Return to Transcripts main page

Wolf

Washington Post: Mueller Investigating Trump; Interview with Jane Sanders on Congressional Shooter; Hung Jury in Bill Cosby Case & Judge Says Try Again. Aired 1:30-2p ET

Aired June 15, 2017 - 13:30   ET

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

(CROSSTALK)

[13:31:45] WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: The Russian probe just exploded. President Trump is under investigation for possible obstruction of justice. That, according to a "Washington Post" report. It comes as CNN has learns that special counsel, Robert Mueller, will interview three senior intelligence officials this week, the Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats, the National Security Agency Director Admiral Mike Rogers, and the former NSA deputy director, Richard Ledgett.

Our senior political reporter, Nia-Malika Henderson is here. Our CNN crime and justice producer, Shimon Prokupecz is with us; and our justice reporter, Laura Jarrett is with us as well.

CNN has not Independently, Shimon, confirmed "The Washington Post" report. Tell us what you and our team have learned, how far are we willing to go in this report?

SHIMON PROKUPECZ, CNN JUSTICE & CRIME PRODUCER: When we're willing to say and what we've learned is that the special counsel, Bob Mueller, wants to talk to some of the intelligence -- these agency heads of these intelligence agents, Rogers and Coats, which you mentioned. All of this is really because a lot has come out through maybe leaks and also on the Hill in testimony before Congress where Trump was asking these intelligence officials to basically knockdown these reports of collusion. It's just something that Trump, as we know, has not been able to get his head around and has had issues with reports that he or his campaign may have been involved in some sort of collusion with Russia. This is what basically what I think Mueller wants to look at, to see if there was any pressure, did they feel any pressure from the president in these conversations that he may have had with them.

Interestingly, the third person he wants to also speak with is the deputy director from the NSA, who is now retired, but we're told he wrote a memo of a conversation that Rogers, the head of the NSA, had with Trump where there was a discussion about collusion and perhaps maybe some talk of having Rogers go to the FBI and try and to ask them to maybe knockdown some of these reports.

So that's supposed to take place sometime soon. We expect that Mueller will interview them. We don't know exactly when. But that should happen soon.

BLITZER: I'm sure it will happen sooner rather than later.

The president was busy this morning, Nia, tweeting as he often does very early, 6:55 a.m., "They made up a phony collusion with the Russian story, found zero proof. Now they go for obstruction of justice on the phony story. Nice."

An hour or so later, he followed up, "You are witnessing the single greatest witch hunt" -- all caps - "in American political history led by some very bad and conflicted people. #makeAmericagreatagain."

He is -- those are official reactions to these latest reports from "The Washington Post," among others.

NIA-MALIKA HENDERSON, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL REPORTER: That's right. They are, in some ways, classic Trump. He had called it a hoax before. Essentially, saying it was phony. They are in keeping with where the RNC wants some of this dialogue to be in terms of this investigation basically saying that it's without merit. And also you hear from some surrogates like Newt Gingrich that Bob Mueller is surrounding himself with people who donated large sums of money to Hillary Clinton for instance. That is in some ways a political strategy. It's designed to keep Trump fighting in some ways with folks. And his supporters have come to see him as someone who's going to be that way and very brusque. It's something being led by Marc Kasowitz who's had a very different reaction who said the problem is leaking.

I think this is going to be what you see from Donald Trump. This is going to be the playbook. You'll see some of his surrogates jump on this band wagon and the RNC take an active role to trying to discredit Mueller. The long-term question in a lot of people's minds is what happens to Mueller. Are there going to be stirrings from this White House, Trump in particular, to have Mueller go away in the way that he made James Comey go away.

(CROSSTALK)

[13:36:01] BLITZER: Fire him?

HENDERSON: Yeah. There have been some conversations. We had Trump aides essentially on our air, Trump friends say that this has been discussed. That Trump was apparently talked out of it. But the problem that Trump has is that he has no control over this. He has no control over where this investigation goes. All he has is Twitter essentially and to connect with his folks.

BLITZER: Laura, apparently, Rod Rosenstein, the acting attorney general, would be the one that would have to fire Mueller. I don't think there's any reason to believe Rosenstein will fire him. What the president could do is fire Rosenstein and put someone else in place who might be open to firing Mueller. I don't think of that is going to happen.

LAURA JARRETT, CNN JUSTICE REPORTER: Rosenstein said as much on the Hill a couple days ago. We're not there yet.

BLITZER: Right. At this stage --

JARRETT: Not there yet.

BLITZER: -- Mueller is definitely there. He's leading the special counsel investigation. But it's by no means a slam dunk, this obstruction of justice. That is a tough charge to prove, especially for a sitting president.

JARRETT: It's really tough. Mostly because you have to show corrupt intent. It can't just be a mistake. I think it's important to note that under the regulations, the special counsel regulations that the Justice Department is using to put Mueller in place, it specifically contemplates that muller would have this power to look into obstruction of justice but it also says he can look into whether the president is obstructing the special counsel investigation and whether he's tampering with witness or any sort of perjury. That's why I think you hear legal experts say he needs to be careful with the tweets. It's not only obstruction of justice with the FBI investigation but the special counsel investigation.

BLITZER: When he says, "These people led by some very bad and conflicted people," he's really going after Mueller among others.

PROKUPECZ: That's right. Also keep in mind that if this obstruction of justice investigation continues there is a chance that Rod Rosenstein will have to recuse himself. Because there is some -- he wrote that memo that ultimately sort of supported the firing of Comey. So that will sort of open a door that becomes even more interesting. What happens after that. So that certainly is an element, you know, I think Rod Rosenstein when he was on the Hill sort of intimated that. There is a possibility that he could be part of this investigation. Thereby, he would have to recuse himself.

JARRETT: Absolutely. He has said, if I am a witness in this or if I need to step aside, I will.

BLITZER: In contrast to the president's very angry tweeting on this, he's been very compassionate and statesman like in the reaction to the shooting at the baseball field yesterday.

HENDERSON: He has been. He talked yesterday for about five minutes or so in the wake of this awful shooting yesterday during this practice. And we'll see the baseball game happen today. Very statesman like. Very compassionate. Calling for unity. Talking about the folks out there, the capitol police who really saved people's lives by their quick action. He talked about Steve Scalise as a friend and that everyone is praying for him and of course that's absolutely true.

BLITZER: We certainly are. Those of us who know him and interview him, we wish him only the best.

Guys, thank you very, very much.

Looking forward to the game at Nationals Park later tonight. That will be a very nice moment for so many people. Big crowd over there as well.

Nia, Laura, Shimon, thank you as well.

[13:39:27] Up next, the congressional shooter posted anti-Trump messages on social media, donated to the Bernie Sanders' presidential campaign. I'll speak live with Senator Sanders wife, Jane Sanders. She's standing by. We'll speak about her husband's very strong disavowal of the shooter on the Senate floor yesterday. Jane Sanders joins me live right after this break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: We're learning more about the gunman who opened fire at Republican congressional baseball practice yesterday. Social media pages reveal someone infuriated by President Trump. In public posts, he also called Republicans "stupid." Called them the "Taliban of the USA." His Facebook page shows he was an extreme supporter of Senator Bernie Sanders and his campaign. Apparently, volunteered on the Senator's presidential campaign.

Listen to what Senator Sanders said on the Senate floor when he heard this news.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. BERNIE SANDERS, (I), VERMONT & FORMER DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: I have just been informed that the alleged shooter at the Republican baseball practice this morning is someone who apparently volunteered on my presidential campaign. I am sickened by this despicable act. And let me be as clear as I can be. Violence of any kind is unacceptable in our society, and I condemn this action in the strongest possible terms.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

[13:45:13] BLITZER: Strong words, indeed.

Joining us now Bernie Sanders wife, Jane Sanders.

Jane, thanks for joining us.

JANE SANDERS, WIFE OF BERNIE SANDERS: Good to be here, Wolf.

BLITZER: It's an awful situation. Have you been able to verify that the shooter in this case did, in fact, volunteer with the Bernie Sanders' presidential campaign?

JANE SANDERS: I haven't, but his Facebook indicates that he had, along with tens of thousands of other people. That's neither here nor there. People volunteered and supported various candidates. This is completely unacceptable. This is not the answer. Violence is never the answer. Wolf, you know, we've been -- Bernie and I have been very vocal about the politics of personal destruction and this is it to the extreme. This is not ok. And it's certainly not what Bernie preaches. We've had rallies with 1.5 million people and there was not violence at the rallies or afterwards. This is a person that was troubled and certainly not indicative of his supporters.

BLITZER: And certainly full of a lot of hate as we saw from some of those Facebook postings. Is there a chance, Jane, that you or the Senator ever met with him while he was volunteering out there on the campaign trail at an event or rally? Do you have any recollection at all?

JANE SANDERS: No. I mean, as we -- as I said, we met with millions of people and certainly worked rope lines. I've never seen him. But he may have shown up on a rope line. I have no idea.

BLITZER: Since the shooting, there's certainly been a lot of talk about the type of language that a lot of politicians are using.

I want to play something for you that your husband said while talking to an audience of progressives this past weekend, then we'll discuss. Listen to this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SANDERS: Today, in the White House we have perhaps the worst and most dangerous president in the history of our country.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: With hindsight, does he go too far in speaking like that about the president?

JANE SANDERS: I don't think so, Wolf. I think what's interesting is that was at the people's summit and what I noticed on the weekend was that without any prior discussion, Roseanne, Nina Turner, Van Jones and I all spoke about being careful and being involved with our policies and with our facts, but not engaging in the politics of personal destruction that we believed in civil discourse. Nina was saying hard on issues, soft on people. Van Jones was saying I don't care who you voted for. What we care about now is where do we stand. Now, dangerous, I mean, when you throw 23 million people off of health care without even a hearing, that's dangerous to those 23 million people. We have to have -- we have to be able to discuss the issues without demonizing the opponent.

And, honestly, Wolf, I think the media needs to look at itself as well. The media, it characterizes every conversation as an adversarial one. Your job, the media's job, I think, is to illuminate the facts, not fan the flames. And the media continues to cover the latest scandal, the latest back and forth, but not the issues so much.

(CROSSTALK)

BLITZER: Let me interrupt, Jane, with all due respect, if a president or a Senator or someone of authority is making very, very strong statements, you want us to simply ignore those statements if there's a social media post, a tweet, and the president says something really, really strong or Senator Bernie Sanders says this is the worst and most dangerous president in the history of our country, do you want us to sensor those words as part of the news media? JANE SANDERS: No.

BLITZER: What are you suggesting?

JANE SANDERS: No. Well, I'm suggesting that just like the Democrats and the Republicans and the Independents and the progressives are all thinking about what happened in this presidential race, that the media needs to do some self-reflection as well.

(CROSSTALK)

BLITZER: The media is doing a lot of self -- we're doing -- I can assure you, we're doing a lot of self-reflection. We are always looking back. We are learning lessons. We want to make sure as the first draft we correct it as quickly as possible. This is not a perfect science, by any means.

But, you know, you hear a lot of criticism in the mainstream media, Jane, from the conservative elements, from the right wing. We're getting a lot of criticism from the left wing from the progressives, people like you as well. It underscores that we're trying to do as responsible a job as we possibly can and we certainly aren't going to sensor very strong statements of people of responsibility.

[13:40:32] JANE SANDERS: I agree. I agree, Wolf. What I'm saying is that during the presidential election, if I were a Republican running, I would have had a fit. I would have been so upset because every day was covered with the latest terrible thing that candidate Trump said. And when Marco Rubio said some silly things, he got attention for a couple of times. He backed off and said, this is not the attention I want. I just think that we need to focus on the issues and recognize that, yes, we're going to have spirited debates. We just started the Sanders institute and we believe an informed electorate demands civil discourse and real discussion and bold thinking. So I just -- I hope that this does not make people think, well, we can't disagree on issues, we can't take spirited stands. That is not healthy for our democracy. What we need to do is to focus more on the issues and you know, I've been telling you that forever, since every time we talk I'm saying, let's focus on the matter at hand rather than who said what. My hope is that, you know, we believe at the Sanders institute that a democracy, a vital democracy requires an informed electorate.

BLITZER: And we saw the words from a former state Senator Nina Turner working at your institute. Both sides need to look in the mirror. We have to decide what kind of language we're going to use in our political discourse.

JANE SANDERS: That's right.

BLITZER: The only reason I point that out is because the language that Bernie Sanders said, it's generated some reaction when a sitting Senator makes that kind of accusation against the sitting president of the United States.

JANE SANDERS: But it wasn't just a sound bite, Wolf. BLITZER: I'm not saying that. These were very strong words. And

what he's saying, basically --

(CROSSTALK)

JANE SANDERS: They are strong words, but back them up with the rest of the paragraph and recognize that we need to deal with this.

BLITZER: From your perspective, worse than Richard Nixon?

JANE SANDERS: I think these things -- right now, we're at a political crossroads. I think we're very concerned -- a lot of people are concerned about us becoming an oligarchy. There are concerns about authoritarianism. We have veterans that have fought and died for our democracy. If we can't call attention to undemocratic attention, that's not good. We need to have free speech, spirited discussion, we need not to make it personal or demonize people. I mean, members of Congress, that's one of the concerns that I have, again, with the media, is that members of Congress on all stripes are caricatured as fools or demagogues or terrible people, and they pay a price for that. I don't think you understand what it takes to be a public servant today.

(CROSSTALK)

BLITZER: I don't -- I don't think we do that. Jane Sanders, a robust democracy needs a free media, needs a robust media.

JANE SANDERS: Yes.

BLITZER: That's what we're doing, responsibly, accurately. There are elements out there that aren't doing that, but we certainly are.

Jane Sanders, as usual, a good conversation. Thank you so much for joining us.

JANE SANDERS: Thanks, Wolf. Bye-bye.

[13:54:13] BLITZER: Just ahead, a Pennsylvania courtroom awaits a decision in the Bill Cosby trial. The jury said it was deadlocked and the judge asked jurors to keep deliberating. We'll have the latest when we come back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: Jurors deciding Bill Cosby's fate let the judge know this morning they were deadlocked but the judge asked them to go back to deliberating.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ANDREW WYATT, BILL COSBY'S SPOKESPERSON: This deadlock shows the not- guilty that Mr. Cosby has been saying the entire time.

GLORIA ALLRED, ATTORNEY: This deadlock could change. They're deadlocked on all three counts. After further deliberation, perhaps after lunch as well, it could be that they could reach a different decision.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: With us now from outside the courthouse in Norristown, Pennsylvania, is Jean Casarez.

Jean, where do things stand now?

JEAN CASAREZ, CNN CORRSEPONDENT: It's been two and a half hours since they got the charge from the judge to go in and continue deliberating. We have not heard from them. So they are deliberating. They are trying to reach a verdict, at least on some of the counts. They have not come out with another note but I was in that courtroom when we realized something was up. Just the way the atmosphere was. And I looked at them and one juror had his hands folded sort of defiantly. Another juror may have had a very small smile. They sat. They looked defeated as a whole group and the judge said, I understand you have reached a deadlock. Remember, Wolf, there are three counts here, aggravated indecent assault, a lack of consent, the fact that the accuser was unconscious and, number three, the fact that when the assault happened, that an intoxicant or drug was used on her by Bill Cosby on her without her knowledge. Very sophisticated law the jury continues to deliberate -- Wolf?

BLITZER: Cosby never took the stand in his own defense, right?

CASAREZ: No, he did not. The defense made a point of that in their closing arguments. They said to the jury, the lead attorney, he said, Bill Cosby did not take the stand, he didn't have to, ladies and gentlemen, because you had his words in his statement to police in 2005.

BLITZER: How long will they be deliberating before they take a break?

CASAREZ: I don't know. The judge said to the lawyers after the jury went out, I am not going to set a time limit on this. So they are in control. I have seen before when they bring in another note, I've seen that charge read a second time and they go back in. This judge, we don't know what he will do.

BLITZER: Jean Casarez, we'll stay in close touch with you. Let us know the latest. Thanks very much.

That's it for me. Thanks very much for watching. I'll be back at 5:00 p.m. eastern in "The Situation Room."

For our international viewers, "Amanpour" is coming up next.

For our viewers in North America, NEWSROOM with Brooke Baldwin, live from Capitol Hill, starts right now.

[14:00:09] BROOKE BALDWIN, CNN ANCHOR: Here we go, top of the hour. You're watching CNN. I'm Brooke Baldwin, live from our nation's capitol for CNN special --