tv CNN Newsroom With Brooke Baldwin CNN March 28, 2019 11:00am-12:00pm PDT
how soon after the fight was she sent to the nurse's station? we know that other student has been suspended. no criminal charges filed, brianna. >> victor, thank you for that. that is it for me. "newsroom" with brooke baldwin starts right now. you are watching cnn. i'm brooke baldwin. thank you for being with me. we begin with growing questions and outrage in the jussie smollett case over why the cook county state's attorney, the office there decided to drop all 16 felony charges and now you have the president of the united states weighing in on this announcing an fbi and justice department review into this case and for the very first time we're hearing from the prosecutor who recused herself from the case and who's office decided to drop all the charges. kim fox admits there was enough evidence to find smollett guilty. the radio reporter who conducted that interview is rob wilder.
thank you for being with me. let's listen to the sound. okay. i thought we had the sound. let's go to your interview with ms. fox. you say -- she says there's a lot of confusion, the chance smollett would have gotten a prison sentence if convicted was slim. how does she explain that? >> i think the bigger issue here is one of what happens i think what fox and my own experience reflects this as well what fox would say is disposing of cases efficiently and quickly in the criminal justice system. our criminal justice system has gotten very, very good at pushing through these cases, and so, you know, cook county courts which includes chicago and then the cook county suburbs, they put thousands and thousands and thousands of cases through the court system every year and many of those are disposed of
relatively early. i think this case is earlier than a lot of them so this one went particularly fast, but kim fox said, look, a lot of them we know before the first hearing how we're going to dispose of this case and it's done before it even really goes to court. >> it is incredible, though, to think back weeks ago and even just a couple days ago when you think of the words of eddie johnson the police superintendent and the mayor and the anger. you asked this great question, which is if she's worried, if kim fox is worried at all about the effect this decision may have on that relationship between the cook county prosecutors and police. i'm curious what she told you. >> her argument was that, look, we work with police all the time, every single day on these thousands of cases every year that we're just talking about, tens of thousands of cases. her take was that this should not kind of dictate the nature of the relationship because this is just one case in a very --
aberration in so many ways in our criminal justice system -- >> hang on. she says should not. you are there. you cover chicago. how will it not? do you think that's inevitable? >> i don't think there's like, you know -- there's going to be a door slammed on this relationship because it just can't be. the fact is when -- when kim fox was running for office, she ran as a progressive who was going to implement criminal justice reform, who was not going to try to use the criminal justice system just to inprison men. we admittedly -- most of the country now agrees that we have a problem with mass incarceration in this country and so that's what she came into office promising and so there was already going to be some kind of tension between her philosophy and what you might call a more traditional law and order philosophy that you might find in a police department, so that relationship is always
going to be -- there's going to be some tension there, and, in fact, historically in chicago, there has not been enough tension in the relationship between chicago and prosecutors. a lot of people believe they work too closely hand in hand where prosecutors have maybe taken cases that they shouldn't have or pushed forward on cases when they should've pushed the police department to do more investigation or most notoriously there was a torture scandal here in chicago over the '70s and '80s involving 100 men who were tortured at the hands of police and that is welcome documented history now and prosecutors were in a lot of those interrogation rooms and didn't come out. historically, that relationship has always been fraught and complicated. >> noteworthy. i appreciate the response and we have the sound now. hear is kim fox. >> the likelihood that someone would get a sentence for felony is slim. mr. smollett forfeited his
$10,000 bond. mr. smollett completed community service and how he chooses to spin why he did those things, what i can tell you is that most people who come through the criminal justice system don't give up $10,000 of their hard-earned money or engage in volunteer services connected with an alleged offense without viewing that as a way of being held accountable. >> again, the voice there of kim fox. when asked about president trump's tweets, smollett's attorney says, she isn't worried about another inquiry. >> we have nothing to be concerned about because there was nothing on our end to request this, to do anything improper and nothing improper was done. >> and while chicago mayor is among the officials pressing the review he's not welcoming any involvement from president trump and here's why. >> i've always said from day one this is a trump-free zone the
city of chicago and i mean it. let me be really clear about something. the only reason jussie smollett thought he could take advantage of a hoax is because of the toxic environment that donald trump created. my recommendation to the president, go to opening day baseball, sit on the sideline, stay out of this. >> emanuel says the city of chicago deserves an apology from jussie smollett. the mayor says he will send him a bill for wasting his city's resources if he doesn't show any remorse. sheryl dorsey is a retired l.a.p.d. police sergeant. so thank you for being on with me and matt, just starting with you, smollett is still -- saw him the other day in the courthouse -- claiming his innocence. others, the other side points to evidence to the contrary. why wouldn't both sides want this thing to go to trial?
>> a case like this with his type of background and what occurred is typical that a case like this wouldn't necessarily go to trial. a trial is longer, it's more expensive. there's many risks on both sides, so a resolution of some type is typical in a case like this, a trial isn't necessarily the common thing that occurs in a situation like this. >> but what about, you guess, a next step, you know, if you maintain your innocence and, you know, folks on the other side are pointing to a grand jury and the 16 felony counts, and we know those documents were sealed like that, if you're innocent, don't you want to say here, read it all, here's all the evidence, this is why i'm innocent? >> well, it's easy to say you're innocent when the documents are sealed, so i mean, the fact that it's sealed and not expunged, by the way, which means that the police and the fbi and other government agencies still have access to it. the fact that it's sealed does make it difficult for the public to access this and you could say whatever you want because you know that certain people mainly
the public do not have access to sealed record. so essentially, he could make whatever claims he wants, but nobody's really going to be able to see those actual police reports at this point now that it's been sealed. >> cheryl, on the police side of things, listening to superintendent johnson's first press conference, he estimated that police spent 23 days on this whole investigation, more than 100 individuals will be sending him a bill. can you just estimate ballpark it for me how much that would have cost the police department? >> listen, i couldn't tell you. let's just say that, you know, police officers make about, you know, 55, $65 an hour times, you know, 12 hours, 24 hours a day times x amount of weeks, you do the math. it's a lot of money and so there's going to be a price to pay long-term with regards to this and i understand why they're upset and whether or not they'll have a complete recovery
and a good relationship with the prosecutor going forward is questionable. they have a symbiotic relationship, they depend on one another. prosecutors don't drop cases like this just cause. jussie smollett got the homie hook up because he had a defense team that did their job. they did what they were supposed to do. because of his celebrity, joe q citizen, me if i had done that, i promise you i'd be sitting in court right now and if i were innocent as jussie says he is, i would want to sit in court right now, forever more there is an asterisk after his name. there are people that will always believe he was guilty. and i think he was that's why he said keep that ten grand on his way out the door. >> for the more famous jussie smollett's of the world and for the folks that will never see that sort of justice. what about the brothers, cheryl, those nigeriant 47th
hour, they could hold them. they were never charged as coconspirators. why do you think we haven't heard from them? >> i thought all along that it was problematic that they weren't charged as coconspirators. they wanted jussie. they make deals with the devils all the time, prosecutors do. they will let one go to get the bigger fish and that's what they did. listen, there was a $35,000 payment made. we know that because we saw the check. the brothers say their training fees are only $20 an hour, so i think they've already been financially made whole, if you will. there's no responsibility for them to come forward or say anything. they're doing the right thing. they're out of it and sitting back and just looking and maybe shopping right now. >> who knows? we have not heard from them, but a lot of people at the time thinking why wouldn't they have been charged in this whole thing. i want to thank the two of you very much for coming on on this case. now this -- >> you might think it's okay
that the campaign chairman of a presidential campaign would offer information about that campaign to a russian oligarch in exchange for money or debt forgiveness. you might think that's okay. i don't. fireworks today as house republicans on the intelligence committee demand their chairman adam schiff resign. we'll show you more of what happened and we've only seen what's the cliff notes but at least we know one thing, the mysterious mueller report is 300 pages long. hear what the attorney general is refusing to do. and new polls show, mayor pete buttigieg just got a big bump. we'll tell you why. you're watching cnn. i'm brooke baldwin. prestige creams not living up to the hype? one jar shatters the competition. olay regenerist hydrates skin better than creams
just days after attorney general bill barr released his conclusion from that mueller report, the president's son-in-law and special adviser jared kushner just left a closed door interview on capitol hill with the senate intelligence committee. this meeting is part of the committee's work to reinterview witnesses. jared kushner first appeared in 2017. to the other intelligence committee here where there were some fireworks today, house intelligence chairman adam schiff is refusing to budge on his belief that the trump campaign colluded with russia and now republicans on that same committee, along with the president say, he needs to resign now. president trump said it in a tweet while house republicans said it in a letter. all of it prompting a fiery response from the california democrat, so here's how it all went down. >> you're actions both is past and president are incompatible with your duty as chairman of
this committee which alone in the house of representatives has the obligation and authority to provide effective oversight of the u.s. intelligence community. as such we have no faith in your ability to discharge your duties in a manner with your constitutional ability and ask for your easy rig nation. this letter is signed by all nine members of the republican side of the house of the committee and i ask unanimous consent that it be entered into today's hearing. i yield back. >> without objection. i'm going to turn to our witnesses who are at the hearing today, before i do and as you have chosen instead of addressing the hearing to simply attack me consistent with the president's attacks, i do want to respond in this way. 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. you might think it's okay that he took that meeting. you might think it's okay that paul manafort the campaign chair, someone with great experience in running campaigns also took that meeting. you might think it's okay that the president's son-in-law also took that meeting. you might think it's okay that they concealed it from the public. you might think it's okay that they're only disappointment after that meeting was that the dirt they received on hillary clinton wasn't better. you might think that's okay. you might think it's okay that when it was discovered a year
later that they lied about that meeting and said it was about a adoptions. you might think it's okay that the president has reported to have helped dictate that lie. you might think that's okay. i don't. you might think it's okay that the campaign chairman of a presidential campaign would offer information about that campaign to a russian oligarch in exchange for money or debt forgiveness, you might think that's okay. i don't. you might think it's okay that that campaign chairman offered polling data, campaign polling date to someone linked to russian intelligence, i don't think that's okay. you might think it's okay that the president himself called on russia to hack his opponent's emails if they were listening. you might think it's okay that later that day, in fact, the russians attempted to hack a server affiliated with that campaign. i don't think that's okay. you might think that it's okay
that the president's son-in-law sought to establish a secret back channel of communications with the russians through a russian diplomatic facility. i don't think that's okay. you might think it's okay that an associate of the president made direct contact with the gru through guccifer 2 and wikileaks and that's considered a hostile intelligence agency. you might think that it's okay a senior campaign official was instructed to reach that associate and find out what that hostile intelligence agency had to say in terms of dirt on his opponent. you might think it's okay that the national security adviser designate secretly conferred with a russian ambassador about undermining u.s. sanctions and you might think it's okay he lied about it to the fbi. 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. >> carrie cordero and there you have, chairman schiff's response, his defense. my question to you is, do you think republicans and this president are succeeding in trying to convince people that the mueller report and the barr report are one in the same? >> there certainly seems to be a sustained public relations effort for them to take what the attorney general did which was deliver a summary letter to congress consistent with what he promised he would do, that he would be transparent when he could, letting them know that he received the report and including what he deemed to be the top level findings, but they haven't seen the report yet and the attorney general has committed to be able to review the report, remove the
information that needs to be reviewed given different legal requirements and justice department guidelines and then actually release as much of the report as he can and we need to see that process take place. it needs to take place quickly but they are seizing on these top level findings that he's portrayed and they are using them, basically, as a political weapon. >> i want to come back to that point, the transparency point, but when you hear -- cnn has confirmed. everyone's been wondering how long this report is. the mueller report we've learned is more than 300 pages, so you have a roughly two year investigation, 300 page report, does that sound about right to you, first and foremost? >> it really does. the report needs to explain the prosecutorial decisions. what i expect it will do is explain the prosecutorial decisions made over the period of two years. as we saw there were substantial charges and indictments brought throughout that period of time,
so i think that sounds right. i think the page number could go up if the additional exhibits or attachments are included with that, so i think it sounds about right. >> now, you have the house judiciary chair, jerry nadler saying that barr told them -- they talked last night -- saying they can't meet this deadline of april 2nd to release this report and i'm wondering because you talk about getting the report out and the transparency, but i was talking to a law professor the other day who i thought made a great point saying democrats shouldn't they be patient and wait for barr to really go through all of this and do all of this properly because if you rush, rush, rush, isn't the -- you're going to redact more if you're rushing, right, and we all want to see more therefore it should be done right even if it takes a little bit longer. >> it needs to be done right. that does need to happen. i understand from a political standpoint the democrats desire to get it out quickly so i think
there's some period of time -- i think they need to give it at least a week or so to see what the attorney general can do, but it really is being used politically, the fact that the attorney general submitted this summary and what we just saw with congressman schiff and at the house intelligence committee, it was really having damaging political effects and i would argue national security effects. we are witnessing the house intelligence committee imploding. i didn't think that the environment on that committee could get any worse or any lower than it did in 2018 when devin nunes, the now ranking member, brushed the declassification of material over the objection of the fbi director and put out a misleading memorandum regarding national security information and now they have used these -- the findings from the attorney general to now put this committee into an even darker place. the hearing today was supposed
to be about russian intelligence activities. chairman schiff's first hearing was on the rise of a authoritarianism. this committee is getting to the point where it's going to have no credibility based on the partisanship that the members are bringing to it. >> the politics of it all. carrie cordero. i know a lot of people are going to be waiting for that day. thank you very much. we'll have that conversation when that happens. there was another fiery hearing today this one involving education secretary betsy devos. see what happened when she defended cuts to the special olympics after democrats challenged her and another day another democrat entering the race for president. what this means for the increasingly crowded field. hey mercedes,
how about letting your hair down a little? how about a car for people who don't play golf? hey mercedes! mix it up a little. how about something for a guy who doesn't want a corner office? hey mercedes, i don't even own a tie. do you think i need a mahogany dashboard? hey mercedes, can you make it a little cooler in here? [ a-class ] i am setting the temperature [ a-class ] to 68 degrees. we hear you. we made a car that does, too. the all-new a-class. all-new thinking starting at $32,500.
you know that look? that life of the party look. walk it off look. one more mile look. reply all look. own your look with fewer lines. there's only one botox® cosmetic. it's the only one fda approved to temporarily make frown lines, crow's feet and forehead lines look better. the effects of botox® cosmetic may spread hours to weeks after injection, causing serious symptoms. alert your doctor right away as difficulty swallowing, speaking, breathing, eye problems, or muscle weakness may be a sign of a life-threatening condition. do not receive botox® cosmetic if you have a skin infection. side effects may include allergic reactions, injection site pain, headache, eyebrow, eyelid drooping and eyelid swelling. tell your doctor about your medical history, muscle or nerve conditions, and medications including botulinum toxins
as these may increase the risk of serious side effects. so, give that just saw a puppy look and whatever that look is. look like you with fewer lines. own your look with the one and only botox® cosmetic. own your look our mission is to provide complete, balanced nutrition... for strength and energy! whoo-hoo! great-tasting ensure. with 9 grams of protein and 26 vitamins and minerals. ensure, for strength and energy. look for savings in your weekly paper.
this isn't just this is moving day with the best in-home wifi experience and millions of wifi hotspots to help you stay connected. and this is moving day with reliable service appointments in a two hour window so you're up and running in no time. show me decorating shows. this is staying connected with xfinity to make moving simple. easy. awesome. stay connected with the best wifi experience and two-hour appointment windows. click, call or visit a store today.
the democratic race for president just got even bigger with another name entering the race today. but first, to the quote, many bloomlet is using after his latest showing in a national poll. it is the best one yet for the candidate from indiana. with me now chris cillizza. in this poll he's still way behind the likes of joe biden and bernie sanders, but he's -- he's moving up in the world. >> yeah, look. mayor pete which i go by because buttigieg is too hard for me, mayor pete is still back in the pack. it's all about momentum at the
moment. there he is, by the way. okay. look, still, if you're joe biden you still feel good about this. 29%. joe biden is the spent 30 years in the senate and was the vice president for eight years. right here mayor pete, mayor pete buttigieg, mayor pete is tied with elizabeth warren which is sort of remarkable. if you told me that the mayor of south bend, indiana and elizabeth warren would ever have the same amount of support in a 2020 hypothetical poll, brooke, i would be surprised. progress matters. the other number i'll look to is beto o'rourke. got to be happy with where he is. he's above kamala harris now. these are -- these two are the two to watch right now. they're the two risers. everybody else is sort of in a similar place that they've been. >> well, mayor pete kind of crushed it in a cnn town hall. >> he did. that was the start of some momentum for him. >> who else is in today? >> let's go through this field -- we'll have to get a bigger screen. mayor pete is still in the
exploratory phase but we have a florida mayor, this came out of nowhere to be honest, wayne messum who i did not know of, we didn't think he was running for anything. he's now in the race. we expect obviously mayor pete. we have two mayors. this field is gigantic, but wait, there's more. literally. let's go to the next screen. these are all the people -- you'll notice none of these people were on the graphic before. these are all other people considering the race. joe biden in just a matter of time michael bennett basically said he wants to run. mike degree vel has run before. we got word last night that terry mccaw live looking for and more likely to run. seth moulton could run. eric swalwell frequently on our air. this isn't just people who we'll put them on the long list, i would say, a half to two-thirds of these people will run.
we would have to move them to the previous graphic at which point you're looking at 16 to 20 credible, serious announced candidates which would make it the largest field in the history of either sides presidential primary process. >> i'm already thinking about the debate stages and how you're going to fit everyone in and all of that and -- >> it's a good time to be in the podium making business. >> exactly. who can really take on donald trump? that's the key question. >> there's lots of options. that's one good thing. it's good that a lot of people want to run. you have a lot of options. you're going to have so many you can choose from like baskin robbins. >> you can't just pick one. how about this? what's to like about kim jong-un? that is the question posed to the secretary of state by a lawmaker in a tense hearing over north korea. we'll talk to that member of congress. also just in, a war of words just started between jussie smollett's team and city
officials in chicago. hear smollett's lawyers and what they're saying to the mayor rahm emanuel saying he will send the actor a bill. biopharmaceutical researchers. driven each day to pursue life-changing cures... in a country built on fostering innovation. here, they find breakthroughs... like a way to fight cancer by arming a patient's own t-cells... and a new therapy that gives the blind a working gene so they can see again.
because it's not just about the next breakthrough... it's all the ones after that. this is a very difficult job. failure is not an option.a. more than half of employees across the country bring financial stress to work. if you're stressed out financially at home, you're going to be too worried to be able to do a good job. i want to be able to offer all of the benefits that keep them satisfied. it is the people that is really the only asset that you have. put your employees on a path to financial wellness with prudential. bring your challenges. my lineage was the vecchios and zuccolis. through ancestry, through dna i found out that i was only 16% italian. he was 34% eastern european.
if you have a garden you know, weeds are lowdown little scoundrels. don't stoop to their level. draw the line with the roundup sure shot wand. it extends with a protective shield and targets weeds more precisely. it lets you kill what's bad right down to the root while guarding the good. roundup sure shot wand. got weeds in your grass too? try roundup for lawns. kills weeds, not the lawn. roundup brand. trusted for over 40 years.
education secretary betsy devos in the hot seat over the trump administration's plan to cut funding for the special olympic. secretary devos had to defend the controversial proposal before the senate appropriations committee. she testified that tough decisions had to be made around the budget process and then this exchange erupted with illinois democratic senator dick durbin. >> did you personally approve the elimination of the $18 million from your budget to help the special olympics? >> well, senator, as you know budget process within the administration is a
collaborative one and it's been my responsibility to present the budget here on behalf of the administration. the president's budget -- >> i think a yes or no will do. the $18 million cut of the funding for special olympics. >> no, i didn't personally get involved in that. >> whoever came up -- whoever came up with that idea gets a special olympic gold medal for insensitivity. >> let's not use disabled children in a twisted way for your political narrative. that is just disgusting and it's shameful -- >> let me tell you what, eliminating $18 million out of an $80 billion budget i think is shameful too. i'm not twisting it. i asked you to answer yes or no. and you said that you did not personally approve -- >> it's not a yes-or-no answer. >> it certainly is as far as i'm concerned. someone has to accept responsibility for a bad decision. >> cnn's ryan nobles is on capitol hill and caught up with secretary devos after that hearing and so, what did she
share with you about what happened? >> reporter: not a whole lot, frankly, brooke. we were hoping to give her the opportunity to explain exactly her position on this particular budget proposal also to explain how she told senator durbin that she was not the one that personally called for this cut to special olympics funding. we asked her that questions. she didn't really answer. take a listen. are you concerned about the supporters of the special olympics that are upset with the decision to remove their funding? is there any other part of the budget, madam secretary, that you feel democrats are incorrectly describing or presenting? i know you mentioned you thought
this was a political issue today during your hearing. can you explain that more? so that was only a small part of our interaction. it was like that for about two and a half minutes. she was caught there waiting for an elevator and we wanted to give her an opportunity to explain this. despite the fact that there has been widespread criticism by this decision from the trump administration through the department of education to slash this funding that they've not backed away from it at all. she has had multiple opportunities to say that they're going to go in a different direction. it's simply not something that's happened. we should point out, though, brooke, there are very few people on capitol hill think that this budget proposal will ever see the light of day. roy blunt who's the republican senator from missouri said that their budget proposal will include that special olympics funding so it seems as though this is not a real threat to
those athletes that participate in this program. >> ryan, thank you. meantime, he has been careful with his words on president trump but all of that just changed of the why puerto rico's governor says he would punch the president in the mouth. plus the secretary of state finding himself in the middle of a fiery hearing. we'll talk to the congressman who had this remark about kim jong-un. definitely see how geico could help you save on homeowners insurance. nice tip. i'll give you two bucks for the chair. two?! that's a victorian antique! all right, how much for the recliner, then? wait wait... how did that get out here? that is definitely not for sale! is this a yard sale? if it's in the yard then it's... for sale. oh, here we go. geico. it's easy to switch and save on homeowners and renters insurance. come hok., babe. nasty nightime heartburn?
diplomat and a former diplomat himself. pompeo didn't just take the fire. he served it right back up. >> we'll be so forceful in denouncing social im, why is the administration so high on communism? >> the very statement there is pretty outrageous. >> i'm talking about north korea, sir. there's a whole lot of rhetoric about liking kim jong-un, falling in love with kim jong-un, kim jong-un being our friend and so let me ask you, why is liking kim jong-un a sufficient reason to cancel or not to pursue sanctions against companies helping his nuclear program as the white house said last week, including the white house there. >> there have been more sanctions put in place by this administration with a global coalition than at any time in the world's history, sir. >> and yet liking him is cited as a reason not to do more. is kim jong-un responsible for
maintaining north korea's systematic labor of camps. >> he's the leader of the country. >> is he responsible for ordering the execution of his uncle by chemical agent? >> he's the leader of the country. >> was he responsible for the decision not to allow otto warmbier to come home until he was on death's door? >> i'll leave the president's statement to stand. he made that statement. we all know that the north korean regime was the responsible for the tragedy that occurred to otto warmbier. i met that family. i know those people. i love them dearly. they suffered mightily, sir. >> so what's to like? >> they suffered mightily, sir. >> what's to like? >> don't make this a political football. it's inappropriate. it's inappropriate to do. >> democratic congressman of new jersey is with me now. he has served on president clinton's national security counsel, he was assistant secretary of state for democracy under president obama. congressman, a pleasure, sir,
welcome. >> thank you. >> you clearly came prepared. you tell me, what was it that you wanted to get out of secretary pompeo? >> i wanted him to address the rhetoric from the president that i think is completely unprecedented in our history. i've never heard a president of the united states express such love and affection for a brutal dictator. we've always dealt with authoritarian countries. i support the administration and its efforts to reach a diplomatic solution with north korea, but to say that you're in love with kim jong-un who imprisons more than a hundred thousand people in concentration camps and who was responsible among many other crimes for the death of an american citizen just -- it's unfathomable to me and then, of course, they made a very foreign
policy decision on the basis of liking kim jong-un and i wanted him to explain that. >> i guess you did not get what you wanted, perhaps, more forceful language and my question to you, is why do you think you didn't? >> you know, i would acknowledge secretary pompeo is in a very hard position. he represents the president of the united states and the president says these indefensible things and so they're very hard to defend and i think he got caught in that -- well, in that very hard spot, but i think it's important for the united states congress to establish that there are some guard rails. of course, we can all debate and disagree about our tactics, visa have i a country like north korea but there are lines we should not cross without being embarrassed as i think the administration rightly was after the president of the united states in a tweet canceled sanctions that his own treasury
department put into place against north korea because, as the white house itself said, he likes kim jong-un. can you imagine if president obama had a done that? if he had canceled sanctions against iran because he said that he liked the supreme leader of iran? the republicans would be up in arms. >> right. you have to think about if the shoe were on the other foot and i remember we covered that cryptic tweet trying to understand what sanctions he was referring to. i would say because we don't have the white house here, they often point to the fact that the president has spaced north korea on the list of state sponsored terrorism and he did walk away from a bad deal when he was with kim in hanoi. i want to just say that. also, though, sir -- >> all of that is fair. all of that is fair, but -- you know, there was a decision made by the president using some very, very strange language and
we have our oversight role and we were trying to figure out what was going on there. >> understand. >> and why is it that affection for kim jong-un has any place in our policy towards that country. >> how about this, this came out yesterday, the commander of u.s. forces in south korea, general robert abrams warned lawmakers that the u.s. might not have sufficient intelligence and surveillance and recognizance capability on the korean peninsula to see an attack coming. how much does that worry you? >> well, it certainly worries me in part because the president has repeatedly said apparently and to the pentagon and internally in the administration and even publicly that he wonders why we should even have troops in south korea. it's very important to me that we maintain our alliance with south korea, that we maintain a military deterrent in south korea to make sure that we can deal with the threat that north korea still poses. i would love to resolve this
through negotiations. until that happens, there should be no reduction in america's military posture or an american military exercise in south korea. >> congressman mallon you don'tski, thank you so much. i appreciate it. accusations flying on capitol hill as the republicans on the house intelligence committee call for democratic chairman adam schiff to resign and it has set off this war of words between the party leaders. >> it's now up to nancy pelosi to remove chairman schiff. we need to restore the trust in the intelligence committee. >> i think they're just scaredy cats that don't know what to do, so they have to make an attack. they did the wrong thing. plus a teen girl shoved off a bridge survived the 60 foot plunge and now the girl who pushed her has learned her fate. >> i'd like to sincerely apologize to jordan, her family
and friends for the pain and humiliation i have caused by my mindless action that occurred last summer. etree for my cousins. a homewood suites for my uncle. a hampton for my sister and her kids. and the waldorf astoria beverly hills for me. can i get a..? thank you. book at hilton.com and get the hilton price match guarantee. few have pure grace. many have strength... few have raw power and many possess beauty but only a few can touch our souls. there are many suvs, but there's only one legend. the 2019 jeep grand cherokee the most awarded suv ever. the 2019 jeep grand cherokee (nat♪re sounds)
which is breast cancer that has spread to other parts of her body. she's also taking prescription ibrance with an aromatase inhibitor, which is for postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive her2- metastatic breast cancer as the first hormonal based therapy. ibrance plus letrozole was significantly more effective at delaying disease progression versus letrozole. patients taking ibrance can develop low white blood cell counts, which may cause serious infections that can lead to death. before taking ibrance, tell your doctor if you have fever, chills, or other signs of infection, liver or kidney problems, are pregnant, breastfeeding, or plan to become pregnant. common side effects include low red blood cell and low platelet counts, infections, tiredness, nausea, sore mouth, abnormalities in liver blood tests, diarrhea, hair thinning or loss, vomiting, rash, and loss of appetite. corey calls it her new normal because a lot has changed, but a lot hasn't. ask your doctor about ibrance. the #1 prescribed fda-approved
it was the horrifying push seen across the country. >> once you say no -- >> ready? >> whoa! >> jordan fell a terrifying 60 feet into that water below after she was pushed by her "friend" taylor smith last summer. jordan sustained major injuries from the fall including punctured lungs and broken ribs. taylor pleaded guilty to
reckless endangerment and just last night she was sentenced as emotions ran high on both sides. jordan's mother slammed taylor's actions. >> taylor didn't give her a little push. she deliberately shoved my daughter off that bridge with no care to her life. she's still not shown remorse in my opinion. i ask that she sit in jail for as long as my daughter had a h to lay in that hospital. >> both of the former friends who were feet apart there cried throughout the sentencing. jordan was so emotional that her statement was read on her behalf. >> i never wanted to be pushed off that bridge and i said no as seen in one of the videos and taylor had no right taking away my right for making my own decision that day. i was really looking forward to a sincere apology and all i've been receiving from the family is threats and lies. taylor has made me feel guilty
and look like a bad guy when i need to remember that i have done nothing wrong. >> taylor then apologized. >> i'd like to sincerely apologize to jordan, her family and friends for the pain and humiliation i have caused by my mindless action that occurred last summer. although it may seem like my intent was to harm or even though i have moved on without putting any punishment on myself, this is false. jordan has passed through my thoughts repeople actively since the incident. >> a judge sentenced taylor to two days in jail and 38 days on a work detail and as jordan looked on, taylor was handcuffed and led out of the courtroom to serve her sentence. you are watching cnn. i'm brooke baldwin. thank you for being here. a emotionally charged hearing in the u.s. house of representatives today where lawmakers squared off her president trump, russia