it and they believe him.

MADDEN: I'll tell you, I think it has more to do with the fact that Trump is always trying -- he lives in this cycle, where he's trying to get positive affirmation from the cable news cycle. He wants to win the next 24 hours of news coverage.

And knowing that they were expediting the inevitable with signing this and not have another shutdown, he was going to declare victory no matter what. This is the way he declared victory is declaring this state of emergency.

CUPP: CNN polling shows only three in 10 Americans support Trump declaring a national emergency.

Will he pay a price for this in the polls, do you think, or will he remain in that steady --

SMIKLE: I think it remains to see if he'll pay a price if Republicans actually side with Democrats and say this is useless. It is smart on Nancy Pelosi's part to force the resolution that the Senate has to take up in terms of denouncing this emergency measure. So that's actually smart on her part. It forces Republicans to actually take -- make a decision about it.

We'll see if there are any defections but that's the problem here. I don't know if it hurts him with his base at all. But I do think he needs it. I think something about him and the affirmation he gets at those campaign rallies, he seems to feed from that and he needs that. So he's got to stick to it.

CUPP: Kevin, couldn't he just pretend to build the border wall?

MADDEN: Well, if you listen to what he's saying, we're already building it.

CUPP: Yes. That's what I mean.

MADDEN: He already moved away from his declaration that Mexico is going to pay for it.

CUPP: Yes.

MADDEN: So again, his focus will be on always declaring victory and then every time he runs into one of these sort of structural road bumps, he's going to say, well, we're already building it and blame the Democrats.

SMIKLE: That is one thing that I think Trump, through his supporters, has not really been able to figure out, the process of moving things through the legislature. Just how this works.

CUPP: Obviously.

(CROSSTALK)

SMIKLE: How this stuff works. He still has to figure that out.

MADDEN: And marshalling the big middle one way or another.

CUPP: Yes.

MADDEN: It's always about the vocal minorities on these --

CUPP: But he's a dealmaker, I thought. I thought.

Wasn't I told that?

Yes?

No?

Kevin, Basil, thanks so much. Always great to have you both.

And we'll be right back. Stay there. (MUSIC PLAYING)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:35:00]

(MUSIC PLAYING)

CUPP: In the red file tonight, the fallout from Amazon's stunning announcement that they were pulling out of a plan to build a headquarters in New York City. Political progressives and community activists helped kill the deal, which had congresswoman Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez doing her happy dance.

She tweeted, "Anything is possible. Today was the day a group of dedicated everyday New Yorkers and their neighbors defeated Amazon's corporate greed. It's worker exploitation and the power of the richest man in the world."

That was a sentiment she doubled down on today during her official inauguration speech in New York. But there was a different reaction from Governor Andrew Cuomo, New York City mayor Bill de Blasio and Senator Chuck Schumer as well as Congresswoman Carolyn Maloney, who actually represents the district where the HQ would have been built. Here's what --

[18:40:00]

CUPP: -- she said.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. CAROLYN MALONEY (D), NEW YORK: It used to be that we would protest wars.

Now we're protesting jobs?

People are complaining about jobs?

(CROSSTALK)

MALONEY: I'm a progressive, too, but I'm pragmatic.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CUPP: So how do you solve this problem?

Here to break it down is the former South Carolina Democratic representative and CNN commentator Bakari Sellers.

You see what I did there?

(LAUGHTER)

CUPP: OK. So here's the cover of the New York "Daily News" on Friday. They write, "Shame on the so-called progressives for rejecting 25,000

high paying jobs and billions in taxes tech biz would have brought to the city."

So, Bakari, in the urge to paint corporate America as evil, are some of these lawmakers putting Democrats in a tough spot with voters?

BAKARI SELLERS, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, I think it was a shortsighted decision on behalf of the city of New York and all those in opposition. I think Amazon and Governor de Blasio -- excuse me, Governor Cuomo and Mayor de Blasio made some errors in their miscalculation of how to sell this deal.

At the end of the day, it's really hard to turn away 25,000 jobs, all of the tax revenue that would be brought, the benefits to the nonprofits. And, you know, for Democrats, we turned our backs on the tenant associations in New York. We turned our backs on those individuals who will be building those manufacturing facilities.

You think about those $25 an hour jobs for those construction workers and all of those people who are going to be put to work, all the growth that would happen around that and so I think it was shortsighted. But I think that we have to sometimes be progressive but also be pragmatic. I don't think anything is wrong with that.

CUPP: It wasn't just AOC. Elizabeth Warren jumped on the same giddy response to the news. But Amazon is in millions of households. I don't have to tell you. You just had twins. I'm sure they're at your house eight times a day.

Is it really a good idea to villainize a company that is just so practical and useful and beloved, frankly?

SELLERS: I mean, on one side we do have corporate greed in the United States of America. We do have fundamental economic inequalities in this country. We have some economic anxiety in this country. And our billionaires and those individuals who are practicing this greed are leaving the rest of the country behind.

On the other side, we have individuals who need jobs in this country. We have to be the party who puts people to work in this country. And not just simply turns them away. I know I'm not from New York. People are going to be looking at us, saying why is he talking about this?

The fact is I actually worked with Amazon and landed an Amazon company when I was in the South Carolina general assembly in a distribution center here in South Carolina. I have seen how Amazon has changed the dynamics. We gave them tax breaks. But the revenues that have been driven to this state --

CUPP: Yes. That's the power lawmakers have. That's it.

SELLERS: And one major point. I mean, just --

(CROSSTALK) CUPP: Quickly. We have to run.

SELLERS: You know, talking about the $3 billion that they were going to get. This is not just a cash payment. This was an abatement. This can't go anywhere else.

CUPP: That's right.

SELLERS: We have to do a better job of understanding about economics and caring about American workers.

CUPP: Good note for someone I know. Bakari, thanks very much.

We have breaking news on the investigation into the attack on "Empire" actor Jussie Smollett. That's next. Don't go anywhere.

(MUSIC PLAYING)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:45:00]

(MUSIC PLAYING)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE (voice-over): This is CNN breaking news.

CUPP: We have breaking news into the investigation of an alleged attack against "Empire" star Jussie Smollett. Two law enforcement sources with knowledge of the investigation tell CNN Chicago police believe Jussie Smollett paid two men to orchestrate the assault.

The actor told police that on January 29th two masked men beat him, doused him with a liquid he thought was bleach and put a rope around his neck all while shouting racial and homophobic slurs. I want to go to CNN national correspondent Ryan Young in Chicago for the latest.

Ryan, what are we learning?

RYAN YOUNG, CNN CORRESPONDENT: We were talking to the two law enforcement sources with knowledge of the investigation. They tell CNN that Chicago police believe Jussie Smollett paid the two men to orchestrate the assault.

The brothers who were arrested Wednesday were released without charges Friday after police cited the discovery of new evidence. The sources tell CNN that the two men are now cooperating fully with law enforcement.

Smollett told authorities he was attacked by two men that were yelling racial and homophobic slurs and one put a rope around his neck and poured an unknown liquid on him. Sources tell CNN there are records that showed the two people purchased the rope at an Ace Hardware store in Chicago.

CNN's attempts to reach both Smollett's representative and attorney were unsuccessful right now. I can tell you police have been working this case; 12 detectives are working this case nonstop. More twists and turns. But, of course, now the focus is on the investigation and how the detectives move this to the next phase.

CUPP: Thanks, Ryan. Appreciate it.

Here to help me break it down further, our CNN legal analyst Joey Jackson. On the phone is our chief media correspondent, host of "RELIABLE SOURCES," Brian Stelter.

Brian, let me start with you. I'm sure, like me, you have been following this over the past week or two as has the country, this story has fascinated us.

What is your reaction to this awful, awful news?

BRIAN STELTER, CNN SENIOR MEDIA CORRESPONDENT: Well, now the ball is back in Jussie Smollett's court. A spokesman for the Chicago Police Department tells me they did reach out to Smollett's attorneys last night after receiving --

[18:50:00]

STELTER: -- new information from those two men that had been questioned by police.

What I was told by the Chicago PD is we need to talk to Jussie Smollett as soon as possible. We need to ask him additional questions. (INAUDIBLE), what is (INAUDIBLE), is he going to cooperate with the investigation? Those are open questions.

But because, from the very beginning, there were political connotations to the story, that were undeniable, those closest to Smollett, these two attackers. This is MAGA country. And they were Trump supporters. This became partisan and polarizing on day one.

I wish it wasn't but that is the reality. And that has (INAUDIBLE) to the story that makes it even more troubling. Obviously we have to wait to see what Smollett is going to say now.

CUPP: From inside, how do you think the media -- you know, the media had to cover this and had to cover this, you know, cautiously and responsibly.

How do you think, on the whole, the media has done as a job?

STELTER: Strong, high quality, tried to be very careful (INAUDIBLE). But because (INAUDIBLE) two hours after the alleged attack, this was a Trump supporter attacking a political connotations. (INAUDIBLE) from day one and when you're looking at those (INAUDIBLE) are saying that someone was able to be weaponized in many different ways.

(INAUDIBLE) they orchestrated this.

Why?

There was a rumor going around a few days ago that Smollett was afraid he was being written off the show and they were going to kill off his character. Well, they studio, FOX, denied that was the case. So the motive here, there's still a mystery at the heart of the story.

CUPP: Brian Stelter, thank you so much.

Joey, what is Jussie facing legally?

What would the charges be?

JOEY JACKSON, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Well, I see prior to even that, just my reaction, prior to being a lawyer, just as a human being, we are in an era where there's so much discord. The political rhetoric is so high and inflamed.

So you have something like this, which just adds to it and adds to the hate when you say, people attacked me and did vicious, vile things. But there are consequences. The consequences are you can't file false reports. When you do that -- listen, the detectives, you asked Brian about the media's response to this, which I think was responsible, I thought the detectives handled it very responsibly, too, in going and interviewing and leaving no stone unturned and doing surveillance and everything that they did to see if there was something really here.

(CROSSTALK)

CUPP: It cost money.

JACKSON: That's my point. That's why it's a crime. Because you are diverting resources from things that are real.

CUPP: In a city that needs none.

JACKSON: People who have real harm. Victims that are actual victims. Because of that, it's criminalized. If you look at something like this there's really a deterrent to prosecuting this. Because you can't have people make claims like this. Look at the people who backed him, supported him, loved him, really had his back.

It's a major disappointment, I think, to all concerned but a prosecutable offense. That's why he hired counsel.

CUPP: Do you imagine Chicago PD have concrete evidence he staged this, beyond just the word of the two brothers?

JACKSON: What I have to believe -- and again, I don't want to speculate but what I'll say based on information and belief --

CUPP: Right, right.

JACKSON: -- police have been working with case. There have been multiple detectives. There's been search warrants issued and executed of the homes of these Nigerian individuals. They have questioned them and spoken at length to them. They left no stone unturned.

(CROSSTALK) JACKSON: They released them without charges. So I would have to believe there's some concrete evidence, in addition to the interviews they have conducted, that leads them to believe, you know what?

It just ain't so. That's a big disappointment. It's a problem. It's wonderful it did not happen in accordance to what he said. It's just so disheartening and disappointing that you put out a narrative like that.

CUPP: If you are Rahm Emanuel and a citizen just cast your city in a terrible light and you already have real crime problem --

JACKSON: That's right.

CUPP: -- how do you handle this?

JACKSON: It adds fuel to the fire. I think if there's anything we need right now, it's unity. It's a lack of the discord. It's lack of homophobic issues and people talking about race in a negative way. We are in a day and age where we talk about immigrants in a derogatory way and --

CUPP: And blackface.

JACKSON: -- 100 percent.

CUPP: There is real pain.

JACKSON: -- precisely, so this adds to that pain. I think we are in troubling times. Rahm Emanuel, it's time to be conciliatory, bring people together and do something about --

[18:55:00]

JACKSON: -- instances like this that shouldn't have happened.

CUPP: It's a bizarre final twist. I'm sure we'll learn much, much more in this story. Joey, thank you for helping us sort through this still developing case.

Ending on a quick political note, the 2020 Democratic candidates were out on the trail today. One was Senator Amy Klobuchar. She is the latest Democrat to enter the 2020 presidential race.

Monday night, she takes voters' questions and discusses what's at stake for the country's future. Don Lemon moderates a CNN presidential town hall Monday night at 10:00 on CNN. Tune in for that. "CNN NEWSROOM" with Ana Cabrera is next.