Skip to main content

tv   CNN Tonight With Don Lemon  CNN  March 28, 2019 7:00pm-8:00pm PDT

7:00 pm
"i'll close the border." what's that going to do? mexico is the problem. your own secretary of homeland security said the mexicans are helping, they're great partners, they're offering people help. she contradicted what you said tonight because you're not telling the truth. just because you beat a felony rap doesn't mean you can run roughshod over what matters. we'll keep talking about it because it matters. i hope they're wrong about how bad it's going to be because you can't care once you have a body count, it's too late. thank you for watching. "cnn tonight with d. lemon" starts right now. >> what you just said applies to so many issues when it comes to this president and this administration. what's the truth and what's the not? people are confused, two peop a. the people cheering him on at that rally, what person in their right mind wants to release criminals? what lawmaker, democrat, republican, otherwise, wants
7:01 pm
there to be more crime in this country? it doesn't make any sense. it's promoting fear. it's fearmongering. >> it is fearmongering. i would answer the question this way. you tell me you've got a bunch of murderers and, you know, drug mules who are coming in illegally, and the wall will stop it? i'm all in, great. build the befophysical barriers. you want to tell me that the problem down there is that? you're a liar. because the problem is kids. that's what you hear from his officials he put in place. he doesn't deal with it because it doesn't sell, don. fear and anger sell in politics. he knew it during the election. he carried through with it on the wall. that's great, you got the wall. he wrote about it in his emergency declaration. he didn't driver eliver on it. this is "they." the people he says are going to let people go, that's him. those are his people doing what they have to under his watch. >> it's tough listening to some of those sound bites. i listen to it because i have to. but there's so much propaganda
7:02 pm
and so many lies. we would spend -- let's just say that we ran that whole thing. we would spend more time than the president actually spoke, for an hour and whatever, just doing the fact checks, just correcting what he said, just explaining what he said or -- >> that's why his friends want the standard ofony or it's fine. that's why they're jumping up and down. >> the starr report, this was 300 and some odd pages, the starr report was 400 pages. we were both around then and lived it. the starr report came out on a wednesday. you know when the public had the starr report? minus the underlying evidence and sources and methods. on a friday, two days later. >> i'll give him the grand jury. i don't see the exigency of tomorrow, but you have to get it as soon as you can get it. they may slow walk it for good
7:03 pm
and bad reasons. good reasons, it takes time, you don't want to get a judge sideways on what they process and what they don't. and the bad reason is they want to slow walk it because they like this victory and they know there are bad things coming their way in that. how do they know? barr told us. mueller couldn't make a call on obstruction. that means there has to be evidence of wrongdoing that he was worried about that has to be true even on russian interference. it has to be true with counterintelligence. there has to be wrongdoing. did it rise to the level of a crime? obviously not, at least on the one count. >> you know who else said that? the very smart and articulate judge on fox news, judge n napolita napolitano. >> italians, very savvy. >> you cannot want transparency -- we want someone with transparency to investigate the smollett case in chicago and not want transparency when it
7:04 pm
comes to your own case. >> sure you can, it's called politics. people expect nothing and they're never disappointed. >> mr. cuomo, missed you last night. hope you tuned in. >> i didn't miss you, i watched you, i thought you did a good job. i thought it was robust, exactly what a town hall is supposed to be about. i was happy to carry the load for you afterwards. you deserved the rest. >> thank you, it was good because people get to hear directly from the candidate. and their questions are always better than hours because they talk about what's important to them. >> oh, yeah, there's no guesswork, this is actually their lives. but boy, did booker make you look small. tiny. little don. >> little don, that's going to be my new nickname. thank you, cuomo. >> i'll be watching tonight, great guests. >> thank you. this is "cnn tonight." i'm don lemon. we have to talk about what the president said a little while ago at his maga rally in michigan, i state he won in 2016. he needs to win it again in 2020. the president spoke for a
7:05 pm
whopping hour and 25 minutes saying exactly what you would expect him to say. >> the collusion delusion is over. the special counsel completed its report and found no collusion and no obstruction. total exoneration. complete vindication. >> so he says it over and over and over. which doesn't make it true. we know very little right now about what is actually in robert mueller's report. just the summary. handful of quotes and the attorney general's letter. but we've got some important new details for you tonight. the primary obstacle to getting the full mueller report is the grand jury information it includes. that is according to a democratic staffer who says congress may get a court order to release the information from
7:06 pm
the grand jury. and we now know something else about the mueller report that is really pretty significant. it's between 300 and 400 pages long. that's a question the doj declined to answer when we asked about it just two days ago. but now we have some numbers from two separate sources. here's why that's important, because it comes down to arithmetic, simple math. let's take the low end of that estimate, okay? say the mueller report is 300 pages long. barr's summary letter is just four pages. with only a handful of quotes from mueller. so why would anybody just accept the attorney general's summary, which is at best only a 1.33% of the length of mueller's report? why would they do that without
7:07 pm
seeing the full report? the american people need to know what's in mueller's report. you need to know what's in that report. this is your country. this is our country.prident con falsely, that he has been completely exonerated. even though he acknowledges he hasn't seen the report himself. >> uh, beautiful conclusion. but the result was great. no obstruction. no collusion. no anything. >> guess what we know about that? that it's not true, what he just said. one of the few quotes, one of the few quotes from mueller in barr's letter says so. it directly contradicts what the president just said. while this report does not conclude that the president committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him. and even though mueller is quoted in barr's letter as saying the investigation did not
7:08 pm
establish that members of the trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the russian government in its election interference activities, americans aren't so sure about that. how do i know? because 56% in our cnn poll say the report does not exonerate the president on collusion. all the more reason that we should all see the full report. so we know the facts rather than relying on the attorney general's summary. that is certainly what speaker nancy pelosi thinks. >> i have said and i'll say again, no, thank you, mr. attorney general, we do not need your interpretation. show us the report. and we can draw our own conclusions. we don't need you interpreting for us. it was condescending. it was arrogant. and it wasn't the right thing to do. so the sooner they can give us the information, the sooner we can all make a judgment about
7:09 pm
it. >> but as the president falsely claims, as he claims he was totally exonerated, his congressional allies are on the attack against one of his harshest critics, congressman adam schiff who chairs the house intel committee. the nine republican members of that committee calling on schiff to resign. guess what? he's definitely not backing down. listen to his heated response today. >> my colleagues may think it's okay that the russians offered dirt on a democratic candidate for president as part of what was described as the russian government's effort to help the trump campaign. you might think that's okay. my colleagues might think it's okay that when that was offered to the son of the president, who had a pivotal role in the campaign, that the president's son did not call the fbi, he did not adamantly refuse that
7:10 pm
foreign help. no, instead that son said that he would love the help of the russians. you might think it's okay that he took that meeting. you might say that's all okay. you might say that's just what you need to do to win. but i don't think it's okay. i think it's immoral. i think it's unethical. i think it's unpatriotic. and yes, i think it's corrupt. and evidence of collusion. >> that made a whole lot of people mad. "are you going to let us talk?" "are you going to yield your time"? man. crazy. you should know tonight i'm going to talk to the man who set up that infamous trump tower meeting, rob goldstone. he's going to be here in just a
7:11 pm
few minutes. but there is something else that the president wanted to talk about tonight. jussie smollett. >> how about in chicago, he s d sasai said -- he said he was attacked by maga country. did you ever hear that one? maybe the only time i've ever agreed with the mayor of chicago, ever. that's a terrible situation. that's an embarrassment not only to chicago. that is an embarrassment to our country, what took place there. remember that. but they're looking at it. >> transparency in chicago. investigate, release the records. but when it comes to the mueller
7:12 pm
report, oh, no, no, summary's good. by the way, i'm pretty sure that rahm emanuel wouldn't say that he agrees with the president. but the city of chicago wants more than $130,000 from jussie smollett to cover the cost of the investigation into his claim that he was attacked in a hate crime. here's rahm emanuel, the mayor. >> when he does pay the city back, i'm just purely -- what the taxpayers have fronted. in that memo section he can write, "i'm sorry and i'm accountable for what i've done." >> tonight you should know, you should stick around, remember the witnesses and the people and that surveillance tape, they were trying to figure out who they are were and they caught up with them and they turned out to be brothers who he knew from the set, nigerians, it went on and on. we'll talk to the attorney of the brothers that police say were paid by jussie smollett to
7:13 pm
stage the attack. you don't want to miss that interview. and the man who set up that infamous trump tower meeting with russians, he is speaking out tonight. his name is rob goldstone. he's going to be here on-set with me, next. i landed. i saw my leg did not look right. i was just finishing a ride. i felt this awful pain in my chest. i had a pe blood clot in my lung. i was scared. i had a dvt blood clot. having one really puts you in danger of having another. my doctor and i chose xarelto®. xarelto®. to help keep me protected. xarelto® is a latest-generation blood thinner that's... proven to treat and reduce the risk of dvt or pe blood clots from happening again. in clinical studies, almost 98% of patients on xarelto® did not experience another dvt or pe. xarelto® works differently.
7:14 pm
warfarin interferes with at least 6 of your body's natural blood-clotting factors. xarelto® is selective, targeting just one critical factor. don't stop taking xarelto® without talking to your doctor, as this may increase risk of blood clots. while taking, you may bruise more easily, or take longer for bleeding to stop. xarelto® can cause serious, and in rare cases, fatal bleeding. it may increase your risk of bleeding if you take certain medicines. get help right away for unexpected bleeding or unusual bruising. do not take xarelto® if you have an artificial heart valve or abnormal bleeding. before starting, tell your doctor about all planned medical or dental procedures and any kidney or liver problems. learn all you can... to help protect yourself from another dvt or pe. talk to your doctor about xarelto®. so, you're open all day, that's what 24/7 means, sugar. kind of like how you get 24/7 access to licensed agents with geico. hmm? yeah, you just go online, or give them a call anytime. you don't say. yep. now what will it take to get 24/7 access to that lemon meringue pie?
7:15 pm
pie! pie's coming! that's what it takes, baby. geico®. great service from licensed agents, 24/7.
7:16 pm
♪ behr presents: tough as walls. that's some great paint. ♪ that's some great paint. ♪ that's some great paint. behr ultra, a top-rated interior and exterior paint. paint, prime, protect - all in one. now that's some great paint! find it exclusively at the home depot. tonight the man who so the up the infamous trump tower meeting between members of team trump and russians is speaking out. before we talk to him, let me refresh your memory. on june 3rd, 2016, publicist rob
7:17 pm
goldstone who represented businessman and singer emin agalarov wrote in an e-mail, the crown prosecutor of russia met with his father aras this morning and in their meeting offered to provide the trump campaign with some official documents and information that would incriminate hillary and her dealings with russia and would be very useful no your father. this is obviously very high level and sensitive information. don junior responded, writing in part, if it's what you say, i love it, especially later in the summer. rob goldstone is the author of "pop stars, pageants, and presidents: how an e-mail trumped my life." thank you, sir, i appreciate you joining us here. many people see this letter as an attempt at collusion, right? they thought it was evidence of collusion. are they wrong? >> they are wrong. and people say to me, was i
7:18 pm
surprised by what we've learned so far from the mueller report, i.e. no collusion. i always thought, if my e-mail and the subsequent meeting at trump tower formed a cornerstone of that investigation and collusion, then this would be the finding they would have, because i know why i wrote the e-mail the way i did, and i know what went on in that meeting because i happened to be there. >> you think it was a cornerstone or just not possible evidence of one attempt at collusion? because remember, mueller's report never said they found no evidence of collusion. they said the investigation did not establish that members of the trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the russian government. that means didn't meet the legal threshold. >> i think, you know, there are people that are far smarter than me and far higher pay grades than me that have spent two years investigating this. all i know is what i know and it's what i've testified five
7:19 pm
times, i've spoken to the grand jury, i've been on capitol hill, i've spoken to the mueller team. on each occasion i felt that the story needed context. and when people understood the context, the collusion side of it became less important. >> let me ask you this before we go on. because we do know, because this is one of the quotes from robert mueller in the summary letter, that russians did interfere in the election, do you feel or have some regret that you may have helped them in that? >> you know, i've been asked in the past, what if anything do i regret. i regret two things. one is that i sent the e-mail. let's be really clear. if i could wind the clock back, when i tried to scourge my client from having me do should have fought maybe a bit harder. i would read later that he told other people that he also had doubts about setting up this
7:20 pm
meeting. if he had even had an inkling of that, if i had had an inkling that he thought that, i would have fought back. the second thing i regret is naming hillary clinton, because it really had nothing to do with hillary. if joe biden had been the candidate, if you had been the candidate, it would have been your name that i used. >> but you said it was hyperbole, but you mentioned the candidate and said it was damaging and there was a russian connection. i want to read something from your op-ed in "the washington post" tonight, you said you would have said anything in that meeting. why would you say that the russians had dirt on hillary clinton in an effort to support trump? of all things, why would you choose that? >> because i didn't make up the e-mail. i made the scant details that my client had given me better or worse, depending on which side you're on. >> let me ask you, why did you
7:21 pm
think that would appeal to anyone in trump's orbit? >> because as a publicist, i pitch people all the time. i have done for almost 30 years. if i pitched you for somebody on your show and said, it's okay, it's kind of interesting, you wouldn't even read the e-mail. if i puffed it up, you would parole re probably read it. to me, the most important line i wrote in that e-mail was, to don junior, maybe you should speak with emin directly. when he responded, "i love it," i thought, he's getting it, that i have no idea what i'm really talking about. and then he goes, "you're right, perhaps i'll just speak with emin." as soon as that was said, i didn't care anymore. i thought, let those two people sort it out. all i've been asked to do is to create a meeting.
7:22 pm
>> i have to -- i don't think it makes much sense. >> it makes sense to me. i hype an e-mail based on scant information that my client has given me which, again, is public record. he had said to me -- it was an attorney who was well-connected. i pushed back a couple of times, what does well-connected mean? and i said flippantly, connected to what? the power grid? it's obvious to me who this attorney is connected to. so then if this attorney, as i'm then told, as potentially damaging information about illegal russian funding to the democrats and their candidate's campaign, the rest of it i puffed up. but i didn't make it up. i puffed those facts up. >> okay. so you're saying, rob, that you were -- >> i was a publicist. >> i get that. i don't mean this in a derogatory way, that you were ignorant of the outcome, of the severity of what you were writing. but then you say, i knew enough
7:23 pm
about what i was writing that they would entertain it, i knew exactly -- because you said they were -- the russian government was supporting -- who would think that? >> i would, because i was in russia with donald trump during miss universe. i saw how he charmed the sternest-looking russians i had ever seen in my life, they were like something out of central casting. i've been to russia many times. i had seen on tv what putin had said about trump and what trump had said about putin. and i'm entitled to my own opinion, in what was a private e-mail from me, a private citizen, to donald junior, his father, there was as much chance of donald duck becoming president as donald trump in most people's opinion. >> i'm not a publicist. i have to say this. if i sent to an official campaign, an official candidate, and i'm mentioning a foreign government, i would know enough,
7:24 pm
like this could really get me in trouble because if this actually happens, this is something that people turn over to law enforcement. >> two things. i did not know that. i did not even think that for one second. am i saying that's good? no, i've never said that. but i didn't think that. also, i didn't -- i'm guy say that without sounding derogatory. i never considered don junior really a part of the campaign. i get it, it's in public testimony. i questioned whether i should send it to mr. trump via some method, whether it's his assistant. then i decided to go way down on the food chain and i chose don junior because i met him a couple of times, to run it past him enough to put it him in touch with my client. so i didn't consider that i was -- >> you didn't think he had enough juice with his own father to -- >> this is what i think. i think i was ignorant and oblivious and i think if i had to guess, he was marginally more
7:25 pm
or marginally less ignorant and oblivious than i was. but there was a campaign chairman in that meeting. i don't mean to throw paul manafort under a bus because he threw himself under his own bus, but i do think, people say all the time, how could you, rob goldstone, publicist from england who works in the music industry, not know this was potentially a crime? the chairman of the campaign was in that meeting. >> and his son-in-law. >> shouldn't one of of them have said, you can't do this? and rob goldstone would have gone, oh, that's interesting, stop. >> that's kind of my point. what do you think? should they have said that? >> knowing what i know now, yes. >> okay. >> and i know you're like -- and i know -- i know it sounds ludicrous. and that's why people on social media vilify me. >> okay. i get that. and that's awful when people do that. by the way, don't read social media. >> right. i'll read it the minute i go off the air. >> the reason i said that,
7:26 pm
because, shouldn't they know better, "they" should have turned it over to law enforcement officials. and i think barr thinks so too. that's why people say, maybe it didn't rise to the level of criminality, but it was an attempt at collusion. in barr's letter he said, multiple offers from russian-affiliated individuals to assist the trump campaign. do you think that you did -- that what you did was right, if it's not criminal, you think it was right to do? >> i think having sat in on the meeting, that it was a classic case of a bait and switch. and when people say everyone told lies about it being about adoption and how could it be about adoption, what i've learned since that meeting and in the last two years, adoptions is a huge part of the magnitsky act. as you know, it's the sanction that russia put in place. at the time i never heard of magnitsky or an act. adoption to me sounded strange. but it's the only thing i took away from that meeting.
7:27 pm
the only thing i remembered. if someone had said to me what was that meeting about, i would have said adoption. it was weird, but it was about adoptions. >> why was it weird? >> because the premise of my e-mail based on emin's facts was this lawyer had something to say about funding to the democrats. what's that got to do with adoptions? as it so happens, it had everything to do with it because what she said was that people like bill browder and the ziff brothers were funding the clintons and they were architects of the magnitsky act act. so it completes the circle. but it makes no sense to people when taken out of context. >> when all of this was happening, the president allegedly helped them draft a letter saying it was about adoption, the magnitsky act a, were you saying, oh something is not sitting right here in the moment? >> no. and i know it's hard for people to understand. if someone had put a gun to my
7:28 pm
head and said what was that meeting about, i would have said it was about adoptions also. >> are you aware of any other russian offers or attempts to assist the trump campaign? >> no. >> you're not? all right. i want you to take a listen to the chairman of the house intelligence committee. this is what he said today. >> my colleagues may think it's okay that the russians offered dirt on a democratic candidate for president as part of what was described as the russian government's effort to help the trump campaign. you might think that's okay. my colleagues might think it's okay that when that was offered to the son of the president who had a pivotal role in the campaign, that the president's son did not call the fbi. he did not adamantly refuse that foreign help. no, instead that son said that he would love the help of the russians. i think it's immoral. i think it's unethical.
7:29 pm
i think it's unpatriotic. >> what do you think? >> i've seen that a few times today. one of the things that strikes me whenever people say it, in this case it happens to be a politician, is that they state what is in my e-mail without stating that i've explained in great detail, much greater detail than we've had time today, including to congressman schiff's committee, why i wrote what i wrote, what it was based on, and that it isn't what they thought it was. so it's almost like you're saying something -- it would be like me saying you're wearing a gray suit and you putting on a blue jacket. i've already explained why that was, that it wasn't some official outreach from the russian government as far as i was giving it. i had given my explanation why those words were used the way they were used. >> okay, i get that. that's on your behalf. but as you said, someone, the
7:30 pm
campaign manager who happened to be in the meeting and other people, one would think they would know better. now that you're on the other side, once you realize that, you don't think that's evidence that they were trying to get dirt and in a way conspire in some way to help the russians? >> i would have thought that if i hadn't attended the meeting. people say to me, weren't you mad that you were asked to say? i'm actually glad i stayed because i heard what was said. if this was a bait and switch, whether emin chose to or didn't know enough to tell me what it was really about, the dangling of the carrot about the funding to hillary's campaign was still all to do with magnitsky. i just didn't know that at the time. >> do you think you were a dupe? i'll explain in just one second why i ask you that. >> i don't know. and i hoped that either the mueller report, which, remember, none of us have seen, we've seen these four pages or whatever, or one of these congressional committees, and i have to say, i
7:31 pm
never thought that until i heard the lawyer, natalia veselnitskaya, say "i am an informant" and i nearly fell off my chair, i was like, wait, that could mean everything i wrote and puffed up may have been 100% correct, but i didn't know that. >> so you hope the mueller report shows you were a dupe? >> no, i hope the mueller report would show, if there was something untoward, that i don't know about it. >> okay, so listen, the reason i asked you that is because there were people on television, there were people out there in the media who were on the president's behalf that were saying, well, they knew nothing, it was nothing, for one example. rudy giuliani was asked by chuck todd about that meeting and he said, you know, you ask me, do you think that they knew anything about russians, and then he responded, and i'm paraphrasing, i just think that she had a russian name and they knew nothing about her. you would know at that point that he's lying because of what
7:32 pm
you said. that didn't set off any alarm bells for you, wait a minute, there's a whole lot of lying going on here? >> as i've said, over the course of the two years i've heard things said, including by the attorney herself, that caused me to go, wait a second. probably the most major one for me was the one saying, i am an informant. there was a report in "the new york times" that she had shown a report to some official in russia. i didn't know any of that. that makes me think, who were these people? i didn't know who they were but i didn't need to know. my client kept saying, it doesn't matter, all i'm asking you to do is set up a meeting. >> do you think the full mueller report should be released? >> i think when those of us that did the grand jury, i believe you're assured that this is confidential and private and confidential, so i understand why there's issues with that.
7:33 pm
but outside of that, yes. >> did you think you were going to go to prison? did you think you would suffer consequences from this? >> i thought -- >> besides the social media backlash and sleepless nights? >> no. >> you said when the mueller report came out, the mueller report and the letter from bob barr, from the attorney general william barr, you said what? >> it's the first time in about 500 nights that i had slept without this feeling of being scared. and it wasn't being scared for something i had done. it was scared of the unknown. when you live your life under a microscope for almost two years, and we live in a social media world where things are said all the time and picked up by mainstream media outlets, i've been called everything from a kgb puppet to a democratic plant to sabotage trump. so the reality is, and it was actually your colleague chris cuomo that said it one day when i tuned in almost 18 months ago, i was a publicist doing my job.
7:34 pm
and if you speak to a thousand publicists you'll get a thousand amazing stories when they've gone over and above what anybody would expect to keep their clients happy. >> but not breaking the law. >> it's not breaking the law, sending an e-mail wasn't breaking the law. >> you can read rob goldstone's account of what it's been like for him in "the washington post" and you can also read his book, "pop stars, pageants, and presidents." i appreciate your time, thank you. the president is saying, quote, the collusion delusion is over. but we still haven't seen the full mueller report. should the president be reserving judgment until we actually get the contents of the report, especially since he said that he wouldn't mind if the american people got to see it? ♪
7:35 pm
[laughter] ♪ ♪ "i'm okay." ♪ ♪
7:36 pm
7:37 pm
rob goldstone, the publicist who set up the 2016 trump tower meeting with russians, is speaking out tonight. you heard what he has to say. now let's hear what they have to say. ryan lizza is here, kristen powers and john dean. good evening, everyone. kristen, give me the reaction, of what you heard from the man who set up the infamous trump tower meeting. >> the biggest take away i had from it was at a bare minimum you had donald trump junior, paul manafort, jared kushner, being receptive to a meeting with somebody representing, as he claims, maybe it was bogus, maybe it was just to get in the
7:38 pm
door, but they were open to a meeting were someone tied to the russian government was going to give them, quote unquote, dirt on hillary clinton. now, that's not a crime. but it's very, very shady behavior. it's very problematic behavior. and, you know, i don't think it's something that completely exonerates the trump organization, that that happened. >> it's not a crime according to kirsten, i'm not an attorney, john, but if you're on the other end of that and you're receiving this information, and you know it is a hostile foreign entity and you're having a meeting and there are direct relations to the russian government, what does that say? >> it says more than rob has said to you. his e-mail really says it all. they're responding to his e-mail which was obviously passed around, and as a result people like paul manafort showed up at the meeting. he certainly knew that dealing
7:39 pm
with a foreign government was not something you do in a u.s. campaign. he's an old hand at this. but yet he was interested in coming to the meeting. it may well be that rob was a cutout, as he describes himself. the mueller report certainly tracked on beyond him to his clients and got some answers that we don't know. >> i was sitting there, i hate to do all this what-about-ism, but i was just thinking, i wonder if this was an associate or someone who was connected to the hillary clinton campaign and the same thing had happened, i wonder what the other side would be saying. >> yeah, i don't think you have to really wonder that much. it would be massive. >> imagine that. but this is nothing at all. >> remember when the e-mail investigation ended and comey wrote a 300-page report and gave it to loretta lynch and loretta lynch put out a four-page press
7:40 pm
release saying, there's no crime here, everyone. imagine what people on the right would say. >> we should take her at her word, don't you think? i'm being facetious. >> what i find incredible about rob is he's open to the idea of being a dupe. the lawyer said she was an informant and he learned a little bit more about her background in the russian system, he did think, well, maybe i was put up to something here. >> but in the end -- >> but that's someone who can be honest, i think, and examine their own behavior, and someone who has been through this and come on and take those questions, because not many people will come on and do that. there are people who are associated with the trump campaign or administration that are afraid to come on because they know the show is about truth and they won't do it because they're afraid of what
7:41 pm
the truth will expose. i have to ask you before we go on, what he said dabout don junior, basically saying don junior is not that bright, that was kind of surprising. >> when he said i went to don junior, he was a nobody, i actually don't buy that, everybody knows, he's the president's son, he was involved with the campaign. the responsibility was for the trump people to say, we don't take meetings with russian agents offering dirt. we go to the fbi. >> that was my point i asked john about. >> that's what i was going to say, it doesn't really matter what he was trying to bring to them or what he was promising to bring to them or whether he had anything or not. it's what they thought he was bringing to them. >> exactly, it's how they reacted to him, and that they didn't turn it over to law enforcement. john, here is what the president had to say about the investigations by congress. >> the democrats have to now decide whether they will
7:42 pm
continue defrauding the public with ridiculous bullshit. [ cheers and applause ] partisan investigations. or whether they will apologize to the american people and join us to rebuild our crumbling infrastructure, bring down the cost of health care and prescription drugs which we're doing incredibly, help us fix our broken trade deals. >> john, ridiculous, redemption, apologize, what's your reaction? >> everything he says, the opposite is the truth. it's just remarkable. this business of the democrats need to apologize, he's the one that needs to apologize. he doesn't get it yet.
7:43 pm
i hope the democrats don't back off. we don't have the mueller report. we need it. they're covering up at this point. it's been around for six days. i'm quite confident that when mueller prepared that, he's probably got an annotated copy, he knows where everything came from, and they can very easily clean it up and put it out. and we don't even know how long it is for sure, we know it's 300 pages plus. i read today on cnn that it may go as high as a thousand words. >> a thousand pages? >> it could be a thousand pages, yes. but i think he's going to have to back off on this celebration he's on, taking victory laps. it's going to wear thin very quickly. and he's going to be caught short on it. >> thank you. that's all we have time for. i appreciate your time, everyone. there's been a lot of backlash since prosecutors
7:44 pm
dropped charges against jussie smollett including from the president tonight. we'll speak to someone at the center of the investigation, the lawyer who worked with the brothers who said they helped stage the alleged attack. she joins me next. ♪ ♪
7:45 pm
t-mobile will do the math for you. right now, when you join t-mobile, you get two lines of unlimited with two of the latest phones included for just one hundred bucks a month. it's not small. but it's not just big either. it's the kind of big where you'll never have to ask, "should i scooch up?" it's big that looks at a sunroof and wonders why it can't just be most of the roof. it's big that's better because we built it that way. the spacious, 121 cubic feet of cargo space ford expedition. (danny) the spacious, after a long day of hard work... have to do more work?
7:46 pm
(vo) automatically sort your expenses and save over 40 hours a month. (danny) every day you're nearly fried to a crisp, professionally! (vo) you earned it, we're here to make sure you get it. quickbooks. backing you.
7:47 pm
president trump blasting jussie smollett at his rally tonight. >> how about in chicago? he said -- [ audience reacts ] he said he was attacked by maga country. did you ever hear that one? >> that's after chicago mayor
7:48 pm
rahm emanuel sent smollett a bill for $130,000 to cover the resources used in the investigation of smollett's claims of a hate crime. so laurie schmidt is here, the attorney who worked with the osundairo brothers. police allege jussie smollett paid them to stage an attack on him in january. gloria, thank you so much for joining us. so let's talk about this. the president says that this case is an embarrassment. what do you make of the charges being dropped? >> well, you know, i have to agree with the characterization of this being an embarrassment. i originally, okay, was planning on going on spring break with my family. we were literally in my living room packing. i had told the state's attorney, you know, i'm going on spring break with my family, i'll see you next week. i had just been in touch with them a few days ago, okay?
7:49 pm
and then i see the news, just like everyone else, and was baffled. baffled. >> so you got no warning. correct me if i'm wrong, brothers who you represented, were they cooperating witnesses and if they were, one would think that they would be notified of any changes in this case, am i wrong? >> well, they were cooperating witnesses to the extent that they were witnesses and they wanted to cooperate. but i don't want that to get confused with like a cooperation agreement. there wasn't any kind of deal or plea deal or immunity offered. but they were witnesses who were fully committed to cooperating. and they had -- nothing had changed. something that i don't think -- i'm sorry, go ahead. >> you said something you don't think what? >> something, i don't think many people realize this, i had just been in touch with the state's
7:50 pm
attorney's office just days ago. they had assigned a victim advocate for each of my clients. we were going to be present at the april 17th hearing. i had a front row seat at the march 7th hearing. so this was coordinating with us. for the state's attorney's office not to give my client and me at that time any notice of these proceedings, it's very uncourteous. >> okay. so, listen, we -- our time is short here because we is so much news. if you can answer quickly, the brothers stand behind their story. >> sure. >> they stand behind their story -- >> yes. >> that they were maid to paid this. $3,500 check to stage this event. you told anderson cooper that check was for training purposes and told george stephanopoul stephanopoulstephanopoulo stephanopoulos -- >> it was for both. it was for both. yes, they stand behind the fact that jussie had also promised them $500 when they came back
7:51 pm
from nigeria for their role in this attack. >> so they never recanted sta e story? >> they never recanted their story. >> do they face the possibility of charges? are they going to be charged in this case? because if he didn't -- >> no, because they didn't -- >> then -- >> i mean, what charges could they face? because they were not -- they did not commit a hate crime. they did not stalk jussie out and attack him for his sexual orientation or for his race. this was completely a publicity stunt that my clients had trusted with their friend and once this got so big and they saw that this was affecting so many people, they stood up and said, we're not going to be part of this fraud. and that's what happened. they were committed to doing that. >> one more thing before i let you go, one of the attorneys said that the brothers could have been wearing whiteface that night? >> i -- i heard that, and i
7:52 pm
think that's absolutely just atrocious. it adds to, i think, why people are giving lawyers a bad name. it's to distract from the real issues here and by putting out conspiracy theories that, perhaps, my clients were wearing whiteface, it just adds to the ridiculous and the offensiveness of this entire thing. >> gloria schmidt, thank you for your time. >> thank you, don. >> thank you. we've got a lot more to talk about when it comes to the jussie smollett case. a former cook county prosecutor is going to break it all down, next. lls. that's some great paint. ♪ that's some great paint. ♪
7:53 pm
that's some great paint. behr ultra, a top-rated interior and exterior paint. paint, prime, protect - all in one. now that's some great paint! find it exclusively at the home depot. i switched to geico and saved hundreds. that's a win. but it's not the only reason i switched. geico's a company i can trust, with over 75 years of great savings and service. ♪ now that's a win-win. switch to geico. it's a win-win.
7:54 pm
so why haven't youul swistarted building? tyler's off to college... and mom's getting older... and eventually we would like to retire. td ameritrade can help you build a plan for today and tomorrow. come with a goal. leave with a plan. td ameritrade. ♪
7:55 pm
so back with the latest on the jussie smollett case. chicago mayor rahm emanuel wants jussie smollett to pay more than $130,000 to cover the resources used in the investigation into smollett's claims of a hate crime. the attorney general has also been asked to review the handling of the case. joining me, someone who knows full well his way around a courtroom, knows about the charges. he was there when the charges were dropped. his name is andrew weis buburg, criminal defense attorney and cook county prosecutor. am i correct, were you there when the charges were dropped? >> yes, don. >> good evening. thank you. let's talk about this. what in the world is going on here? the cook county -- the cook county state's attorney issued a statement saying, this is kim foxx, "did not formally recuse herself from the smollett case, rather she informally separated herself from the decisionmaking. what does that mean? >> well, that's my conconfusing.
7:56 pm
she recused herself, w from the matter, she's back on the back end discussing the case. i was there at the time this happened. just happened to be in the courtroom. when i heard the decision to drop the charges, i was stunned and my jaw dropped. >> why? because you had never heard anything tlike it? why? >> i've dealt like many cases like this that end in a similar fashion. it's not uncommon in cook county for the state's attorney's office to offer some kind of pretrial diversion program. generally the program that they run is a one-year program so you accept this and you have to earn it through the period of one year, stay out of trouble, go to court once every three months, see a probation officer, community service and if you complete it after nine months to a year, the charges are dropped. the pace at which this case is dismi dismissed is this i've never seen before. >> andrew, what happened here? what do you think happened? no one seems to understand. >> well, i don't know that i do, either. i've been racking my brain
7:57 pm
trying to figure out how we got here. what really puzzles me, the case was set initially for april 17th and they decided to advance the case, run in early on march 26th, whatever the exact was and dismiss the case kind of quietly so that raises some questions. i don't believe anything nefarious took place, don't think anything corrupt took place. there's some explanation for why this had to be so quickly dismissed and i have not been able to figure it out yet. >> andrew weisburg, thank you, i appreciate your time. >> any time, don, thank you. >> the president is railing against smollett tonight. why smollett is his latest favorite target and what it signals to his base.
7:58 pm
7:59 pm
this is "cnn tonight." i'm don lemon. the city of chicago going after "empire" actor jussie smollett demanding he pay more than $130,000 to cover the cost of
8:00 pm
the investigation into his claims that he was the victim of a hate crime. smollett was charged with staging the attack against himself, but prosecutors dropped all the charges against him on tuesday. stunning just about everyone, including mayor rahm emanuel. >> given that he doesn't feel any sense of contrition and remor remorse, my recommendation is when he writes the check in the memo section, he can put the word, "i'm accountable" for the hoax. >> even president trump is condemning the move by prosecutors to drop the case saying this tonight at a political rally in michigan. >> he said he was attacked by maga country. you ever hear of that one? maybe the only time i've ever agreed with the mayor of chicago. maybe. that's a terrible situation. that's an embarrassment, not only t


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on