Return to Transcripts main page

New Day

Chicago Police Department Holds Press Conference Outlining Case against Actor Jussie Smollett for Filing False Report of Assault; Jussie Smollett Reportedly Proclaims Innocence to Castmates on "Empire"; Interview with Democratic Congressman David Cicilline of Rhode Island. Aired 8-8:30a ET

Aired February 22, 2019 - 08:00   ET

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

[08:00:00] CHRISTINE ROMANS, CNN CHIEF BUSINESS CORRESPONDENT: -- there's something to be said for in college. That's when you're growing up as an athlete and you're learning the game?

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: If they were there for four years, but they are not. That's the problem. Christine Romans --

ALISYN CAMEROTA, CNN ANCHOR: We could go on. We could go on. I'm fascinated by this. We could go on.

(LAUGHTER)

BERMAN: Romans, thank you very much.

Actor Jussie Smollett doubles down on his claim that he was attacked despite what police say. NEW DAY continues right now.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Jussie Smollett took advantage of racism to promote his career.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Let the process work.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: He is presumed innocent.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It's the fall of an icon.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The level of this betrayal, if this is true, is so deep.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: If he has done this, he should tell the truth. If he believes he is innocent he should fight.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: A federal judge imposing a strict gag order on former Trump adviser Roger Stone.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: She excoriated him. She said, this isn't baseball. You don't get three strikes.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: He's a hair away from ending up jail, and the judge isn't going to tolerate it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This is NEW DAY with Alisyn Camerota on John Berman.

CAMEROTA: Good morning, everybody. Welcome to your NEW DAY. It is Friday, February 22nd, 8:00 now in the east.

We have some breaking news overnight. CNN has learned that the actor Jussie Smollett called a meeting with his cast and crew on the set of his show "Empire" late last night. One person who was at the meeting has told us that to the surprise of everyone Smollett defiantly stuck to his story, proclaiming his innocence.

BERMAN: The star is accused by police of filing a false police report after allegedly orchestrating an attack against himself. Authorities say Smollett paid two brothers $3,500 to stage an assault. Listen to Chicago's police superintendent.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

EDDIE JOHNSON, SUPERINTENDENT, CHICAGO POLICE: I know the racial divide that exists here. I know how hard it's been for our city and nation to come together. Jussie Smollett took advantage of the pain and anger of racism to promote his career. I'm left hanging my head and asking why.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BERMAN: Joining us now, CNN's Saturday night line-up, S.E. Cupp, host of "S.E. Cupp Unfiltered," and Van Jones, host of "The Van Jones Show." Van, counselor, you're the one with the law degree at this table, here, so I do want to start with you on the breaking news. The fact that after this all happened before our eyes yesterday with the Chicago police unveiling their case against Jussie Smollett, Smollett's lawyer sent out a note saying that he maintains his innocence. He went to the set of "Empire," told the crew that he's innocent and asked for their support. How does that play now?

VAN JONES, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: This is a TV drama that's playing out in real life. Is it possible that this is some sort of M. Night Shyamalan thing where you have some twist at the end and it turns out that he's actually an alien? There could be some bizarre explanation for this that nobody could think up. But the reality is when the police come forward and they say they've got text messages, they say they've got video, they've got all these digital breadcrumbs left behind, it seems to me somewhat reckless to come forward and say I am completely innocent. Usually you'd expect a lawyer to say presumption of innocence, he needs his day in court, don't rush to judge. But to come out and say what he's saying, they either have some incredibly exonerating piece of evidence that they are holding in reserve, or this is I think one of the most reckless strategies I have seen in a criminal defense case.

CAMEROTA: One more question to you as a lawyer, Van. Was it unusual to have a police captain and prosecutor spell out their case so unequivocally, in such granular detail, before any trial? I remember days when people would say we're going to save our evidence for trial. We don't comment on ongoing investigations. The amount of what they called evidence they spilled yesterday was I thought pretty jaw- dropping.

JONES: Had that been a Hollywood script, you would have said, listen, police don't do that. That would not happen. Unfortunately, we are in a world where standards seem to be changing. I think the Chicago police obviously have a great deal of confidence in their evidence. And they did put on a show like we have not seen before. I do think it makes sense to criticize them for doing that.

At the same time, the problem is that Jussie Smollett wanted this tried in the media. He's the one who went to the media. He's the one doing the interviews. He's the one driving all of this public discussion. So he himself decided he wanted this thing tried in the press. And so now it's being tried in the press. It's unusual, this whole situation is unusual, but I think that you've got to eat the whole hamburger on this. If you wanted it in the press when it was going your way, you can't complain now.

S.E. CUPP, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: I think the police had to do that yesterday, because he allegations that Jussie Smollett made were so fraught, and so many people didn't believe him. And they knew that the burden of proof would be on the police. The police would be under a microscope. There would be a lot of scrutiny. You better be right on this.

[08:05:03] And I think to get ahead of this, because now this has been a multiweek story that has really painted the town of Chicago in a not great light, except now I think we have a lot of confidence in the Chicago police in that this actually isn't the town that Jussie Smollett described it as, but I think they want the story gone and away. And it's not going to be gone and away for a while, because we're going to be talking about it. And there's going to be a trial probably. But I think they had to do that. I think they had to say this is what we've got. It is open and shut for us. And now we'll let a jury decide.

JONES: The problem that they were facing, to your point, is that they're going to arrest the guy.

CUPP: Right.

JONES: Once you have got somebody who is charged at this level, it's either going to all leak out and leak out and leak out, or you can put your whole case forward.

I think one of the things that you're going to see now is you can't just assert that you are innocent and then hope that people believe you. If there is some evidence of his innocence, if we are going to do this the way we are now doing it, where is the evidence? Where is the exculpatory evidence that this thing has been set up, that all these video cameras are lying, that these text messages are fake? You're going to have to come forward with a very big rebuttal. And I don't know how you do that.

CUPP: We're not psychiatrists. But to get inside the mind of someone who would do this to begin with, who thought that this was a good idea, and potentially did it twice, right, sent himself hate mail to the "Empire" set, that's also alleged. That's not a person who is thinking rationally, who has thought this through. Van, as you laid out I think last night really eloquently, he was playing a very culturally important character on his show. To have that mantel and platform and risk it and jeopardize it as he did so recklessly, that's not a person who is thinking rationally.

So I am not surprised that he's sticking with this story and doubling down. We have seen this kind of pathology before. Anthony Weiner, for as long as he could get away with it said I didn't do it. That wasn't me. It's not me. That's not a picture of me. It's not actually that unusual.

JONES: I think a couple of things. First of all, when you talk about people who lie and get away with it. In some ways we are seeing that at the highest levels of our government. I think that is kind of an unfortunate thing. We're in almost this post truth world, you make up your own facts, and that seems to be playing a role.

There is a reason, and I think it's important to point out, that some of the stuff was believed. A lot of people thought it was sketchy, but some of this stuff was believed. The Chicago Police Department did itself well yesterday. It has not done well in the past, even recently. Reports of a lot of abuse and corruption, that kind of stuff. The Chicago Police Department, you could understand why some people thought, well, I don't trust them. And then also, the reality is there has been a rise in hate crimes, there has been a rise in intolerance. I think the worst part about this whole thing is that the truth that the Chicago police department does have improvements to make and the truth that hate crimes are on the rise has now been completely obliterated by the potential that this is a hoax.

BERMAN: And that's what the superintendent, that's what Eddie Johnson said yesterday, pretty eloquently. I want to play that.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

EDDIE JOHNSON, SUPERINTENDENT, CHICAGO POLICE: My concern is that hate crimes will now publicly be met with a level of skepticism that previously didn't happen.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BERMAN: That's the police superintendent there. S.E., you have talked about this, and not just on this subject.

CUPP: Yes. Alisyn, you and I have talked about me too. And almost worse than real sexism is an allegation of false sexism because that makes it harder for everyone. That sets us all back. I was talking to someone at the beginning of this week, and he said the Jussie Smollett thing was an affront to seven different groups of people. It's not just African-Americans, it's not just gays. It's gay African-Americans. It's trans people. It's victims of rape.

CAMEROTA: It's Trump supporters.

CUPP: Trump supporters. It's Chicago as a city, it's the police, it's the media. He offended and betrayed so many different populations in this ruse. The damage is incalculable. And the conversations we are not having because of Jussie Smollett, it's just such a shame. It's really sad. It's really sad.

JONES: I just want to hold open the possibility that there is some explanation.

CAMEROTA: We have to, because the whiplash is too much from fully believing him to fully not believing him.

JONES: Look, I have never seen the police come forward in the way they did. Either the police are incredibly reckless and they somehow have been duped themselves or have made up a bunch of false text messages and videotapes, which seems weird, or --

CUPP: And receipt.

JONES: And receipts and everything else. Or there is some explanation here and we're all going to be sitting here a week from now going I can't believe --

[08:10:05] CUPP: Anything is possible.

JONES: So anything is possible. So I want to say, let's not go from one to the other. But in this situation ordinarily what you would have is responsible attorneys coming forward and pleading for him to have his day in court and ask people not to rush to judgment. Unless there is a massively shocking exculpatory evidence, I question the wisdom of letting him go out there and say I am completely innocent after what we saw yesterday.

CAMEROTA: See, when I heard the police chief say he did this because he wanted an increase in his "Empire" salary, I was thinking, oh, so, clearly, he has confessed. Clearly, they're talked to him. He's confessed. He's explained why he did that. He's explained his motive. No. He hasn't. So I can't believe we already have that information already. And then to hear he went on his "Empire" set and told his fellow friends and castmates, I'm innocent and I hope you will support me, the whiplash is crazy.

CUPP: Responsible attorneys would tell him, don't talk, just don't talk. Stop. And he's talking. And yes, for the police to come up with that motive, which also makes no sense. It's not a rational motive.

JONES: That's not how people get raises.

(LAUGHTER)

CUPP: No, it's not. No. That also doesn't make any sense. I don't think they would sort of invent that. I don't think they would manifest that out of thin air. I think there is something in this paper trail, evidence trail that led them to believe that. I think they have a lot more than they have actually released considering they've released a lot. And we'll just have to watch it all unfold. It's very sad.

BERMAN: The politics of this, the fact that there were so many Democratic candidates for president who came up very quickly to condemned the alleged crime which now police say wasn't an attack, the attack on Justice Smollett, the fact that they are now, some of them are apologizing for stepping back from it, how does this play?

JONES: Trump also spoke out.

BERMAN: He did. He actually did. People forget that.

JONES: And listen, it's so sad, because we always say, listen, why doesn't Trump speak out on these horrible issues? Then he did. It turns out that maybe it wasn't true. So the fact that Trump spoke out gives the Democrats a little bit of cover. But obviously we are living, and I think S.E. spoke to this very well, we are living in a world where how do you deal with these allegations? What's the standard of proof? What's the proper level of outrage versus waiting for facts?

CUPP: Caution.

JONES: Caution. That is all getting played out and reworked in real time. And it is going to continue to impact the Democratic primary, because there will be other incidents that come up, 99 percent of the time these things I think are more true than false. But I think everybody running for office on both sides now is going to say, hold on a second, let's make sure this is not another Jussie Smollett situation where we may have to walk something back. And to your point, then re-walk it, and re-walk it again, because everybody comes to a conclusion before all the facts are in.

CAMEROTA: And to be clear, claims of crimes being perpetrated on someone are certainly 99 percent accurate generally. This is very rare. This is an outlier. So are sexual harassment claims. All the statistics show this is an outlier when somebody makes a false claim.

CUPP: Which makes it doubly bad.

CAMEROTA: S.E., thank you very much. Van, thank you very much. Watch "S.E. Cupp Unfiltered" tomorrow and every Saturday at 6:00 p.m. eastern. Then stay for "The Van Jones Show" at 7:00. Van has Congressman Joe Kennedy and Comedian Hasan Minhaj tomorrow night. He has promised this will be hilarious.

BERMAN: Hilarity.

(LAUGHTER)

BERMAN: And in the falsetto. Apparently, the only things that are funny are in said in falsetto.

CAMEROTA: Thank you, guys.

BERMAN: If Trump's new attorney general holds back on the Mueller report, what can lawmakers do to make America, make sure that the country gets to see it? We're going to speak to a congressman who has a plan of action. That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[08:17:25] JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: Sources tell CNN that Attorney General William Barr is preparing to announce the completion of Robert Mueller's Russia investigation as early as next week. The big question now, who gets to see this Mueller report and what can Congress do if the attorney general holds part or all of it back?

Joining us now is Congressman David Cicilline. He's a Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee.

And, congressman, you are going to introduce legislation next week, I believe, that would require the publication of the special counsel report. Why do you think that's necessary?

REP. DAVID CICILLINE (D), RHODE ISLAND: Well, I think it is absolutely critical that the American people who have been watching this investigation for the last two years are entitled to know the conclusions of the investigation and they should see the report in its entirety, absent, of course, any stuff that has to be kept classified.

Mr. Barr, when he testified during his confirmation hearings was very evasive about making a commitment to disclose it to the American people. Legislation I will introduce with other colleagues will require the production of that report. This is an investigation done on behalf of the American people. They have a right to know the results of it.

BERMAN: Now, that is a legislative path to have the American people and the full Congress see the report. There is a potential legal path as well.

I want to read to you from an op-ed from Neal Katyal overnight. He noted a historical precedent here, which is Jaworski, who was the last special counsel in Watergate. He said: Of course, there is no open impeachment inquiry now but that could quickly change if Mr. Mueller writes a report that's anything less than a full clearing of the president. Congress would be under a constitutional obligation to investigate the facts for itself.

The precedent here is that Jaworski turned over boxes of information with a bit of a road map and Congress was allowed to see them after a judge ruled that it would be -- it would be bad if they didn't have the evidence for the investigation. Do you think that can happen --

CICILLINE: There is another -- yes, there is another course of action, too. The Judiciary Committee could compel Mr. Mueller to come before the committee and produce the report. So, I think the chairman has made it clear that we intend to do everything possible to ensure that that report becomes available to members of Congress and the public.

We have a responsibility, to be sure the American people see what this report finds and we are going to use both legal remedies, legislative remedies, court remedies if we need to. This report belongs to the American people. They have a right to know the truth and we're going to make sure they do.

BERMAN: My reading of historical precedent is, is that the reason that the House Judiciary Committee was able to see the evidence collected by the special prosecutor was because a judge determined there was already an open impeachment inquiry, formal impeachment proceedings.

[08:20:13] Are you willing to open formal impeachment proceedings if that's the only way to see the evidence?

CICILLINE: Well, I didn't read the precedent that way. I think, in fact, there is still a basis for Congress to demand the report with ongoing investigations under way in the Intelligence Committee oversight hearings and the Judiciary and Oversight Committees. So, there are proceedings under way in terms of investigation of the administration that relate to this.

So, I think there is clearly a basis to compel the production of the report. But I think we are committed to making sure we get access to the report. The American people have a right to see it and know the truth. I think we are prepared to do whatever is necessary to do it.

BERMAN: There is classified information and you say that should be redacted. There is also the grand jury information and testimony. That could be protected here. You will not be able to see it unless a judge opens it up, right?

CICILLINE: Correct.

BERMAN: Historically speaking, grand jury testimony is private. That's where the information might be that you may want if you are going to pursue some kind of recourse here.

CICILLINE: Absolutely. I think if we determine there are grand jury proceedings essential to see, as you suggest in your question, that we will pursue a legal strategy to get those. But, hopefully, this won't be necessary. Hopefully, the attorney general of the United States will understand that critical importance to the American people will provide the full report and all the supporting evidence to the Judiciary Committee and to the American people.

BERMAN: But you are not at impeachment yet, even just as a means for leverage here?

CICILLINE: Oh, no. I can only speak for myself, but I think it's critical that we get this. It may, in fact, have facts which support initiating impeachment proceedings. And we cannot be precluded from seeing it. If we have to have a perfunctory motion to open it up in order to access those materials, I think it's critical that we do it. BERMAN: All right. I want to ask you about a case out of Maryland

right now. A Coast Guard lieutenant is under arrest on weapons charges, but officials say he was planning multiple murders of Democratic politicians, also media personalities, someone who apparently even a self-proclaimed white supremacist for 30-plus years who read up on various terror activities. The president has not yet weighed in on this yet.

Do you think he needs to speak out?

CICILLINE: Well, it would be helpful in the president did. I mean, any time an individual engages in that kind of behavior and makes those kind of serious threats, it ought to be condemned by everyone, I think to the extent that people have maybe misread some of the president's statements, and some of the language that he's used as an invitation to do something like that. It would be helpful if he made it clear violence such as that is never permissible and would condemn it in the strongest terms. I think it would make a difference.

BERMAN: Apparently, in some of the writings of this suspect, he talked about what would happen if there were impeachment proceedings, if something did come of the Mueller report. Are you concerned about the political environment in general that exists in these coming weeks when parts of the report become public or when it reaches this conclusion?

CICILLINE: Yes. I mean, this is particularly damaging about the president's ongoing effort to attack the institutions of this country, rule of law, the FBI, the courts, the legitimacy of the Mueller investigation. I think it has, you know, encouraged that kind of thinking, and we need to have a president who respects the rule of law, who honors the critical institutions of our democracy, who supports the brave men and women in law enforcement and our judiciary, our free press.

So, I think the president's ongoing efforts to undermine this investigation and to attack our democratic institutions has been harmful to our country. And I think as many people have asked him to stop and instead use language that supports these institutions would be very helpful. But I think it's led to a deterioration of respect for things that have made America the envy of the world, a free press, highly qualified law enforcement and rule of law. Those are the crown jewels of our democracy and we need a president who understands that and supports that and speaks about it in a supportive way.

BERMAN: Congressman David Cicilline from Rhode Island, thanks so much for being with us.

CICILLINE: My pleasure.

BERMAN: Alisyn?

ALISYN CAMEROTA, CNN ANCHOR: A former Trump campaign staffer has a story to tell about what she endured on the campaign. She's silenced by a nondisclosure agreement. Now, she's suing to get all of those NDAs lifted. Hear what she has to say live, next. (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[08:28:45] CAMEROTA: President Trump has long favored the use of nondisclosure agreements to prevent disparaging statements about him from going public. Well, now, a former Trump campaign official is suing to nullify those agreements, arguing that they penalize employees who have legitimate workplace grievances.

Joining us is Jessica Denson. She is the former Trump campaign official bringing this class action suit.

Jessica, it's great to have you here.

Let's start at the beginning, in August of 2018, you were hired by the Trump campaign.

JESSICA DENSON, FORMER TRUMP CAMPAIGN OFFICIAL: 2016.

CAMEROTA: That's right. Sorry. 2016. As a phone bank administrator and were promoted to Hispanic engagement director on the campaign.

DENSON: That's correct.

CAMEROTA: Then what happened?

DENSON: Then, I was able to work for a brief time really with a beautiful engagement effort into welcoming people into this campaign that had not previously been engaged with or been represented properly in the media as being supporters of the campaign.

CAMEROTA: But after a short time --

DENSON: Yes.

CAMEROTA: -- you say that you became the subject of bullying, harassment, sexual discrimination. Can you describe some of those?

DENSON: Yes. I was subjected to a rain of terror by the man who hired me, a man by the name of Camilo Sandoval who is currently still at the Veterans Affairs Department.

END