tv Anderson Cooper 360 CNN February 22, 2019 9:00pm-10:00pm PST
get to know geico and see the latestou could inisn't just a store.ty it's a save more with a new kind of wireless network store. it's a look what your wifi can do now store. a get your questions answered by awesome experts store. it's a now there's one store that connects your life like never before store. the xfinity store is here. and it's simple, easy, awesome. kate?
good evening. tonight, a major milestone in the mueller investigation. we're waiting tonight for the mueller team to submit their sentencing memorandum in the paul manafort case. now, the deadline is midnight. the memo is likely the last major filing in the prosecution of paul manafort. as we have seen in other sentencing memoranda, it may also contain new information in the russia investigation, and serve as another sign post toward the overall investigation is headed. >> there was no collusion. there was no obstruction. there was no anything. so that's the nice part. there was no phone calls, no nothing. we have a -- i won the race. you know why i won the race? because i was a better candidate than she was and had nothing to do with russia. and everybody knows it's a hoax. it's one of the greatest hoaxes ever perpetrated on this country. i look forward to seeing the report. if it's an honest report, it will say that. if it's not an honest report, it won't. >> that was the president earlier today. will tonight's memo provide any
clues to that final report? that's one question out of many, and it's not the only breaking news on the subject either. there is new reporting as well tonight on potentially new evidence that michael cohen gave federal investigators about the trump organization. maggi haberman is on that biline and we'll talk to her shortly. first the manafort memo. what can we learn from the memo? we are expecting this really at any moment now up until midnight. >> yeah. we are expecting this, anderson, up to midnight. it could come at any moment. it's just another friday here in washington, d.c., as we await news from the mueller team. and really, this is, we hope, in some ways, could button up, put a lot of information together about the mueller investigation. we know from other filings that they considered paul manafort a central figure. he was at the heart, the matters he was involved in. has been at the heart of what the special counsel has been looking at. and specifically, what we're looking to see in this memo that hopefully gets filed soon is whether or not they explain any more the relationship between
paul manafort and this long-time business associate of his, constantine, whether or not it explains what their relation is, especially during the campaign. the other things we're going to learn more about, paul manafort's business activity. a lot has been made about that. and really, ultimately, do they in any way put together more information about where their investigation stands? is this a milestone for the mueller investigation? this could be the last significant filing that we see from them. >> the new york district attorney's office is also preparing charges against manafort if he were to get a presidential pardon. is that correct? >> yeah, that is correct. they have been working on this case for probably about two years now, anderson. it's also related to tax charges and loans that he received from banks, the manhattan d.a.'s office started looking into this
around the same time that mueller came in. and what happened is, they had stopped. they basically did not take any kind of heavy activity. they did not do any kind of heavy investigative activity, because they did not want to interfere in the mueller investigation. and certainly, the other concern from folks in law enforcement and manhattan d.a. is that the president could pardon paul manafort, essentially letting him free on all of these alleged crimes. some of them that he's been convicted on. the manhattan d.a.'s office wants to secure, make sure they can at least secure charges that the president would not be able to pardon paul manafort on. >> all right. appreciate it. we'll come back to you, obviously. pete before he hands the report over to the attorney general, how much do you think we could learn from this memo? because in the past, we have seen a lot of details put into the sentencing memo. >> it's unclear. and i hate to speculate about something that is going to be obvious in minutes, if not
hours. but, look. there is a reason why separate and apart from, you know, wanting to telegraph major developments in what the investigation is for them to want to say more detail in the submission. and the reason for that is, you know, remember, initially paul manafort was -- went to trial. was convicted on eight counts. in one case, in the eastern district of virginia. then decided not to go to trial with respect to the d.c. case, the one we're talking about. and decided to cooperate. and entered into a cooperation agreement with the special counsel's office. and got, you know, kind of a nice deal, having to plead guilty to only two counts, two conspiracy counts. and then they ripped up the cooperation agreement, and they don't have to stabbed by it any more, because they believe paul manafort lied. and that was litigated and basically agreed upon that he lied and didn't deserve the benefit of this cooperation agreement. so for that reason, the prosecutors are now very free to talk in much greater detail, as they did in the other case,
about all sorts of things they think paul manafort did. and the precursor to this was the occasion of one of the prosecutors for the special counsel's office declaring in open court how interested they were in a particular meeting between paul manafort and mr. kilimnik as simone was just talking about. so they have incentive to bring before the court with respect to the particular case how serious his conduct was, because he breached the cooperation agreement. separate from any interest in putting before the public, before the report becomes public, if it ever does, what happened in the case. >> yeah, i mean, the prosecutors are supposed to outline all the facts that should be considered at his sentencing hearing. mueller -- others have commented, though, that in the past mueller has been very adept at revealing only the minimum amount of information he has throughout this investigation, but has put details into these documents and some have argued that it's a way to get it in front of the public in a way that might not be possible, depending on how this final report is handled. do you believe that he is
intentionally putting details in there to kind of get them out into the public sphere? >> you know, i don't know. it doesn't strike me as the way that bob mueller traditionally operates. if he knows he's going to have an opportunity to provide a full report to the attorney general as is required by the guidelines under which he was appointed, i don't think so. but it's a tantalizing prospect to think about that. so i think it's -- i think it's interesting. i think there have been sort of fascinating tidbits that you and i have discussed before that don't necessarily have to be in the document and find their way into the document anyway. but i think it's impossible to tell. >> at the end of all of this, how much time do you think manafort might end up serving? i mean, you know, beyond any question of a pardon, just in terms of sentencing? it's very likely he could spend the rest of his life in jail. in prison. >> the reason for that, he's 69 years old. he turned 70 in april. look, the prosecutors, as a lot of people have described with
respect to -- remember, he has two cases. he refused to waive the venue requirement that the government is supposed to meet. so he had a case in virginia and a case in the district of columbia. with respect to the other case we talked about a couple of weeks ago, the sentencing guidelines, as determined by the probation department with respect to his report that happens in every case when anybody is facing sentencing in the federal system, said that the guidelines range is 19.5 to 24.5 years. that's on the one case. on this other case that we're talking about tonight, he can face additional time. now, according to the cooperation agreement that they had originally entered into, the parties agreed, the defendant and the special counsel's office agreed, that some of that conduct was overlapping. with respect to the conduct overlapping like the tax evasion and those sorts of things that the sentence in the one case should be concurrent with the
sentence in the other case so the second case wouldn't dramatically increase his exposure. but one of the counts on which he's going to be sentenced in the case we're talking about tonight, the d.c. case, was a conspiracy to obstruct justice in connection with witness tampering. that will likely be on top of whatever he gets in the other case. and in the other case, although the sentencing guidelines call for 19.5 to a 24.5-year sentence, i don't think that that will happen. i think that that seems excessive. and it's largely driven by the dollar value of the tax evasion that we're talking about in that case. so that happens all of the time. there's an exorbitant amount of time called for by the sentencing guidelines. i think the likelihood is not going to be anywhere near that but still substantial. i wouldn't be surprised if it was very high, single digits or low double digit sentence. >> this notion of the district attorney in new york preparing in case mueller gets pardoned by the president, he -- they can do that? i mean, how would -- how do they actually go about that? >> you have to do it carefully. we have something in the constitution called the double jeopardy clause. >> right, yeah. >> and it can apply, depending on the circumstances, in both directions if the federal
prosecutors go first versus whether the local prosecutors go first. generally speaking, if the federal prosecutors go first and it's the same conduct that's at issue, depending on the state constitution of the local prosecutor, and in new york, it's a pretty -- it's a pretty high bar, they can't go forward. so there are arguments that can be made depending on what their case is about. i don't know exactly what their case is about. but it likely will at a minimum be about tax evasion. and there was a fix made to new york law some years ago after the leona helmsly case, making it clear that if you commit tax evasion on the federal level -- federal taxes, and then separately evade state taxes, you don't have a double jeopardy problem. so i would expect he's at a minimum looking at that. but without knowing the details, you don't know what the legal obstacles will be. there may be some, but they're pretty smart over there and probably have figured out a way not to have those problems. >> wow. i love that you have been able
to connect leona helmsly to part. >> i've always wanted to say her name on national television. >> blast from the past. preet barrera, thank you very much. i want to dig deeper with ken cuccinelli, shan woo and phil mudd. do you believe this could be a glimpse into where mueller's investigation stands so far? how revealing based on what he's done in the past do you think mueller would be? >> i don't want to throw shade on the party. but the theory for it being more revealing depends on two things, anderson. a., they're trying to give us hints, which i would agree with preet, i don't think they're trying to do that. or two, now that the plea agreement has been breached by manafort, the prosecutors don't have to limit themselves. and the reason they wouldn't limit themselves is to make sure that they put all the bad conduct in front of the judge,
to make sure he gets a very heavy hit on the sentence. but i don't think they need to do all of that right now. if we assume that the mueller team likes to be minimalist, they don't need to pull out a lot to give them a very heavy sentence, because simply based on the dollar amount, it's already high. and he's also got the virginia case coming up. so i don't know that they necessarily have the incentive to reveal a lot here, just to really punish him for his breach. >> ken, do you agree with that? and one big aspect of the case that this filing may cover is manafort's contact with, you know, constantine kilimnik, which preet was talking about, who prosecutors are alleging is connected to russian intelligence and that manafort shared polling data with. >> right. if there is anything beyond sharing polling data, i might expect to see it in the
explanation of the special counsel to the judge as part of sentencing. but beyond that possibility, i would agree with the comments already made that bob mueller is not going to look at this as an opportunity to reveal more. i think you can expect to see him continue his sort of minimalist approach to revealing information. like i said, with the one exception, if there is unique significance to that meeting, i would, in fact, expect to see it, because i would think the special counsel would want the judge to consider those unique facts as part of the punishment phase. >> phil, talk a little bit about sort of the focus on kilimnik. if he's indeed connected to russian intelligence, as prosecutors have alleged, do you think that whatever manafort shared with him would have been passed along to others? if it's just, you know, a lot of republicans will say, look, polling data, that's not like top-secret information. >> i -- >> right.
>> no, i agree with that. i agree. i hate to say this, anderson. i agree with the two lawyers who have been on tonight. it's the first time ever i'll say that. but i mean, the lawyers for the defense have a right to see the information that mueller has. so if there is information that's been passed along to kilimnik, i think if it's not extremely sensitive, they should have it. i mean, in terms of the conversation you were having earlier about what lawyers say about the jeopardy that paul manafort is in, i'm going to agree again. i think mueller doesn't have the responsibility, and i don't think he will reveal a lot of information. manafort, as we discussed, is 69 years old. even in limited circumstances, he's got 5, 10, 15 years. that's a lot of time for somebody that age. so we keep talking about the amount of information that will be revealed in this legal process. i'm not sure that's going to happen. he's already under tremendous jeopardy. he's already going to face jail time. i'm not sure this will be as interesting as people talk about, anderson. >> shen, manafort's legal team
have until monday to file their own request for manafort's sentence. given his lies to prosecutors, how much will that really matter? will they recommend will matter? >> i think it will matter a lot. this is truly their last-ditch effort here to try and get him out from under a really bad problem. so i would expect them to both play up his age, his ill health, and probably take another shot at claiming that some of the misrepresentations he made were more accidental than not. they can't really get the judge to change her mind on what she did point out. but they can paint the overall picture this was not one mass of intentional lies. that some of it perhaps due to his age and health was just misrecollection. so i would look for a pretty powerful statement from them. because they really need to push this down. his only hope of getting this low was that the prosecution would agree to go down in the guidelines, because of his cooperation. without that, all he's left with is the hail mary for the pardon.
and, you know, that may still be out there. perhaps it can be a message that what he was holding back on, what he was lying on, was maybe important enough to the trump people, that maybe that's his message that i deserve a pardon. >> ken, as jeff toobin has pointed out, apparently paul manafort looks terrible, walking with a cane. looks like he's aged considerably. does not look like he's in good health. ken, i want to ask you about what i talked with preet about, about manhattan prosecutors, the idea they're preparing a criminal case against manafort if president trump decides to pardon manafort. you know, preet talked about, if it's state tax evasion, then it's not double jeopardy on federal charges. >> right. >> a., do you agree with that? and is that fair for -- i mean, to kind of do an end run like that? >> well, first of all, i do
agree with the double jeopardy analysis. but having dealt with double jeopardy myself over the years in my legal capacity, you ask it an interesting way, anderson. you asked is it fair. i think most americans objectively, if you took the politics out of this, if you asked about a state-level prosecutor lying in wait if things don't go a particular way at the federal level or if they do, most americans would be -- would not be comfortable with that. that is our system, however. it is perfectly legal. it is perfectly constitutional. it's a separate charge, a separate offense and a separate sovereign. so there's no getting in the way of it if you're president trump or if you're paul manafort. so that is going to be left hanging out there, regardless. >> shan, i guess me saying -- using the word "fair" is a little naive, because had you're talking about the legal system, what's fair and legal are often two different things. >> well, we hope they're aligned most of the time, anderson. but i would say the easiest way to understand that double jeopardy argument to me is i have to pay both state and federal taxes. so i don't think the majority of people would think that it's unjust. i mean, it makes perfect sense analytically those are two separate charges for him. there has also been some reporting they have been laying in wait. the way i'm reading that, they did just pause it because they
didn't want to interfere with mueller and now they can resume it. so i think they'll move forward with that. and, again, that's just -- it's a never-ending nightmare for the manafort people and team. there is no end to the misery here. and i don't know if they would be able to cut some kind of good deal, because at this point, they have no leverage on him. >> phil, i mean, pending charges in manhattan, possibly at the new york state level, i mean, it just goes to show, even if the president escapes the mueller probe, his legal troubles are far from over. this is just going to drag on and on. >> boy, we're talking -- let me now differ from the lawyers. we're talking about a lot of legal issues, as somebody who participated in investigations. my sympathy level is near zero. we have a very complicated case with a series of witnesses who decided to lie. one of them is manafort, who lied repeatedly. whether it's federal or state charges, if you want to lie in
front of a judge, and in front of federal investigators, and then you say, well, you know, i don't really like jail, because i don't feel very good. and i have health issues. you know, i understand there's a double jeopardy question. i understand there's questions about whether the public will view this in one way or the other. but as someone who investigated, when you lie, you're going to have to pay the price. and one of the prices is, you're going to spend some time getting three hots and a cot. three meals at my taxpayer dollars and a room and a federal prison. i don't feel that sympathetic. he should have told the truth. end of story. >> phil, i never want you testifying against me. >> that's going to happen one day, anderson. you're done. >> if it does happen, i am done. phil, thank you very much. shan woo, ken cuccinelli, thank you very much. coming up next, the president preparing for what michael cohen might tell congress next week. there is late word on new information he's already given to federal prosecutors, as you'll see. the subject matter in question lives squarely on the far side of one of the president's red lines. we'll talk to maggi haberman about that. and breaking news in the r.
kelly case. details on the sexual abuse charges he's facing and when he is expected to turn himself in. ♪ t-mobile is always happy to see you. 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. and relief from symptoms caused feel the clarity of non-drowsy claritin by over 200 indoor and outdoor allergens. like those from buddy. because stuffed animals are clearly no substitute for real ones. feel the clarity. and live claritin clear.
has been excellent. they really appreciate the military family and it really shows. with all that usaa offers why go with anybody else? we know their rates are good, we know that they're always going to take care of us. it was an instant savings and i should have changed a long time ago. it was funny because when we would call another insurance company, hey would say "oh we can't beat usaa" we're the webber family. we're the tenney's we're the hayles, and we're usaa members for life. ♪ get your usaa auto insurance quote today. dad! hiding when i was supposed to be quitting. i thought, i should try something that works. i should try nicorette.
nicorette mini relieves sudden cravings fast. anytime. anywhere. nicorette mini. you know why. we know how. nicorette mini. turn up your swagger game with one a day gummies. one serving... ...once a day... ...with nutrients that support 6 vital functions... ...and one healthy you. that's the power of one a day. this is the all-new it's beautiful.. beefy and mean looking. it's the strongest, most advanced silverado ever. the cab is bigger than the last generation. it's the first truck i've seen make you look small. but that's not all... whoo! oh my... whoa! the silverado has more cargo volume than any competitor. very impressive. now, during the chevy presidents day sales event, get 0% financing for 72 months on this all-new silverado. drive yours away this presidents day. we're awaiting the
sentencing memo recommendation from robert mueller's team tonight. that could happen any time before midnight. we'll obviously bring that as breaking news. there is other breaking news tonight ahead of michael cohen's upcoming testimony before congress. the question is, did the president know about it earlier today when he said this. >> have you ever heard anything about michael cohen's testimony? >> no. >> are you still considering -- >> lawyer/client. but he's taking his own chances. >> fairly nonchalant, all things considered, especially given that this next story crosses his red lines. it landed late today in the "new york times." the headline reads, cohen gave prosecutors new information on the trump family business. the "new york times" maggi haberman is our political analyst and joins us now. so maggi, talk about your new reporting. that michael cohen offered up to federal prosecutors in new york. do we know how detailed it got or what we know about it? >> as we say in the piece,
michael cohen met recently with prosecutors from the southern district of new york, which is where he pleaded guilty to talk about the trump organization. information related to insurance claims. we don't have more details than that. we don't know where these insurance claims were processed or what they were for, specifically. but that is what he talked about. he also was asked questions about imad zuberi, mentioned by name to the presidential inaugural committee a couple of weeks ago. there was a -- more of a business transaction between cohen and zuberi than was let on in an interview with the "new york times." there had been some check he had written to cohen. cohen apparently didn't deposit it, but zuberi played it off as if they had barely had any interactions. what this all adds up to, we don't know. but remember, cohen is going to be testifying three times next week, two closed doors, one in an open setting. i think there are going to be a
number of things he's not allowed to talk about. but it's really just, again, a reminder that he remains one of the biggest threats to the president. not just now, but going forward. >> so zuberi -- and that's a name not a lot of people know. but you have reported on him in the past. initially, there was -- or part of what people -- authorities have been looking into is money paid to the inaugural committee. you're saying at the same time he also was paying michael cohen $100,000, which is something he had downplayed to you previously, saying he really hadn't had business dealings. >> correct. he said he had had a couple interactions with him, that they had talked about doing some real estate venture that didn't end up taking place. that appears to have been true. however, he did write this check to michael cohen that appears not to have been cashed. but i don't know why you write someone a $100,000 check if you're not planning on going into business with them. and to your point, zuberi is notable, because he was a very large donor to the inaugural committee.
he had been a clinton donor and obama donor before that. he was someone who was looking for entry points into the new administration. he clearly thought that michael cohen might be one. he thought the inaugural might be another. he wrote $900,000 in donations to the inaugural committee. >> we should also point out, this is around the time that michael cohen seemed to be kind of selling himself as an entry point into the new trump administration. i mean, you know, there were companies i think, you know, at&t was one of them and others which we now know i think gave michael cohen money for a consultant. >> there were a lot of companies that i think were looking to -- that had absolutely no connection to trump or his orbit. and were trying to understand the new white house. and i think that michael cohen became somebody who folks went into business with for that purpose. but i think that, again, we don't know the full scope of everything he talked about with the prosecutors.
but he clearly did not simply, you know, stick to what we have heard before, which is about hush money payments to women who had claimed to have had affairs with president trump. michael cohen worked for the trump organization for a decade. he was around for an awful lot of discussions and an awful lot of transactions that took place. and presumably he has stories to tell. >> do you know how something like this comes about? i mean, why wasn't this information that michael cohen gave to them a while back? i mean, he has certainly been involved in the southern district now for quite some time. and you talked about also information he might give in the future. is it not the kind of situation where they just ask him to download all his information that he has in his head? >> it's a great question. remember that michael cohen did not strike a -- a cooperation deal with the southern district. that would have required him to basically sit and answer whatever questions they wanted about whatever topic they wanted in his life, any crimes he may have knowledge about, or partake in himself or been aware. he chose not to do that.
and that is believed to be part of why he got the pretty large sentence that he got. there is always the possibility that if prosecutors find his information credible and useful, they could recommend a sentence reduction. it obviously remains to be seen if that will happen. he was supposed to go to jail in two weeks. he is now not supposed to go for another two months, because he had some medical issues. but i think that this has not taken place in the typical course of things that we see with the southern district. we're just going to have to wait and see what it amounts to. >> it's also interesting, because in the past, the president has continued to attack michael cohen. you know, in certain mob-like terms, referring to him as a rat. knowing -- it's interesting, though, to see how the president is going to react to his testimony, because, as you say, he doesn't have a cooperative agreement. if he has -- he may have more information that he could give to prosecutors, depending on how prison time goes for him, depending on how his feelings are toward the president as time goes by. >> right.
and, look, it certainly doesn't have to be -- just thinking ahead to the testimony, forgetting about what happens in the future with the prosecutors, to your point, he's going to testify next week. the president will be out of the country. michael cohen can talk about things that even if they are not legally damaging, they could be politically damaging to the president. and that has been one of the things that has confounded a lot of people, even supporters of the president, who look at how he has behaved toward cohen and think why would you intentionally attack someone the way he has, knowing that cohen may have this wealth of information that he may be able to talk about. the president and his allies have repeatedly questioned michael cohen's credibility. the southern district, even there, where prosecutors went after him pretty aggressively, also said they found his information on certain issues to be truthful. robert mueller's team issued a stronger memo before michael cohen was sentenced, saying he had been helpful to their investigation and they found it truthful. so i think you are going to see all of this play out where michael cohen is testifying next week. >> just very briefly, and you
may not know the answer to this, because it may not be known. do we know, is michael cohen meeting in advance with, you know, staffers on capitol hill in advance of his testimony? because oftentimes politicians like to do that, because it can help them hone their questions, you know. they're not just going on a fishing expedition in front of cameras. they can hone their questions much more succinctly. >> we don't know the answer to that. i would assume there would be some insight among democrats about what michael cohen -- what areas generally he might be touching on. but it's not clear at all how much advance prep there is going to be. not clear how much time everybody is going to get. there are a lot of members of this committee. and so i think that there is going to be an awful lot of interest from different people. >> yeah. maggi haberman, thank you very much. appreciate it. coming up, an arrest warrant has been issued for r & b singer, r. kelly, indicted on ten felony counts of sexual abuse involving four victims, including minors. the singer's lawyer says he's going to turn himself in tonight. we'll have the latest on that. (door bell rings) it's open! hey.
this is amazing. with moderate to severe ulcerative colitis, are you okay? even when i was there, i never knew when my symptoms would keep us apart. so i talked to my doctor about humira. i learned humira can help get, and keep uc under control when other medications haven't worked well enough. and it helps people achieve control that lasts. so you can experience few or no symptoms. humira can lower your ability to fight infections, including tuberculosis. serious, sometimes fatal infections and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened; as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure. before treatment, get tested for tb. tell your doctor if you've been to areas where certain fungal infections are common, and if you've had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have flu-like symptoms or sores. don't start humira if you have an infection. be there for you, and them. ask your gastroenterologist about humira. with humira, control is possible.
thanksmrs. murphy. unitedhealthcare, hi, i need help getting an appointment with my podiatrist. how's wednesday at 2? i can't. dog agility. tuesday at 11? nope. robot cage match. how about the 28th at 3? done. with unitedhealthcare medicare advantage plans, including the only plans with the aarp name, there's so much to take advantage of. from scheduling appointments to finding specialists, it's easier to get the care you need when you need it.
recently called "surviving r. kelly" says the singer's alleged activities has been an open secret for almost two decades. and we quote him now, saying it's time for him to finally pay for the harm he has caused. the black girls' lives he's ruined. cnn's randi kaye joins us now with the latest. so what more do we know about this? because, i mean, this has been going on, obviously, for quite some time. >> absolutely, anderson. r. kelly has long had a reputation for trolling underage girls dating as far back as the 1990s. remember, he reportedly had married the singer aaliyah when she was just 15. he was 27. neither actually ever admitted to the marriage, which was reportedly annulled before she died in a plane crash years later. but over the years, the stories of abuse and manipulation have just continued to surface. girls as young as 15 accusing kelly of having sex with them, plying them with drugs and alcohol. the first time lawsuit filed in 1996 which a woman who alleged a sexual relationship with kelly, which she said began when she was 15.
was later reportedly settled. another from a woman whom kelly said initiated a relationship with her, also settled. and in 2002, kelly was accused of having sex with a 14-year-old girl in a video in which the girl was urinated on. kelly was arrested in that case when he was 35. then acquitted six years later. one accuser claimed he impregnated her when she was 16. another said he videotaped her without her knowledge. kelly has strongly denied all of these allegations over the years. but as of tonight, anderson, he has been indicted on ten counts of aggravated criminal sexual abuse involving four victims, as you mentioned, three older than 13, but under 17, according to the state's attorney in chicago. one count refers to kelly using force or the threat of force. his attorneys have yet to release a statement on all of this. but this all comes on the heels of attorney michael avenatti announcing he's handed over a videotape to the state's attorney's office in illinois that he says shows kelly having sex with an underage girl. cnn was actually able to view that tape and it appears to show kelly having sex with a girl who
refers to her, quote, 14-year-old genitalia. and the man refers to the age of her genitalia, as well. and the girl repeatedly calls the man "daddy." this new footage very disturbing, lasts almost 43 minutes. but what is on the video apparently mirrors some of the alleged acts. >> and there was also videotape of that, as well. >> that was a child pornography case that went to trial finally in 2008, so it took six years. in that case he was accused of making a 27-minute sex tape with an underage girl. the alleged victim met him when she was 12, claimed he made her do vial things and filmed them all. that video does have similarities, including the urination and was submitted to the cook county authorities. in the end, the jury decided the identity of the girl was not conclusive, and he was found not guilty. but now as more women have continued to come forward with stories of abuse, something really seemed to shift in r. kelly's world, anderson. in january, the lifetime series
you mentioned, "surviving r. kelly" was released, including testimony from women who said they had been abused. and after that kelly dropped by his record label. so now after all these years, many women are hoping that justice will final be served, anderson. >> all right. well, we'll see him turning himself in tonight. joining us cnn legal analyst and former federal prosecutor ann millgrin. how strong does the state's case seem to be? >> i think it seems very strong. and we can distinguish it in a minute against that case that went forward in 2008 with one victim. here you've got four separate victims. that is, you know -- that it is a pattern. and you've got three of them under age. so essentially statutory rape charges. and then you've got one that's force. or threat of force. and so here you've got four separate women, three of which are between the ages of 13 and 17, all of whom are alleged
victims in this case. and it really is, when you think about these types of cases, and having victims cooperate and come forward, having that number of victims, it just -- it makes a huge difference in sex crimes cases. and i would say one thing, just about the 2008 case. you know, having investigated it and tried cases that are -- involve sex crimes. i would say this. that case was particularly difficult, because the victim did not cooperate at the trial. and so it was hard to figure out. it was, you know -- the government was not able to prove it was her. and r. kelly denied it was him. i think we're going to see a really different situation here. >> i mean, you prosecuted sex crimes. as you said, the fact there are multiple victims here makes a major difference when a -- when an alleged victim refuses to cooperate, refuses to testify,
then it becomes, you know, very -- if not impossible, to proceed with the case. >> absolutely. and even one victim cooperating, it is not nearly as strong as having four. and remember that kim fox, the state's attorney, after that documentary that you and randi were just discussing came out a couple months ago, kim fox said please come forward if there are victims in cook county. so she has four victims willing to cooperate with her in a case against r. kelly. that makes it such a strong case versus having just a single victim and really will make a difference in the trial and prosecution. >> so there is expected to be a bond hearing tomorrow. would someone facing these charges typically be allowed to post bond and remain free? >> yeah, it really depends. what you see in a lot of cities is you would see very high bail set, if at all set. in cases like this. they didn't charge rape here. they charged it as aggravated criminal sexual abuse. so it's sort of a level two felony. again, the sentences are really potentially very high between -- up to seven years on each count, if he's convicted. and so i think it's very likely
that the judge will set extraordinarily high bail on r. kelly. the real question is, is he a risk of flight? and so, you know, that's what it's going to come down to. is he willing to surrender his passport? you know, what if his tour dates or commitments abroad? a judge would not look kindly on that. and, again, you know, he's been -- he has shown up to court before and has been present in trials. so i think he has a good chance to get high bail. >> all right. ann, appreciate it. just ahead, the latest on the jussie smollett saga. i'll talk to cornell west about the hoax. what may cause people to cast doubts about the next time a racist attack -- real racist attack surfaces. we'll be right back. yes, we are twins. en i went on to ancestry, i just put in the name of my parents and my grandparents. i was getting all these leaves and i was going back generation after generation. you start to see documents and you see signatures of people that you've never met. i mean, you don't know these people, but you feel like you do. you get connected to them. i wish that i could get into a time machine
and go back 100 years, 200 years and just meet these people. being on ancestry just made me feel like i belonged somewhere. discover your story. start searching for free now at ancestry.com. this is the avery's trying the hottest new bistro.ery's. wait...and the hottest taqueria? and the hottest...what are those? oh, pierogis? and this is the avery's wondering if eating out is eating into saving for their first home. this is jc... (team member) welcome to wells fargo, how may i help? (vo) who's here to help with a free financial health conversation, no strings attached. this is the avery's with the support they needed to get back on track. well done guys. (team member) this is wells fargo.
the producers behind the fox show, "empire," have decided to remove jussie smollett's character from the final two episodes of the current season. this is in the wake of accusations he paid two men $3500 to stage what he claimed was a racist and anti-gay attack on him in late january. in their statement, the producers call the allegations, quote, very disturbing and say they're placing their trust in the legal system as the process plays out. the two men have been cooperating with authorities. joining me now is dr. cornell west, professor at princeton and harvard. dr. west, thanks for being with us. first of all, do you believe -- >> thank you. >> -- the allegation that jussie smollett staged this attack and filed a false report? or at this point, where are you
on this? >> well, it's a good question. i like to stay in contact with the evidence and hope he has a fair trial. but it looks as if there's evidence that for some reason he came up with this hoax. but we'll have to see. you know, he's a very talented actor. and the sad thing is that, you know, we lose sight of the human beings who are the genuine victims. gay brothers, black folk, brown, red, yellow and others. and this is true even in the r. kelly case. it's so sad. you know, it's the children. it's the precious and priceless black girls that we need to focus on. his genius is undeniable, his music has enriched my life, but
he has to be accountable. that kind of activity is gangster activity, thuggish activity. he has to be accountable. but a long history of this, though, brother. anderson. you've got the philosophical genius and a nazi, renowned lyrical genius, but a fascist. how do we keep track of the art which still affects us and then the very ugly and vicious and malicious activity that's too often going hand-in-hand with genius. but i think r. kelly needs a fair trial too. no doubt about that. and robert kraft. we can go on and on. the brothers are just out of control of all colors, i can tell you that. all of them. all we brothers need to be held in some way accountable. but go right ahead. >> a spokesman for the naacp said the allegations against smollett should not be used as a smokescreen to obscure real racism in the united states. how concerned are you about that, and people using this as kind of a reason to doubt claims of actual hate crimes? >> no, i think the naacp hits the nail on the head. there's no doubt about it. but think about this, though, brother anderson. that war crimes, wall street crimes, white collar crimes. i wish that we would focus as much on those crimes as we do on these particular hoaxes,
seemingly, and even the crimes on the street. if we're going to have a rule of law, it's got to be a rule of law for everybody. we've all got to be accountable. but see, i come out of the legacy of jerusalem that says i always look for the criminals at the top. and then i keep track of the criminals in the middle. and below. because we need to be concerned with criminality, no matter what, as well as the criminality inside of ourselves. but the ones at the top oftentimes are the most dangerous. and they're the ones who very rarely get this kind of focus, this kind of highlight, this kind of accountability that people are calling for. >> that's certainly true. the superintendent, it was interesting, for the chicago police yesterday, talked about how as a black man, he was left asking why, why would anyone, especially an african-american man, use the symbolism of a noose to make false accusation
if that is, in fact, what happened? >> yeah. i also want to keep in mind that brother smollett has a drug problem. and so he might not be in full control. he still has to be accountable. but he might not be in full control. r. kelly in the same way. i think of his precious mother, jo ann, taking him to church and teaching him music. he couldn't read and couldn't write but produces this magnificent music. lula, his first girlfriend, who died drowning in his eyes. the wounds are so deep. but the fundamental question always is, will you be a wounded herder or a wounded healer? and if you're wounded, as is the case it seems to me with smollett, as is the case with r. kelly, might be the case for robert kraft. i don't know his life. but the question is, whatever wounds you have, will you choose to be a healer or will you choose to be hurter? and if your wounds are going to be those that -- it's a choice. and if you're wounding others, especially girls and black
girls, i mean, my god. you know, the value of life in this society, is one in which our precious black sisters, especially under 15, are always overlooked, always downplayed. and so, when you engage in that kind of violation, and so this is sinful, capital s if i can use a christian category on corporate media here tonight. it's wrong. it's just immorale. >> it's interesting that you talk about choice. people are sometimes victims of their circumstance. but there are plenty of people that would have every reason to be angry to do something wrong and yet they make a choice of how to live their life despite what they have experienced as children or what they have experienced at some point in their life. they make a choice about the path that they want to walk and it's an important point that that is a choice that one can make.
>> and that is precisely the lesson that r. kelly heard from his magnificent teacher who wrote precious lord martin luther king jr.'s favorite song. what does she tell r. kelly? you have been wounded. you grew up out of the projects. you grew up hated. haunted and harassed. you can bounce back. but in bouncing back, not only create beautiful music, but you have to treat human beings right. the women, the men, the elders, the babies and r. kelly has this genius on the one hand. thugish proclivity on the other and it is going to have to pay. you got to reap what you sew.
even he is bounce back in prison. >> there's redemption. redemption is possible for everybody. >> bounce back is always a possibility. that's exactly right. >> appreciate your time. thank you very much. i want to check in with chris and see what he is working on for cuomo primetime at the top of the hour. >> he has a unique ability to give one hope and he has an interesting take on r. kelly. my flip is the other side. you have been hearing stories like this for a long time on him. part of the prosecution is going to be the discussion why did it take so long for these charges to manifest and are they going to be evidencing a pattern. we have new information about what michael cohen has been talking about with investigators. the president's right, cohen wasn't just his lawyer. he was very involved in different aspects of his business and we're going to relay new information about what that could mean for donald trump and why this could be a bigger problem for him than the mueller probe and just like you, we're on mueller watch. we'll see if this pleading on
manafort comes out. this is the last best chance to find out what manafort meant to the actual russia probe before the final report. so we're on it. >> 7 minutes from now. chris, thanks very much. more break news on this busy friday including robert kraft as we were just talking about, owner of the new england patriots that we touch on briefly, he is being charged on two counts of soliciting prostitution in florida. we'll have the latest on the charges against him. ♪ t-mobile is always happy to see you. 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. walking a dog can add thousands walking this many?day. that can be rough on pam's feet, knees, and lower back. that's why she wears dr. scholl's orthotics. they relieve pain and give her the comfort to move more so she can keep up
with all of her best friends. dr. scholl's. born to move. just as important as what you get out of it? our broccoli cheddar is made with aged melted cheddar, simmered broccoli, and no artificial flavors. enjoy 100% clean soup today. panera. food as it should be. tear up ticket. find the cat. [ meowing ] mittens! make it rain. [ cheering ] [ singing opera ] change the music. ♪ when i move, you move beep. beep. use the rocket. [ sputtering ] if only everything in life listened to you like your new a-class. hey mercedes. [mercedes-benz voice assistant] how can i help you? change color. make it cooler. play my music. the a-class... ♪ coaching means making tough choices. jim! you're in! but when you have high blood pressure and need cold medicine that works fast, the choice is simple. coricidin hbp is the #1 brand that gives powerful cold symptom relief
what is alleged? >> this stems from an investigation into allegations of human trafficking which investigators say took place at the asia day spa down there in jupiter, florida. police charged kraft with two counts of solicitation. this is a misdemeanor. but they say they have all the evidence they need. they say part of that evidence is on video tape. they say they have video tape of kraft in a room where they say that they characterize this video take as kraft taking part in what they characterize as paid acts. they did not elaborate beyond that, but you can use your imagination there. this is an investigation that went on for several months and again, police say they have all the evidence they need on this one. >> has kraft made a statement or had anything to say about this? >> he has. he made a statement through his spokesperson that said in part kraft denies the allegation. the statement reads we deny that
mr. kraft engaged in any illegal activity. because it is a judicial matter we will not be commenting any further. but once again, police say they have not only evidence against kraft but against 25 other men that they identify as johns. they say they have tape of kraft and the other men as well. >> we'll continue to follow it. thank you very much. appreciate it. i want to give you a reminder. don't miss full circle. it's our daily interactive newscast on facebook. you get to vote on what stories we cover. every day at 6:25 p.m. eastern time. you get the details, facebook.com/anderson cooper full circle. check it out. it's fun. no doubt more about that tonight. also r. kelly and a lot more ahead, chris is going to be handling things from here on out. let's go to chris for cuomo
"prime time". >> thank you, anderson. i am chris cuomo and welcome to "prime time". it's friday and i have new information for you. federal investigators talked to michael cohen about the president's business and i don't mean person. the president said don't mess with my money and now they are doing exactly that. cnn learned investigators have spoken with cohen to learn, in part, about insurance policies and claims at trump properties as well as other business practices. why cohen? because the president is right. he really wasn't just a lawyer for him. he did lots of work on the business side. cuomo's court has the answer to why this could be worse than mueller for the president. speaking of the special counsel, tonight is the deadline to file his last major pleading in the longest running case of his russian interference probe. how did paul manafort's crimes fit into the wider russia investigation? we may learn tonight on the our watch. so don't go anywhere. that could come any minute. we also have new information on when mueller plans to drop his final report.
it's a big night. so let's get after it. >> a lot unfolding. it's immediately gavel cuomo's court into session. welcome to the show. good to have you for the first time. >> thank you. it's great to be here. >> neil, are you good? are you hearing me okay? >> john, i'll start with you. you get to go first. so the new reporting we have is yes they want to know about the president's business practices in the southern district of new york. insurance claims. the new york times had that and left it there. we have advanced it to how did they use insurance at the companies? how did they file? how much did they cover? how much did they claim? how much did they recover versus how much they spent on those claims? was it done legitimately. pretty specific questioning. what does it mean to you? where could it lead? >> this seems to be part of the broader investigation into the trump organization and how it was doing business