tv CNN Tonight With Don Lemon CNN January 5, 2017 12:00am-1:01am PST
donald trump taking his battle with american intelligence to the next level. this is cnn tonight. i'm don lemon. the president-elect reportedly planning to limit the power of this country's top intelligence adviser. but what's behind his feud with the intel community? and a shocking crime captured on facebook live. four black suspects apparently assaulting a white victim while shouting anti-trump slurs. is it a hate crime? plus, inside the mind of a mass murderer. the convicted killer of nine people in the charleston church massacre, in his newly revealed jail house journal, dylann roof wroits, i'm not sorry, i have not shed a tear for the innocent people i killed. should he get the death penalty? we'll discuss. but i want to get to the stand-off between donald trump and america's intelligence agencies. here to discuss, author of
"security mom." and the author of the perfect kill. 21 laws for assassins and cnn's chief national security correspondent jim sciutto. good evening to all of you. jim, tonight there's new reporting about when the declassified version of the intelligence on russia's hacking will be released. it's be what can you tell us? >> we're learning tonight that will be released to the public on monday, just a few days away, the current president will be briefed on this on thursday. president-elect briefed on friday. and the question is, then, what does president-elect trump do with this information? does it, you know, allay his own concerns about this, his own doubts about the hacking and the intelligence agency's assessment that russia is behind this hacking. but we know that you and i and the public are going to get our
first view that president obama ordered of this intelligence, we'll see it on monday. >> if donald trump is not listening to u.s. intelligence, then who is he listening to? >> it's a fair question. we don't know. i talk to people inside the intelligence agencies. keep in mind, this is not a democrat or republican issue, right? the obama administration says russia's behind this hack, but also so do the republican speaker of the house, the republican majority leader in the senate. other republicans, mccain, graham, et cetera. so why is donald trump doubting that assessment? we don't know, but it's been very public and i speak to folks inside many intelligence agencies, they are alarmed by this, and they're concerned that this is the president-elect questioning their assessment of the hacking on the u.s. election. >> the ambassador was on the hour before and said that there was some politics that were
playing into this, bob. do you agree with that? >> exactly. well, i mean, trump doesn't want to admit the possibility that russians could have tipped the elections in his favor. he doesn't even want to consider that. and the fact that 17 u.s. intelligence agencies said the russians hacked with the intention of helping him, he can't admit that, he doesn't see a way around this, and he's reacting by turning to credible sources like julian assange or even vladimir putin, who, of course are denying the hacking, as they would. you know, frankly, he's in a tough spot. if he admits the russians helped him, what's that going to do for his presidency for the next four years? >> he mentioned julian assange, why was that? >> this is bob's sarcasm. took me a while to catch it. he's right, you have a president-elect who woke up this
morning, praising julian assange. no one should have any sort of heroics about julian assange. he released the names of military personnel serving in afghanistan. he released hundreds of thousands of classified documents, even trump's own party says he's an enemy of the united states. and julian assange views the united states as an enemy. and so the theatrics have gone from a guy who sort of became president because he was disruptive, to essential a destructive one. and i don't know the end game here. i mean, i try to be pretty calm on your show. i don't know the end game here. this one's a little bit disconcerting about how trump can get agencies to not be undermined and to support an effort that's not about trump. this is the united states intelligence agencies. they're for you and me.
they're not his. >> mike, i'm going to drill down in a second. but do you know what the end game is here? >> no. the president-elect declaring war on his own intelligence services, this is unprecedented. i joked today who is going to be the first to release material on donald trump. t you don't go after your own spies. many of these people put their life on the line. one thing that stood out to me about the assessment that all 17 intelligence agencies did. they stated with high confidence that russia was behind the hacking. they don't do that in the intelligence community unless they have proof. and the analogy i'm seeing from skeptics, this is just like iraq wmd. donald trump himself said that. you have a former cia operative on air. the cia never thought saddam
hussein, with high confidence, was reconstituting his nuclear weapons program. that was a complete miss conception. so this is unprecedented. and donald trumpsiding with an australian anarchist who has called afghan informists expendable, he said "f" them. i mean, i don't know what kind of assessment you make of this man. >> is he right about wmd? >> yes, he's right. the cia was asked, do you think that saddam kept his wmd, that was an assessment, a guess. so trump is wrong. they didn't get it wrong. they said, our best guess. i ran iraqi operations. i know what we had, i know what the white house briefings were. the bush administration said we're going to war in any case. give us whatever you have to make talking points. and that's the truth of it. so this is not comparable.
this is forensics. this is the national security agency, the fbi, dhs, have all come down and said the russians did it to help trump, and that's the end of the story. and that's as good as intelligence and evidence ever gets. >> jim, there are so many hot spots all over the world. how dangerous could things get if donald trump continues to be at odds with the intelligence community in the future? >> here's the issue. when the ic comes to him and says north korea has a nuke it could put on the tip of an icbm to hit the west coast of the u.s. when it comes to him and says, there's an imminent terrorist threat to u.s. homeland, what does he say? does he accept that assessment? and what does he say when he goes to the american public and says, the ic has told me x about this threat and yet for weeks and weeks, i said the ic is not credible on russian hacking, why do they believe him when he says, i need to commit u.s.
troops to this problem, or i need to get the american population on alert for a threat to the u.s. homeland? why do they believe him then if for weeks now, let's be honest, it's not one day or one week. for weeks now, he's been undermining his own intelligence community. we don't know why, but he has. when i speak to folks inside these agencies, that's the concern. that has consequences. you can't reel that back in, in one week or a month or a year's time. people -- that has an effect, when you publicly undermine our own intelligence agencies, that's a real concern. >> you and everyone on the panel, especially michael, were sort of aghast, and said you don't know what the end game is here. and i don't know another way to ka as ask, but do you think the president-elect understands the severity of undermining the intelligence agency, about going to twitter with 140-character
diplomacy and intelligence? do you think he really understands that? >> i can't speak for him because i don't really get this. i will say, his proxies are on your show and other shows, and the people around him will say, he needs to shake things up and he's asking questions. everyone agrees that's legitimate. but by doing so publicly, on twitter, the long-term impact on the intelligence community, is grave, and it will affect morale. everyone knows twitter is disruptive. i have teenage kids, so i get the social dynamics of twitter and -- but he's the president-elect. my kids can roll their eyes. he has access to nuclear weapons. there's a difference. and i think it's just very important that the people around him, you know, and you're starting to see this. pence -- vice president elect pence was not on the gravy train today in terms of throwing the ic under the bus. and i think at least some of the people around him understand it.
it is going to make for a very interesting series of confirmation hearings for those who are going to be asked directly, the secretary of defense, their assessment of the intelligence. >> this is from george little, former cia spokesman. he said, let's stare this reality square in the face. potus, president-elect of the united states is pro-putin and believes julian assange over the cia. on january 20, we will be less safe. do you agree with that? >> yeah. and that's a euphemism for saying the united states of america elected a fifth columnist. that is speak for i don't trust this man, i think he's compromised, i think he's working on behalf of a foreign government. >> who just sighed? >> we probably both did. i know george little. he worked for leon panetta and the cia. the thing is here, it's not
political partnersh political. it's not democrats coming out and saying donald trump is beyond the pale here. it's the republican speaker of the house, the republican senate majority leader, tom cotton, lindsey graham, john mccain. this is a thing. we are americans at the end of the day. this threat from russia, not just on election, but in crimea, in syria, regarding, you know, their hacking capability, buzzing u.s. aircraft and warships across the world, this is not something that one party says it happening. this is happening. so the question is, how does the next president of the united states address this threat? and i talked to a lot of folks on both sides, both parties, certainly in the agencies who are dismayed at this reaction. nkts i wa >> jen spoke about this earlier. is there a risk that at some
point the intelligence community begins tailoring the intelligence to donald trump to essentially not draw hissire i and if so, how dangerous is that? >> they will. they will rewrite intelligence at the top, but at the same time, the intelligence community, that's the fbi and the cia, trump will regret this, going after them. just as nixon did. let's remember watergate was undone by an fbi agent. and you'll see the same thing. if he wants to fight with the intelligence community for four years, he'll pay for it. >> thank you, panel. i appreciate it. when we come back, caught on camera, a young white man apparently assaulted by four young black suspects shouting anti-trump slurs, the whole thing broadcast on facebook live. chicago police call it sickening, but what's the motive here? when it comes to healthcare, seconds can mean the difference between life and death. for partners in health, time is life.
>> it is a crime that chicago police call sickening. and it is. and i think we can all agree with them on that. an 18-year-old white man beaten by four teenage black suspects, the whole thing broadcast on facebook live. i must warn you, this is very disturbing to watch. cnn's rosea flores is covering this story for us from chicago. rosa, it's disgusting. this disturbing video out of chicago tonight. tell us the latest. >> reporter: you know, don, it really is disgusting. according to chicago police, they believe this man was targeted because he has mental health challenges. they also believe that he knows at least one of the suspects and that at least initially he was with them willingly. but that obviously changed, and like don said, we have to warn you, this video is very graphic.
crime? is this racially motivated? we've asked the police at this point. they're still investigating the motive. >> and they said they do believe the victim knew the attackers. how long was the victim with the offenders? >> you know, that's one of the things that they're also investigating. but they do believe he was with them for 24 to 48 hours. so you still have to wonder exactly what transpired in that time. because right now, we're only seeing a small window that was caught on video. now they do say that the offenders stole a van from a suburb, because this victim is from a suburb, not from chicago, and they brought him to chicago, and that initially, he was with them because he knew one of them. but that obviously changed, don. >> they're in custody tonight, all four of them, right? >> yes. four of these offenders are in custody. we're expecting charges to be filed within 24 hours. and when we see those charges,
don, we'll get a better picture of exactly what transpired here, because the charges will tell us a little more as to what happened, or what police believe happened. >> do we know how old they are? >> they're all 18 years old. according to police, they know each other from school. at some point, one of these suspects went to the same school as the victim, and that's how they know each other. >> who is raising these kids? it's unfathomable. >> it's disturbing. >> it's really just vile and there's no excuse for it. how is the victim doing tonight, rosea? >> you know, the palaolice say y can't get into the extent of his injuries, but they say he's highly traumatized. even having trouble talking to the police about what transpired because he's so traumatized. >> well, we hope he's going to be okay. rosa, thank you for that awful, awful story.
i want to bring in jeffrey toobin. the video is difficult to watch. your immediate reaction? >> you know, we can talk about this in the legalities, but you just have to wonder, like how can human beings be so awful and just, as you said, who raised them? what motivates people to treaty in a disabled, defenseless person like this, this way? and unfortunately, in our line of work, we see a lot of evil and this just looks like evil. >> this is dumb, stupid behavior here. no home training. because no one i know who was raised by any parent would even dream of doing something like that. my mom would probably beat me worse than that guy. we've been talking to the police. police say they're still investigating. they won't classify it as a hate crime. is this a hate crime? >> well, i don't know. and i don't want to prejudge too
much, because frankly, even the video has so many bleeps that you would need to hear what he said. racial epithets perhaps might have been bleeped, and that's something that would be relevant. i'm not sure everyone knows, but racial motivation can be black versus white, white versus black. and so it is certainly possibly a hate crime. everyone should be clear. it's illegal under any standard. hate crime laws merely enhance penalties. they don't create something that wasn't criminal into being criminal. this is obviously an assault of some kind. it's only a question of how prosecutors would charge it. and they certainly would want to do a full investigation, talking to any witnesses who might be listening to the tape without the bleeps. all of that would have to be involved in a measured decision about what precise crimes to charge.
>> i did watch the unedited version of this, and they do use the n word, but the kids i see are black kids, using the n word. and you do hear some of them -- by the way, you can't help but feel sorry for the victim. you see him, he's being choked. he's being hit. he just looks awful. but you hear some of the offenders, jeff, shouting f trump, f white people. do you think this was politically motivated, a politically motivated crime, or are these just stupid kids? >> you know, i'm gonna stay three words you're never allowed to say on cable news, which are, i don't know. i mean, i just -- you know, what goes into the heads of people who are doing something like this? you know, i just -- i can't fathom it. whether you can say it was political, racial, i don't know. that's why you have to do a full
investigation of the whole circumstances surrounding this event. you know, i just really don't know how to characterize at this stage, what the motivation is here. is racial animus, hostility, certainly that's a possibility. >> the fact that they would put it live on facebook, which is why many people don't put any credence into social media, because these are sadly the type of people you get responses from. the people who think it's okay. and i wonder if, because you can go on anonymously and do things like that, that people feel free to be able to put something like this on social media, which is just beyond the norm of anything. >> but just how stupid, to put a -- to put yourself committing a crime on social media. i mean, master criminals, these people were not. but in a way, i'm grateful that they did put it on social media,
because now they're definitely caught. if there hadn't been social media, who knows how this investigation might have gone. the perversities are many in this story. but it certainly seems like we're not going to have a case of mistaken identity in terms of the arrests that went on. >> we're not done discussing this terrible offense. we're going to dig deeper. thank you, jeffrey. we'll be right back.
with the beating of a white teen. the suspect shouting anti-trump slurs as the attack was broadcast on facebook live. we'll discuss now cnn political commentator and former press secretary for bernie sanders. there are certain things that i can't say it's a hate crime because chicago police won't say it. they're not done with their investigation. but when you look at this, simone, they're saying f white people, f trump, how can you say it's not a hate crime against a white person? >> first, i want to say this is absolutely sickening. it's unfathomable that so much hate and anger can fill up a person where they go out and they think this is okay. and it was stupid to do it on facebook live, but that's a whole other story. this is sickening and i'm going to say something that's probably not popular. we cannot classify things as a hate crime. motive matters.
so was this for hate of donald trump, the president-elect, because of the things he said, or pure hate of white people? that matters, because if we start going around and anytime someone says something sickening in this instance, in connection with the president-elect, or donald trump, or even president obama for that matter, because of their political leanings, that is slippery territory. that is not a hate crime. hate crimes are because of a person's racial ethnicity, religion, gender, a disability. because someone doesn't like your political leanings, and they do something bad to you, that is not a hate crime. >> but aren't all hate crimes motivated by stupidity? >> by a lot of things, stupidity, carelessness, thoughtlessness. i agree with simone, this is sickening to think that some thoughtless thugs would do something like this to someone who appears to be so innocent. but not to get too far ahead of
the legal skis here, based on what we hear in the video, it does sound as though it's a hate crime. the language they used about referring to the victim as a white person in the different language they use. and i hope it's classified as that because the penalty will be much greater. they deserve the harshest penalty they could get. i'm like you, i'd fear what my parents would do to me if i was caught doing something like this. but i never would. >> when you look at the video, why would anybody on earth think it was okay to treaty in another person like this, regardless if it's a disabled person, white, person, a black person, whatever? why on earth? i just don't understand it. >> it's man's inhumanity to man. it's brutality is what it is. and i think the fact that this
is a vulnerable person who was probably duped into sort of going along with them, it appears. somebody who was mentally disabled, i think makes it even more sickening. but at the end of the day, you just try to wrap your head around evil. that's what this is. it's brutality, man's inhumanity to man. >> i don't think it's evil. i don't think it's evil. i think these are young people and i think they have bad home training. when i say who is raising these young people? i have no idea, because no one i know on earth, who is 17 years old, or 70 years old would ever think of treaty inning another person like that. you wonder, where is your parent, where is your gardian? let peter answer. go ahead, peter. >> i don't know. look, this isn't -- the epidemic
of violence in american society, robert kennedy spoke about it eloquently decades and decades ago. this is a horrific example, as people say, sickening, disgusting example of a kind of senseless violence that exists throughout american society. look at the number of people who are murdered every year in the united states compared to other societies around the world. this is one particularly grotesque example of a kind of casual violence that we just take for granted in the united states. >> simone, i'm sorry. go ahead, what did you want to say? >> i just want to remind folks, that we cannot sit here and ignore, at least for the last year, on very public display, the worst parts of america have been brought from the fringe into the mainstream. so that affects people on both sides. we've talked about white naturalism, white supremacists and the kkk. but when this inflammatory rhetoric is out there, when someone is repeatedly telling
you that your community is the worst of the worst, it brings out the worst of the worst in people. so i'm not defending what they did, what these young people did was sickening. i would argue they also need some help in addition to, you know, some consequences. but this just didn't come out of thin air. some of the nastiest -- [ all speak at once ] >> let me just say this. these young people probably never watch the news. probably have no idea really -- >> i really don't think that's fair. y'all have to give young people in this country more credit than that. >> no idea really -- [ all speak at once ] >> i'm just saying that's my point of view. i don't think they really understand -- they don't understand the ramifications of tying someone up and beating them and putting it on facebook live, then they certainly don't understand the ramifications of a presidential election. >> i don't think this is about a presidential election. i think this is symptomatic of what we're seeing across the country, with the breakdown of
the american family, which is unfortunate, heart-breaking and tragic. and we'll find the motives as this continues to unwind and we find out more. but the disgusting language they used and the girl in the video is laughing about it and egging her friends on. for them not to have the moral fortitude to realize this is absolutely wrong, something is going wrong, it appears, at home, and what they're being taught, and for them to think this is okay, we've got a lot of teaching to do with our children and i think, as i said, it stems from the breakdown of the american family. >> simone, you think i'm being too hard on these kids? >> i'm very hesitant to cast these young people who come from broken homes. for all we know, they have a mother and a father with good jobs who've tried to instill good moral values and the young people aren't listening. one, we need more facts. two, we have to be careful to cast our young people aside. this was wrong, sickening,
grotesque. they need help, they need to be punished. but we have to have an elevated conversation about the surroundings and the things that our young people are dealing with every day, and the images they're seeing. they might not watch the news, but they're on twitter where the president-elect is. they're on facebook, they're listening to the breakfast club, the radio. and all of these nasty nasty things that we've talked about, that we've witnessed over the last year, they have seeped into our children. they are in our schools. and it is coming to bear its ugly head in egregious ways. >> matt, she's saying and peter's saying they're not making excuses for these kids. that this did not just happen in a vacuum. >> well, look, it's fair to have a conversation about our culture. i think whether it's video games or violent movies, that those things, music, whatever, i'm not a prude, but those things all have an impact. i'm a little bit concerned, though, about the way this conversation is going right now.
i think that if this was a different situation, if you had white teens who had tortured and brutalized an african american young man and those white teens had talked about obama and had been laughing, i don't think we'd be having a conversation about our political discourse is so toxic and maybe they saw things on twitter about obama. >> simone, he's talking to you. >> and i would say that's true. because the relationship of black people to america is very different than the relationship of white people to america. we're talking about, you know, years, 200-plus years of slavery, 87-plus years of jim crow. i'm not making excuses for these things, but it is not the exact same thing. we have to talk about these at elevated levels. we can't boil it down to someone saying something disparaging about the first black president of the united states of america when the current president-elect questioned his authenticity as
an american. that has some layers to it. >> i just think in context, having watched that video and the first or second thing maybe that you bring up is to inject, like, well, maybe these -- i mean, the impression i'm getting at least from you and correct me if i'm wrong, is that you know maybe they were asking for this, maybe -- >> oh, i'm sorry. >> maybe donald trump stoked this. >> let me clear this up. i've never said no one was asking for it. the first thing i said, it was sickening, disgusting and it was wrong. but what i did say was, we don't know if it's a hate crime. that is very -- >> peter, you're not usually this quiet. peter's been sitting here absorbing this. >> it's so disturbing, honestly, i have difficulty kind of having a conversation about it. i think they're two completely different conversations. there's a conversation about the horror of what these kids did, which is a horror, period. end of conversation. there's a totally different conversation about where we're heading as a society where we
are becoming more racially divided than we were even a few years ago. which i think is tragic and i think, yes, donald trump bears some of the blame for that in a way that another republican candidate, another republican president wouldn't. because of some of the frankly racist things that he's done. that has nothing to do, however, with in any way mitigating the horror of what this event was. >> that's going to have to be the last word. thank you very much. a dramatic day in court today as convicted killer dylann roof faces a jury that will decide whether or not he gets the death penalty. sometimes you just know when you hit a home run.
that's how i feel about blue-emu pain relief spray. odorless and fast-acting. it soothes all my muscle aches and pains. and it's convenient for those hard to reach places. and if you're like me, you'll love blue-emu super strength cream. it's made with real emu oil, it's non greasy, it's a deep penetrating formula that works itself down into your joints. take it from me. it works fast and you won't stink. blue-emu, it works for me it'll work for you.
convicted charleston church shooter dylann roof began presenting his case in court today as jurors decide whether to give him the death penalty. he was convicted of federal murder and hate crime charges for the massacre at a church that left nine people dead. martin savidge is in charleston and has been covering this story for us. dylann roof addressed the jurors today and began making his case in court. tell us what happened. >> you know, don, i would have to say it's one of the most remarkable days i've ever spent inside a courtroom. that's saying a lot covering all the trials i have. what made it so was the fact of,
just picture it, you have a man who is a convicted mass murderer at this point, a self-acclaimed white supremacist who is standing up in front of the courtroom and talking to the same jurors who had convicted him, who now are considering whether or not to put him to death. and in listening in that courtroom are several survivors of that horrific attack and many family members who lost loved ones in that attack. and then you've got the prosecution that stands up and says, if ever there is a person that deserved to die, it is dylann roof. if there was ever a perfect case for the death penalty to be applied, it is this case. and then they drop a bombshell by saying that while he was in jail, six weeks after the shootings, dylann roof, if you thought maybe had had a change of heart, was keeping what was then a secret jail house diary and it was written in there by his own words. he said, i do not regret what i did. i am not sorry.
i have not shed a tear for the innocent people i killed. so you have all of that and then dylann roof gets up and speaks, walks to the podium and faces that jury. he doesn't express any remorse. he doesn't ask for any mercy. he says, i'm not crazy. despite what you may have heard, i do not have any mental deficiency, i have no mental illness. it was over in 90 seconds, essentially, what he had to say, and then he sat down. it was just a remarkable day. and that's just day one. >> what's remarkable, martin, he has been adamant on representing himself during the sentencing phase of trial. with his defense team staying on as legal advisers. how has this part gone? >> well, this is another weird part of this. they are there, the two very acclaimed defense members of his team, but in essence, they're now stand by attorneys. they're not allowed to sort of question anybody in the
courtroom. they're not allowed to talk directly to the judge. dylann roof is his defense attorney. now they can talk to him and he can talk to them, if he wants to. but he's already made it pretty dle clear that he doesn't really like them, because they brought up a mental defense, and he cannot stand that as a possibility. in fact, he feels very much like he was betrayed by them. >> interesting. it's not surprising, that some people walked out. i understand that three people walked out of the courtroom while roof was speaking. who were they and why? >> reporter: yeah, these are all people that are in the u.s. attorney's office section. so this would be family members or very close friends, or, you know, it was hard to tell exactly. three people sort of brushed by very quickly. they were all women, and they all were obviously disgusted just to hear dylann roof as he began there to speak to the jurors. and one of them said, and it's a
quote, this is just crap, as she went out. there were other emotions that were expressed. you saw people openly sobbing as the prosecution went through talking about the victims. some people doubled over in grief and others had to come to their aid. it was just such an emotionally packed day. and as i say, we still have many more to come. >> martin savidge in charleston, south carolina, thank you very much for that. when we come back, inside the mind of a mass murderer. what we learned today about dylann roof and why he slaughtered nine people. so, mr. harris, we have your fingerprints on the safe. a photo of you opening the safe. a post using the hashtag "#justrobbedthesafe"
convicted charleston church shooter dylann roof told a jury today, quote, there's nothing wrong with me psychologically. here to discuss that, the founder of the elite institute. dylann roof gave an opening statement today in court. what did you make of it? >> well, he's not representing himself. what he's clearly representing is a delusion i've talked about on your program before. he's got this delusion that the black race is inferior and like a soldier, he's out there to defend the white race and to begin a race war. i mean, what he described was in
no way a case -- it was in no way relevant to a death penalty phase of a death penalty trial. it was about, i'm not sick, i'm not mentally ill, my lawyers are wrong about that. and what the prosecution presented is in no way a surprise to me about his remorse. >> why is it so important for him to present himself this way and that there's nothing wrong with him? >> his most likely diagnosis is schizophrenia. i'm not certain, but i am certain he has paranoid delusions. when you look at his manifesto, he developed racist beliefs and this fight for the white race in a matter of hours. not over years. and if you look at experts who study these kinds of terrorists and white supremacists, approximate incubates over years and typically white supremacists are much older than dylann roof. in their fir50s, 60s, and 70s.
they associate with other white supremacists. so that's not the picture here. in fact, don, i don't think anyone has commented on this yet. not one prosecution witness was an expert on white supremacy. nobody got on the stabbed and said we profiled dylann roof and he's a classic white supremacist. the prosecutors are saying that, but nobody who has profiled him is saying that. >> you've heard of suicide by cop. >> yes, i've evaluated people who have done that. >> people are saying it's suicide by trial, that he's looking for the death penalty. >> they're trying to read something rational into something that is so wholly irrational. i love what martin was saying, this is weird. for me, this is common place for somebody with a mentally il perso ill person. would a soldier express remorse for killing the enemy?
his delusion, if you read his manifesto is one that really places him at war, at a life or death struggle. and he killed the enemy. now this is a horrible, tragic crime and i in no way want to diminish it or excused it. but we do need to understand these things in order to stop them from happening again. >> you do believe he's racist? >> of course he is. as a consequence of delusion, though. >> so he can be racist and bright at the same time? >> there's two kinds of racism. he's racist as a human being, that's his belief, or you give him anti-sipsychotic medication and he's no longer racist. >> i worked with the man who shot gabrielle giffords. the prosecution said today, he's got months of planning, he killed people because of the color of their skin.
jared laugh ner had his reasons, his planning, same scenario. but the difference is, he got treatment. he was found incompetent to stand trial and he had remorse. >> he said he wrote a journal for six weeks. let's talk about it. he said, i do not regret what i did. i'm not sorry. i have not shed a tear for the innocent people i killed. i do feel sorry for the innocent white children forced to live in this sick country. i feel sorry for the innocent white people killed daily at the hands of the lower races. i have shed a tear of self-pity for myself, that i had to do what i did in the first place. i feel pity that i had to give up my life because of a situation that should never have existed. so besides that being completely odious, what do you make of this? >> again, in the context of all the behavior i've seen, the observations of him in court, the flat affect that we see in people with skriz frenia, his firing his attorneys, fighting the mental health defense, and
the collusion that i uncovered in his manifesto and other statements, i mean, four hours of interrogation i watched. this young man is delusional. he's at the classic onset of mental illness. so of course he did not shed a tear. would you shed a tear if you shot a terrorist that was about to set off a bomb in new york city? i wouldn't. i would shoot that terrorist. so if you climb inside his mind. what do we know about it so far? we know his attorneys had him evaluated. from his perspective, he had to endure two mental health evaluations. he's got a mental health illness is my view. if you look at the lens of what you just read through the lens of paranoid schizophrenia, of course he's not shedding a tear or having any remorse. because he's not being treaty inned. >> you should feel remorse for
shooting innocent people. >> i've worked with iraqi veterans. one in particular i'm thinking of, who shot and killed a family running through a roadblock. they ignored the warnings. they had three warnings. he followed the rules of engagement. and he killed innocent people. he felt terrible about it. but not as terrible as he would feel if he had done something that was truly, truly wrong. he was vindicated. he was not court-martialed. he understood it was a horrific accident, and it's a different kind of guilt. >> he had to make a choice. >> he was at war. >> prosecutors have said he wanted to start a race war, or wanted to start a race war. could it just be as simple that he was a racist and that was his motivation? >> i would have loved to see expert witnesses saying he's definitely a racist. and he's not associating with anybody, so what's his big plan there? >> thank you, doctor. i appreciate that.
divide emerging between the president-elect and senate republicans after donald trump supports the opinion of julian assange over the intelligence community. republicans and democrats digging in the battle over obamacare. republicans have begun the process of repealing it, but what is the replacement and what is president obama going to do about it. and video that will shock you. a mentally