Return to Transcripts main page

Legal View with Ashleigh Banfield

Trump Says His January Event Raised $5.6 Million for Veterans; Trump Attacks Media At News Conference; Police To Investigate Child's Fall Into Enclosure; Zoo Stands Behind Decision To Kill Gorilla. Aired 12:30-1p ET

Aired May 31, 2016 - 12:30   ET

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

[12:30:01] ASHLEIGH BANFIELD, CNN ANCHOR: And folks, I know, it's easy to hate the press. We all do at times. But you cannot hate the work that Drew Griffin has done, because if he's pointing out that someone is taking your money and cheating with it, that is universally a good thing.

Drew, thank you for that, I appreciate it. There's still a lot more obviously on this particular question and how it's going to be handled with the media as well.

Donald Trump's new war with the media, it's probably say it's not so new but it started as a news conference to answer opponents who accused him of exaggerating the amount of money that he raised for veterans while getting huge headlines for a big event. And many campaign stopped afterwards. So did he satisfy the critics and more importantly, what about the veterans? Some standing behind him betrothed (ph) approval of his work. Other veterans not even close. That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[12:35:21] BANFIELD: A dogged questions from experienced reporters led Donald Trump to finally make a public list of beneficiaries and dollar amounts resulting from his January fundraiser for veterans groups. And in his firry news conference announcing said groups, there he is at Trump Tower, about an hour ago, Donald Trump made his resentment for the press crystal clear.

The presumptive GOP presidential nominee claimed he raised $5.6 million for 41 different groups. And that's a great thing. But then he called the press dishonest and sleazy for daring to push him for the details that he released today, four months after the event.

I want to bring in Jon Soltz. He serves two tours in Iraq. He co- founded the progressive advocacy group votevets.org.

Jon, you have been very public about spending money with your group to make sure that Donald Trump never becomes president. It's hard for the layperson to look at you and your position about Donald Trump. Your group has said he uses vets as political props, but then also to see veterans standing behind him as he makes this announcement. Help me navigate the veterans' position when it comes to Donald Trump, especially on a day he actually did announce $5.6 million for veterans.

JON SOLTZ, CO-FOUNDER & CHAIRMAN, VOTEVETS.ORG: Well, I think our 450,000 members inside votevets.org. We think Donald Trump is a fraud. First, because he was afraid of a presidential debate with Megyn Kelly and that's what started this entire debacle.

So, you know, basically didn't want to debate on real issues and he decided he was going to, you know, give money to veterans. That would be great. But Donald Trump has never been involved in veterans' advocacy prior to his time running for president.

In fact, his number one nemesis on Twitter, Rosie O'Donnell, a very well known philanthropist to veterans groups, so I think today it hurts me to see veterans standing behind him not just because he's using them as props but because some of them obviously aren't very vetted as well. Their backgrounds are sketchy at best.

And the things that he said about John McCain, you know, being a POW, he likes people that weren't captured.

Well, I just think at this point, most veterans are disgusted with Donald Trump. And I think that's why he's, you know, under performing Mitt Romney who he calls a loser by 14 points with veterans. Mitt Romney beat Barack Obama by 24 points with veterans and Donald Trump has had a drum beat of issues inside the veterans' community with his four draft deformings and on as to why we're not supporting his candidacy.

BANFIELD: I do want to ask you. Donald Trump said during the news conference that Hillary Clinton has never done anything for vets. Now, I'm paraphrasing, but effectively that's what he said. Hillary Clinton has never done anything for vets., is that true?

SOLTZ: It's absolutely false. And I think, you know, Hillary Clinton spent a lot of time on the Armed Services Committee. She is very skilled with these issues. I can tell you I met both of these candidates individually. Both of them I met in 2006. When I met Donald Trump, he was at an event in New York City and I walked up to him and I say, "Hey sir, I'm Jon Soltz. I'm starting this organization called votevets to try help veterans run for office who served in Iraq." And he said, "Hey kid, send me a letter."

You know, when I talked to Hillary Clinton three of four months later, at an event after the election he said, "You know, Jon, are you going to stay in the army or are you going to get out?" And I said, "I don't know, because leading soldiers in Iraq is the greatest honor you can have." And she said, "You know what, Jon, it is the greatest honor."

And while Donald Trump stood up there today and trashed the press because they asked him legitimate questions about his philanthropic giving, Hillary Clinton released a statement that talk about the things that she's going to do for military families, like give more to families of soldiers and marines who died in combat, relook, permanent change station dwell times for military families.

So Donald Trump had the entire press corps today, the entire corps. And all he did was attack you guys. He could have talked about the backlog, he could have talked about the challenges in the veterans' community instead, he insulted the president, or the press and the administration for the work they've done for veterans.

So I think that this choice is very clear and Hillary Clinton's record is strong in regards of taking care of veterans. And Donald Trump, I can't even say it's bad because he doesn't even know the basic issues that he's suppose to know to be president of the United States.

BANFIELD: Jon Soltz, votevets.org, nice to have you. Thanks so much for your reaction to what we've seen today. And I do want to remind our viewers, that what Donald Trump announced was $5.6 million, a lot of money, raised for vets.

Don't want that to get lost in what happened afterwards with this sort of firry press conference.

Later today, Hillary Clinton is going to join Jake Tapper live to talk about Donald Trump's financial contributions to the veterans groups as well as his policies as well.

Coming up today, 4:00 p.m., Eastern Time right here on CNN.

[12:39:55] Back in a sec.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BANFIELD: Continuing to follow our breaking news from the latest extraordinary moment in this 2016 campaign. Donald Trump releasing all of the details from his January fundraiser for veterans, all the while, slamming the press for questioning conflicting claims that came from the campaign about the event and about the amount that was raised.

I want to discuss this with Donald Trump supporter, Kayleigh McEnany who's with us live and also CNN Media Analyst, Bill Carter.

So Kayleigh you've seen the pretty much all of the media since the news conference began. And the reaction to it and you just saw the veteran who spoke out from votevets.org saying that Donald Trump dismissed him as a veteran, that it's not true what Donald Trump said about Hillary Clinton having never done anything for veterans' causes. And then this all-out assault on the press for asking questions.

[12:45:07] You're a Harvard law grad. You're a smart woman. And you of anyone would know the constitutional right of the press and appreciate it. What's wrong with the press asking questions about money when it's being claimed on the campaign trail relentlessly?

KAYLEIGH MCENANY, CNN POLTITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well, at first quickly to the previous guess I thank him for his service but as you mentioned he runs a progressive veterans organization, so it's intuitive that he would have favorable view of Hillary Clinton and less favorable view of Donald Trump.

That being said, I think it's completely fair for the press to ask these questions of Donald Trump. That is fair, but Donald Trump's frustration is real and then this is the frustration. Bill Clinton had two dozen interactions, millions of dollars with companies that were being investigated or had matters before the state department. There have been many allegations of quid pro quo corruption why have in every single one of those been vetted as fervently? So Bill Clinton was ...

(CROSSTALK)

BANFIELD: ... he was pretty doggedly investigated by the press to the point where even his sexual provocation (ph), you know, led all the way to an actual impeachment. So ...

(CROSSTALK)

BANFIELD: ... I'm talking today thought. Like the reason the questions are being asked, is he's holding a news conference about it. Four months after the fact. Their campaign has dictated numbers that have varied widely. These are fair questions. Drew Griffin makes his living on making sure that people don't cheat us.

MCENANY: It's what the focus is. The media has devoted.

(CROSSTALK)

MCENANY: ... that the media has devoted unending resources to scrutinizing Donald Trump, who did a good thing by giving 5.6 million towards the veterans. But the Clinton foundation, they're very -- there are dozens and dozens of allegation of quid pro quo corruption, I haven't seen one news papers scrutinize all of those transactions the way they scrutinized something good that Donald Trump did. Where's the scrutiny of the Clinton foundation? Only "the Wall Street Journal" are going after the Press Core.

BANFIELD: Bill Carter, in 25 years as media correspond within New York Times.

CARTER: Right.

BANFIELD: And now you're, you know, CNN media analyst. Is there undue attention and undue scrutiny on Donald Trump?

CARTER: Well, He is new in terms of running for president, so he's going to be more serious vetting of everything he's done for sure. I think the turning -- the question is what Bill Clinton had done is a way of deflecting. The press wants to know answer to certain questions. They're not sleazy for asking questions. They're not corrupt. They're not loser because they ask questions. It's their job to ask questions and there were questions about this. And you can deflect or you can answer without attacking people.

I think it's become sort of a strategy from Mr. Trump and I know him well and he's good at this. He's a great communicator, he's very good at this but he tries to intimidate always -- I can't just answer and say you're incorrect here. He's got to be -- you're corrupt and you're a loser and you're wrong. BANFIELD: And sleazy.

MCENANY: But Bill it's not deflecting because here's the thing. Donald Trump answered the question. He gave a list of 39 organizations, accounted dollar for dollar the 5.6 million and went to the organizations. It's completely fair though to ask why there's not the same scrutiny of the Clinton foundation.

CARTER: You can ask that.

MCENANY: But it's not dollar for dollar ...

CARTER: But it's not sleazy for a person to ask you today about it.

BANFIELD: And no one would call you sleazy to insult ...

CARTER: It's not sleaze.

BANFIELD: ... that I think issue is...

(CROSSTALK)

BANFIELD: ... the Press Core asked him why are you angry with us for asking questions, when we had so many different numbers. I think the question is, it's okay to disagree. You and I disagree oftentimes on this set. I disagree with everybody on this set and never once have I looked at someone and called them a sleaze or a loser for doing so. It's the manner in which you treat your adversary.

MCENANY: It's not just Donald Trump though. Gallup reported last year that the trust in media is at an all time low. There's a reason the American people do not trust the media, it's not coming from nowhere. Donald Trump's frustration is giving a voice to the millions of millions of Americans who don't trust these organizations like the Washington Post who have 20 investigative reporters on Donald Trump, but they're unable to confirm how many they have on Hillary Clinton. When asked about it, they say, oh, it's quality, not quantity. Institutions like the -- organization like the Washington Post

BANFIELD: And again.

(CROSSTALK)

CARTER: It is good point.

BANFIELD: Fair point.

CARTER: But Hillary Clinton has been in the arena before, she has run before. She has been subjected to this kind of investigative journalism before. Mr. Trump is new to this. And he's getting a bigger dose of it. There's no doubt about it.

BANFIELD: I have to leave it there although I think we could go on ...

CARTER: Can I say one last thing?

BANFIELD: Real quick.

CARTER: He seems to be setting up an enemies list which we saw from President Nixon. I don't think that helps with the press.

BANFIELD: Is that true?

MCENANY: I don't think so at all and there are real questions about Obama who ostracized certain members of the press from his Press Core.

BANFIELD: How about you both come back. How is that sound?

CARTER: OK.

BANFIELD: Thank you, both very brave bright minds and I think it's interesting that we're seeing so many people at odds on a very same thing, thank you. We're going to get back to politics in about 10 minutes.

We got another big story of the day. You've probably seen it and it is causing a lot of consternation among those who feel one way or another about this terrifying gorilla story. Police are in fact, now investigating. How such a thing could have happened?

[12:49:45] We're going to ask the gorilla's former caretaker, what would have happened if zookeepers have held their fire? Back after this.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BANFIELD: Cincinnati police say they now are going to be looking into how a little boy ended up in the gorilla enclosure at the zoo. That child slipped away from his parents and fell into the enclosure coming face to face with that 450 pound gorilla named Harambe. Zookeepers said they had no choice but to shoot and kill Harambe after he dragged the boy through the moat in the manner that you just saw.

I'm joined by CNN Legal Analyst Danny Cevallos and CNN's Jessica Schneider. Jessica a growing outcry without questions, since seeing this video and of course, the shooting, what's happened since?

JESSICA SCHNEIDER, CNN CORREPONDENT: Ashleigh, this controversy is raging online. We've seen that petition with more than 300,000 signatures, people calling for criminal charges to be filed against the parent and or the mother.

Right now, we've just learned that the Cincinnati police department will in fact, investigate this incident. No word on who they'll be investigating or exactly what. But we know that there will be an investigation. Again, no criminal charges, but the police are looking into this.

We just got a statement from the Cincinnati police. Here's what they said. They said that they are reviewing the circumstances surrounding the incident with the gorilla at the Cincinnati zoo. After the review, we will determine if charges need to be brought forward. If it is determined charges need to be brought forward, we would then discuss it with the Hamilton County prosecutor's office?

The prosecutor released a nearly identical statement. The only difference was they said they would reveal details from the investigation. Once it was complete.

So again, no details about what it would entail or how long this investigation might take. But now know police are looking into this, and also on another note, we talked to the association of zoos and aquariums. They too say that they will be looking into this. The last crew report by the zoo and it is an agency that issues accreditations for this zoo every five years, Ashleigh.

BANFIELD: All right, I want to bring Danny into the conversation. When the police say they're investigating and they might consider charges against the zoo? Or against the parent? Against who?

[12:55:06] DANNY CEVALLOS, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Great point. There are so many parties in this controversy. Each of whom could have issues of liability themselves. The zoo, the family, and there are two vantage points at which to look at this. Are there charges appropriate because of the harm to the gorilla or are there charges appropriate because of potential endangerment of the child?

So, if charges are even considered, they might be for example, reckless endangerment of the child for failure to supervised. Another angle could potentially be the child's trespass, but it's generally difficult to hold parents liable for their child's trespass and especially when you have a case here. A child that young is generally considered unable to form any sort of criminal intent that could even be imputed to the parents above him.

BANFIELD: And just to be clear, the petitions that Jessica just reported that the number of signatures and the hundreds of thousands, that's not what get police to act.

CEVALLOS: Not at all.

BANFIELD: But because yesterday, the police said they were not investigating.

CEVALLOS: Not at all. I mean, we are not a system that is ever relied upon petitions and certainly not online petitions to decide who and when we prosecute, but there are many moving parts here. There is potential about liability on the part of the zoo, but there could also be the zoo perceived as a sort of victim, especially in the case of trespass.

And again, I was cautioned this many times in law school by a well- known professor, animals. You can love them. You can own them. But do not be lulled into believing they have the same legal rights as humans. They may, in the future, and there have been movements in that direction, but as it stands today, animals are simply treated as the most part, channels. They're not human and not legally considered as such.

BANFIELD: Danny, thank you for that. Most of us all got to know this animal Harambe, because he was shot and because of the terrifying video that was released.

But my next guest met Harambe the day he was born. Jerry Stones took care of Harambe even taking him home at night. And he joins me live on the telephone from Brownsville, Texas. Jerry, Thank you so much for being with me.

I've been so curious to ask you the manner in which Harambe dragged that little boy, is that something that is standard? Is it normal for gorillas in the wild to drag their young that way? Did you feel that that boy was in imminent danger of death or terrible injury?

JERRY STONES, HARAMBE'S FORMER CARETAKER: Ma'am, I told everybody right up front. I'm not going to comment on anything that happened at that point because until the investigations are done by the AZA, the USDA, the police department, the zoo. Until that is all done, and we know what their position is, I'm not going to really going to involve in that. And this zoo will not kind of involve in that.

BANFIELD: But what about just the behavior of gorillas in general? Do they typically drag their young like that?

STONES: Well, Martha one of the oldest females we have here sometimes she should be going along and the baby would be handled by the hand and they'll start stumbled along with her and everything but, you know, they're not exactly as always as sweet and delicate with their babies as we are. But then, that, you know, you're looking at this thing totally from a point of view that. I honestly can't -- it just dumbfounds me to how people are looking at all of this and trying to predict what's normal, what's not normal. What the -- it is -- I don't want to get involved in that, ma'am. I can tell you about Harambe, but I don't want to get involved in that.

BANFIELD: I can understand that, because I think everybody wants to know what possibly could been going through the mind of the zookeepers who had to make the fateful decision and what they were witnessing and they're far more savvy about gorilla behavior than we are.

STONES: Well, I can tell you right now. One thing I can tell you, and I have made this statement to numerous people. That when this whole thing took place, the parents, there are standing there and they were scared to death. They were mortified. You know, and the public around them had to be just scared to death that this beast had this baby and none of them knew him. OK?

And pursue that people had -- they had to be scared and try to decide what do we do? What decisions do we make? They can't win this and then -- but then you cross the fence over on his side of the fence and here is this animal that has this strange thing in his house.

And he knew what adult people were, but he had no idea. He'd never around children. It smells similar. It looks similar. But what is it? Do I play with it? Am I supposed to be afraid of it? What do I do? And he's sitting there in his mind trying to figure out what he should do and he had to pay the price. There was really -- these people, I honestly don't know, you know, I can't go any farther than that, ma'am, because I wasn't there. I wasn't standing in their shoes and for me to make a decision on this would be totally wrong at this time.

[13:00:04] BANFIELD: I understand, Jerry, and I do appreciate you being on the program. Thank you Jerry Stone a former caretaker of Harambe.

Thank you all for watching Legal View. Stay tuned.