tv CNN Tonight With Don Lemon CNN December 6, 2016 12:00am-1:01am PST
reality show in history, starring donald trump. this is cnn tonight. i'm don lemon. drama, pot stirring and the cutthroat competition to get the nod for trump's cabinet. as one famous cabinet hopeful after another takes a turn in front of cameras at trump tower. who will come out on top in the big finale? and shocking news in the
michael schlager murder case. a mistrial when jurors weren't able to reach a verdict of an unarmed black man shot in the black by a white police officer. what we saw with our own eyes seems to be undeniable. why couldn't jurors agree? let's talk now. anthony scott. brother of walter scott and also chris stewart represents walter scott's family. thank you for coming on. i appreciate it. >> hi, don. >> how are you doing tonight? anthony what is your reaction to the mistrial? >> actually, i'm not doing very well, don. i'm disappointed and based on what the evidence showed, they cannot come up with a verdict of guilty. i think she presented a very good case. on friday, the judge read a letter from a juror. listen to this.
>> as you stated, we must follow the instructions you have given us and the law. we all struggle with the death of a man and with all that has been put before us. i still cannot, without a reasonable doubt convict the defendant. at the same time, my heart does not want to have to tell the scott family that the man that killed their son, brother and father is innocent. but with the choices, i cannot and will not change my mind. >> when you heard those words, what was your reaction? >> it was upsetting, prior to the judge dismissing the six alternate jurors, he asked them
if they were willing based on the evidence presented in the case to go further with the case. from the statement that that juror stated there, it sounds like he had a conflict. he's saying that he -- he's saying he's innocent. and then he's saying he's guilty. he can't be both. so i think he should have made up his mind and chose what it actually was, a guilty man and convict him of murder. >> chris, i find it interesting that you say you are not worried that you will get justice, and that this is just a delay? scarlet wilson says that officer slager will be tried again. what do you expect the time line for a second trial to be? >> hopefully soon. charleston needs it, and the country needs it, this was a big missed opportunity to heal a lot of the pain in the community. show the community that their
lives matter. and show officers out there doing their job, they are not michael slager. it was a total fumble today. >> justice delayed is justice denied, do you believe that? or do you think in the end they will get justice? >> justice delayed. he bought a few more months out of jail. he will end up behind prison bars where he deserves. >> i wonder what it was like to hear officer slager on the stand. what was it like? >> i wasn't there that day. that was the only day out of the whole trial that i missed. and i think it was god's meaning for me not to be there. i did watch it via the computer and just listening to him. his testimony did not match what actually happened. there was just lies there. and you could tell he was lying.
nothing was lining up. what he said happen, we didn't see happen, so it just didn't make any sense to me why the jurors cannot come to an agreement, based on all the evidence they had in front of them. >> speaking of that, chris what do you think the jury saw differently than the public who sees this video and can't imagine any other verdict than guilty? >> yeah. well, we've heard from four sources, it was just one juror, it's very obvious, it's not just the videotape. santana testified about what he saw before the videotape that there was no fight. officer slager was never in danger, which is what his self-defense angle was, it never should have happened. that one juror got on to the jury and already predetermined he's never going to put mr. slager behind bars, which is a violation of his oath. >> there were 11 jurors, one was african-american. do you think that was a fair representation of the community?
>> i don't think it was a fair representation of the community. but it was what we got. and based on the judicial system, i felt comfortable with it, i thought we had the best case and the stronger case evidently we didn't have a strong enough case to get the conviction, we're not losing hope. we're still trusting in god. and keeping the faith, it's not over, we're going to continue to seek justice and we will seek justice in this case. >> thank you. >> thanks, don. >> thank you. i want to bring in harry houck. laura coats. and jury consultant joe ellen demetrius. this is a tough and emotional case.
this seems to have come down to one juror who could not convicted. lawyers say they want someone on the jury who will stand up for their convictions and not be swayed by the pressure of the rest of the group. is that what happened here? >> i think it's very clearly what happened we don't know anything about this particular juror, what his background is, if there was a juror questionnaire. very clearly, this was a gentleman who believed in whatever his particular persuasion was, and was not going to change his mind no matter what the pressure was being placed on, not only by his fellow jurors, but also by the judge. when the judge gives an allen charge, basically he's saying to the jury, look, folks, we have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars in this lawsuit. another case would have to be tried if there is a mistrial, and you really need to go back and make a decision. and yet one man for whatever reason stood up and said, no, i
cannot go with a vote of guilt. >> can you -- i heard this referred to as a stealth juror, can you explain what that is, and whether it fits this case? >> certainly, don a stealth juror is someone who comes in who may be hiding information about their background. maybe he has law enforcement in his background. maybe something happened in his life that he did not share or the attorneys did not ask the right question door the voir dire process, and they come into the jury with one thing in mind and in his case, a person could say, his preconception was to acquit this particular officer. that's generally what a stealth juror is. >> on friday it appeared there was one hold out juror.
what do you think happened with this jury? i think the weekend was a time for them to reflect further, you're seeing what happens when juries are con fronted with the idea of a police officer on trial. one of the key questions that every prosecutor and defense attorney will ask in a voir dire is whether the jury will give more weight to the testimony of an officer over a civilian. the answer usually is yes. people are going to give a lot more weight to the officer, when the officer is a defendant. there is this level of increduality. they say i don't want to believe someone in uniform would do this. what piqued my interest the most is a statement based on the choices i have, i can't convict. what seemed to me, you had a juror who said, i don't feel comfortable with the homicide or murder charge. there's much less for this particular officer. >> it's interesting. do you think the jury was -- do
you think the charges were correct against the officer? >> i think they were, but i think one of the strategic airers the prosecution may have made was that they originally came in with a murder charge. they then allowed the jury to hear a voluntary manslaughter charge. different charge based on the intent of the officer. maybe there's some reason to doubt that there is some basis to just have a straight murder charge. you saw that evidence by the fact that the jurors then asked today, well, why did you give us the manslaughter charge to consider as opposed to murder, it was very telling. >> i also find it interesting, you said from the start, you could not condone the shooting. >> correct. >> this is what slager said often the stand, and then we'll talk about it. >> in my mind fear, with everything leading up to this
with the run, to not cooperating, the fight on the ground. mr. scott coming after me while we were on the ground in the chest area coming at me again. cold fear that mr. scott didn't stop, continued to come toward me. >> unarmed, running away from the officer, not toward him does his defense any sense? >> he doesn't have much of a defense at all. i'm shocked we didn't get a conviction in this case. that video is so clear, i think what might have happened is either the judge who gave them the information regarding the laws and the stipulations of the laws, may have done something wrong for all i know. maybe the district attorney didn't make his case good enough.
the fact is, we had 11 jurors that were for conviction, and one against it. that's the problem with jurors, you never know how people are going to think. to me, and to any police officer watching this video and watching this trial, you got to say to yourself, this is a bad shoot. this officer needs to go to jail for what he did. i don't know what was going on when he fired at that man. i've been in that situation. >> you said you've been in the situation. a million times -- so what do you think the root problem is here, was it bad training? he said he was in fear. often times, that's what happens in these cases. most times i was in fear, i was in fear for my life. >> he may have been in fear in his own mind. he did not have the law says you cannot shoot at a fleeing felon. it's basically, he did not have a weapon in his hand. the fact that even in the video, officer slager went back and picked something up and put it down down near the body. you could see clearly even the
way he's trying to articulate in the trial what his fear was. i'm sitting there thinking, what in the hell is this guy talking about? you know, nothing makes any sense to a police officer who has been through this type of thing before. >> does this show the difficulty, laura in convicting an officer in these types of cases. >> you have supreme court precedent that allows deference to officers that defines what's a sense of fear. as harry talking about, as anybody with eyes saw the videotape looks at and sees a man 18 feet apart from the officer when he's first shot. it's hard to believe there's reasonable fear. not only does the supreme court get that deference, every day civilians on the jury will say to themselves, i have do believe a different narrative here. that seems at odds with what we believe. that's why it's so frustrating. reasonable doubt has to first be reasonable. it's not beyond all shadow of
any scintilla of evidence. it's what's reasonable here. it's clear it was not a reasonable defense, but themes the breaks when it comes to juries. you have to have uninimity. and in this case, with a new trial, with a new jer, you will be able to achieve that one way or another. >> thank you very much. i appreciate it. coming back to hear from are donald trump's cabinet tryouts the greatest political reality show ever?
(vo) it's the holidays at verizon, and the best deals are on the best network. (both) yes! (vo) with no surprise overages, you can use your data worry free and even carry over the data you don't use. and right now get four lines and 20 gigs for only $40 per line. and, just for the holidays, buy the motoz play droid absolutely free. no trade-in required. i love you in that, no, i love you in that. no, i love you in that! (vo) hurry, these offers end soon. get the best deals and the best network, only on verizon.
donald trump working to fill his cabinet. tapping ben carson to run the department of housing and urban development. this is a transition like none we've seen before. here's deborah feyerick. >> reporter: it's arguably the greatest political reality show of all time, hosted by one time reality tv star, now president-elect. facing very real responsibilities. like all great reality shows, the trump transition features alliances, plot twists and cliffhangers. >> the real part of the art of it is creating the right all the of suspense, the right amount of drama to keep people engaged. watching this transitioning, it feels like it's being plotted meticulously. >> rather than official press conferences.
contestants parade past a golden backdrop. a live set as cameras role on potential cabinet secretaries and advisers, before they ascend to the inner sanctom of the booth. >> i apologized for it, i paid a very heavy price for it, and i've learned from it. >> it's not just people, it's places. take china and taiwan. taiwan getting in the first phone call and rangeling its parent nation china. trump up ending decades of protocol. tweeting, taiwan called me. >> trump is our first reality tv president-elect. he knows how to give something worth watching. >> immunitity challenges are also in play. early trump supporters, chris christie and rudy giuliani seem to have a white house job virtually in the bag.
but christie, the rival turned ally left the island. trump's son in law jared kushner reportedly banishing christie for convicting his father on tax evasion and illegal campaign donations. and reportedly failing to let him out 28 days early, according to vanity fair. in the meantime, rudy giuliani's hope for secretary of state seems to be fading in a growing pool of contenders. the president-elect recently taking a fresh look admit romney, bachelor style at a candlelight dinner. kelly ann conway, taking her fight against romney public. >> he went so far out of his way to hurt donald trump. >> which may explain romney rival john hunts man. a fellow billionaire appearing so quickly on scene. >> you're fired. >> giving way to new ones. >> disaster. all like disasters. >> donald interrupt has cast himself as the president-elect. he's an ideal tv villain.
>> the trump transition leaving a divided nation with cliffhangers. threatening not to accept the election results if he lost. to seducing his audience and winning them over. >> on television, the worst thing that happens, you disappear. you get voted off the island or you get fired, but what's happening right now has real and potentially dire consequences. there's a danger, don, in blurring the lines between what's real and what's not. what's real is diplomacy, longstanding policy and protocol. it's a world in which snubs can have serious consequences. don? >> deborah, thank you very much. the trump transition has its cliffhangers, the president-elect saying only he knows the finalists for top positions.
[ male announcer ] eligible for medicare? that's a good thing, but it doesn't cover everything. only about 80% of your part b medical expenses. the rest is up to you. so consider an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. like all standardized medicare supplement insurance plans, they could save you in out-of-pocket medical costs. call today to request a free decision guide. with these types of plans, you'll be able to visit any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients...
plus, there are no networks, and virtually no referrals needed. join the millions who have already enrolled in the only medicare supplement insurance plans endorsed by aarp... and provided by unitedhealthcare insurance company, which has over 30 years of experience behind it. with all the good years ahead, look for the experience and commitment to go the distance with you. call now to request your free decision guide.
the president-elect takes office in 46 days. right now, the spotlight is on trump tower where he's interviewing a parade of cabinet hopefuls. in a process that looks more and more like reality tv every day. cnn political commentator alice stewart. a republican political consultant the. i'm going to tell my corny story about dinner last night. i overheard the table next to me, every day, one day i expect whoever gets the cabinets nod to be given a rose in the lobby of trump tower. it was a group of older people. you know what, they're kind of right. does that seem right to you, alice? >> it could totally happen. i would not be surprises if we come out of trump tower and see donald trump handing out roses to whoever is one of the top picks. that's completely doable. >> you think it's completely doable. he's a reality tv star, he owned the miss universe competition.
does it surprise you it looks more and more like a reality tv show every day. >> no. every decision he makes, he's fully cognizant of the spectacle of it. that's what he does, so by having all of these different candidates for secretary of state, he not only gives himself the ability to sort of be at the top of this apprentice like or bachelor like reality show. do you want mitt romney or jo jo, who's going to get the final rose. he gets to command the narrative, he gets to buy the media narrative, distract the attention away from some of the more pressing issues going on in his campaign. and he gets to bring in ez all these candidates and humble them. let's say mitt romney goes back to being a critic of donald trump. trump gets to say, he was much more conciliatory when he came to have dinner with me those few times in new york. it's a strategic move what he's doing.
>> speaking of mitt romney, you say that in this game what we call a transition survivor. mitt romney got a reprieve last week. >> he got a second chance. he got to have dinner. don amd trump clearly cares about personalities and relationships and those types of things. i have to be honest with you, why is this a surprise to anybody that this is a reality tv show. we've seen this for two years. i think it's kind of refreshing. we see who all the candidates are. first it was going to be gingrich, then chris christie, then it turned out to be pence. i think this is kind of fun to see, these are all people who are credible people. i don't see a problem with any of this. >> i don't think we're saying
it's a problem. it's just interesting, it's like a reality show. even last week when he went to that rally in ohio. i want to save the suspense for next week, but he let the cat out of the bag. i think you're right. >> he didn't let the cat out of the bag, he knew -- we reported it as breaking news on cnn a minute later. i think that's a smart thing to do. >> there's also the aspect of, he likes the theater of it. but in his defense, cameras are everywhere, everywhere you go, whether you're walking outside trump tower or his golf course, he's playing to the camera and feeding the narrative, at the end of the day, while this is great conversation and great talk for television, voters and people don't care about the vetting process, they care about the picks and what they're going to do to improve their lives. look at the people he's picked. they're talking about replacing obama care. we have others with regard to session. he's picking good qualified people, and we have to note,
he's way ahead of schedule, much further ahead of presidents in the past. i think you have to give him a little credit. it's a lot of fun to make light of the situation as being very productive and getting good -- >> he's being lauded by some of those people or for picking some of those people. for others, they're more controversial. there's a sense here that what is driving donald trump's decision making, if what's driving it is a sense of spectacle, saying, this candidate looks right for the part, that does not bode well for his decision making process as president of the united states. now, i will say, bringing in a lot of people, having a transparent selection process, that's all great, bringing in certain rivals, that's all great, but the decision making would be the best secretary of state, not how can i put on this spectacle, who's going to be the winner or who might look best or appear to be the best secretary of state. >> you said people don't care about the process, do you think they're annoyed by the process
at all? would they rather just hear about it and see the show? this has helped, it's refreshing and it gives them something to talk about? >> i think people are really not interested in the day to day in and out and the turnstile at trump tower right now who's going in, and waiting to get the rose or the candlelight dinner like mitt romney, they really just want the cliff notes at the end of the day. who's getting what pick and who will trump be talking to tomorrow. we have the tease for tomorrow already. we'll see a promo throughout the day. >> it's funny, every day it's a way of keeping the narrative on hand. there's other news to cover, but then someone else walks in to trump tower. in the early days of transition, people started chattering about who his picks would be. very organized process, i decide on cabinet and many other decisions. i am the only one who knows who
the finalists are. what does it tell you about his views of this process? >> i think there's some truth to it, he's given a lot of candidates and then he narrows it down. it's not like so far he said, hey, i want so and so from season two of the apprentice to be my attorney general. all of these people have been credible people. the one thing they have in common, they are not yes men and women, they are people who are very independent thinking, and i think he likes that, let's be clear, there's a whole team helping him get to those finalists, and they're going through a vetting process, so by the time they get to donald trump, they're pretty credible and they're qualified. >> we slu say about this team, part of the reason this process is taking so long, is because that team is divided. there are a lot of people who believe that donald trump should pick someone who's helped him out throughout his campaign, who's supported him from the beginning, who represents this outsider, maybe even channel some of that populous anger that steve bannon does. there are other people who say, no, you're president of the united states now, you need to
be president for all people and make a more responsible decision, that's where you see him going after the likes of mitt romney. >> we saw that to play off the reality show a little bit. the alliances like they did on the different reality shows, formed different alliances, we've had some of the picks that have come up, mitt romney being one, we've had certain trump team members who have formed alliances for or against certain people, that's natural. these are people that they know who they would like, they are certainly making recommendations, they know at the end of the day, it's donald trump's decision. >> he's picking quality people now, but that's this part of the elimination process, and the next round when there are other -- maybe some advisers, maybe it will be season two of the apprentice, who knows, you never know with donald trump. i want to ask you this, before we have to go. you get calls from people who are disappointed they're not being considered for the administration. why are they telling you that? >> i like a lot of other people that have clients are saying, hey, can you get me in there,
i'd really like to be considered for x, y, z or ambassadorship or whatever. these are a lot of people tripping over themselves who weren't on board with donald trump. i think it's interesting, donald trump is not keeping a litmus test of you're with me or you weren't. ronnie is not the best example of that. >> is that what's going on here, you're throwing your hat into the ring? >> i'll speak for you, john. i think you're good. >> thank you, i appreciate all of you. the real life consequences of fake news. an armed man bursts into a washington, d.c., peetsz rhea, and it's all because of a wild conspiracy theory.
a man armed with an assault rifle bursts into a washington, d.c., pizzeria yesterday. he claimed he was there to self-investigate an outrageous and completely false online conspiracy theory. an imagined pedophile ring being run out of the pizzeria. edgar madison welsh, it's a case of real life consequences of fake news. my cnn political commentators
join me. good evening to all of you. you have been talking a lot about fake news during this election. this is a prime example of what can happen when people latch on to these conspiracy theorys. is there a way to keep this fake news from circulating and inspiring these extremist views? >> this is the question i dread this is a hard question, it doesn't have a satisfied answer right now. there are lots of things individuals can do. some things that newsrooms can do. i didn't take pizza gate seriously, when it started to come out in early november i thought it was so ludicrous, so disgusting, people trying to link her to a pedophilia ring. i just dismissed it. maybe i shun the have. maybe we should have tried to debunk it more clearly early on. buzz feed did good work on that. there are steps we can take, there are no --
satisfying answers to this hard problem. >> that's hard, because you give life to it. >> during the campaign there were some rational people who i thought before -- they started believing these things that were -- mark, don't you agree, it's like, you can't possibly believe that, and they did. >> right, the amazing thing is how committed people can be to holding on to a position, despite all evidence to the contrary, you have a belief in something, or you want to believe something to be true, you can debunk the story, challenge the story, give as much life to the story as you want. there are people who will still tweet the story and argue the story down. this trump moment is a post fact moment. we don't care what the facts are, we want to believe what we want to believe, regardless of what the facts say. that's very, very dangerous. >> that's not just true on the right either. there are lots of liberals who want to believe lies as well. >> absolutely.
>> there's a lot of talk about this on the right right now, it's a bipartisan problem. >> peter, you look flummoxed. >> it's a bipartisan problem, we have the spector of the trump potential national security adviser being someone who sent out a tweet suggesting that hillary clinton was involved in sex crimes with children, and his son who is now part of the transition has been repeatedly sending out these tweets. last i checked, there was no national security adviser who was sending out those kinds of tweets. right now we're in a really unprecedented situation, where not only are these conspiracy theorys, you have donald trump's national security advisory and his son who are actually propagating them. >> i want to ask you about this, he's talking about mike flynn's son. until pizza gate is proven to be false, it will remain what do you make of this?
>> michael flynn's son should not have sent out that tweet or given that story any sort of legs or legitimacy. the pizzeria definitely has what i would see as a libel suit on their hands. i appreciate the washington post for once pointing out new nuance. michael flynn the elder was referring to something completely different from pizza gate. whether he should have gone down that road is an open question. good for the washington post to point out there is a difference that mike flynn the national security adviser was not promoting pizza gate. his son should not have done it. >> he also, general flynn has promoted conspiracy theorys in the past. nypd blows whistle on new hillary e-mails. must read, so he wasn't -- according to the washington post, and you, it wasn't this particular one, he is still
national security adviser to be the national security adviser and he's still promoting conspiracy theorys. >>s athe washington post said he was not promoting, this is a quote from them, a full blown conspiracy theory, he was asking questions that sources like the new york post were asking. i think there's a difference when you ask questions that newspapers were asking. then floating a baseless conspiracy theory. like the 9/11 truther theory, which i would love for peter bineart -- to disown from his wing >> i've never had any connection in my life in anyway to the 9/11 -- >> you're a leftist, so yeah, if you want to implicate the right with this. >> no, kayleigh this is a bizarre red herring. what we're talking about, what don was asking about, the guy
that's going to be national security adviser, you're right, it's a different allegation of hillary clinton involved with pedophilia, but the question is, especially when you have a candidate like donald trump who shoots from the hip like this. >> do you really -- >> no, no, let me finish. do you want a national security adviser who's sending out news links accusing the democratic candidate of being linked with pedophilia. a charge in which is totally absurd. >> peter, every time you're confronted with a difficult question, you call it a bizarre red herring. >> it was -- >> i have no -- >> never in my life. >> as a main street leftist, you have to confront the extremist on your side and your party, those are 9/11 truthers, michael moore. if you want to have me talk about the extremists in my party. >> michael moore is not a senior adviser or going to be part of any campaign or administration. go ahead, mark. >> he's a prominent leftist.
>> but the conversation here isn't whether prominent leftists have opinions we disagree with. i wouldn't put michael moore in the box you just did. this is a question of whether senior level advisers in a presidential administration. >> the national security adviser. >> of all things, the national security adviser. if susan rice walked in the building and said, i don't think 9/11 happened or snapple is created by the kkk to defertilize black folk, these kinds of things are circulating in the white house, we would think it was bonkers. the problem is the trump administration is normalizing these narratives. at a time when donald trump has tweeted things that are baseless and absurd. you have a president who himself is a birther. that himself speaks to the challenge here. why i say we're in a post fact moment. >> earlier today on cnn i said, trump's a conspiracy theorist. they got picked up by blogs or
websites. saz if that was a surprising statement. it's just a fact. you might say it's okay. trump is many things, he's beloved by many people. he's many things, one of the things he is is a conspiracy theorist. we saw that last wyche, millions of people voted illegally. that's a conspiracy theory. there's no proof of it. we're talking about opinions here as well as facts. we should have opinions flourish. i want the michael moore's of the world and the general flynns of the world to share all their opinions on twitter. but we've got to figure out ways to come together on some of the facts, at least just some of the facts. why people are so uncomfortable right now, 27 days after the election, it feels like we're partially pro opposed truth. hopefully we're not all opposed truth at this point. but it feels like we're in a post truth world. >> paul ryan, when confronted about donald trump's claims, no one has found any evidence for. would not condemn it. that's what's remarkable. you have republicans who were during the campaign willing to
stand up to donald trump, who were caving in. >> you say as the daily show put it, it's the enablers that are worse than donald trump, they actually enable him without even saying. without even having the backbone to tell him the truth about himself? >> the republicans are running washington right now. physical someone is going to stand up to donald trump when he says things that are dangerous, it's going to have to be people like paul ryan and they're not doing it. >> all right we'll be right back.
(vo) it's the holidays at verizon, and the best deals are on the best network. (both) yes! (vo) with no surprise overages, you can use your data worry free and even carry over the data you don't use. and right now get four lines and 20 gigs for only $40 per line. and, just for the holidays, get a samsung galaxy s7 edge for only $15 per month.
the question is what are his qualifications? his own close advisor armstrong williams said earlier he didn't think that carson would take the job because he doesn't have any experience running a government agency, and he hasn't shown any expertise in housing and urban development housing. i would love to be surprised, but besides the fact that he grew up poor, what qualifies him for this job? >> let's put up the tweet you're talking about or what he said. i'm sorry, it's what he said. arm strong williams, he's never run an agency and it's a lot to ask. that's not his strength. the last thing he would want to do is take a position that could cripple the presidency. how do you respond to that, kayleigh? >> i think he's extremely qualified. not only does he have a passion for this because he grew up in poverty and worked his way out of it. not only that, but this is a world class neuro surgeon. he had a leadership award for being one of the greatest leaders in his field.
he sat on the board of companies like kellogg. he was the head at john's hopkins of the neuro science center. he devised the first method to separate conjoined twins. he's a leader and compassion. the experts in washington clearly aren't doing their job and they're not getting it done. let's give a shot to someone who is one of the most extraordinary minds i think we have. >> mark? >> wait a minute. i'm just baffled by this. first of all, you said he's extremely qualified. and then you explained the ways he's a talented neuro surgeon. to that doesn't qualify you to head hud. >> he's a great leader. >> wouldn't he be more qualified to be the head of health and human surgeons than he would be to housing and urban development? >> absolutely. leadership skills are not transferable. you know? the lebron james is the leader of the cavaliers.
it doesn't mean they're the leader of housing development. he, himself, said i don't know how to run an office or a bureau or have any experience in government. if he says that himself, why do you choose him to be the leader of one of the most significant departments in america? >> i think his own comments against the job is notable. i do think leadership skills are transferable, though. >> some are. some are not. coming out of poverty doesn't make you qualified. coming out of public housing doesn't make you qualified to run public housing. by that logic half of black america should be the head of hud. >> but mark, the leaders in the experts you extol are the ones who gave us the sub prime housing crisis, one of the greatest foreclosure crisises we've seen in the history. these are the experts? let's give ben carson a chance. >> no, those experts -- >> this is the logic that i find
so baffling. it's like, yes, people in government who actually have experience may have made really big mistakes. just like people who know how to fly airplanes sometimes screw up and get it wrong. it's not an argument for taking people who have never flown an airplane and putting them in the cockpit. >> but they've been on a plane. >> it's not an argument for putting people with no experience in these jobs. [ laughter ] >> ben carson said the guy that's on the plane before. >> nancy pelosi calls ben carson a disturbingingly unqualified choice. what do you say? >> pass. >> go ahead, mark. what do you make of that. >> she's absolutely right. everything else i said tonight aside, there's another fundamental challenge.
ben carson made his bones as a republican speaker but talking about how he doesn't believe the government should be supporting people in the ways hud has been designed to do so. it's hard for him to push forward the public housing if he doesn't believe the government should have that relationship to its citizens. to me it's a backwards role for him. he's not the right fit for this. there are so many better people. i agree with peter. >> let's hope it's not a joke, actually. it's an important job. >> mark, you're on fire tonight. sorry about that. anyway. thank you all. i appreciate it. that's it for us tonight. thank you for watching. i'll see you right back here tomorrow. . . . "why are you checking your credit score?"
president-elect trump widens his search for cabinet picks again. could the coo of exxon mobile be the frontrunner for the top job at the state department? the death toll rising in oakland. now the city wants to know if the deadliest fire was caused by a criminal act? a mistrial in the case of the cop who shot an unarmed black man in the back. good morning. welcome to "early