Return to Transcripts main page
Anderson Cooper 360 Degrees
Trump On Negative News Coverage Of Him: "I Think That's Really Illegal"; Sen. Cruz Calls FCC Chair's Threats Against ABC "Dangerous as Hell"; Charlie Kirk's Last Message To Van Jones; U.S. Attorney Erik Siebert, Under Pressure By Trump To Charge NY Attorney General, Is Stepping Down; Trump Says He Wants To Fire U.S. Attorney Who Declined To Charge NY AG Letitia James With Mortgage Fraud; Former U.S. Attorney Alex Acosta Defends Epstein's 2008 Plea Deal In Hours-Long Appearance On Capitol Hill; One-On-One With Director Rob Reiner. Aired 8-9p ET
Aired September 19, 2025 - 20:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
REP. CHELLIE PINGREE (D-ME): ...is to make agriculture net zero, but, you know, today, climate change isn't such a popular item with this President. But on the other hand, keeping farms viable should be, in this USDA should be all about how do we serve our farmers.
So, this bill is really to talk about those things that would make it more viable to be on the land, how to reduce your energy costs. What kind of research do you need to deal with the weeks and weeks we've had of drought this year? What do you need to do more irrigating and how you do all these things?
BILL WEIR, CNN CHIEF CLIMATE CORRESPONDENT: Bill weir, CNN.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
ERIN BURNETT, CNN HOST: Don't miss "Farm Aid 40" live tomorrow night at seven. Thanks for joining us. AC360 starts now.
[20:00:37]
ANDERSON COOPER, CNN HOST, "ANDERSON COOPER: 360": Tonight on 360, the President of the United States says since he won the election, coverage of him is too critical and he thinks it's in his own words really illegal.
Also, with Charlie Kirk's funeral this weekend, a look at what is planned and CNN's Van Jones, who sparred online with Kirk, joins us to talk about Charlie Kirk's personal outreach to him the day before he was assassinated.
And later, the federal prosecutor who could not do the President's bidding and make a federal case against New York's Attorney General and James Comey. The President today said he wanted him gone and tonight, he is.
Good evening thanks for joining us. The President has weighed in again on free speech and Jimmy Kimmel's indefinite suspension by ABC. And once again, he steered the conversation at a press availability late today from that to how broadcast networks were treating him. Even when asked about the ostensible reason behind that suspension, remarks Kimmel made in the wake of Charlie Kirk's murder.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REPORTER: Follow up on Charlie Kirk, there's been a lot of talk about free speech this week. Do you see a difference between cancel culture and consequence culture?
DONALD TRUMP (R) PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: I mean, your question is a little trick question. I like -- I'm a very strong person for free speech at the same time, when you have networks that where I won an election, like in counties, I guess it's 2,600 to 525, that's called landslide.
A landslide times two when you have that kind of -- that level of popularity or voter support, as I did in the last election. And yet, 97 percent and 94 percent different numbers, you see different numbers with different stats, but 97, 94, 95, 96 percent of the people are against me in the sense of the newscasts are against me. The stories are 90 -- they said 97 percent bad. So they gave me 97 -- they'll take a great story and they'll make it bad. See, I think that's really illegal.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COOPER: So just to follow the logic there, the President says because he won the election and he doesn't like the tone and tenor of newscast coverage of him, too many stories he calls bad, it's illegal, news coverage he doesn't like, he's hurt by, angered by is illegal.
Now, that is sure a far cry from the Donald Trump of just eight months ago who announced he was going to be a champion of free speech and against any form of censorship.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: I will also sign an executive order to immediately stop all government censorship and bring back free speech to America. Never again will the immense power of the state be weaponized to persecute political opponents.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COOPER: That was the promise -- never again will the immense power of the state be weaponized to persecute political opponents.
We are seeing the immense power of the state, the immense power of the President to silence critics, to silence free speech, whether it's through actual actions or simply threats, intimidation, a willingness to block mergers or hold up deals in order to get companies to bow, or law firms or media organizations or universities or museums or tech companies. That is the argument some have made on the right. Well, the administration didn't do anything to Jimmy Kimmel. They didn't take him off the air. The FCC didn't do anything, ABC did, their parent company, Disney, took him off. The ABC Disney CEO, Bob Iger, he reportedly made the decision.
But the backdrop to that decision is that the President has already shown a willingness to use the federal government, whatever levers he has, in ways not seen since the Nixon administration and beyond what we saw in the Nixon administration to lean on and coerce broadcast media into submission. And his FCC chairman has made clear on a right wing podcast that he wanted Kimmel gone. And a powerful ABC affiliate group, who needs that FCC chairman's approval for multi-billion dollar merger did exactly what he encouraged affiliates to do.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BRENDAN CARR, CHAIRMAN OF THE FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION OF THE UNITED STATES: We can do this the easy way or the hard way. These companies can find ways to change conduct, to take action, frankly, on Kimmel or there's going to be additional work for the FCC ahead.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COOPER: That's FCC Chairman Brendan Carr on Wednesday, just hours before ABC pulled "Jimmy Kimmel Live" from the air and he isn't done yet. Here he is yesterday, signaling more to come.
[20:05:18]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
WILL CAIN, FOX NEWS CHANNEL HOST, "THE WILL CAIN SHOW": What are you talking about when you say not the last shoe to drop?
CARR: Look, we're going to continue to hold these broadcasters accountable to the public interest. And if broadcasters don't like that, simple solution, they can turn their license into the FCC.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COOPER: There's more reaction to all of this today, including from a staunch conservative supporter of the President, Texas Republican Senator Ted Cruz.
(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)
SEN. TED CRUZ (R-TX): And I've got to say, he threatens it. He says, we can do this the easy way, or we can do this the hard way. And I've got to say, that's right out of "Goodfellas" that's right out of a mafioso coming into a bar going, "Nice bar you have here, it'd be a shame if something happened to it."
(END AUDIO CLIP)
COOPER: Senator Cruz also had this warning.
(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)
CRUZ: It is unbelievably dangerous for government to put itself in the position of saying, "We're going to decide what speech we like and what we don't, and we are going to threaten to take you off air if we don't like what you're saying."
And it might feel good right now to threaten Jimmy Kimmel. But when it is used to silence every conservative in America, we will regret it. And so again, I like Brendan Carr, but we should not be in this business.
(END AUDIO CLIP)
COOPER: Well, Jimmy Kimmel's remaining colleagues weighed in last night.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JIMMY FALLON, "THE TONIGHT SHOW STARRING JIMMY FALLON" HOST: A lot of people are worried that we won't keep saying what we want to say or that will be censored, but I'm going to cover the President's trip to the U.K. just like I normally would. Well, guys, President Trump just wrapped up his three day-trip to the U.K. and he --
VOICE OVER: -- looked incredibly handsome.
STEPHEN COLBERT, "THE LATE SHOW WITH STEPHEN COLBERT" HOST: If ABC thinks that this is going to satisfy the regime, they are woefully naive and clearly they've never read the children's book, "If You Give a Mouse a Kimmel."
VOICE OVER: From Comedy Central, it's the all new government approved "Daily Show" with your patriotically obedient host, Jon Stewart.
JON STEWART, "THE DAILY SHOW" HOST: Are the naysayers and the critics right? Is Donald Trump stifling free speech?
"THE DAILY SHOW" CORRESPONDENTS AND HOSTS: Of course not, Jon.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COOPER: That, of course, was satire, which Brendan Carr once seemed just fine with in 2022. He said, "Political satire is one of the oldest and most important forms of free speech. It challenges those in power while using humor to draw more people into the conversation." He also said this in 2023, "Free speech is the counterweight. It is the check on government control. That is why censorship is the authoritarian's dream."
Well, now he is in a seat of power and we are seeing how he is using it. The President, meantime, seems delighted by Mr. Carr today, calling him, quote, "an incredible American patriot with courage. He also, for the second time got into it with ABC news' Jonathan Karl, who referred back to his words on inauguration day about bringing back free speech.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JONATHAN KARL, ABC NEWS CHIEF WASHINGTON CORRESPONDENT: I just want to settle this free speech question because you've said that you restored free speech in America. Is that free speech, including for people who are harshly critical of you, for your political opponents, for people who say things you don't like.
TRUMP: I've become immune to it. There has never been a person that's had more unfair publicity than me. And that's why your network paid me $15 million or $16 million, I believe, to be exact. George Papadopoulos. And that's why CBS paid me a lot of money too and that's why I sued "The New York Times" two days ago for a lot of money. Because I -- well, I'm winning. I'm winning the cases and the reason I'm winning is because you're guilty, Jon. You're guilty, ABC is a terrible network, a very unfair network and you should be ashamed of yourself.
NBC is equally bad. I don't know who's worse. I think they're equally bad. And, you know, for you to stand there and act so innocent and ask me a question like that. But look, you paid a big price because you were dishonest, Jon. The reason I won that lawsuit was because you were dishonest. You were proven to be dishonest. And so, you can't sit back and just say, oh, well, what do you think? You know, like you're some wonderful person. You're not a wonderful person. Frankly, you're a terrible reporter. You know it, and so do I.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COOPER: One note on "The New York Times" lawsuit, the President said he was winning. Today, the judge threw it out, saying the complaint was, "improper and impermissible" in its current form. He added that a complaint is, "not a protected platform to rage against an adversary." And he gave the President's lawyers 28 days to file an amended version.
So we begin tonight with the latest from CNN chief media analyst Brian Stelter. So, what are you hearing about talks between Jimmy Kimmel, his lawyers, ABC executives?
[20:10:03]
BRIAN STELTER, CNN CHIEF MEDIA ANALYST: Well, were hearing there is no resolution, no solution to ABC's late night problem more than 48 hours after ABC pulled Kimmel's plug.
Meantime, as you just showed, Anderson, Trump continues to mislead the public about his pressure campaign against the press. Today, he repeatedly said that ABC and CBS, "had to pay him." I found that really telling because ABC and CBS did not have to pay President Trump. They chose to pay settlements to make painful lawsuits go away, even though legal experts said the networks could have gone to court and probably prevailed.
Today's ruling in Florida, throwing out that Trump lawsuit against "The New York Times" shows that when Trumps threats come up against the legal system, the threats sometimes evaporate. Yes, Trump's legal team has suggested that they will re-file in the next four weeks, but it's important to recognize Trump's performance of strength against the media is sometimes actually masking weakness.
But Disney didn't put up a fight when Carr spoke out on Wednesday. Disney did not go to court to defend Jimmy Kimmel. Instead, the lawyers who are now involved, Anderson, are Kimmel's lawyers. They might be negotiating his exit, but right now we don't know how this is going to end.
COOPER: And what role, if any, do affiliate stations have in how this plays out? I mean, obviously we know they have played a role in what happened to Jimmy Kimmel, and we've talked about that. Sinclair, the largest owner of ABC affiliates, they've now demanded Kimmel "issue a direct apology to the Kirk family" and "make a meaningful personal donation to the Kirk family and Turning Point USA" before they would put his show back on.
STELTER: Those are extraordinary, highly unusual demands, and they reflect the rightward conservative tilt of Sinclair's managers. They also point to this fractured relationship between the local stations and ABC as a network. That's why there may not be a path forward for Kimmel to return, even if he wants to, and even if his staff wants to get back to work, which I presume they very much do.
This is revealing the pressure points in the American media system. It is not as if President Trump and Brendan Carr can actually revoke a local station license. They can't just take them away and shut down a station. It would cause a years-long legal battle. But the leverage point happens whenever a local station is transferred or sold or bought. Right now, Sinclair has pending business before the government. So does Nexstar, another big station owner. We've talked about this, this week.
So we are seeing how these station owners are vulnerable to government pressure, and they're not the only ones. Disney is also in a difficult position because it also has a pending deal before the government. It needs Justice Department approval to buy a streaming service called Fubo.
So these executives, they are keeping in mind the importance of currying favor with the Trump administration, given just how blatantly transactional President Trump and FCC Chairman Brendan Carr have proven to be.
COOPER: Yes, Brian, stay with us. Joining us now is our team, Republican strategist, former Trump campaign adviser and CNN senior political commentator, David Urban; Harvard Law Professor, Rebecca Tushnet; and television and media reporter for "The Los Angeles Times, Stephen Battaglio.
Stephen, what's your sense of, I mean, who makes the next move or is there another move here for Kimmel to make?
STEPHEN BATTAGLIO, TELEVISION AND MEDIA REPORTER FOR "THE LOS ANGELES TIMES": I'm surprised it's gone on as long as it has. And I think it just shows that -- people I've talked to who are close to Jimmy Kimmel know him well, say that he will not apologize or he will not come out there and he certainly won't do what Sinclair is asking him to do, sort of an absurd request to give a donation to Turning Point USA. And that's going to make it very difficult to put him on -- put him back on. And it's turning into an absolute public relations disaster for the Walt Disney Company.
There were -- the Writers Guild East, their members were protesting outside of Disney headquarters today. I don't think Bob Iger likes seeing his names on posters with the word "fascist" on it or photos of Donald Trump. It is getting extremely ugly.
COOPER: Professor, what's so interesting about this, the way this all played out is, again, the point that, you know, the President didn't have to and the FCC didn't actually have to do anything other than speak out, because the President has already shown with what he did with law firms that just by pulling levers of pressure, he can get these organizations which have other business interests to cave. And with law firms, it was okay, your attorneys are not going to be allowed into government buildings, so you won't be able to meet with government officials. And you have clients who need -- you need to be able to meet with government officials. We will intimidate other people from other big corporations from hiring your firm. I mean, this is part of a pattern.
REBECCA TUSHNET, HARVARD LAW PROFESSOR: It's definitely part of a pattern and the thing that's just very hard to swallow is also in that pattern is that the people who fight win. So, the law firms that fought back, because this was cartoonishly unconstitutional, that easily won. So, nobody needed to fold. And frankly, the same is true here, except, as you said some of them want to fold to get approval for their mergers.
And, you know, if we want government not to be in the business of dictating content, one of the things we need is more competition, fewer mergers, so that the government doesn't have that place to step in.
[20:15:41]
COOPER: David, how does a supporter of the President square the President's comments from eight months ago saying, you know, I'm going to pass this executive order protecting free speech. Never again will the government use its immense power to silence anyone with these actions.
DAVID URBAN, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: You know, Anderson, I like that second tape you rolled that did show the President saying that. And, you know, I agree with Senator Cruz and associate myself with his remarks, as he said in the Senate, I believe that he's exactly correct. Whether its Elizabeth Warren pressuring Amazon to censor, you know, Google, the censor searches for books on COVID or whether its Joe Biden pressuring Mark Zuckerberg during COVID to take things away, or whether it's Donald Trump and Brendan Carr pressuring, you know, in this situation, I think its reprehensible. I think it's wrong. I think cancel culture in any form is wrong. But what I think, Anderson, is the nub here is really look, Jimmy Kimmel and Jon Stewart and others, they bashed the President night after night and it's fine. It isn't satire and it's part of the American system of, you know, debate and dialogue. And it's funny at times. What isn't funny, though, and what I think got Kimmel and the problem here is, you know, the raw nerve of Charlie Kirk. I mean, the kid was brutally assassinated basically on live television for the world to watch. We all saw what happened. We saw his widow mourning. He hasn't been buried yet. He has -- his service is this Sunday.
And for Jimmy Kimmel to come out and be so insensitive in that moment and really just repulsive and not say that he's going to come out. If he would have come out and said the next day, look, I overdid it. I really apologized on the Charlie Kirk thing. I shouldn't have said that. But I mean, what I said about Trump. I think he'd still have his job. I think Americans understand, what I don't think Americans understand was kind of the mean spirited attack on Charlie Kirk. Free speech is free speech, and the marketplace is going to police itself. You know, when your business model is attack 50 percent of America at some point, you know, the networks are going to say the local affiliates aren't going to be able to get advertisers from tractor supply or Walmart or the Trump supporters, and they're going to boot them out.
And so, I think the business decision of who you keep employed and who's funny and who's not funny. Look, Nate Bargatze, Anderson, is the world's most successful comedian. Historically, it's a verifiable fact. Every record book he's broken, stadiums. coliseums. You know what he isn't? He isn't political. He's just funny. He's just a funny guy.
And so, maybe the rule is, if you want to try to have a late night show, be funny. I think Jimmy Fallon is funny. He doesn't cross over the line into like mean spirited politics. So, I think if Kimmel went back and said, hey, I am really sorry for offending Charlie Kirk's families and supporters, what I said was insensitive. That would go a long way in America. We're talking about healing and coming together, and for him to kind of dance on his grave, I think is just reprehensible.
COOPER: Was anybody dancing on Charlie? I mean, let's just lets, I mean, well, as I remember he put out he put out a social media post expressing condolences to the family. And what he said on and we're putting it up there. But what he said on the show, which is my understanding of what the issue was with the that the FCC was pointing to, and I think we probably have that was a portrayal of how he said people in the MAGA world were doing everything they could to try to you know, to try to make sure -- I mean, do we have -- let's play this clip? Because I don't want to get it wrong here.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JIMMY KIMMEL, "JIMMY KIMMEL LIVE" HOST: We hit some new lows over the weekend with the MAGA gang desperately trying to characterize this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them, and doing everything they can to score political points from it. (END VIDEO CLIP)
COOPER: I understand it's insane. I can see how you could see it's insensitive. I'm not sure that's dancing on Charlie's grave.
URBAN: Yes, Anderson, completely insensitive. If he were to do that to any other person. I mean, can you imagine somebody joking about -- pick any other any other person's death in America, any political situation. It is just insensitive. It's -- you want to make fun of Donald Trump? Have at it. You want to make fun of any politician? Have at it. It is a full contact sport. To do that to someone who is who is dead, who was brutally murdered, kind of on live television.
COOPER: To me it seemed a criticism of his supporters as opposed to something. But I don't want, I'm not here to speak for him, but I played the tape for that reason. David, thank you. Brian Stelter, Rebecca Tushnet, Stephen Battaglio, as well.
Coming up next, the surprising outreach CNN's Van Jones got from Charlie Kirk the day before he was assassinated and why Van is paying tribute to a man that he deeply disagreed with. Van is here to talk about it.
Also tonight, the departure of a career federal prosecutor whom the President appointed. But then wanted gone when he would not do his bidding.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: When I saw that he got two senators, two gentlemen that are bad news as far as I'm concerned. When I saw that he got approved by those two men, I said, pull it because he can't be any good.
[20:20:57]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[20:25:21]
COOPER: Tonight, students at Utah Valley University gather to pay tribute to Charlie Kirk, who was assassinated on their campus just nine days ago. The vigil comes ahead of Sunday's funeral for Kirk. Tens of thousands are expected to attend, including President Trump. His murder and some unexpected outreach at Kirk made the day before his death, had resonated with our CNN colleague Van Jones.
The story begins when a Ukrainian woman was fatally stabbed last month in North Carolina. The suspect is a Black man, and Charlie Kirk and Van got into a public sparring match online. Kirk claimed the murder happened because she was White. Van denounced that as completely unfounded. Kirk then sent out what Van calls a firehose of tweets challenging his argument, which Van says sparked death threats against him.
In the midst of all of this, Kirk reached out to Van in a direct message on X. "Hey, Van, I mean it. I'd love to have you on my show to have a respectful conversation about crime and race. I would be a gentleman, as I know you would be as well. We can disagree about the issues agreeably."
Now, that message was sent on September 9th. Van says he did not see it until the very next day, after Kirk was murdered. Van Jones just wrote a piece about this for cnn.com and is here tonight.
I mean, this is extraordinary. So, this was received the day before he was killed?
VAN JONES, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR:, Yes, look, I mean, we were beefing. We were going at it online, on air, and then after he died, after he was murdered, my team called and said, "Van, he was trying to reach you, man."
What? And what was he doing? Dialogue, let's be gentlemen together. He says let's disagree agreeably. So, I'm sitting on this, and I'm watching, the whole country talk about Civil War, censorship, justifying murder about this guy? This guy is reaching out to his mortal enemy saying we need to be gentlemen. Sit down together and disagree agreeably. And the next day, he's killed.
And I sat on it long enough, and I just said, you know what? We're going to memorial weekend for this man. We disagree, everybody knows, we were not friends, okay, at all. But you praise the good, when it's time to memorialize somebody and what he did, and I didn't even know it was good. He was not for censorship. He was not for Civil War. He was not for violence. He was for dialogue, open debate and dialogue, even with me, even with me.
COOPER: If -- would you have gone on his show? Would you have done --
JONES: Now, look, I would probably try to get him on your show. I mean, I wasn't trying to build his platform, but I would have called him. We would have talked and we would have started the process of trying to figure this stuff out. And I think what happens is, people get so worked up, Anderson, seeing us go at it, they think they're supposed to go out and kill somebody or go out and talk about Civil War, or go out and silence people, or cancel people, or fire people, or censor people about Charlie Kirk? Mr. Debate?
I did not agree with him on literally almost anything, but we were words, not weapons, guys. We were words, not weapons guys and we were getting into a position where we could get some real debate going, whether it's going to be on CNN, on his show that wasn't worked out, but I would have taken him up.
I wanted to beat Charlie Kirk in a debate. I didn't want somebody to shoot him. That's how we do it in America. And the idea that now people on both sides are justifying murders and calling for Civil Wars, we've got to calm this down, Anderson. We need to calm this down. We need to lower the temperature. Yes, we disagreed, but like you said, we can disagree agreeably as his last words to me. Let's disagree agreeably. We should take that spirit into the memorial weekend for this guy. COOPER: You also wrote that in the wake of Charlie Kirk's murder, you said Americans have a choice. They can choose more violence, more outrage, more censorship, or a different way. It's similar to what the Governor in Utah, Spencer Cox, has said in recent days.
JONES: Look, he's a Republican. He's saying the same thing. I'm saying, I'm a strong Democrat. We have a choice now. This could be the beginning of us getting off of this pathway. But the pathway were on, Anderson, is scary. It's about more violence. It's about more retribution. It's about more censorship. It's about more and more of everything that nobody wants. But we can't seem to get off of it.
Charlie Kirk in his last message to me was pointing a way out. Civil discourse, civil dialogue, debate, let's disagree agreeably. If you want to get off this train, we can do it this weekend.
COOPER: Van Jones, thanks so much, appreciate it.
Up next we have breaking news. The federal prosecutor who doesn't have enough evidence to charge New York Attorney General Letitia James, whom President Trump considers a political enemy, is stepping down. Details on that ahead.
[20:30:17]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COOPER: Welcome back. There's more breaking news tonight. The U.S. Attorney under heavy pressure from President Trump to charge a New York state official, the President considers a political enemy, is stepping down.
[20:35:03]
Earlier today, the President said he wanted to get rid of Erik Siebert, head of the Eastern District of Virginia. And that's Siebert there. The President has been demanding that he charge New York Attorney General Letitia James with mortgage fraud. Siebert's office does not have enough evidence, they say, to bring an indictment.
The President is angry with Siebert because he -- or with Letitia James, because she won a business fraud case against him and his company.
We're joined now by Michael Moore, former U.S. Attorney for the Middle District of Georgia. Michael, good to see you. I wonder, what is your reaction to the news of Mr. Siebert's apparent resignation?
MICHAEL MOORE, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: You know, I'm glad to be with you. I'll tell you, I'm not surprised at all. And I think it's just more of sort of the same nonsense that we've seen out of the administration, whether they're pressuring networks, pressuring law firms, and now you're seeing where they are pressuring appointed U.S. attorneys, which is one of the most dangerous things they can do.
You know, the U.S. Attorney serves strictly at the pleasure of the President. So they can, in fact, the President can fire the person or ask that they leave. What we have not seen, until we have really gotten into the Trump administration, is a President so willing to take his hand and slam it down on one side of the scale and try to use a person's political position to threaten that they will lose their job if they don't do his bidding against his political foes.
COOPER: Well, you know, the President, during his first term, was famously reported to have said, you know, where's my Roy Cohen? I mean, what was --
MOORE: Sure.
COOPER: -- Siebert supposed to do, prosecute a case without enough evidence? I mean, I would think that would just waste time and money and probably annoy a federal judge.
MOORE: Yes. He really did the noble thing as a prosecutor, and he was true to his oath, both as a lawyer and as a prosecutor. And that is that you seek the truth and you seek justice and you don't, you know, show favor or affection one way or another. You certainly are not a lackey of a president and you are to exercise some independent judgment.
You know, there's an old case that all the U.S. attorneys are familiar with that talks about our job is not to get convictions, but it's to seek the truth and it's to seek the right thing. And so, if he didn't have enough evidence and he was bound by his oath as a lawyer and certainly the oath he took as U.S. attorney to step back from that case and not just move forward as a way to save his job.
COOPER: I mean, for people who aren't that familiar with the system of U.S. attorneys, I mean, as you said, he was a career prosecutor. He was nominated U.S. attorney by President Trump. If career prosecutors --
MOORE: Right.
COOPER: -- can't do their jobs without political interference, whether it's a Republican president or Democratic president, what happens to the system of justice?
MOORE: The DOJ just becomes sort of the loaded gun for the White House, and that's not what you want. When we were sworn in and one of the first meetings I had with President Obama, he came out and said, look, you're not my lawyers. You're the lawyers for the American people, for the country.
You're not here to do my bidding. I may have priorities in my administration, but you do them in a way that complies with the law. But you're not my lawyers. You don't represent me.
That's never been the case with Trump. He thinks that everybody comes in, takes a loyalty oath and that they need to be simply at his beck and call to do whatever he wants, whether it be within the confines of their oath or the Constitution or outside of that. And that's a dangerous place to be. If you've got people who wield so much power in the federal criminal justice system that they can come in and indict somebody simply because the person who appointed them says this is the only way you can keep your job.
COOPER: Yes.
MOORE: No matter what the evidence may show, you -- if you don't do this, you're going to lose your job. And that's a dangerous place. You know, we've been teetering sort of along the edge of this thing for months now. And we don't have courts coming in and using the power that they have to stop some of the over-empowerment of this executive.
But, you know, I think that you'll start to see people take these as real warning signs, whether it's the First Amendment, whether it's DOJ pressure, whatever it may be, that we're getting mighty close to a place where we're going to have to have somebody step in.
COOPER: Michael Moore, it's great to see you. Thank you very much.
MOORE: Great to be with you.
COOPER: Up next, the former federal prosecutor who gave Jeffrey Epstein an incredibly lenient plea deal is called not credible after testifying on Capitol Hill by some. Later, my one-on-one interview with Rob Reiner, something to make you laugh at the end of this very difficult week, director of "Spinal Tap II" and "Spinal Tap," which I'm a huge fan of. Embarrassingly, so we'll see, ahead.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[20:44:06]
COOPER: Welcome back, former U.S. Attorney Alex Acosta, who you may remember, negotiated the controversial 2008 plea deal with Jeffrey Epstein, testified for six hours today before the House Oversight Committee was behind closed doors. According to a readout of the testimony shared by the committee's chairman, James Comer, Acosta defended the deal, saying that a key issue was if the Epstein case should be prosecuted federally or locally.
Acosta also pointed to potential evidentiary issues he says could have jeopardized the conviction if the case went to trial. Democrats on the panel dismissed Acosta's claims as not credible, while Comer described him as cooperative, saying he gave information that will help the probe into the government's handling of the Epstein case. Comer also said that Acosta claimed he never saw President Trump's name on any documents related to Epstein.
Joining me now is Democratic Congressman from Florida Maxwell Frost, who serves on the House Oversight Committee. Congressman, thanks for being here.
So you heard Chairman Comer's characterization of Acosta's testimony, particularly his justification for Epstein's lenient plea deal. Does that explanation seem credible to you? [20:45:14]
REP. MAXWELL FROST (D-FL): It doesn't. Number one, I wouldn't say he was fully cooperative. Many of the questions that we asked together at the heart of why he gave Jeffrey Epstein, a convicted sexual abuser and a human trafficker, why he gave him the sweetheart deal.
Number one, Alex Acosta doesn't even believe it was a sweetheart deal. He said that with a bit of contempt. He really feels like he did the best he could and that they did the most that they could. And we know that that's not true.
In fact, even during this deposition, we asked them if he knew or would acknowledge that Jeffrey Epstein assaulted more women when he left jail, and he wouldn't even admit that. I feel like if can't answer those two questions truthfully, it leads to credibility issues with everything else he says.
The other thing I'd say is there were many questions that we asked that we didn't get straight answers on. A lot of I don't recall this, a lot of I don't quite remember. And so I'm not exactly sure if that's fully cooperative. And I'm not sure he was being 100 percent truthful with us in that deposition. I think there was a lot of evading going on.
COOPER: And Congressman Frost, you were -- I mean, you said that -- or I should say Chairman Comer said that Acosta expressed remorse over the fact that Epstein was able to get a work release agreement in the Palm Beach County and that he, meaning Acosta, had previously gotten assurances that it would not happen. Did that add up to you?
FROST: I asked, actually -- I personally asked a lot of these questions in the deposition. He -- it's not that and what he relates to us is it's not that he got assurances that he wouldn't be let on work release, but it's that once it happened, they were upset about it. And that's what he told us.
Apparently, they sent a one letter to the corrections department to say, hey, you shouldn't let him be on work release. But I just don't buy it. I don't buy that. This is one of the most high profile cases that he undertook as state attorney here in the state of Florida or sorry, as U.S. attorney here in the state of Florida. And the fact that there's so many key details that he didn't remember is what shows me that he wasn't fully being forthcoming with us in the deposition.
COOPER: Comer -- Acosta also, according to Comer, testified that he, quote, "never saw President Trump's name on any document or any matter related to Jeffrey Epstein." Did Acosta express any opinion on whether Justice Department should release all Epstein related files?
FROST: Not while I was in the room. And actually one of the things we asked about, there's a New Yorker article from before this case was even taken up where Donald Trump is in it talking about his good friend Jeffrey Epstein, talking about the fact that he liked to be a lot around a lot of women, around a lot of young women. And so we asked from our side, hey, was he interviewed or asked any questions during your investigation? We didn't get a straight answer. Apparently, he didn't really know much about what's going on in his own office during this very high profile investigation.
COOPER: Congressman Frost, I appreciate your time. Thank you very much.
There's --
FROST: Yes.
COOPER: -- more breaking news for the third time so far. U.S. forces have struck a boat the President says was carrying drug traffickers. He made the announcement on his social network, saying the Pentagon, quote, "ordered a lethal kinetic strike on a vessel affiliated with a designated terrorist organization conducting narco trafficking in the U.S. South Com area of responsibility." And according to the President, the strike killed three men on board and no U.S. forces were harmed in the operation, which took place in international waters.
Coming up, something to make you smile, I hope at the end of this long week, I am obsessed. You may or may not know with the movie "Spinal Tap" Director Rob Reiner stopped by recently to talk about its new sequel, which is already out called "Spinal Tap II: The End Continues." That's next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[20:53:36]
COOPER: If you've never seen the old movie "Spinal" -- this is "Spinal Tap", you have to see it. It's one of my favorites. If you don't know, it's a largely improvised mockumentary about a completely over the top and equally hapless heavy metal band. It was made 41 years ago.
And now finally, there's a sequel. It's called "Spinal Tap II: The End Continues." It's just been released in theaters. All of the original members of the band have returned to put on one last rock show.
(BEGIN VIDEOCLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: A lot has happened since the last time I saw you.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Crypto.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Have you been playing music at all?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I play music at a pub.
(END VIDEOCLIP)
COOPER: Rob Reiner is the director of "Spinal Tap II" and directed and appeared in the original "Spinal Tap." He's the co-author also of "A Fine Line Between Stupid and Clever: The Story of Spinal Tap." I spoke to him earlier this week before the firing of Jimmy Kimmel.
(BEGIN VIDEOCLIP)
COOPER: I'm sure you get this wherever you go, but I am trying to resist the urge to just regale you with one liner from "Spinal Tap."
ROB REINER, AUTHOR, "A FINE LINE BETWEEN STUPID AND CLEVER: THE STORY OF SPINAL TAP": Well, you know, this goes to 11, which you hear all the time --
COOPER: No, no, I wasn't going to do that. I was going to do --
REINER: I know. Yes.
COOPER: -- Bobbi Flekman from Polymer Records.
REINER: Yes, yes, yes.
COOPER: Money talks bull walks.
REINER: There you go. Yes.
COOPER: I --
REINER: And my favorite is "A Fine Line Between Stupid and Clever."
COOPER: Of course. I met her on Sunday. It was my lucky Monday.
REINER: Yes.
COOPER: You know what I mean? You know what I mean.
REINER: This goes to 11. It's actually --
COOPER: It's too much. It's too much. It's too much (INAUDIBLE) perspective.
REINER: It's in the Oxford -- there you go. This goes to 11 is in the Oxford English Dictionary.
[20:55:02]
COOPER: As it should be.
REINER: As it should be.
COOPER: But, I mean, you must get people all the time just regaling you --
REINER: Yes. You do get --
COOPER: -- and like, and it must be annoying. I, like, yes, I know. That was from 1984.
REINER: No, it's fun. It's fun to know that you've things that -- a movie you made has -- had that kind of impact. It is fun. COOPER: I just want to ask you about it, like every individual scene in the film that I'm obsessed with. But I will -- I'm going to have to resist. But let me just ask you about when they go to Graceland --
REINER: Yes.
COOPER: -- and they're around Elvis grave and they're trying to harmonize. And then I can't remember who was it says, says, like, well, this really puts it into perspective. And someone else says, well, it's too much.
REINER: Too much.
COOPER: It's too much (INAUDIBLE) perspective.
REINER: Yes, yes. And --
COOPER: I cannot tell you how many times I have personally just used that line, like in all sorts of serious situations.
REINER: I know we're in that now --
COOPER: Yes.
REINER: -- unfortunately.
COOPER: Yes, it's too much. Anybody in the world who does this hand gesture, I mean, you know, it's from "Spinal Tap."
REINER: Yes.
COOPER: Like, you know, it's like the puppet show in "Spinal Tap" that someone just, you know --
REINER: You know everything from --
COOPER: Yes, I do.
REINER: You know, every line from the film more than I do.
COOPER: So what was the decision to -- how did it come about to decide to try to top it?
REINER: It's crazy because for years, people kept saying, do a sequel, do a sequel.
COOPER: Right.
REINER: We never wanted to do it. Figured we did it. That's it. The bar is too high. But this is the honest to God truth. In 40 years, the four of us were supposed to split 40 percent of the profits. And I'm not exaggerating. It's going to sound like a joke.
Each one of us got 82 cents. It's just a joke. It sounds like a joke, but that's it. We never got any money.
COOPER: How you robbed of the profits?
REINER: Well, it's --
COOPER: I'm using the term --
REINER: It's for creative accounting.
COOPER: OK.
REINER: And Harry Shearer --
COOPER: So you really made no money --
REINER: No money, no money. Harry said, that's not right. We should get the rights back. He sued, got the rights back. Now we have it back. We said, what are we going to do with it?
We still said, leave it alone. But then we started talking. And amongst the four, you know, three of us, we start -- it was four of us now, we're thinking, wait a minute. The four -- the three guys have not played together in 15 years.
COOPER: Yes.
REINER: So why was there bad blood? Were they not talking?
COOPER: Yes.
REINER: That all of a sudden gave us the idea. Then we've looked around. We thought, all these older bonds (ph)--
COOPER: Well, that's the thing.
REINER: These old guys, you know, the stones are out there. The eagle --
COOPER: ACDC, I'm just looking at all.
REINER: ACDC, they're all out there. I saw, you know, the who, you know --
COOPER: Yes.
REINER: -- they're out there doing it. You know, we think -- and Oasis just came back together.
COOPER: Yes.
REINER: We said, OK, it's about old guys having to do one last concert. So it all started to come together.
COOPER: Wow. And the companion book, too --
REINER: Yes.
COOPER: -- is behind the scenes of -- REINER: Yes.
COOPER: -- "Spinal Tap."
REINER: The book is called -- here we go, "A Fine Line Between Stupid and Clever." And if you can see, it's written by me --
COOPER: Right, Rob Reiner.
REINER: -- and, you know, with the guys inside. But then if you flip it over, it's called the "Smell the Book," which is from the movie --
COOPER: A reference to "Smell the Glove."
REINER: "Smell the Glove."
COOPER: Yes.
REINER: And it's written -- and it's by Marty DeBarge, which is the character I play.
COOPER: Right.
REINER: And with Nigel and David.
COOPER: In the scene of, you know, this one goes to 11, he actually then did a rebuttal and that wasn't planned.
REINER: Well, no. What happened was we knew we were going to do a thing about an amp that went to 11 because we had the prop made up. But how we talked about it, that was never discussed.
So I suggested something. He didn't know I was going to say it. I said, well, I don't understand. Why would you make 10 the top number, make that a little louder and have 10 be the top number?
He didn't know what to say to that. So he just takes this long pause and he goes, well, this goes to 11. That was his answer. I pinned him into a corner and he came up with that.
COOPER: But they used to actually go on to -- I mean, they played --
REINER: Yes.
COOPER: They could play to Carnegie Hall.
REINER: Well, they're really good musicians.
COOPER: Yes.
REINER: And that's the other thing. They take pride in the fact that they are really good musicians. And the second film, A Fine Line, you know, which is, you know, the -- it's called "The End Continues."
COOPER: Right. REINER: "Spinal Tap II: The End Continues," You got Elton John in there talking about that they're really good musicians and that you don't -- they're not like a normal heavy metal band. You don't find --
COOPER: So they're really playing?
REINER: They're really playing.
COOPER: Wow.
REINER: Every single note is them and it's all live. And they said, you don't find a mandolin player in the heavy metal band.
COOPER: The songs must have been we're written --
REINER: Oh, yes. No, the songs are written.
COOPER: The song, OK. All right.
REINER: The songs were all written.
COOPER: I mean, in ancient times between -- before the dawn of it --
REINER: Yes, that's all written. I've been here -- here's a crazy one. Here's a line that Nigel says. "No one knows who they were or what they were doing." OK, so if you go to Stonehenge --
COOPER: Yes.
REINER: -- there's an educational center.
COOPER: No.
REINER: They have quotes up there. Philosophers, poets, scientists. And up there, it says, "No one knows who they were or what they were doing." Nigel Tufnel, rock musician. It's right up there.
COOPER: It's amazing.
Rob Reiner, thank you so much.
REINER: Thank you.
(END VIDEOCLIP)
COOPER: I'm a huge fan.
Program note about my other show, "The Whole Story" this Sunday. In it, Sara Sidner meets the black and white sides of an old fashioned Southern family united by a shared secret. One side of the family is descended from enslaved people, the other descended from the enslavers.
Now, they all share a name, but don't spell it in the same way. It's a fascinating hour. And in the end, an uplifting story. CNN's Sara Sidner tells it this week on "The Whole Story: A Family in Black and White." That's Sunday night at 10:00 Eastern right here on CNN.
The news continues. The Source with Kaitlan Collins starts now. I'll see you Monday.
