Return to Transcripts main page
Erin Burnett Outfront
Mayor: One Ferguson Police Department Worker Fired; Feds Cleared Darren Wilson in Michael Brown's Shooting; U.S. Ambassador Slashed With Razor Blade; Congressional Committee Subpoenas Hillary Clinton's Emails
Aired March 04, 2015 - 19:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
ERIN BURNETT, CNN ANCHOR: OUTFRONT next, breaking news, the U.S. ambassador of South Korea in a violent attack, bloodied by a razor blade. We'll have a live report. We're going to go to Seoul coming up.
And more breaking news, the mayor of Ferguson moments ago announcing a Police Department employee has been fired over racist e- mails. One comparing the President of the United States to a chimpanzee.
Hillary Clinton, we have new details tonight that she has a homemade e-mail server. Congress is now calling for all her e-mails on the Benghazi attack, but will we ever know what all is? Let's go OUTFRONT.
And good evening. I'm Erin Burnett. OUTFRONT tonight, breaking news. The mayor of Ferguson responds to charges of racism throughout his Police Department firing one officer, suspending two others. This as new racist e-mails, new ones sent by both police and city officials are released by the Justice Department. Among them, e-mails referring to the President as a chimpanzee. Another via e-mailing that First Lady Michelle Obama and in no case were any of the senders ever discipline.
Also today, Ferguson Police Officer Darren Wilson, it was announced, will not face charges in the shooting death of Michael Brown by the Justice Department. The department ruling that Wilson did nothing to violate federal civil rights laws. Michael Brown's family has issued a statement saying impart, "While we are saddened by this decision. We our encouraged that the DOJ will hold the Ferguson Police Department accountable for a pattern of racial bias and profiling. Our son's death will not have been in vain."
Ed Lavandera is OUTFRONT tonight in Ferguson. And Ed, the Justice Department, I mean, coming out with more and more detail. These racist e-mails though which we're now seeing one after the other are truly stunning.
ED LAVANDERA, CNN CORRESPONDENT: You know, absolutely. Attorney General Eric Holder described this report as quote, "searing." And in those e-mails, you can there, you can see a couple of them where they talk about referring and depicting President Barack Obama as a chimpanzee. Another one showing a group of bare breasted women apparently in Africa with the caption that read Michelle Obama's high school graduation. Staggering and offensive, to say the least. But when you talk to residents here in Ferguson, they say that this report is simply another story of we told you so. This is what we've been saying has been happening here for years.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
LOISTINA HOSKIN, FERGUSON RESIDENT: Oh, my.
LAVANDERA (voice-over): This a pile of frustration for Loistina Hoskin and her daughter Kimberly. Several dozen citations courtesy the city of Ferguson stacked inside a file like a memory book of bad dreams.
HOSKIN: I don't think you could ever put a dollar amount on the stress that it cost me.
LAVANDERA: A few years ago after Loistina husband passed away, Ferguson officials started issuing Lois Tin a stream of minor code violations around her home for the way her cars were parked in a driveway, for a down tree knocked over in a storm. She tried to fight these citations and this happened.
HOSKIN: I was arrested when I went to court for failing to appear, which was ludicrous because I had been coming to court all the time.
LAVANDERA (on camera): So, you appeared in court and they arrested you for failing to appear.
HOSKIN: He said I was under arrest. And I said, what am I under arrest for? And he said well, I'm not sure but they said something about failing to appear.
LAVANDERA: You're there?
HOSKIN: And I'm there. Yes. So, I went -- he handcuffed me. Put me back of the squad car. I was locked up for four hours.
LAVANDERA (voice-over): This isn't even Loistina's most stunning story. In 2009, she said a city inspector claimed her car was derelict and needed to be moved from the driveway. She said the 1998 Oldsmobile wasn't much to look at but it was the car that took her to work every day until police officers showed up with a tow truck.
(on camera): So, you saw them tow the car from your driveway?
HOSKIN: I was standing out there when they towed it. Yes.
LAVANDERA: Do you feel like your car was stolen?
HOSKIN: It was stolen. It was stolen right in front of my eyes.
LAVANDERA (voice-over): Kimberly Hoskin says, black residents in Ferguson drive around with the constant fear of seeing red and blue lights in the rearview mirror. She says, she's been issued nearly a dozen traffic citations.
KIMBERLY HOSKIN, FERGUSON RESIDENT: I've had police officers like I'm coming towards them, we're coming towards each other, turn around, follow me --
L. HOSKIN: Make a u turn.
K. HOSKIN: Make a u turn. Follow me. Find out everything is okay and turn around and go back in the direction that they were going.
LAVANDERA: Loistina and Kimberly Hoskin say their citation battles have cost each of them nearly $5,000. They are hoping the fight is now finally over.
K. HOSKIN: I think that if nothing happens, it will be worse because they'll think they got away with it.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
LAVANDERA: And Erin, what a lot of legal aid experts here in the St. Louis area say that what this situation has created is this downward spiral for poorer people who aren't able to dig out of the get that just accumulates and accumulates that many people have lost jobs because pay have been taken into custody and it's just this downward spiral that many people are just simply not able to dig out of -- Erin.
BURNETT: All right, Ed, thank you very much live from Ferguson. And tonight, the now former officer involved in the shooting that sparked this entire federal investigation has been cleared. The Justice Department saying that Darren Wilson is not going to face criminal charges for the killing of Michael Brown, an unarmed teenager.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ERIC HOLDER, U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL: Michael Brown's death, though a tragedy, did not involve prosecutable conduct on the part of Officer Wilson.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BURNETT: Evan Perez is OUTFRONT in Washington. And Evan, the Attorney General, I mean, when you watch him saying that, it sort of sounds like it pained him to say. What was his reasoning for not charging Darren Wilson when we just saw e-mails from that department that were clearly endemic referring to the President of the United States as a chimpanzee among others?
EVAN PEREZ, CNN JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: Well, Erin, the investigation in the end just did not rise to the standard that they have to meet to bring a criminal case under federal civil rights violation. This was a case, you know, the biggest problem for them was you had witnesses that were shaky. People who came on CNN and said one thing in their interviews and when they went to talk to FBI investigators, they said another thing. Here is passage from the report that the Justice Department issued today. It said, as detail throughout this report the evidence does not establish that the shots fired by Wilson were objectively unreasonable under federal law. If you recall, Erin, one of the big controversies was whether or not Michael Brown had hands up, which became a chant for some of the protesters down in Ferguson. This report says that it's really not clear whether he had his hands up and in the end, they say that the most important thing here was that he was moving towards Officer Darren Wilson and that's why he had reason to fire the shots that killed Michael Brown.
BURNETT: All right. Thank you very much, Evan Perez. And OUTFRONT now Anthony Gray, an attorney for Michael Brown's family. And Jeff Roorda, the business manager for the City of St. Louis Police Officers Association.
All right. Good do see both you have again. Anthony, I want to start with you.
ANTHONY GRAY, ATTORNEY FOR MICHAEL BROWN JR.'S FAMILY: Hey, Erin.
BURNETT: The Justice Department not bringing charges against Darren Wilson. Yet, this is you know, the same day they are issuing a report about rampant discrimination against blacks by Ferguson police officers. An e-mail referring to the President as a chimpanzee, an e- mail of bare chested dancing women with the caption Michelle Obama's high school reunion as women were in Africa. There are many, many more examples here.
GRAY: Right.
BURNETT: When you see those e-mails and you see no charges against Darren Wilson, are you angry, is the family angry?
GRAY: The family is obviously angry because the outcome was much different than they anticipated.
BURNETT: Yes.
GRAY: I find it when you hear the results of the internal investigation and you juxtapose that with the announcement today that there will no charges, it's kind of difficult to also reconcile how that came about. Because you have an actor who is Darren Wilson who came out of this very environment that you just described as being racially charged and have this history and pattern of discrimination.
BURNETT: Right.
GRAY: He is the person who was manifesting these very findings that the Justice Department were discussing. And I don't see how they separated the two when you look at it like that.
BURNETT: When you put it like that, I mean, it does race the question of how they separate the two. Jeff, how do you? Because when you look at the statistics from the Justice Department, 67 percent of the population in Ferguson is black, blacks though represent 85 percent of people pulled over in traffic stops. Ninety three percent of those arrested. When you look at that disparity at first value that seems pretty damming. What am I missing?
JEFF ROORDA, BUSINESS MANAGER, CITY OF ST. LOUIS POLICE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION: Well, what we're missing is the context here, Erin. You know, sixty seven percent of Ferguson is African-American. That just tells us who is laying their head on a pillow at night in Ferguson. It doesn't tell us who law enforcement is coming into contact with in the streets. Ferguson to its credit is a very integrated city and sort of an island of segregated cities out in St. Louis County where some of the neighboring cities are 80, 85, 90 percent African- Americans and those folks are traveling through Ferguson, shopping in Ferguson and in some case committing crime in Ferguson. So, I don't think that you can make a direct close connection between the census population in Ferguson and the disparity which by the way is lower in the state average but in traffic stops here.
BURNETT: All right. So, okay, which is an interesting point. Let's say we say what you're saying at face value that you have neighboring towns where the percent are actually in line with Ferguson and it matches up. So, say that's true. You then have to deal with this Jeff that the racist e-mails. I mean, let me just read another one of them so everyone can hear it. June of 2011, this e-mail was sent describing a man seeking to obtain welfare for his dogs because they are, quote, "mixed in color, unemployed lazy, can't speak English and have no friggin clue who their daddies are." These e-mail exchanges involve superiors in the Ferguson Police Department. There are only 72 people in that department. I guess the question to you is, I mean, what percentage of the force was sending or forwarding these racist e-mails? Is there any way that you can say this was happening in such large numbers and this wasn't an endemic department wide disaster?
ROORDA: Well, the things that are said in those e-mails are deplorable, they're hurtful and they are patently racist. But that doesn't mean the entire department's racist. That means that there are some actors. And as of tonight all three of them either suspended or fired that made very poor choices about their conduct at work. I don't think we can make this quantum leap and logic that means that Ferguson is engaging in the practices that they are accused of without knowing more.
BURNETT: Anthony, you don't think it's a quantum leap?
GRAY: No, I don't think is a quantum leap. Because you got a star with one person in order to have a pattern. It then goes to two, perhaps in three. I don't know what number would satisfy anybody out there that has a problem with this report in order to see pattern and a practice and a systemic problem through the department. Keep in mind now, the folks that are the targeted individuals have reached this conclusion a long time ago. That's why nobody is shocked and nobody is surprised by what you're saying. And I personally feel that what kind of environment that we have in Ferguson where people feel so comfortable to put this on city wide e-mail and not feel a sense of fear of being reprimanded. It speaks of the environment, it speaks to the atmosphere, it speaks to the climate. It goes directly to August 9th at broad daylight when Mike Brown Jr. was shot by Darren Wilson.
BURNETT: All right. Thanks very much to both of you. And we should note of course for the record, no one was held responsible for those e-mails or accountable until today when someone was fired.
OUTFRONT next, breaking news. The U.S. ambassador to South Korea attacked and bloodied with a razor blade just moments ago. We're going to go live to Seoul and find out what just happened in this horrific attack.
And more breaking news, a Congressional committee subpoenaing Hillary Clinton's e-mails. But the question is, is they actually going to ever guess them all or ever know if they don't. Because she was using her own private e-mail server. A special report.
Plus, opening statements in the Boston bombing trial. The defense attorney admits his client did it. But said his brother brainwashed him. Will the jury spare him from death?
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BURNETT: Breaking news, U.S. ambassador attacked, slashed with a razor blades just moments ago. Government sources confirmed that Mark Lippert, you see him there, bloodied, the U.S. ambassador to South Korea was attacked in Seoul. He was hit in the hand and cheek with a razor blade. Attacked in broad daylight. These are disturbing images of the ambassador bloodied and recovering right after the attack. You can see that blood on his forehead, across his face, on his hands, down his shirt. We were just getting new video of a suspect being taken down moments after the slashing which you see here. The man with the sort of the maroon shirt and the bald spot. We're told President Obama just called Ambassador Lippert to talk to him telling he's in his thoughts and prayers.
Paula Hancocks is OUTFRONT from Seoul tonight. Paula, what are you hearing about this?
PAULA HANCOCKS, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, Erin, the confirmation we have from the embassy spokesman at this point is that Ambassador Lippert is in hospital. That he is in a stable condition and from the footage that we can see he's being helped to a car to get to the hospital. But he's walking himself. He's holding his right cheek and we know that from police a man in his mid-50s, surnamed Kim, that's the only detail we have at this point, a very common surname here in South Korea slashed the ambassador with a razor blade on his right cheek and his hand. Now, it's uncertain at this point what the motivation was. He was a breakfast meeting. It happened about 7:42 in the morning. Just under two hours ago here in downtown Seoul. Just around the corner from here, a venue that's just across the road from the U.S. Embassy.
And he was going there to talk and make a speech about the reunification of the two Koreas. Apparently as soon as he walked into the lecture hall, a man approached him and that's when he was attacked. Now of course police are looking very closely as to why this has happened. There has been local media reports about the man shouting about the U.S. military drills that are ongoing with South Korea at this point which anger North Korea. We've heard reports that the man was also shouting about reunification of the two Koreas. The topic of the talk that Ambassador Lippert was going to be give. But at this point, he's in custody, he's being detain and he's being questioned -- Erin.
BURNETT: All right. Paula, thank you very much. So many questions out there about who did this and why.
Joining me on the phone is the former U.S. Ambassador to South Korea Christopher Hill. Ambassador Hill, thank you. I know you are in Seoul tonight. What are you hearing about this attack?
CHRISTOPHER HILL, FORMER U.S. AMBASSADOR TO SOUTH KOREA: Well, certainly. I mean, the first point to understand is this is a very safe city. And as U.S. ambassador as you have some security. It's not to be confused with the security you might have in a place like Iraq. But you have security. But generally, you're able to sort of walk very freely. I mean, I often walked from the embassy to my home by myself. So, this is not a high threat. Obviously, we have to find out who this gentleman was, this was all about, et cetera.
BURNETT: Yes.
HILL: But certainly there are people in Korea with very strong views on a number of issues. It's a very tense part of the world. And so, we'll have to wait and see precisely what this is about.
BURNETT: Very tense of course with the U.S. military drills going on with South Korea and North Korea with a nuclear weapons. And we all know of course threatening to attack the U.S. around that movie. I know, you know Seoul extremely well. Who do you think could be responsible for this attack?
HILL: Well, at this point, we're going to have to see who this is. But it would not surprise me if this wasn't an individual for whatever reason has very strong views. You know, it's important to remember that the current President Park Geun-Hye when she was on the campaign trail a few years ago was attacked in a similar fashion with a similar weapon. This is a razor blade. So, unfortunately it's not the first time this has happened to a public official.
BURNETT: Well, all right. Well, thank you very much, Ambassador Hill. We appreciate your time tonight.
And now, let's go to Barbara Starr. I mean, Barbara, when we talk about tensions here, they are incredibly high. Of course you had North Korea, threatening to attack the United States over that movie. Deep tensions in South Korea, the U.S. and South Korea doing military drills right now.
BARBARA STARR, CNN PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT: They are indeed, Erin. And a lot of discussion that that could have been one of attackers, one of the things that the attacker talked about. This military drill long planned. And it is something that has causes a lot of attention between South and North Korea. The U.S. military very publicly saying the drills are defensive. The north of course believes it's the beginning of an invasion. Both long planned. And in fact, the U.S. military had notified North Korea about the exercises. The U.S. view is that they are defensive in nature, that they contribute to the readiness of the U.S. and South Korean forces and it's all about stability on the Peninsula. North Korea obviously having quite a different view and today, we now know that the top U.S. military commander in South Korea, U.S. Army General Curtis Scaparrotti also briefed on this attack against the Ambassador Mark Clippert -- Erin.
BURNETT: All right. Barbara, thank you.
And I want to go now to Tom Fuentes, of course formally of the FBI. And Tom, we know so far this man's surname is Kim which is I understand is common as Smith or Jones, it doesn't tell us very much. He's in his mid-50s. This comes though, you know, when you're talking about U.S. ambassadors, the U.S. very much on edge after what happened to Chris Stevens in Libya. Who do you think could have been behind this attack?
TOM FUENTES, CNN LAW ENFORCEMENT ANALYST: Well, I think right now I would agree with Ambassador Hill then it could be just a lone individual or somebody that, you know, has strong opinions about the reunification of the North and South Korea. And the ambassador in essence is a celebrity American in every country where they have them. When I ran international operations in the FBI, we had ambassadors that were targeted several times by nuts simply because they were a celebrity of the U.S. government, high profile position representing the United States. And it was almost as much as being a celebrity as it was anything to do with American policy. I should add in this case, the FBI has an office in Seoul Korea. They will be working with the state department investigators and the South Korean police authorities.
This is a chargeable offense as a U.S. citizen much less as a U.S. ambassador. The person that this this could be charged and brought back to the United States for prosecution. In this case I don't necessarily expect it. They will make a joint decision with the South Koreans and if it turns out to be a mentally disturbed person, something like that and not part of a major plot they'll probably go ahead and just monitor the South Korean prosecution or whatever actions that they take. As far as the tensions with North Korea, I can't imagine, you know, that this was a hired assassin deployed with a razor blade to take out a U.S. ambassador.
BURNETT: Do you think North Korea would have been more sophisticated than that? I guess the bottom-line to that point though is, after what happened to Chris Stevens, the first U.S. ambassadors killed in 50 years in Libya, in Benghazi, ambassadors are still walking alone, don't have security. I mean, I understand South Korea is relatively safe but it is next to a nuclear power that threatened to attack the U.S. just a couple of months ago.
FUENTES: That's true. I mean, that should be something the regional security office which is a division of the State Department, the RSO's are responsible for the protection of U.S. personnel assigned to an embassy especially the ambassador and I would think in this day and age, an ambassador would want some level of security to be with him when he's out on the street out in public like that, again as a public figure. And, you know, we had a random deployment of FBI agents in 2005 to Tbilisi, Georgia. And in that case, an individual has targeted the U.S. ambassador until he heard that George W. Bush was going to make a speech there in May of 2005 and then he changed his plans and decided to throw a hand grenade at our president. So you could see where ambassadors are often just for whatever reason in much of it often because they are celebrity targeted.
BURNETT: All right. Tom, thank you very much. And OUTFRONT next, Hillary Clinton not only e-mailing through a personal account exclusively but actually using a homemade server. Why? Why would you do that? A Congressional Committee is now saying give us every single e-mail about the Benghazi attack.
And the Boston bomber goes to trial, his defense attorney admits his client did it. For day one came out, he did it. The question is, can they get him off?
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BURNETT: Breaking news, a Congressional Committee issuing a subpoena for all of Hillary Clinton's e-mails on the attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi. That's because of new revelations that Clinton used a personal e-mail account for all her communications as Secretary of State. And according to the Associated Press, the server for the personal e-mail was housed at Clinton's personal home in New York State.
Dan Simon begins our coverage OUTFRONT.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
DAN SIMON, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): As Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had access to the highest levels of government exchanging e-mails with foreign heads of states, politicians, even the White House. The only problem, those e-mails were apparently coming from her house in Chappaqua, New York. Not only did Clinton use a private e-mail address while Secretary of State, she also used and maintain a homemade e-mail server traced back to her home according to the Associated Press. An unusual practice to be sure, but not one that's difficult to pull off.
(on camera): Having an e-mail server in your home basically requires you having a computer. It doesn't have to be a fancy one. You also have to have the right kind of internet connection, something called a static IP address that any individual can get from their provider and of course software. It's really that simple.
SIMON (voice-over): And according to internet security experts, they see some advantages as to why Clinton wanted a home system.
WENDY NATHER, 451 RESEARCH: One advantage for Mrs. Clinton in particular is that she would have very tight control over who ever has physical access to the system as well as who, you know, can log in, probably nobody can log in remotely.
SIMON: But experts only point out that private email accounts are generally not as secure as commercial or government accounts.
JOHN HERING, LOOKOUT CO-FOUNDER: I think in any environment where an official with very senior level access to sensitive information is using personal e-mail, it definitely increases the risk profile.
SIMON: Clinton has yet to explain why she wouldn't use a government account. There's concern her e-mails may not have been saved for government records.
But her defenders say the emails would, in fact, be archived by State Department staff receiving them. Problem is that would exclude emails to people outside of U.S. government. While keeping track of e-mails a bigger concern, at least at the White House, appears to be any classify information was compromised.
JOSH EARNEST, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: So, this question about classified information being passed around on those e-mail systems, that is certainly not supposed to occur.
SIMON: It may not have occurred had she followed her own advice in his home video from 2000 that aired on NBC News.
HILLARY CLINTON, FORMER SECRETARY OF STATE: As much as I've been investigated and all that, you know, why would I -- I don't even want to do e-mail?
SIMON: Dan Simon, CNN, San Francisco.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
ERIN BURNETT, CNN ANCHOR: Kind of an ironic ending there.
All right. Well, OUTFRONT now, David Brock, the founder of the Correct the Record. It is a pro-Hillary Clinton group.
And Sean Spicer, the chief strategist and communications director for the Republican National Committee.
All right. Sean, let me start with you.
Hillary Clinton was allowed to use a private e-mail account. She is not supposed to use it for all of her communications, but she was allowed to use one. So, ultimately, what's your problem with it?
SEAN SPICER, RNC COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR: Well, I think most people have a private e-mail account, a Yahoo or Gmail or whatever account. That's totally normal. You have your personal account, you use it for your personal business. But there's a reason that government officials conduct government business on government e- mails.
This system was set up the week she was sworn into office. It was clearly set up to evade the kind of monitoring and security systems that are in place in the government. The problem is that while it's admirable that David Brock is out there as the only guy standing in Washington to defend her, he earlier today said she handled this perfectly.
But 1994, David Brock in January of '94, gave a statement where he said the public's right to know is outweighed by the public figures' right to privacy. This is a perfect example of what 1994 David Brock was talking about.
We need to know what kind of business was being conducted by Hillary Clinton on her personal thing and why she sought to evade the official procedures that all government officials are supposed to operate under.
BURNETT: All right. So, David, let me put this question to you. You stand by that statement that she handled it perfectly?
DAVID BROCK, FOUNDER,M CORRECT THE RECORD: Sure, yes. The law was followed. The 2009 law was perfectly followed. All the e-mails were preserved. That's what the law required.
BURNETT: How do we know that, though? How we ever going to know that if it was on her own server?
BROCK: How are we going to know that they were preserved?
BURNETT: Right.
BROCK: The State Department briefing said yesterday that she turned over 55,000 pages of e-mail last fall. And that was nine out of ten e-mail. The one in the ten would be personal email that wasn't relevant to a pertinent public duty.
And the vast majority of these emails were in the State Department system for years because they were sent to people who had government accounts. So, she was compliant and she was transparent.
(CROSSTALK)
SPICER: With all due respect, Erin, I mean, David Brock has no clue what he's talking about. He can't, because if he does know then he's violating the law by coordinating with Hillary Clinton and violating government ethics laws. So, David Brock, while admirable that he's the only guy in Washington that will stand out here and go on show after show defending her and making outrageous claims that this was handled perfectly, it doesn't make any sense. No one knows what Hillary Clinton did with these e-mails.
BROCK: Yes, we do know.
SPICER: That's the biggest problem. No, you don't. And if you do, then you're violating the law, David.
BROCK: She put her cards on table by putting the 55,000 pages of emails. SPICER: Because she said that.
BROCK: Now, hold on, it's only nice to hear from the Republican National Committee because they should know this is a Republican operation from top to bottom here. This is about desperate Republican tactics on the eve of presidential election. If you want to talk about it in political terms, let's put up that Hillary put her cards on the table versus what Jeb Bush did where he cherry picked the e- mails.
BURNETT: How do we know whether it was cherry picking or not?
(CROSSTALK)
BURNETT: OK, go ahead.
BROCK: Yes. And Scott Walker, a secret e-mail system so he could do political work on county time. And the bridgegate fiasco where Christie's aides.
(CROSSTALK)
BROCK: That's real sketchy.
SPICER: You're doing great, David.
BROCK: Now, let me go back --
(CROSSTALK)
BURNETT: Look, my question is, when you say nine out of ten, how do I know it's really nine out of ten? Because I know what that one was, how do I know it wasn't very important, relevant or classified? It's her judgment.
BROCK: No, no, here's -- yes, so here is how the law works. The law works in that the head of the agency makes the decision about what's relevant and pertinent.
SPICER: The fox gets to take the hen house.
BROCK: Hold on. If you're going to say that wasn't work, then you're going to hold Hillary Clinton to a double standard. It works for every other head of every government agency.
BURNETT: You're saying if we have a problem with it, anyone in the public will have a problem.
BROCK: That's absolutely right. Don't hold her to a double standard.
BURNETT: Sean, that is an interesting point. That's the standard for everyone else.
SPICER: No, because in 2009 what David is trying to do is play fast and loose with the facts. There's a law in 2014 passed that dealt with how records had to be preserved. But in 2009, the National Archives and Administration put out regulations as to how -- everyone was supposed to handle.
BROCK: She followed them. And she followed them.
SPICER: The White House actually agrees that this is how she was supposed -- no, you don't know that, David. You have to clue because she gets to cherry pick what she puts out.
Look, the fact of the matter is, that on the week that she was sworn into office, she went out and set up a private e-mail account run out of her home to purposely evade these --
(CROSSTALK)
BURNETT: Let me interrupt here. Sean, she could have done it to purposely evade, she also could have done it with, hey, now, I'm secretary of state, I need to have the security to preserve these, to make sure no one will come in and steal them, right? It could have been the exact opposite intent of what you're saying.
SPICER: Absolutely. Good point, Erin. But the fact of the matter is every security expert says the way she set it up was for privacy, not security. In her own book, "Hard Choices", Hillary Clinton goes after -- has a whole chapter dedicated to hackers attempting to go into the State Department and government officials and how the digital cyber world that we live in today is dangerous. If she was so concerned about security, then she would have used that system. Second, she would have consulted folks and said I need to set up a secure system.
This isn't somebody having --
(CROSSTALK)
BROCK: How do you know she didn't do that?
SPICER: It's someone who's intentionally going out of the way to evade government monitoring.
BURNETT: Now, give David a chance to respond.
BROCK: There's no evidence of that. Now, first of all, there's also no evidence of any wrongdoing. There's also no allegation of wrongdoing.
SPICER: Yet.
BROCK: Oh, yes, yes, just keep moving the goal post.
But, listen, Chairman Gowdy was on your air today. Now, first of all, he's already yesterday got his facts wrong about whether she had multiple personal e-mail accounts or not. So, it's not an investigation you're going to have a lot of confidence in.
He said he's a terrible lawyer and I'll give him that. He also has a terrible case, because Congress, as you know, we've been on the show before about the 10 investigations that have already gone in Benghazi. This is a dying investigation. Breathe new life into it. Get a false story written and then you're off to the races.
Well, we're not going to stand for congressional abuse of power. And that's what's really going on here, and the chairman refuse to say that Secretary Clinton violated the law.
Now, Sean, do you think she did?
SPICER: I don't know. That's the problem.
(CROSSTALK)
SPICER: It gets solved very easily.
BROCK: Can't you read the law?
SPICER: I know the law.
BROCK: Did she violate?
SPICER: Yes, I do think she violated the act, the 2009 act.
BROCK: You're the only one I seen to say that.
SPICER: OK. If you're going to ask me a question, let me answer. I think the easiest to do this is have her release all the e- mails and we can all know what's going on, because if she wasn't going to evade and this wasn't an attempt to evade, then release all the e- mails. That will solve this for everybody. And it's easy.
It's one simple thing. Governor Bush put all of his e-mails for everyone to see. She should do the same.
BROCK: No, he did not. He did not. He did not.
SPICER: It's a very simple fix. Because you said she's handling it perfectly.
BURNETT: All right. Sean got the first word. Quick final word to you, David.
BROCK: These emails, maybe Sean doesn't understand the law. They have become permanent federal records. That means they will become public. They are FOIA-able. The Congress is going to have access.
BURNETT: The ones we know about. I mean, that's the issue. Are we going to ever truly know?
BROCK: We do know.
BURNETT: All right. Thank you very much, David and Sean. I appreciate it. And next, we have breaking news. New surveillance video of the
Boston bombing. We're just getting this into CNN now. We're going to show you what you're seeing. Jurors in the bombing trial watching this for the very first time.
And a major FBI raid on what's called a maternity hotel. Destinations for pregnant Chinese women coming to the United States so their babies will get what they want, American citizenship. We actually tracked down the people running the hotels.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You're going on a jog?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I can jog.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BURNETT: Breaking news in the Boston bombing trial. Tonight, we have just released video just out to the public moments ago, never before seen footage of the marathon bombing. This was played to jurors in court today.
We want to warn you. This is difficult to watch but this is something you've never seen before and this case it's important to show you.
This is surveillance video that shows the aftermath of the heinous terrorist act. One of the bombs exploded right here in front of Marathon Sports. That's what you're looking at is Marathon Sports. Everyone jumps back and then employees are turning tourniquets out of the clothes in the store to try to help injured victims.
Now, let's show you this other part of the video here. You see the victims coming in. They're trying to use the tourniquets to try to help people, the wounded being treated on the street, on the ground right there in Boston.
Dzhokhar Tsarnaev faces the death penalty for the bombings, that he carried out two years ago with his brother. Four were killed. More than 260 wounded. More of them losing limbs. Their lives completely altered forever.
Deborah Feyerick is OUTFRONT in Boston. She's been in that room.
Deb, what was the reaction when those videos were shown? This is a group of jurors who know this case intimately, have personal, you know, feelings about it because they live nearby. They saw this video for the first time today.
DEBORAH FEYERICK, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, they did. It was an incredibly emotional day in that courtroom because of this video and because of the images. And you had people on the stand in their own words and then pointing themselves out on the street where they lay and the seconds after that first bomb erupted at the scene of the finish line at the Boston marathon.
We had one woman who was a senior in high school at the time, she said that all of the body begun tingling, and she felt herself going increasingly cold. She knew she was dying. She was bleeding out, because the shrapnel from one of those pressure cooking bombs had shattered her main artery. She survived, her mom was standing next to her, lost both her legs. That one also in court today.
There was a second woman. She lost one of her legs. She describes as she calls to Crystal Campbell (ph) and held her hand and look at her and said, my legs hurt. And then all of a sudden, Crystal's hand went limp. And that was the last she ever spoke.
A third woman described how she saw her bones and skin laying on the sidewalk next to her. She reached for her son but her hand also was shattered and all she could hear was her 5-year-old screaming mommy, mommy, mommy. It was incredible testimony that gave a voice to the carnage and pictures we have seen coming out of that attack on the Boston marathon, Erin.
BURNETT: All right. Deb, thank you very much.
And Paul Callan is with me now.
That video, that new video, I want show it again to people what the jurors saw for the first time today, what we're now seeing for the first time. It is hard to watch. It is emotional. It brings back, as I said, the carnage that people experienced on that day.
What impact will this video have on jurors?
PAUL CALLAN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: I think it has an enormous impact. And, you know, the defense today tried to sort of get around it a little bit by admitting that he in fact had committed these acts to sort of take the punch of that case. But nothing can take away the emotion of that video, the carnage that was caused by the actions of Tsarnaev. And, you know, prosecutors are really trying to inflame the passions of the jury by showing him this.
BURNETT: So, they said he did it. They're saying that he was brainwashed by his brother. We know that after he did this attack, after he dropped the backpack that killed people, wounded hundreds, he went to Whole Foods. He bought a gallon of milk. When he was in that boat where he was found, he scrolled a message about Islam. ABC News first showed this image, "Stop killing our innocent people and we will stop."
He did those things. How can the defense argue he was brainwashed?
CALLAN: It's a very, very tough hill to climb for the defense to convince the jury of this. Although I will tell you, I was looking at the stats, in over 400 case where is the Justice Department sought the death penalty, they have only gotten about 50 cases, a little bit more than that in the United States.
In this case, though, prosecutors are saying this was a cold, calculated killing. An 8-year-old boy died in the case. You see the picture of him and your heart just goes out, and the scrollings indicate he knew what he was doing.
BURNETT: All right. Paul Callan, thank you very much.
CALLAN: Thank you.
BURNETT: And OUTFRONT next, FBI agents cracking down on a thriving business that brings tens of thousands of women to the United States illegally and then they give birth, and guess what? Their babies are Americans. We have a special report next.
And have researchers found the bones of John the Baptist? We have a sneak peek of this week's episodes of our special series, "Finding Jesus."
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BURNETT: A massive FBI raid against a growing trend in the United States, tens of thousands of pregnant women, mostly from China, coming to the United States to give birth because they want their babies to be American citizens.
Kyung Lah is OUTFRONT.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
KYUNG LAH, CNN CORRESPONDENT: This man refuses to talk about the raid of his apartment complex and more than 50 other locations across southern California by federal agents, but this man, a Chinese citizen who calls himself Jeffrey Woo (ph), would.
(on camera): You came here to have your baby in America?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes.
LAH (voice-over): That's the goal of the lucrative shadow industry that federal agents are investigating. It's known as birth tourism, catering to mainly to Chinese mothers. The promise? Come pregnant to America. Your baby goes home a U.S. citizen.
It finds roots in Beijing, store fronts like this one and this one offer package deals. On Chinese language Web sites, they advertise to parents offering a step by step guide to obtain a U.S. visa and then arrange travel to cushy, inviting American homes where 24 hour nurses and doctors would care for the mother.
According to the federal investigation, the pregnant mom pays up to $50,000 and then coached on how to lie and what to tell U.S. immigration all in exchange for her baby's U.S. citizenship.
Under current federal laws, coming to the U.S. just to have a baby isn't illegal but visa and tax fraud and money laundering are. And that's the heart of this investigation.
(on camera): Federal agents may have halted birth tourism rings raided out of apartment complexes, but across California, many more of them exist. Some run out of residential neighborhoods, operating out of homes.
Hello. Excuse me?
(voice-over): Recently, an OUTFRONT investigation found birth tourism ring running openly out of this Los Angeles area home.
(on camera): We just wanted to talk about what brings you here.
(voice-over): The people coming out weren't interested in stopping.
He and pregnant mothers, we tried to speak with --
(on camera): Hi there. Ni hao.
(voice-over): Didn't want to talk.
Back at Jeffrey Woo's temporary apartment complex, he says his family told U.S. Customs they were coming to Los Angeles to give birth and plan to return the entire family to China. But in two days, when his wife is expected to give birth to their second son, the newborn will have something priceless.
(on camera): Are you a U.S. citizen?
JEFFREY WOO, CHINESE CITIZEN: No, no.
LAH: But your baby will be?
WOO: Yes, right, maybe, maybe. It depends on his choice.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
BURNETT: Kyung, it's pretty amazing and I get emotional when you see their side how desperately they want this, but obviously it's not right. I mean, you've done extensive reporting on this story for us.
How big is this business? How many people are doing it?
LAH: We're talking about thousands of people. According to Chinese media, in 2008, there were approximately 4,000 Chinese mothers who gave birth in the United States. Four years later, 2012, those numbers more than doubled to 10,000. It's 2015 now. Certainly those numbers are higher.
And, Erin, it certainly raises security questions about what happens to these Chinese babies carrying U.S. passports as adults.
BURNETT: It sure does. It sure does. And now, they can screen and women try to come in not looking pregnant. Is a pregnancy test a right to give away someone at the border? So many questions. Kyung, thank you.
And OUTFRONT next: were Jesus and John the Baptist brothers? DNA might hold the answer. DNA of Jesus? A sneak peek of "Finding Jesus", coming up.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BURNETT: And now, a peek at "Finding Jesus". That's our new series here on CNN. And this week, the question is, whether DNA can prove if Jesus and John the Baptist were brothers.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
ANNOUNCER: An unprecedented CNN event. He didn't vanish without leaving a trace.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: For the first time in history, we're able to place these relics.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: And grasp something that changed the world.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This is really the moment of truth.
ANNOUNCER: This is the story of Jesus.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: A rock upon which the church is built.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: An icon of scientific obsession. This extraordinary defiant and archaeological piece.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What do we really have here?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Why did Judas betray Jesus?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Somebody chose to write this.
UNIDENTIFIED MAEL: The science does matter. Is this the Turin shroud of Jesus?
ANNOUNCER: What are the clues he left behind?
Faith, fact, forgery, "Finding Jesus", premieres Sunday night at 9:00, on CNN.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
BURNETT: And thank you for joining us.
Anderson starts now.
