Return to Transcripts main page
Don Lemon Tonight
Trump Supporters Prepares to Attend MAGA Rally; U.S. Attorney Geoffrey Berman Fights for His Position; President Trump is Forcing Out the U.S. Attorney for Southern District of New York But is Refusing to Step Down; Marches and Rallies to Mark Juneteenth, Commemorating the End of Slavery in the United States. Aired 11p-12a ET
Aired June 19, 2020 - 23:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[23:00:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DON LEMON, CNN HOST: This is CNN Tonight. I'm Don Lemon.
It's 11 p.m. on the East Coast and we have multiple breaking news stories on this Friday night. Not one but two Friday night news dumps from the Justice Department against the backdrop of a country in turmoil.
Maybe they think the news will get lost amid President Trump's making his return to the campaign trail tomorrow with a massive rally in Tulsa, Oklahoma. He's expecting thousands of supporters to pack an indoor arena, even though Oklahoma is reporting a record one-day increase in coronavirus cases, and Tulsa County has more infections than any other county in the state.
Public health officials warning that the rally has the potential to be a super-spreader event. Maybe they think that it will get lost among the soaring numbers of coronavirus cases in California, in Florida, and Arizona, all seeing record high numbers.
And the World Health Organization is saying we're in a, quote, "new and dangerous phase of the pandemic."
Maybe they think it will be drowned out by marches across the country celebrating the Juneteenth, the end of slavery in the U.S. Thousands rallying for unity and justice from Atlanta to Oakland to Washington, D.C. just weeks after the death of George Floyd sparked national protests on police brutality and systemic racism.
I'm talking about two big stories breaking out of the Justice Department late tonight. The U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York is resigning. Geoffrey Berman has run for the SDNY since 2018, investigating multiple members of Trump's inner circle.
The news coming right after the DOJ dropped a new version of the Mueller report with less redactions. We're going to cover all of these top stories in the hour ahead from a country in turmoil. So, I want to begin tonight with the country's two major crises coming
together, tonight and tomorrow in Tulsa, Oklahoma as the conflict over race and politics meet, right, meets the coronavirus.
And joining me now is CNN White House correspondent John Harwood and CNN senior political analyst Ryan Lizza. Good evening to both of you. I appreciate it.
So, John, the president may be craving giant crowds with thousands of people, masks optional inside a closed arena, it goes against the CDC guidelines. And even the White House's, the White House's guidelines. I would say that the White House is in denial about the risk. But at some point, it seems much more intentional than that. It is intentional deception.
JOHN HARWOOD, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Well, it's certainly intentional. Look, the White House can hear what Anthony Fauci has to say, and what the Corona task force -- Coronavirus Task Force has said.
[23:04:59]
This is a situation. You used the right word at the top of the description. He craves the adulation of these crowds. Trump has had a very rough last several months. He's been battered, he's way down to Joe Biden nationally, down in nearly all the battleground states.
He's been just hit by adverse event after adverse event. And so, he lives for the adulation of others, the admiration of others. And so, he is dying to have this crowd in Tulsa cheer his name. He's going to have 20,000 inside, it's got overflow space outside.
And secondly, he wants to send a signal to his supporters around the country that his campaign is kicking off, and he's going to fight. And third, by not requiring masks something that he does not encourage himself, he does not model himself for other people, he's trying to send the message that we've moved past the coronavirus, and we're into the reopening phase of the country.
It's a very risky message. Because the more the coronavirus explodes in places like Arizona and Texas and Florida, and in Oklahoma, it's going up as well, the more risk you have of damage to the economy right as we get to the fall. But he's not looking at the long term. He's looking at right now.
LEMON: John, also tonight, Trump is saying that the Defense Secretary, Mark Esper, and Mark Milley, the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff should have been proud to join him on that walk across Lafayette Park. Really? Proud to stand by while peaceful protesters were sprayed with tear gas all so he can get a photo-op?
HARWOOD: Don, one of the things we learned from the John Bolton book that came out this week is that the president believes that his personal interest is more important than the national interest, or is the national interest in his mind. And so, when Mark Milley and Secretary Esper expressed the view that
it was a mistake for them to participate in this domestic stunt for the photo-op at St. John's Church, they are saying that in the interest of the proper role of civilian/military relations in the country, and their conception of their duty.
Donald Trump's conception of their duty is duty to him. And so, he said in that interview with Axios, well, maybe by regulation they shouldn't have done it, but I wouldn't have handled that that way. I know the regulations better than they do. What he's saying is they should ignore those concerns of their office and do what is good for me.
LEMON: You know, John, this -- the president is in a tailspin. He is unable to handle the racial unrest in this country. He is downplaying or intentionally deceiving people about the coronavirus pandemic that has killed over 119,000 Americans.
And instead of attempting to unite he is threatening protesters, he's always been able to get away with this stuff before. But are -- I mean, I don't know, are there signs now that his usual tactics aren't working well for him?
HARWOOD: Well, we know they're not working well for him because he's trailing Joe Biden by eight or nine points in the average of national polls. He's trailing in nearly all of the battleground states. Sixty- one percent of the American people told the Quinnipiac pollsters the other day he's dishonest.
And what we've seen in the portrayals of President Trump from John Bolton, from Jim Mattis, from John Kelly, his senior most top aides is to affirm the very harsh negative judgments we heard in the campaign in 2016 from Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz, and Hillary Clinton that President Trump is dishonest, that he's amoral, that he's unfit for office.
That is becoming a consensus judgment of nearly everyone who has encountered Donald Trump, and there's no sign that he's going to change.
LEMON: He is, you know, this new book is out, right, and he's not happy about it so he is calling -- Trump is calling John Bolton a whacko as we learn more allegations about this -- about the White House from this book. Name-calling people who turn on him, that's part of the pattern for Trump. The White House press secretary was asked about that today. Here it is.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JIM ACOSTA, CNN CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Why does the president keep hiring people who are dumb as a rock, overrated, way over their heads, wacko, and incompetent?
KAYLEIGH MCENANY, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: So, the president makes hiring decisions based on the fact that he likes to have countervailing viewpoints. I spoke to him this morning about the hiring of John Bolton in particular. And he said, I like to counterbalance my own opinion with individuals that often time have the very opposite positions of my own.
[23:09:58]
He likes the model of having a team of rivals, like what we saw in President Lincoln's administration.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
LEMON: I mean, do you actually think that the president said the words countervailing and counterbalance? But anyway, a team of rivals. Really?
HARWOOD: Look, Kayleigh McEnany seems to want to top herself in ridiculous comments one after the other. look, the problem is not the people Donald Trump has hired. Because all of them walk away, even if they walk into the office with sterling reputations, they walk out with a common judgment of Donald Trump.
At some point, you have to accept the reality, I don't expect Kayleigh McEnany to do it, but the American people have come to accept it, a majority of them, and people who had close contact with Donald Trump have come to accept it.
The problem is with Donald Trump, he's the president. He, as I said, from his 2016 Republican rivals, Democratic rivals, and now his senior most aides, they all agree, he is not fit for the presidency. And you can't talk your way out of that no matter, you know, what you stand at the White House podium and try to conjure up in terms of a comparison to Abraham Lincoln.
LEMON: John Harwood, technical difficulties, you got the whole segment to yourself. So, our apologies to our Ryan Lizza. Thank you, John. I appreciate it. Have a good weekend.
HARWOOD: OK.
LEMON: So, I want to bring in now CNN's senior justice correspondent, none other than Evan Perez, our senior legal analyst Preet Bharara, and by the way, the former U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York, Laura Coates joins us as well, senior legal analyst who is a former federal prosecutor. Good evening to one and all.
Preet, I'm going to start with you. So, another Friday night firing. This time of one of the most important U.S. attorneys in America. You don't buy that Geoffrey Berman stepped down. I mean, you think he was fired or --
(CROSSTALK)
PREET BHARARA, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: I don't. I don't buy that.
LEMON: -- our reporting said he was forced out?
BHARARA Look, I -- yes. I have some experience with being fired by the president in that exact job. The press release says he stepped down. I understand from just the circumstances from the reporting and from people I've talked to myself that Geoffrey Berman was fired.
Now people will point out, I'm sure, immediately that the president has every right to fire a United States attorney. Those people serve like I did at the pleasure of the president.
But coming on Friday night, unexpectedly, he's your own hand-picked person prosecutor for that job, less than five months away from an election, with all sorts of other reporting going on including with respect to the John Bolton book, just because it's authorized and maybe lawful doesn't mean it doesn't stink to high heaven.
And I'd to understand what was going on here. I hope that if it's possible that Geoff Berman, the outgoing U.S. attorney would explain some of that if he has the ability to do so, and I think Congress should ask some questions.
It's a highly irregular thing to do in this way with respect to your own United States attorney when there are all sorts of investigations swirling around. The president and his associates, there may be angry about the way that some of the prior investigations were conducted with respect to his former lawyer, Michael Cohen and others.
There are a lot of questions that should be questions asked and I wait to see if we get any answers.
LEMON: Evan, I want to bring you in. What do you know about this unexpected departure of Geoffrey Berman?
EVAN PEREZ, CNN SENIOR JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: Yes, Preet is right. I mean, Geoffrey Berman was pushed out. He was ousted from the U.S. Attorney's Office. I'm told, Don, that he was offered other jobs inside the Justice Department. he was offered the civil division here in Washington where the assistant attorney general Jody Hunt just abruptly announced his departure earlier this week. But Geoffrey Berman declined that job.
So, he was forced out of the job in New York. Now, it tells you a lot about the way this was done. Bill Barr, the attorney general was in New York today. He met with Berman and this all went down today. But the attorney general decided to skip over the deputy, which is normally.
You know, when Preet was fired, for instance, they put the deputy as the acting attorney general - I'm sorry -- the acting U.S. attorney. They didn't do that in this case. They decided to bring in someone from New Jersey to be the acting while they wait for the Senate to act on the nomination of Jay Clayton, who is the chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission.
So, it tells you a lot, that they believe that the Justice Department here in Washington doesn't believe that the Southern District of New York can really be trusted. They wanted someone that they could trust, and that's the reason why they brought in Craig Carpenito who is the U.S. attorney in New Jersey who is going to be the acting U.S. attorney in Manhattan now, now that Berman is going -- is leaving on July 3rd. BHARARA: And to do both jobs.
LEMON: Laura, let's --
[23:14:57]
BHARARA: I mean, the extraordinary thing, I'm sorry to jump in, but the extraordinary thing is that you have a person who has a big, full- time job in New Jersey, it's a big prosecutor's office, there were lot of cases now being ask to come in and supervise an even bigger office that does even more cases while we wait in the final moments of this administration, at least this term of the administration, the nomination of someone else.
Who, by the way, is a nice guy. I know him. And he's an able civil litigator, never tried a criminal case. He's never done any criminal cases whatsoever. That would be a first in 60 years in the Southern District of New York.
LEMON: Interesting. Preet, you can jump in any time. I don't mind at all. But let's get Laura -- let's get Laura in on this. And Laura -- let's I want to talk about something because Preet mentioned this earlier, but I want you to dig in to it.
Berman was hand-picked by President Trump. Under his leadership, Berman's office has been investigating Rudy Giuliani and others. Could that have something to do with it?
LAURA COATES, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: I wonder, Don, if there were some coincidence here about this process. And you know, one of the things that makes this so unusual and also predictable, is that we've seen over the course of the administration as it relates to those who are in a prosecutorial position that the president really takes seriously at the pleasure of the President of the United States.
Meaning, what actually pleases him or his colleagues, his people that he's working with or that work under him in some capacity.
And remember, one of the things that is so important about this, we talk a lot about the morale of police departments across this country. There is morale involved for not only the career prosecutors who serve under this appointed U.S. attorneys, but it also has an impact on the prioritization of cases within a prosecutor's office.
It's not as if everything will stop depending upon who the U.S. attorney is, but it does have a big influence on other cases that are in the pipeline and down the road charging decisions, and decisions to how to go forward.
We've already seen what happened here in Washington, D.C. when there was a replacement of prosecutors who were handling say, the Roger Stone sentencing, et cetera. So, it makes a very big impact, and I suspect it's directly tied in many respects to the president being displeased by the handling of the investigations of those who were close to him and those who are no longer close to him as in Michael Cohen or Lev Parnas. LEMON: So, Laura, let me -- let me ask you this. Because Evan talked
about the SEC Chairman, Jay Clayton. The Attorney General Barr has said in a statement that President Trump plans to nominate him to replace Berman. Never been a prosecutor. How unusual is that?
COATES: Well, it's very unusual particularly in a jurisdiction that's known as, and Preet can talk to this, the sovereign district of New York. And the idea that these are extraordinarily competent litigators who have a very wide grasp of trials, of this tragedy of evidentiary- based prosecution of course.
So, to somebody who is going to oversee career prosecutors who would not be able to give perhaps guidance necessary.
PEREZ: OK.
COATES: And remember, the SEC although it's related to financial crimes --
(CROSSTALK)
PEREZ: Can I take a look real quick?
COATES: -- is quite different than what's happening to, of course, the idea of SDNY. And so, there is some financial component. I mean, SDNY does overseas cases like this, but it is unusual in some respects to have somebody who is a top official in a prosecutorial office of that stature who does not have a litigation experience.
However, I trust in career prosecutors. I was one of them. The idea that we are competent enough to handle cases in spite who is appointed. And I hope that's the case in SDNY.
LEMON: OK. Let me ask you this, Evan. I need to bring you in here. This is the statement of U.S. Attorney Geoffrey Berman an announcement by attorney general. And the statement says. I learned in a press release from the attorney general tonight that I was stepping down as U.S. -- United States attorney. I have not resigned and have no intention of resigning my position to which I was appointed by the judges of the United States district court for the Southern District of New York.
I will step down when a presidentially appointed nominee is confirmed by the Senate. Until then, our investigations will move forward without delay or interruption. I cherish every day that I work with the men and women of this office to pursue justice without fear or favor and intend to ensure that this office's important cases continue unimpeded.
Talk to me, Evan.
BHARARA: Good for him.
PEREZ: What? I mean, look, I think Preet -- Preet knows exactly what this playbook looks like because this is sort of a little bit of what happened with Preet. But, look, this is what we were hearing. We were hearing that Berman
was not going willingly. That he was essentially being told that he was being replaced. And just the atmospherics of everything, Don.
And keep in mind, that the Justice Department and Attorney General Bill Barr had tried to do this last year. There was a period where they were orchestrating a way to get rid of Berman and put someone else in there. And then a couple of guys who were working with Rudy Giuliani ended up buying a one-way ticket to Vienna.
[23:20:04]
And the FBI went and arrested them suddenly, and that made it impossible at that moment to get rid of Geoffrey Berman. That's the reason why they didn't pull this off last year, and why he was able to survive all of that. All of that. And of course, now we know that the Giuliani investigation is an outgrowth of that investigation to Lev Parnas and some of the Giuliani associates.
So, Berman has been on the radar for the attorney general, for the president, for some time that somebody that they wanted to get rid of. And all of this, of course, you know, the lack of trust in Berman goes back to the fact that he is the one, it's his office that named the president as essentially an unindicted co-conspirator in the Michael Cohen case. They named him as individual one --
LEMON: OK.
PEREZ: -- you will remember in that case.
LEMON: Right.
PEREZ: So, all of the -- all of this is connected in the end.
(CROSSTALK)
BHARARA: Can I --
LEMON: OK. So Preet, listen, so -- yes, I can, but I want you to weigh in, but let me just read this. I was appointed by the judges of the United States District Court of the Southern District of New York. I will step down when a presidentially appointed nominee is confirmed by the Senate. Basically, he is -- he is daring them and saying fire me? Is that, am I right?
BHARARA: No, I think he's saying more than that actually. It's an incredibly interesting statement. He's saying essentially, you cannot fire me. But people are forgetting here is, I was presidentially appointed and confirmed by the Senate as most our United States attorneys.
But there is a petition in the law when you fire someone and you in an acting, they have a limited term during which they can serve, after which the president either has to nominate someone and get someone confirmed or the judges, the chief judge essentially the district appoints you. And that's what happened with Geoff Berman. Geoff Berman is not a
Senate confirmed. Geoff Berman is appointed by the court. And I didn't brush up in the law in the few minutes that I have before coming on. It sounds like he is taking the position, and if he's taking it (Inaudible).
He is taking the position that I'm appointed by the court. And I cannot be removed by anyone but the court, I think, unless and until there's a Senate confirmed (Inaudible) in my place. So, I'm not going anywhere. So that's kind of an interesting standoff
PEREZ: Right.
BHARARA: -- that you don't see quite often.
PEREZ: Right. And the interesting thing, Don, for to see -- yes, that's what he's saying.
LEMON: Hang on, hang on, hang on.
PEREZ: He's saying that he cannot be fired by Bill Barr.
LEMON: Evan, hold on. Because again, and you're right. I mean, Preet, you know this playbook. So, they're saying they can't fire him. So now what? What happens now?
BHARARA: Now, you know, maybe there will be litigation, maybe there will be a game of chicken. it sounds like the game of chicken was tried. Look, it makes no sense that you have an able, good United States attorney who had the respect of the office, Geoff Berman in place, it's minutes before the administration the term that it's going to end.
You claim you like him enough, according to the reporting, that he's able to get another big job in the Justice Department. Why engage in this game of musical chairs? Right? Musical chairs is maybe fun game for, you know, toddlers to play, not a good way to accomplish justice.
Clearly, didn't want him in that particular role. Why would they go out of their way if they didn't like a person to give him some other, lesser job in the Justice Department? What person with self-respect would want to do that? Maybe it's in part because they have understood that by operation of law, it's not so easy to get rid of somebody unless they want to go willingly.
So, he'll continue to stay there. I've never seen anything like this before. My situation is not quite like this. I refused to resign, but I accepted the idea that if the president who appointed me wanted to fire me, then I would go. I just wanted it to be done by the president himself because he's the one who shook my hand and ask me to stay.
In Geoff Berman's case he might have like to stand on. I've never seen a litigation about something like this. It's not good for the department, it's not good for that office, it's not good for the administration of law enforcement to go about something like this in such a ham-handed way. And by the way, if there is a litigation, and I don't mean to
disparage large groups of people who work in -- for the President of the United States. But their litigation strategies tend to be terrible.
We saw that in a couple of cases in the Supreme Court this week, and we saw it in the case of John Bolton and his book. They are not good when they try to do something that is improper and inappropriate and justifying it with the court. And you have the court firmly embroiled here because it's the court that appointed Geoff Berman.
So, I will be on the edge of my seat watching this not just as a citizen, but as someone who, you know, served that office for many, many years.
LEMON: Laura, I want to bring you in --
(CROSSTALK)
COATES: Preet --
LEMON: -- and ask you. Because here we are again. How often are we here on a Friday night talking about these late-night firings from the Justice Department? Go on, Laura
COATES: Too often in fact. And three words I think that's on the tip of everyone's tongue in addition to the word why, is perhaps obstruction of justice in some way. And the reason I bring that phrase up is because I, like Preet and Evan, and you, Don, have the same questions about why now, why this U.S. attorney, and why at this particular late stage in the first term of a presidency?
[23:25:00]
Why would this be the issue do and still try to move the person to a different section? Unless the person had direct oversight over a matter to which the president did not want to be pursued?
Now, it's speculation, of course, to think of what all the reasons the president may want that. Well, we have a past as prologue sort of definition of what's happened when the president has sought to avoid prosecution or the pursuit of prosecution by any entity.
And so, I'm wondering at this point in time if the answer of why the musical chairs is being played with this particular person, who's had very big ties to people who were aligned with the President of the United States.
If -- if there is some basis to suggest that he would need the courts and to seek resource with the court, perhaps the president would have to explain in some way, I, in the pleasure of the president that protects him to say well, there's a reason I'm doing this, and it's a benign reason. It's not to try to obstruct some pursuit in justice and some form of fashion.
If that's the case, we're in Deja vu even more so than what Preet had experience because we've all seen what happens when there is an obstruction of justice claim against this president.
I mean, the Mueller report just came out in a more unredacted form today talking about this very issue about what the president's motivations were and were not in relation to different trials.
So, I'm curious to know if now is the time, because of particular pursuit of a case that involves either the president or someone within his circle. And if that's the case, well, the threat about mentioning that the court was the one to appoint him is much more than just a chicken game. It's in fact, do you want to tell them why you'd like me to leave, or shall I?
LEMON: Can I ask you this, Preet, and I'm getting this from a source and you can correct me if I'm wrong. That Berman didn't name Trump as a co-conspirator. Michael Cohen did. He excused himself from the Michael Cohen matter. And it is believed that Trump wants him gone because his finance cases coming due, as well going after Rudy who will -- who might roll on Trump. Can you talk to me about that? Is there any -- is that true and did he excuse himself from the matter of Michael Cohen?
BHAHARA: He did. He did recuse himself. I don't know if that recusal remains in effect. But it is Michael Cohen who said in open court, in a play allocution that no doubt was received by assistant U.S. attorneys in the office, that he did something at the direction of individual one, who we all know was the President of the United States. Which is essentially saying this person is an unindicted co- conspirator.
And yes, it's true. I think Berman did the right thing just like Jeff Sessions did with respect to the Russia investigation and recused himself. At least that's according to the reporting. I don't know what the documentation is. I don't have inside knowledge and I don't know if he came back on the case. I don't think he did.
You know, I just think it is hugely interesting that they are choosing to do this at this time, that Geoff Berman is an independent person who follows in the great tradition of that office and often named the Southern District of New York, and that it may be true, as others have said, at this particular case have said about, John Bolton speculated in his book -- not speculated, it's announced in his book.
Donald Trump said to the president of Turkey, Erdogan, I don't have my people in the southern district, once I have my people in the southern district, we can do something about these cases you're concerned about.
The president doesn't oversight. There president doesn't like inspectors general. The president doesn't like independent law enforcement, and the president doesn't like the Southern District of New York.
And so I feel bad for that office for a lot of reasons, among them, that in about three years and three months they will be in their fourth United States attorney. That's not good for continuity. That's not good for the enforcement of laws. It's not good for the administration (Inaudible). It's not good for anybody.
And I feel it more strongly obviously and you can hear it in my voice because I used to run that place. But it's the same kind of thing that the president does at the State Department, at the Defense Department, and all sorts of other places. He runs rough shot over government because he doesn't trust it unless it is fully in service of personal interest and that's all he seems to care about.
LEMON: Tonight, the president firing one of the most important U.S. attorneys in the United States. And now the U.S. attorney is saying, I'm not going anywhere. Daring him, or saying you can't fire me.
We'll continue with this group on the other side of the break. Don't go anywhere.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
LEMON: Here's our breaking news. President Trump forcing out the U.S. attorney for the South District of New York or trying to, but Geoffrey Berman is refusing to step down. Let's get back now to Evan Perez, Preet Bharara, and Laura Coates.
Evan, you wanted to jump in. We read the statement, Geoffrey Berman saying, basically, you can't fire me, I cherish every day that I work with the men and women of this office to pursue justice without fear, favor, and intend to ensure that this office's important cases continue unimpeded.
PEREZ: Yeah, Don. That sets up a really interesting legal question that I frankly don't know what the answer is. I don't know whether Berman is right, that the attorney general doesn't have the power to fire him. It does -- it is not something that we've ever seen before where -- frankly, just the circumstances that we're living in.
Keep in mind, the -- just the -- you know we've seen this before in this administration. There is a lot of incompetence in the way they've handled a lot of things. One of them is the fact that they never managed to get a Senate-confirmed U.S. attorney in Manhattan. Think about that. It's one of the most important prosecutor jobs in this country and they never bothered to even get it done.
And so it's -- this is the reason why Berman is sitting there in that office, an appointee of the court, because they could never actually get their stuff together. So, this is now the reason why Berman is saying, you can't fire me because I was put here by the judges in the Southern District of New York. And we'll see whether or not he's right.
[23:35:00]
PEREZ: I don't know whether he is or not.
BHARARA: You know, what's interesting is --
LEMON: I got to ask you -- go ahead, Preet.
BHARARA: I'm sorry. I've been thinking about it during the break because I haven't had a lot of time. I imagine the people in the Southern District of New York have been furiously researching the question. The problem is many people may appreciate it. In the law, when you have something that is unprecedented and the law is not clear, it's impossible to predict, you know, how it will play out.
I'm not aware of a situation where you have a court appointed United States attorney who is attempted to be fired by the Justice Department and refuses to go. Do you stand in the marshals to remove him? Does he blockade himself in the office?
As an initial matter, you would think this is just like top of my head legal reasoning. The first court that would think about addressing the issue is the very court, the Southern District of New York court, took the initiative to appoint him in the first place, to retain him. He was, you know, put there by Trump. But they took the initiative to appoint him for a permanent term unless there is a, you know, future Senate-confirmed person.
So I would imagine that the court which, by the way, also a very independent court and thinks very highly of itself and how it interprets the law, is going to be sympathetic, I would think, to Berman's view that he should remain in the job unless and until -- by the way, they've had three and a half years to find a Senate-confirmed person they could put in there and they haven't done it. So, I think the first move goes to Geoff Berman.
LEMON: Just quickly, I want to ask you, Preet, do we know -- anyone in the panel -- do we know how many cases or what is in front of the Southern District of New York as it relates to Donald Trump or President Trump or the campaign or the administration? Does anyone know what's there?
COATES: There's a wide swath of cases that relate to campaign finance violations. That's the basis of a lot of the case involving, of course, Rudy Giuliani, the Trump campaign, all about Lev Parnas and other associates. Many other cases that relate to Donald Trump or those in his orbit are related to campaign finance violations or funneling foreign money into U.S. election.
And so if you are wondering about the umbrella of cases that could offend the president of the United States or the Trump campaign going forward, I suspect it's the case that directly relate to issues that are -- as the president said earlier today, his campaign is going to start tomorrow.
Well, here we are. Although you recognize, of course, Don, that perhaps his entire administration has been one (ph) reelection campaign, but technically in his mind, it starts tomorrow, and suddenly would have a Friday night massacre, firing situation where you have campaign finance violations at the heart of what Berman is overseeing.
LEMON: Mm-hmm. Laura, what does this say about the attorney general, about Bill Barr, the man in charge of the Justice Department?
COATES: Well, remember, the U.S. attorney's answer to the attorney general of the United States, well, they serve -- I serve at the pleasure of the president.
And so what you're seeing perhaps is exactly what a former judge here in Washington D.C. has spoken about quite, you know, explicitly about Barr as others have opined on the issue about the fact that he is serving perhaps an audience of one.
And in doing so, undermines the morale across the board of career prosecutors, who have a vested interest and being independent, who don't want their offices vulnerable to political sway and leanings.
And so if in some way -- and I don't know what his specific -- particular role is here -- but if in some way he is facilitating what looks to be something that will undermine, as he's already said, the expedience or going forward of any cases, it adds another log to the fire for people burning about their problems with the attorney general and his inability to really boost or contribute to morale and career prosecutors' ability to do their job.
LEMON: Evan, you have covered, as Laura has said, the umbrella of cases that she is talking about, specifically as it relates -- as I recall, weren't there a number of unsealed indictments that were never acted upon during the initial phases that we haven't heard about since all of the started?
PEREZ: On the Mueller investigation -- are you talking about the outgrowth of the Mueller investigation? There were bunch of things --
LEMON: Yeah.
PEREZ: -- that were sent out to New York. And right, we know that at one point, they were looking into the Trump Organization. None of that ever came to pass as, you know, bringing any charges against anybody. But keep in mind, Don, that there are things that, you know, perhaps the FBI and prosecutors may have that is open on their desks. They know because the president is sitting president. He cannot be charged with anything.
[23:40:00]
PEREZ: But you can certainly wait until he is out of office to take action. And I think that is the thing. If you're Donald Trump and if you're his lawyers, that is what you worry more about with the Southern District of New York. You work about what they can do to you after you leave office, after you're no longer protected by the immunity that he enjoys right now, right?
And so I think Bill Barr and the people around him certainly have been trying to figure out a way to have more direct control of this office because they believe they didn't have enough.
LEMON: Well, the president says the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York is out. But that U.S. attorney is saying, I'm not going anywhere. We'll continue right after this. (COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[23:45:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
LEMON: OK, so here we go, the breaking news on a Friday night, again, when it comes to this administration. President Trump is trying to force out the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York. Geoffrey Berman is refusing to step down. What does all of this mean?
We are back with Evan Perez, Preet Bharara, and Laura Coates. OK, so, let's talk about the big picture here. What is -- what does all -- do we know what this means and what's going to happen? Preet, is a law not clear?
BHARARA: Don, I've been trying during the two commercial breaks to look at my phone and talk to folks. There is information from 1979. Someone sent me about the removal of a court-appointed U.S. attorney. There is another provision in the U.S. code that says sort of unequivocally that the president -- every U.S. attorney shall be removable by the president of the United States, but that is in the section that contemplates employment by the president and confirmation by the Senate.
So maybe that doesn't apply, which is a long candid way of saying, if you're going to pay me as a lawyer to render an opinion, I need a little bit more time.
LEMON: OK. Laura, could the president go to the Supreme Court of the United States and say, OK, deal with this, even though they are done with hearing cases? Is that possible?
COATES: You can certainly make an emergency motion with the Supreme Court. Remember, this is the same president who tweeted just yesterday or two days ago, do you think the Supreme Court doesn't like me very much on number of issues? So, I wonder if he will be reluctant to do so in this capacity.
I think more or less (INAUDIBLE) Supreme Court has often deferred to executive branch on matters involving -- we know national security- related matters and the like. I think, here, we are talking about what seems to be uncharted territory and yet another instance where our democracy and separation of powers and the appointment power of the president is being tested.
We are finding in many respects that when it says, in case of an emergency, break glass, you're not finding a whole lot of meat behind it because a lot of what has been done has been about protocol, has been about a pattern of behavior, and about precedent. We are seeing yet another incident of unprecedented time here.
In addition to what we're talking about, I have to wonder how it will look in actuality. At some point, he will have to be or will be shut out from communication and correspondent if he is no longer there at the pleasure of the president. I can imagine that the attorney general, who has been sort of the right-hand man of this president, would say, well, let's continue to envelop him into the conversations of consequence. And so it might be that he is physically there, but only in terms of actual occupation of the office, not in terms of being able to run it effectively.
If that begins to happen, if there are orders coming down from the attorney general, say, to a career or line prosecutor, we already know there has been instances when the A.G. has overridden the decision that even prior or current sitting U.S. attorneys were in for a really sticky situation that I think does not serve justice.
And so, at some point, the question will be for this U.S. attorney, is this the way to go down in terms of the course of conduct? Do you want to invite the courts in to have some precedent established or do you want to go quietly off into the night? It seems he is not choosing the latter. I am still wondering why he is so adamant.
Is it because for the same reasons he has been praised by members of his office right now, that he has sort of blocked the system that was expected of a person who was interviewed by this president, hand chosen, unlike any other U.S. attorney with a personal interview, is there something about his political independence that has gotten under the crab of this administration?
LEMON: Evan, quick question for you. Let's come back to the central question here. Go on, sorry.
BHARARA: As you can tell, I'm attached to the issue. A real crisis was averted because in my case, when I was fired, I had to leave that day. In the press release from the Justice Department, Geoff Berman is being told he has got two weeks. So, the question doesn't have to be resolved at this moment.
And I think based on what I'm sensing and hearing from, because the legal question is not crystal clear, Geoff Berman and his people are researching the question and trying to see for now whether or not they have a good leg to stand on so he doesn't have to go.
If in the course of a number of days after a back and forth between him and the attorney general in the Justice Department, the case is much more clear that they do have the power to fire him, then I presume he will go. If on the other hand, the way of the law is on his side, as I researched it further because we have this two-week period, then he will stay and then we have that standoff that I am talking about.
But I think right now, he is taking a strong position because he doesn't have to leave right away and that leads open the possibility of not having the same standoff in some few days.
[23:50:00]
LEMON: OK. Evan, I need to get back to the central question here because you cover this every single day. The central question is: Why would they want him out? PEREZ: I think that the central reason is simply that Bill Barr wants somebody there that he can trust. Don, I think Bill Barr wants more control frankly over this department. Geoff Berman is not somebody that he felt that he can control.
I know they spoke probably once every three to four weeks. If you'll remember, just a few months ago, the attorney general appointed the U.S. attorney in Brooklyn to be the guy to handle all Ukraine matters because he knew that Berman was already investigating Giuliani's Ukrainian friends.
So, that was always a strange arrangement and it was seen as a sign that the attorney general wanted somebody that he felt was loyal, somebody that he trusted to handle a sensitive matter like the Ukraine stuff. So we know that is one reason why he did that.
And so, perhaps, again, it may not be just about one case, in particular. It just simply maybe that the attorney general feels that the Southern District of New York was acting a little bit too, frankly, ornery, behaving just the way they always behave, which is a little too independent, and he wanted more firm control and this is how he can do it.
LEMON: Well --
(LAUGHTER)
LEMON: If we're going to have the breaking news that we had tonight, I had the perfect group with me.
(LAUGHTER)
LEMON: The person who used to run the office and the person who covers it --
PEREZ: And was fired.
LEMON: -- and the person who is an expert on all those matters. Yeah, and was fired.
BHARARA: Deja vu all over again.
LEMON: Thank you all.
BHARARA: Thanks, Don.
LEMON: Say again? Deja vu all over again for Preet Bharara. Thank you. I appreciate it.
(LAUGHTER)
LEMON: We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[23:55:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)
LEMON: Marches and rallies across the country today to mark Juneteenth, commemorating the end of slavery in the United States. Thousands of people are out in the streets, calling for unity and justice just weeks after the video of a police officer with his knee on George Floyd's neck shocked the nation.
Let's discuss now. Bryan Stevenson is here. He is a civil rights lawyer and the founder and executive director of the Equal Justice Initiative. Bryan, I love having you on. You're always so knowledgeable. Thank you so much. We've seen marches and celebrations all across this country today on this Juneteenth holiday, commemorating the end of slavery in the United States. What's your reaction to this historic day getting such heightened attention this year?
BRYAN STEVENSON, CIVIL RIGHTS LAWYER, FOUNDER AND EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF EQUAL JUSTICE INITIATIVE: I think it's really exciting, Don. I mean, we have never reckoned with our history of slavery. We've never really talked about it.
When you go to South Africa, everything tells you that there was a period of apartheid that the nation had to struggle to overcome. If you go to Rwanda, Rwandans will insist on making sure you know what happened during that terrible genocide almost 30 years ago. When you go to Germany, the landscape is covered with memorials and monuments. You can't go 200 meters without encountering something that speaks to the horror and the shame of the holocaust.
But in this country, we've never really reckoned with the legacy of slavery. It's only in the last five years that we even have museums that talk honestly about what that legacy represents. And in this region, which you well know, the landscape is littered with this very confusing iconography, where we actually celebrate and laud and honor the perpetrators of enslavement.
And so, I am excited by this increased activity. I'm excited by this increased activism because I believe we have never really committed to a truth and justice era, and we really desperately need that because all the other issues that we've been talking about -- police violence, mass incarceration, disproportionate impact of COVID-19, all of those problems are related to this legacy of social injustice that we've just never addressed. And I am excited by what I'm seeing today.
LEMON: Yeah. Asked a number of people today about Juneteenth and about -- specifically about what happened in Tulsa with black Wall Street. People had no idea. Many people had no idea. So finally, there is some, at least, larger awareness of it.
Bryan, today, the former president, Barack Obama, tweeted this. He said, "Juneteenth has never been a celebration or a victory or an acceptance of the way things are. It is a celebration of progress. It is an affirmation that despite the most painful parts of our history, change is possible. There is still so much work to do."
Compare that to our current president saying that he made Juneteenth famous.
(LAUGHTER)
STEVENSON: Well, I do think it reveals just extraordinary ignorance that exists in this country and our inability to talk honestly about what the institution of slavery really represents. We put out a report this week that actually revealed that there were 2,000 more lynching victims in the 12 years following the Civil War than had been previously documented.
And we don't really understand the significance of this. I have talked about this before, but I really believe the great evil of slavery wasn't the involuntary servitude and the forced labor. It was this idea that we created that black people are less deserving, less worthy, less capable. And that idea, which was the center piece of this ideology of white supremacy, it was the enduring evil of slavery.
And it was so strong that it defeated the 14th Amendment, which should have protected black people after celebrating Juneteenth and maintained their ability to make progress. It was greater than the 15th Amendment, which gave black people the right to vote but it was never enforced since we've had 100 years of Jim Crow and segregation and exclusion and police violence without any kind of meaningful effort or response.
And that's about this ideology. And I think President Trump's remarks reflect the way in which we have never dealt with it. We've not -- never talked about it. Most people have almost no understanding of what happens at the end of the Civil War.
