tv CNN Newsroom With Brooke Baldwin CNN July 5, 2016 11:00am-1:01pm PDT
that is -- and also there is one other point, wolf. we know from some of the wreckage that has been pulled out of the water that there is sooting and smoke damage. so, yes, there was a fire on egyptair 804. >> richard quest reporting the very latest. we'll stay on top of it. m that's it from me. the news continues right now right here on cnn. thank you so much. great to be with you on this tuesday. i'm brooke baldwin. you're watching cnn. breaking news today. wow. hillary clinton. we have learned from the fbi, exposed top-secret information to hackers, extremely careless in her use of personal e-mail servers, use of personal devices. the headline is that the fbi is not recommending charges for what she did. fbi director james comey today
giving a scornful assessment of secretary clinton's actions while she served as secretary of state. but ultimately saying it falls short of criminal intent. here is director comey just a short
time ago. >> from the group of 30,000 e-mails returned to the state department in 2014, 110 e-mails in 52 e-mail chains have been determined by the owning agency to contain classified information at the time they were sent or received. eight of those chains contained information that was top-secret at the time they were sent. 36 of those chains contained secret information at the time. and eight contained confidential information at the time. although we did not find clear evidence that secretary clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information, there is evidence that they were extremely
careless in their handling of very sensitive highly classified information. although there is evidence of potential violations of statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case.
prosecutors necessarily weigh a number of factors before deciding whether to bring charges. there are obvious considerations like the strength of the evidence, especially regarding intent. responsible decisions also consider the context of a person's actions and how similar situations have been handled in the past. in looking back at our investigations, into the mishandling or removal of classified information, we cannot find a case that would support bringing criminal charges on these facts. all the cases prosecuted involved some combination of clearly intentional and willful mishandling of classified information, or vast quantities
of information, exposed in such a way as to support an inference of intentional misconduct, or indications of disloyalty to the united states or efforts to obstruct justice. we do not see those things here. although the department of justice makes final decisions on matters like this, we are expressing to justice our view that no charges are appropriate in this case. i know there will be intense public debate in the wake of this recommendation, as there was
throughout the investigation. what i can assure the american people is that this investigation was done honestly, competently and independently. no outside influence of any kind was brought to bear. >> unsurprisingly, donald trump wasting no time, tweeting his disdain here, quoting him, he says the system is rigged. general petraeus got in trouble for far less. very, very unfair, as usual. bad judgment. and another fbi director said crooked hillary compromised our
national security. no charges. wow. #riggedsystem. meantime, hillary clinton's campaign ready to lay all of this to rest with this statement. as long as the secretary has long said it was a mistake to use her personal e-mail and she would not do it again, we are glad that this matter is now resolved. all of this as we are just an hour away from a campaign first this year. the president of the united states hitting the trail with the presumed democratic nominee in the state of north carolina. we'll take you there. but first, evan perez kicks things off, our cnn justice correspondent. comey said while there may be some evidence of violations, no reasonable prosecutor would bring a case since doj said two follow the recommendation of the fbi, does this mean this is a fait accompli? >> we do expect, brooke, that this will be the decision that the justice department announced. onniously they're going to take a little time to review what the fbi sends over. my i understanding they're sending over a voluminous report that details all the people
they've talked to, all of the evidence and the testimony that people have provided in this case that now has lasted about a year. a year of investigation. but as director comey said, at this point looking at all the totality of evidence and including hillary clinton's own interview with the fbi over the weekend on saturday, three and a half hours of interview, they've decided that there's not enough evidence of willful or intentional behavior here that would support bringing charges. obviously as you noted at the top, there's plenty here to find fault with what she did. not least of which is he mentions that there's seven e-mail chains in which hillary clinton participates in the conversation that had direct information about classified or special beingaccess programs. that's problematic for one reason, politically at least. because we've heard from the last few months from mrs.
clinton's campaign that she did not send or receive any classified information that was marked as such. obviously she's using that very legalese type of language. but what the fbi director is saying is essentially this stuff was classified and, given her position, she should have known it's classified. it had no business on this home-brewed server that she was using when she was secretary of state, broo. >> evan, thank you. you know, in one of the most stinging indictments, comey laid out the escalated threat of clinton's e-mail usage while on foreign soil and expressed his shock and just how unsecure clinton's server was. >> none of these e-mails should have been on any kind of unclassified system. but their presence is especially concerning because all of these e-mails were housed on unclassified personal servers, not even supported by full-time security staff like those found
at agencies and departments of the united states government, or even with a commercial e-mail service like gmail. >> so with me now, cnn senior legal analyst, jeffrey toobin. senior washington correspondent jeff zeleny. trump surrogate boris epstein, and hillary rosen, a hillary clinton supporter. jeff, turning to you off the bat. hello. on the law -- i know mentioned petraeus in your response, i want you to distinguish the difference here. this is all about intent. >> correct. >> right? so explain to me connecting the dots why comey's saying she did not intend to intentionally disclose. >> some crimes are what are known as specific intent crimes, and some are known as strict liability crimes. if you are drunk driving and you're caught going too fast and you fail the breathalyzer and you say to you police officer, but i didn't intend to drive too fast, they don't care. your intent is irrelevant.
but this crime, disclosure -- improper disclosure of classified information is a specific intent crime. and that means it is not enough that you improperly disclose classified information. you have to know that you are breaking the law and do it anyw anyway. and that's the difference between this case and the petraeus case. because the petraeus case -- >> which is what trump points out in the tweet. >> -- he disclosed notes and papers to his biographer girlfriend and he later admitted he knew it was classified. hillary clinton has said from the beginning that she thought she was not disclosing classified information. now it turns out she was wrong. but in terms of her intent, there is nothing that the fbi has discovered that contradicts her claim that she thought she was dealing with unclassified information. and that's why -- there's one part of comey's statement we haven't talked about that i think is very important. he looked at -- the fbi looked
at, did they make any attempt, hillary clinton or her people, to sort of cover up what she did, to destroy documents? because that's usually a sign of a guilty conscience, of criminal intent. and they didn't find anything like that. and i think that's very significant in the ultimate conclusion. >> okay. so again, the headline -- this is the fact that she did not do any of this intentionally. huge burden off of her back. but still, jeff zeleny, you heard the word "careless" mentioned over and over. here are my two things. for months we know she has said over and over that she never sent or received anything that was classified at the time, and two, that she handed over every work related e-mail. when you listen to director comey today be with that's not entirely true. >> it's not entirely true, brooke. that's one of the reasons that hillary clinton is going to have to relitigate all of this all over again. she is going to have to apologize again. she's going to have to say, look, it was not my best use of
judgment. if anyone was not paying attention over the last year or so to this, this is coming directly when people are paying attention and this is a problem for hillary clinton. she's been trying to improve her trust numbers. she's been trying to improve her credibility numbers. this is going to erode that and make that more difficult. yes, they are very happy that there are no criminal charges recommended. obviously that would have been nothing short of a disaster for her campaign. but this is hardly a clean bill of health, if you will. there's plenty in here, in the director's very long press conference for donald trump to pick over. and he already is. and plenty in here for anyone who is skeptical of the clintons. so she is going to have to address this directly. i'm not sure if she will here today in north carolina but in the coming days and weeks she is going to have to try to prepare once again and answer questions of people who wonder why she did this in the first place? it goes right to her judgment and right to the fact that the
rules don't always seem to apply to the clintons. that's something that's really a problem for her. >> hilary rosen, to all of jeff's points, you even look at a recent cnn poll. 66% of americans think her personal use of e-mail on a private server were wrong. and so even if she won't face any sort of criminal charges, which is huge, huge, huge for her, still, how does the clinton camp tell the american voter, no, we don't think she's above the law, no, she can't skirt around the rules, you need to trust her. >> well, two things. first, i go back to the point that jeffrey toobin and jeff zeleny just made which is that the fbi, after this thorough investigation, found that actually this wasn't a trust issue. this was just a bad judgment issue. and so -- but when asked by the fbi to hand everything over, to do everything, she did. there's no finding that said that she made any attempt to
hide anything from the government when they looked into this. so i go back to this larger point which is, this may seem like the worst thing possible. in context, it is the one dark stain on hillary clinton's record here in terms of judgment. but elections will end up being about choices. and donald trump has 400 lawsuits against him of unethical business behavior, against failure to pay taxes, against cheating construction workers out of pay, against cheating former business colleagues and the middle class. so what i think ends up happening is the clinton campaign has to find a way to have this not be only conversation about hillary clinton and will end up being sort of one thing that gets a lot of attention versus trump's hundreds of things that get a little bit of attention. that's going to be a challenge going forward. >> all right. on that, i know, boris, i'm sure
you're champing at the bit to get on this. i heard hillary say this isn't a trust issue, it is a judgment issue, which is what i know donald trump has pointed out before. i imagine that the trump campaign is en route to the editing house to cut the ad where you have comey saying "careless" over and over. >> we'd love for hilary rosen to go out there over and over again and say that her candidate has bad judgment. yes, that is the truth. she does have bad judgment. hillary clinton is somebody who would have been fired at her job as secretary of state. if this was someone else, they'd have been reprimanded in termed of sanctions. hillary clinton would have had to have been fired by barack obama? >> he did not say that. >> yes, he did. now barack obama is going to be stumping for hillary clinton today. >> hillary, jump back in.
>> in terms of her history of bad judgment, let's not forget the clinton foundation and benghazi. this is one of a million instances of bad judgment by hillary clinton. any time you celebrate not being indicted by the fbi as a. candidate for president, it is a pretty bad day for you. >> hillary, respond to that. >> comey did not say what he just said. he simply said that were somebody still in office around this, that there would be some administrative sanctions. that is a very different thing. but he also said that the broader state department had a lax of security. >> under their boss, hillary clinton. >> having this one piece for many years and that has not been necessarily hillary clinton issue. so i think what you have to -- >> that's unfair and untrue. >> i think what you have to look at -- >> let her finish. >> i'm looking for the time when donald trump is as forth right about a mistake that he made as hillary clinton has been about this mistake that she made. the american people are very forgiving when you're honest
about them. and that's what comey said today. hillary clinton was honest about her mistakes. >> no, he did not say that. absolutely not. >> let me hit pause on this conversation. we're keeping all of you around. jeff is in charlotte, north carolina. we are an hour away from seeing for the first time this general election cycle the president of the united states on the trail with hillary clinton all the while, all of what we've discussed, sort of hanging over them or a burden off of her back, depending on where you are coming from. we also have just learned what the white house has just said moments ago about the major announcement from the fbi today. will president obama touch this at all when he steps on that stage in charlotte? stage in charlotte? more on that with my panel next. . let's do more. add one a day women's 50+ complete multivitamin. with vitamin d and calcium to help support bone health. one a day.
you're watching cnn. back to the breaking news here. fbi recommendation -- no charges should be filed against hillary clinton comes on the very day of a major high point for her campaign. the president of the united states returning to the trail, this time on her behalf. eight years ago when then-senator barack obama was in north carolina, hillary clinton was his rival as they vied for that democratic nomination.
flashforward to today, president obama is hoping to make secretary clinton his successor. minutes from now he'll do his first clinton campaign event in charlotte, north carolina and the presumptive nominee will be by his side. it is happening a mere four hours before and 150 miles from donald trump's event, also in north carolina, just a hop, skip and a jump away in raleigh. southern showdown scores how much the state is in play. mitt romney took the state in 2012. let's go to brianna keilar in charlotte where that event is set to take place. my friend, we have just learned from the white house that president obama specifically will not touch or will not make any mention of what director comey did earlier today in the fbi news. do we have any kind of indication that hillary clinton might say anything about it? >> reporter: i don't think that
we're expecting that she's going to, brooke. i don't think they want to bring that up. what is really an attempt to build a lot of enthusiasm here in north carolina. so you heard the clinton campaign saying that they are pleased and highlighting that these are career professionals at the fbi, trying to down play some of the politics. certainly those charges coming from donald trump and those on the right. but what we're really seeing here is hillary clinton trying to get a little push from president obama. his approval ratings are significantly higher than hers. more than ten points higher. this has a lot to do with this state in particular. you said it. 2012, president obama wasn't able to get enough support to win north carolina like he did in 2008. he's hoping, hillary clinton is hoping, that that can change for her in 2016. and what they're hoping is that this is a must-win state for donald trump and that they can
deprive him of that. they think if they can build some enthusiasm and also highlight him as the alternative, that she's going to have a shot. but brooke, with all of this fbi, with this investigation, even though it seems to have come to an end without charges, you had the fbi director comey saying that she was still -- and her aides were still extremely careless. so there is this issue of judgment and trustworthiness. president obama, i think what the clinton campaign is hoping, is that he's going to help her dispense with some of that today as he tries to vouch for her character and for her fitness to govern. >> as the fbi news was still swirling, donald trump has tweeted about this and has been blasting how president obama and hillary clinton on air force one, this is your tax dollars at play. can you talk about that? >> reporter: i can. this is something you will hear certainly -- i think you heard allegations like this -- or
bring brought this up when president obama was running, too, because it does resonate with taxpayers, the yd that their money could be used for campaigning. the clinton campaign is saying -- and this is the case. they do reemburimburse for the comparable cost of a plane similar to air force one to filet. this would be the case if hillary clinton were on plane or not. so there is a reimbursement from the campaign. of course there are costs associated when the president is flying on air force one. that's what happens. it's just more expensive than flying a normal boeing plane. that is just the case. but they're being very careful to push back on what donald trump is saying and saying that they are working within the guidelines for how they do this. it is of a considerable expense to hillary clinton, that her campaign is putting forward, brooke. >> brianna keilar, thank you very much, my friend. let me bring my panel back to talk about the politics of all of this today. jeffrey toobin is back.
hilary rosen. hillary clinton supporter. boris epstein, trump surrogate. and potentially momentarily jeff zeleny will pop back in front of that camera there in charlotte. hillary rosen, to you, jut on how the politics will fall today. the president's approval rating is at 52%. that's massive. obviously the clinton campaign wanting some of that magic dust to sprinkle around her. but still today the headline swirling is comey's announcement. >> yeah. and what i think you have is closure for a lot of voters who wanted to support hillary clinton to don't like what donald trump has to offer but might have been a little bit worried that maybe she would get in further trouble. that's not going to happen. and so i think -- look. this isn't going to satisfy everybody. it is going to keep conspiracy theorists busy for the rest of the campaign and of course as jeff zeleny said, the media is
going to continue to pick at her answers versus what the fbi said. but for the majority of voters, i think that they will let hillary clinton move on and talk about what she's going to do for the country and what her concerns are for the middle class. i do think that this represents a significant closure here. >> boris, would you agree -- i know how you feel about all of this. but would you agree that the fbi did an independent, impartial investigation? >> yes. i do agree they did an independent investigation. and there is no issue with the investigation as far as i'm concerned. but i do have an issue you for the result. >> forgive me, boris. let me hit pause. now to the state department. they're talking about the fbi news and e-mails. >> -- but clearly the fbi found enou enough, you know, secretary clinton's intent or whatever notwithstanding, that generally there were a lot of officials
that they came across in the scope of this investigation that led them to believe that the culture is not taken as seriously as it should be. >> i'll let the fbi director speak to their findings and their recommendations and his investigation, as he should. the question was do i share -- do we share the assessment of the culture at the institution of the state department to be lax. and we do not share that assessment. we take it very seriously. >> clearly he found it in this previous administration, in the previous term. so you're saying that maybe there was a lax culture, that doesn't exist anymore? >> no, i'm not saying that at all. i'm not parsing words here. i'm saying that the state department has in the past, and does today, take the treatment of classified information very seriously. >> so it was just a few people that did not take enough care? >> i'm not going to speak to -- any more specifically about the findings and recommendations that the fbi made and announced
today. what i can tell you is we don't share that the broad assessment that there is a lax culture here at the state department when it comes to dealing with classified information. quite the contrary. >> i have one more. can you -- the fbi director said that, had some of these people still been in office, that they would have been subject -- or could have been subject to administrative penalties. is anybody that's currently employed by the state department going to have any notes in their files as a result of anything that their e-mails uncovered in terms of their communications? and then, also, some of the previous employees that worked for secretary clinton and were found to have exchanged what is now believed to be classified information, are they going to have kind of posthumous notes put in their file should they ever seek to be employed by the u.s. government again, and does the state department do that or
does the fbi do that? like what's the process there? >> let me answer it this way. i think i alluded to this at the top. we're going to determine the appropriate next steps, following a decision by the department of justice. that's where this really lays right now. we have, as you know, and i've said we have an administrative process to evaluate cases where information may have been mishandled. as i have said previously, at the request of the fbi, we did move forward with that process. so as not to interfere with their investigation. we also don't believe that it is appropriate at this time, given that there are -- that the matter is now before the department of justice to determine their next step, to make decisions or not to make decisions, we don't think it is appropriate for us to move forward with that at this time. i just don't have an update for you on any possible timing or scope of that review process.
>> so what would be the -- so once the department of justice makes their recommendation, then you would determine what administrative processes you want to move forward with? >> i think we need to wait to see what the justice department decides to do now in the wake of the fbi investigation before we move forward one way or the other. and we want to allow the proper time and space for that before we decide anything further with respect to those issues. >> -- if you don't have the answers, if you could undertake to take them, as it's been explained to me, there are two separate processes that can be undertaken here. one of them is an administrative process, and the other is a security clearance related process. as it's been explained to me -- but i'd like to confirm -- the administrative process governs solely people who are currently
employed by the department of state. so can you confirm that that's the case, that administrative processes or sanctions don't apply to people who are no longer employed by state. second, as it's been explained to me, it is possible for people who are no longer employed at state, but who retain a security clearance, to be subject to a security clearance process and perhaps sanction. is that your understanding as well? and then a couple of other specific things. are any -- does former secretary clinton or any of her senior aides specifically cheryl mills, jake sullivan and uma abdean, continue to have security clearances by the state department? and if so, is it theoretically
possible that you would then review those security clearances in the light of whatever is ultimately the justice department prosecutorial decision and the fbi's investigative material? >> there is an awful lot there. let me see if i can dissect it. i'm certainly not going to get ahead of what is still an ongoing process now at the justice department or speculate one way or the other about which way this will go. i don't know. i'm happy to answer your question about administrative processes. i don't know if there is a technical definition for administrative and whether that applies in broad scope to only current employees or former employees. i'll have to take that. on the security clearance process or review. all i can tell you, generally speaking, is that if there is a need -- i'm speaking broadly. not to this.
the way it typically works, as i understand it, is that the department that issues a security clearance, if there is -- if it is determined that that clearance needs to be reviewed, for whatever reason, it is up to the department that issued it to review it. regardless of whether the employee is still at the -- is still employed by the agency. the agency has that responsibility, unless, of course, that employee went to a different federal agency and then got it renewed there. does that make sense? i'm not going to speculate one way or another about the degree which this is even -- part of it. the fbi director was very careful. i'm going to be very careful. these are now decisions that have to be discussed. findings and recommendations have to be absorbed by the department of justice, and then they'll make decisions or not going forward. and then on your last question about the individuals, we do not
discuss the security clearance of individuals as a matter of policy. we just don't discuss those. >> but these are former officials. >> we don't -- we do not discuss. >> one of them, jake sullivan and the transcript of his deposition in the civil lawsuit in which he was deposed as part of discovery, his lawyer said that his security clearance was restored so that he would have the ability to look at some of the material that was classified that they wanted to talk to him about. and so it's at least in the public domain in that one instance, according to his lawyer, that he had, as of that date, about a week ago, a security clearance. why can't you talk about whether former officials have security clearances? >> because that's our policy. it's been a long-standing policy. we do not discuss the security clearance levels or access of
individuals, current or former. that's our poulicy. >> it is a state department policy? >> i know it is at least a state department policy. i'll find out if it goes beyond that. >> certainly there have been instances, whether general petraeus or sandy berger and others that when there was punitive action taken they did discuss the security clearance. >> i'm not going to discuss the individual security clearances from this podium. just not going to do it. and if -- i refer you to the individuals in question and if they represented by others, to speak to that. but i won't do that. >> on the question of lax, laxity, you state that you disagree with the assessment that the state department was -- is lax as a culture being lax in the protection of classified information. why is it that the highest state department official was allowed
to establish and use a private e-mail server with, as i understand it, no government provided security for e-mails that contain information that, as the fbi director said this morning, some of which was classified at the time it was sent and received. i mean if it's not lax, how can the top official of the department go off and set up their own system that isn't subject to the normal procedures here? >> look, i'm not going to relitigate the investigation. as i said, i'm not going to speak to the findings or recommendations. the fbi director spoke to that earlier today and to what they found in terms of the practices
back then. and how those practices were followed. what i'll just tell you, broadly speaking, we don't share the assessment that as an institution, an entire institution, that the state department has in the past, or does today, take lightly the issue of sensitive and classified information. they absolutely don't. >> the reason i asked it is that you look at -- as i understand it, every level of potential check or balance here -- right -- the assistant secretaries for ds, undersecretary for management, according to the inspector general's report, these people were not asked, and did not voice an opinion on the use of this system. the person on the seventh floor who was charged with these kinds
of issues, at least according to the report, told people -- told two people not to talk to anybody about it. so even if the quibble is with the word "laxity," do you feel that your systems were sufficient to safeguard classified information sent by or to the secretary of state? >> again, i think the fbi director addressed that as well as part of their investigation. i am simply not going to discuss or comment on their findings and recommendations with respect to this case. this issue -- wait a second. wait. wait. and to your question. and as he said himself, his assessment of the state department's rules was not part of this investigation and i'm comfortable addressing that,
that on -- as a whole, in the main, we absolutely do not share the broad assessment that the entire culture there at the state department is lax when it comes to protecting sensitive and classified information. what i'm basing that on, brad, is the long standing -- not just me, the long standing indoctrination once goes through before you get employed here and the periodic reviews of the training and sensitive information handling that you have to go through. all the time. i've been here little bit more than a year. i've already had to you go there it several times myself. that we have two networks for e-mail traffic that are deliberately set up to handle various degrees of sensitive information. and that the work of diplomats
all around the world is by its very nature sensitive, but it is also outward facing. and has to be. there is a role here at the state department to be communicative. to have dialogue. to foster communication. that's a big part of who we are. and i can tell you that everybody involved in that understands the risks and the opportunities of it and takes it very seriously. to say that the culture here is lax, that's a pretty broad brush and again we wouldn't use it. we don't believe it. >> the problem is this indoctrination that you speak of obviously didn't work. when it came to the past secretary or the hundred or so officials who all contacted her during the course of her tenure or the dozens of officials who would have known that she wasn't
using a state.gov address or would that known have information that was at least on the borderline, was going to a non-government account. so that failed across the board. right? >> i'm not going to make qualitative assessment. the ig spoke as well to this. i'm not going to talk about the findings and recommendations of this investigation. but this was -- but there is a difference, brad, between an assessment of e-mail practices under secretary clinton's tenure, and how they were implemented, and saying that the culture here at the state department is lax. >> no, no, no, hold on. sorry, but you can't separate the head of the agency and everybody who worked around her at a senior level in this agency and say -- >> i'm not trying to. >> -- well, there was somebody out there who was following the
rules so the culture was okay. >> it's more than somebody, brad. >> well, i don't know. show me an ig report that shows me all the aide hee adherents. secondly, you make the statement the department was an outward looking agency. they were all about internal messaging. they were all about her and her aides consulting on matters that weren't meant for public consumption. there's even messages about not wanting things out for public consumption. so i fail to see how that's an argument that shows why somehow this is distinct or excusable. >> it is a valid argument when you talk about the entire institution, brad, and not an individual inside it. regardless of whatever level that individual serves -- >> all right, we're going to move away from the state department spokesperson. listen, he's getting tough questions. should be getting tough questions about the state of the culture at the state department under secretary clinton given the fact that we heard from
director comey that even though they're not recommend criminal charges, there was carelessness. so you have that. but let's focus right now on this picture. let's go back. charlotte, north carolina. the bird has landed here. air force one there on the tarmac. we've just seen both the president of the united states standing outside the beast. president of the united states and hillary clinton who took a ride with him. this is huge, huge, huge today. this is the first time the president has been on the trail with the presumed democratic nominee. let's stay full on these pictures. hillary rosen, let me bring you in. hopefully we still have you. can you just walk me through what we're seeing, why this is significant? >> what we are seeing is a president with approval ratings upwards of 60% of the country putting his arm around hillary clinton and saying i know this woman. i trust this woman. she is the best person to lead this country forward. and we're seeing them do it in north carolina which is a swing state that has represented
youth, diversity, change, many things that barack obama's hoping to pass along to hillary clinton. now he didn't win that state in 2012. but nonetheless, the 45rdthe ha donald trump has to work for those votes, the better off hillary clinton is. so this is a big day for hillary clinton, and it is an important day for president obama who wants to see his legacy upheld. >> all right. to be fair, from the clinton supporter to the trump surrogate, boris. same question. hillary clinton. president obama side by side. what do you see? >> i feel bad for president obama. i'm sure when he agreed to this trip he did not expect to be traveling with somebody who was under such scrutiny today, under such a cloud like secretary clinton is. someone who again was told by fbi director comey should have been reprimanded if she were still employed by the state department. and most likely lose her security clearance.
let's take a step back from all this politicking here. if you're a voter in north carolina, you're looking at secretary clinton, do you believe she did not know -- >> we can't crawl inside of her mind. >> i let you finish. >> let's just function on facts. this is brooke. >> brooke. sorry. my point is this. my point is this. the voters know better. the voters know that hillary clinton is someone who broke the rules. the inspector general of the department of state said she broke the rules. this appearance today in north carolina is unfortunate for president obama because it will hurt him long term. he is the boss. secretary of state works for him and he allowed for this to continue for four years. he allowed for this carelessness to continue. he maybe approved it, maybe he didn't. but you know he got e-mails, if he received e-mails from hillary clinton from the personal account. so he definitely knew about the personal account. why didn't he put a stop to it. that should be asked as well.
as you are seeing, the secretary of state is now getting very tough questions from the media, the department of state, about what's going on there now and what mr. kirby is trying to do, the spokesperson for the department of the state, trying to deflect and say it used to be that way then, it is not this way now. it used to be that way when secretary clinton was in charge of the department of state. that's when all this awful, awful -- >> no, no, he's not saying it was awful. this is brooke, by the way, boris. >> hi, brooke. >> no, he was just being asked about the culture. he was asked about whether it was lax. he said no, we can't comment on security clearance. what he was being asked was whether or not anyone at state was being affected by this despite the findings of the fbi and the doj. he couldn't answer that just yet. with that in mind, we'll stay on these pictures. let me bring in jeffrey toobin. for people watching and thinking, hang on a second. when you look the timing of this -- by the way, nobody expected to see the director of the fbi drop the bombshell that he did today.
we knew he was speaking. we didn't know what exactly he would say. that said he made it crystal clear that this was an impartial, independent finding that he would then pass along. yes? >> it really is an unusual situation where you have someone with so much institutional credibility embracing this decision. jim comey is not just the director of the fbi. and he has a ten-year non-renew able agreement. george herbert walker bush named him united states attorney in manhattan, perhaps the most important u.s. attorney's office in the country. he worked with george w. bush. he brings an enormous amount of credibility to this decision and i think you can say this was a very even-handed decision. clinton people can take an enormous amount of satisfaction and gratitude for the fact that
she will not be charged with a crime. however, he was scathing about how she conducted her business at the state department. you know, there is a lot of conduct that is really bad that is not criminal. and that's as it should be. we don't want to prosecute -- our jails are full enough. we don't want to prosecute every single possible violation of law because all of us might be in trouble in that case. >> he did say -- maybe even if she still was secretary of state, the behavior, the actions, would still bear i think his word was sanctions or some sort of consequence. it is not criminal, but sanctions. >> right. there are lots of situations when people who have access to classified information in the government make mistakes. they disclose it in some improper way. they use the wrong server. they leave something on an airplane. there are many sanctions if you work for the government that are short of criminal prosecution. criminal prosecution is very,
very rare. but, something can be put in your file. you can lose a security clearance. >> what about foreign actors part? i think that's another layer of this. we've heard donald trump in the past, one of his talking points has been about how foreign countries, foreign leaders could hack into some of these classified e-mails. director comey did acknowledge that while there is no evidence of this with her servers or her devices overseas, if she was e-mailing with let's say a former u.s. leader or foreign leaders, that their e-mails could have been compromised. >> that's right. and that is of course a very chilling possibility. he also said something which i found very interesting, which i certainly didn't know, even as someone who's followed this very carefully, is that her private server -- the one she set up in her basement in chappaqua -- was less secure than if she'd simply had a gmail account. >> say that again. >> is that her server that she set up with the suffix dot
clinton mail, was less secure than the kind of gmail account that anyone can get. because gmail, as he pointed out, they have an entire security staff. they worry about their people, their customers, and how -- whether they can be -- their e-mails can be read by untoward sources. her independent operation was less secure than just a regular g mails account which struck me as quite startling. it was news to me. >> hillary, as we were staying on these pictures here, this is a packed house. charlotte, north carolina. let's talk about the politics of north carolina and why this is also significant, why they're there. why know that obama won the state in '08. he lost it to romney in 2012. people have talked about this sort of conservative resurgence in the state of north carolina though. in some of my reading as a result of hb-2, the discriminatory transgender bill about to become law, democrats
are hoping the uproar over that will get voters to the polls in november. why is north carolina so important? >> well, north carolina's been a swing state in the last three or four presidential elections, and as you said, president obama carried it in '08. what you have in north carolina now is a very -- a surging young electorate, a very diverse electorate, a significant portion of african-american voters. and so again, i think hillary clinton does not have to have north carolina to win the presidency, but donald trump does. if donald trump ends up having to defend -- spend time in north carolina defending his position there, that's time away from much more opportunistic battle ground states for hillary clinton like virginia and florida and ohio. so i think from democrats' perspective, this is kind of a
defensive play. but for donald trump, this is a must-win state. so again, it's the optics of president obama going there saying these are voters who are swing voters, undecided voters. but for hillary clinton, this is an opportunity. for donald trump, it is a must-win. >> i want to thank my panel. we'll take a quick break here as we are watching an waiting to see the president of the united states for the very first time on the trail with the presumed democratic nominee. i'm brooke baldwin. we'll be right back.
of state for the bureau not recommending any criminal charges against her based upon what they found over months and months of investigating. the most stipgi istinging criti clinton's actions at state, comey raised the question that hostile hackers to have accessed her e-mail containing sensitive information. >> they used her personal e-mail extensively while outside the united states including sending and receiving work related e-mails in the territory of sophisticated adversaries. given that combination of factors, we assess it is possible that hostile actors gained access to secretary clinton's personal e-mails account. >> let's bring in bob behr, former cia. you just heard director comey, folks she was e-mailing with, whether u.s. leaders or foreign
leaders, their e-mails were compromised. so they were exposed. >> well, brooke, they could have been exposed, but so could she have. a server like hers, a public server, you can do what's called a side channel attack. it is a standoff attack and still read her e-mail. they could have done it at the home in new york. they could have done it on her cell phone. as we've been talking about, the chinese and the russians would have been very negligent if they wouldn't have gone after their server. i would vo been if i were them. >> you're saying they would have been negligent had they not tried to hack her. >> absolutely. we go after the chinese and russian leadership with the same sort of attack. sophisticated intelligence services can get into her server and e-mail without leaving a fingerprint. >> would we ever know if they did. >> i don't think we'll ever know. we could have factor some day come out. the russians in particular are
very, very good at this. they've done our elm commumbass communications, attacked it remotely and got into our diplomatic correspondents through the '70s, '80s and '90s. >> i don't know if you were listening to the tough questions thrown at the state department spokesperson, but based upon what we learned today, do you think -- i think the tough questions are merited. he was talking about the culture at state and not only hillary clinton and her servers and devices but those who worked around and under her. does that need a good long looking at? >> it does. it is the leadership and it is republican and democrat alike. the cia, fbi complain about it all the time. these people take classified information in the white house and get on the phone, open lines or e-mails and it is discussed openly. if i had been caught sending this kind of information, top secret, i would have been fired same day. anybody in the intelligence or state department would, too. there's just different rules for
people in the white house or the secretary of state. this is not a partisan issue. just sloppiness as director comey said. it should be corrected, i'm just not sure how to do it. >> thank you so much. let's continue on. hour two. top of the hour, you are watching cnn. i'm brooke baldwin. live pictures here of charlotte, north carolina. two major breaking stories with huge impact here for the race for the white house. any minute now president obama will begin his first campaign event for hillary clinton. we just saw them get off of air force one together. that was quite the visual, the proverbial hand around her shoulder as his approval ratings are at 52%. other story today, this damning conclusion by the fbi that hillary clinton exposed top-secret information to hackers, was careless, that was
director comey's word over and other in her use of her personal e-mail servers and her multiple devices. but despite all of that, in their months of investigating, the director of the fbi says ultimately it falls short of criminal intent sew does not recommend charges. here
is director comey just a short time ago. >> from the group of 30,000 e-mails returned to the state department in 2014, 110 e-mails in 52 e-mail chains have been determined by the owning agency to contain classified information at the time they were sent or received. eight of those chains contained information that was top-secret at the time they were sent. 36 of those chains contained secret information at the time. and eight contained confidential information at the time. although we did not find clear evidence that secretary clinton or her colleagues intended to
violate laws governing the handling of classified information, there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive highly classified information. although there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a
case. prosecutors necessarily weigh a number of factors before deciding whether to bring charges. there are obvious considerations like the strength of the evidence, especially regarding intent. responsible decisions also consider the context of a person's actions and how similar situations have been handled in the past. in looking back at our investigations, in to the mishandling or removal of classified information, we cannot find a case that would support bringing criminal charges on these facts. all the cases prosecuted involved some combination of clearly intentional and willful
mishandling of classified information or vast quantities of information, exposed in such a way as to support an inference of intentional misconduct, or indications of disloyalty to the united states or efforts to obstruct justice. we do not see those things here, although the department of justice makes final decisions on matters like this, we are expressing to swrjustice our vi that no charges are appropriate in this case. i know there will be intense public debate in the wake of this recommendation, as there was throughout the
investigation. what i can assure the american people is that this investigation was done honestly, competently and independently. no outside influence of any kind was brought to bear. >> so, unsurprisingly, donald trump has responded wasting no time tweeting his disdain. two tweets for you. one, he tweets the system's rigged. general petraeus got in trouble
for far less. very, very unfair. as usual, bad judgment. then another, fbi director said crooked hillary compromised our national security. no charges. wow. #riggedsystem. meantime, clinton's campaign ready to be finished with this. this statement released a little while ago. as the secretary has long said, it was a mistake to use her personal e-mail and she would not do it again. we are glad that this matter is now resolved. again, all just reminder, we are minutes away from seeing secretary clinton on that stage in charlotte with the president of the united states for the very first time on the trail together. evan perez, patiently waiting here, our cnn justice correspondent, with really sort of the news here. so the fbi determined 110 of the e-mails stored on her private server had classified information. explain that for me and the likelihood that the department of justice will respect what we heard from the fbi today. >> well, i'll take your second question first. we expect that the justice
department will follow the guidance that the fbi director laid out this morning. but on the question of the 110 e-mails, now these are e-mails that the cia, the nsa, other agencies determined was classified. this is information that they owned in the parlance of the u.s. government and they decided that this was e-mail -- these were e-mails -- this was information that did not belong on an unclassified system. not to mention a private e-mail server outside of government control. so we now know those are 110 e-mails, 52 different chains. more than that, we know about seven e-mail chains that comey mentioned in which hillary clinton was participating in the conversation and that included classified and other high-level pieces of information, special access programs, things that should never be discussed and in unclassified e-mails. one of the important things to take away from today is what jim comey did today was essentially give a save to the justice department.
we had obviously some questions that were raised because loretta lynch met privately with bill clinton. there were questions raised as to whether it would affect the outcome of this information. he owned all of this. he says this is what we looked at, this is what we found. this is what we're recommending to the justice department. this is almost never done. you never hear the fbi director come out and say this is the end of the investigation. by the way, these are the bad things we found but it doesn't rise to the level. so again, very unusual day. very unusual situation he didn't even tell loretta lynch or any of his bosses what he was about to say when he took the podium today, brooke. >> yep. yep. he essentially said no one's heard this before and here i go. evan perez, thank you so much, covering all of this for us. turning now to matt miller, used to serve as director of the office of public affairs at the department of justice from '09
to 2011. full transparency, he supports hillary clinton for president. but matt, great to have you on. welcome. >> thanks for having me. >> with your justice hat on for me, we saw director comey recommending no criminal charges. is this a fait accompli? >> yeah, it is. i think it's been a fait accompli from the beginning of this investigation. there was never likely to be any outcome than what we saw today. in this the beginning if you look at what secretary clinton did, sure, it was a mistake to set up and handle the e-mail the way she did. but to prosecute her for that, you'd have to prosecute dozens of other officials as with secretary clinton's e-mails. >> in the process of this i talked to our legal brain, jeffrey toobin, the crux of this is intent.
so the fbi concluding she never intentionally disclosed classified information. but, republican house speaker paul ryan, let me read this. he released a statement today saying the fbi's decision defies explanation. he says, in part, no one should be above the law. but based upon the director's own statement, it appears damage is being done to the rule of the law, declining to prosecute secretary clinton for recklessly mishandling and transmitting national security information will set a terrible precedent. matt, does he have a point? >> he has a point that no one is above the law. but i actually think no one deserves worse treatment under the law because of who they are either. director comey, by having this really unprecedented press conference today, gave an opening for people like speaker ryan to call into question his judgment. it is very unusual and it is even inappropriate under doj rules for director comey to do what he did. if you're not going to bring
charges, if you're not going to put the weight of the government behind them in court, then you are supposed to say -- i cannot think of another example when the department after conducting investigation declined to bring charges. but publicly announced conclusions like the director of the fbi did. it really turns due process on its head and puts director comey in a position where he is not just the investigator but he's also the judge passing judgment on whether these practices were appropriate or not. >> why do you think? do you think this is because loretta lynch shared oxygen with bill clinton a couple of days ago on a tarmac on a plane? >> no. certainly i think by having that meeting, she kicked the decision a little bit to director comey. said she was going to accept his recommendation. but it still doesn't explain why the director had the press conference he did. only thing i can think of, he's always been someone who's very carefully cultivated his image
of independence. knowing he was going to come to the conclusion he did of any charges, i felt like he had to give republicans a bone by really making -- >> but what about, matt, yes, yes, maybe throwing a bone but there has been one mega criticism of the clintons and hillary clinton that she sort of is above the law or makes her own rules and this just, if you talk to trump folks, as i have, they say this fits right in to that. >> but it doesn't. what the department is supposed to do is actually determine break the law or not. that's what this investigation was for. at the end of the investigation -- >> isn't this a judgment issue? >> well, there is a question about judgment. voters can pass judgment on that. but that's not what the fbi is supposed to do. the fbi looks at criminality or not. if they don't find criminality, which they didn't in this case, they aren't supposed to insert themselves in the middle of a political campaign as director comey did. it wasn't appropriate for a law
enforcement official to do. >> matt, thank you. i see a lot of iphones and cameras which tells me perhaps this moment is imminent. where we will see the signs "stronger together" meaning both the president of the united states and secretary clinton. they'll walk out. this is the first time the president has stumped on the trail for the presumed democratic nominee. big picture she. our cnn political director is standing by. a cnn presidential historian. brianna keilar is there in charlotte where we are watching, waiting for those two to appear. david, first just to you. can you just tee this whole thing up with me? obviously you have the optics of this. walking down the stairs out of that air force one. walking out together. all the while this news hanging over both of them or depending who you ask, a burden off of her shoulders? >> yeah. listen with be this is probably
not the day that hillary clinton would have designed or her campaign would have designed for the first time she hit the campaign trail with barack obama, but she does get a sort of legal victory here and removes this cloud of potential criminal charges on the same day that she does get to campaign with the popular president. so at the end of the day, it's all in all a pretty good day for hillary clinton. of course, having those comments from jim comey, they just will continue to give her opponents fodder to really go at the issues of judgment and trust. i would be listening very carefully at this event, brooke, when the president's coming out. what is he saying to help validate her in those quarters? because that's been her vulnerability here. that's what got reinforced with some of jim comey's comments today. let's listen to what the president has to say that sort of boosts her in the trust area.
we know that he is expected to talk about his own personal journey how he went from clinton opponent to sort of cheerleader in chief and sort of walk through how he got there. i would imagine you are going to hear him address some of these concerns. >> what a relationship arc and to be a fly on wall of that plane cabin as they were flying down to charlotte. brianna, what will you be listening for? and will hillary clinton touch this at all? >> i don't think so, brooke. i obviously don't think she would have chosen this for the day for announcement. i don't think it will rain on her parade because this event here this north carolina is trying to build enthusiasm here in a state that her campaign is considering a must-win. president obama did not win here in 2012. he did in 2008. her campaign thinks that if they
can keep donald trump from winning this state, that she has a much better pathway to the presidency and that his may be foreclosed, in part because of this. i think we're going to hear him vouching for her. even though there are no fbi -- even though there aren't any charges, as you heard today, there are still questions about her judgment and the fbi director made that very clear. so i think that we're going to hear president obama providing her some back-up and vouching for her qualifications, and also for her judgment. >> okay. i know it's loud in there. music is teed up. we are about to see the president and secretary clinton appear on that stage there in charlotte, north carolina. a key, key state here. we know that obama, then senator took it in '08. he lost it in 2012. obviously secretary clinton hoping it turns blue come november. tim, to you, sir. listening to all of this, earlier when we were chatting you were referring to security clearance in washington like a willie wonka ticket. >> yes, indeed.
>> what do you mean? >> what i mean is when you talk about the culture of secrecy at sta state, difficu differentiate be political appointees, the career foreign service officers, they understand how to deal with classified information. their careers would be ruined if they mishandled classified information. and i don't -- i suspect you'll find that the culture among the permanent government in state is very, very respectful of classified information and maintaining classification. >> david, i was looking at polls from i think it was two weeks ago, the cnn/orc poll where we were essentially talking to voters and asking about whether they thought hillary clinton did something wrong with regard to her servers. and some 60%-plus said yes. i know maybe they're not saying this is a trust issue but it is a judgment issue. how does the clinton campaign turn that around ahead of
november 8th? >> remember, hillary clinton herself sort of fits that category. she has called it a mistake and said that she wouldn't do it this way again. i think she's going to have to probably go through another round of identifying this as a mistake after how strongly jim comey came out. >> what does she need to say though other than it was a mistake? >> i do think, brooke, there's this one bid that still needs to be cleared up. there is lots of videotape of hillary clinton saying that she never sent a classified e-mail that was classified marked classified at the time it was sent or received. jim comey said today that's not the case. that's not what they found in the investigation. they found seven e-mails that did bear markings of classification in e-mails. i think that herself is going to have to be cleaned up by her to some degree. and again, to address as she did last week these questions, she
knows she has a trust deficit. she understands that. she spoke about this recently. and i would imagine that she's going to have to continue. it is not a one and done kind of thing, especially when the fbi director comes out in such a private way, clears you of any criminal wrongdoing, recommends no prosecution whatsoever and that any prosecutor would sort of turn their head at this and say there is not enough here to prosecute, and yet still raised these questions. so she can sort of accept that political victory of being cleared while also address iing any lingering concerns as she tries to put it to bed. again, i do think that this moment that's upcoming here we're not likely to hear much about this because this is going to be a real attempt to try to bring barack obama into her campaign effort, reawaken that obama coalition. remember this is happening at a time when barack obama is popular. >> 52%.
>> yeah. he's at one of the highest periods of his second term since his second honeymoon after the second inaugural there. this is one of his most popular periods of his second term. timing is just right for hillary clinton. we rarely have seen -- remember, the last two-term presidents, al gore didn't ask bill clinton to come out and campaign for him so he wasn't really part of the effort to try to get his s successor in place in a big way. and george w. bush was quite unpopular at the time that john mccain was out campaigning. so watching a sitting president go out there and really campaign for a successor in this way, we haven't seen in quite some time. >> what a day. we're waiting for the moment here. quick break, our eyes are in charlotte, north carolina, waiting for the president and secretary clinton. be right back. clean food.
words you don't often hear. words we at panera live by. because clean food is food as it should be. with no artificial flavors, preservatives, sweeteners, and no colors from artificial sources. we think clean food tastes better, feels better, does better. 100% of our food will be clean by year's end. every bite will be food as it should be. ♪
democratic nominee, hillary clinton. meantime, north carolina's a busy place today because we know in just a matter of hours, about 150 miles away in raleigh, north carolina, we will be seeing donald trump at his own campaign rally, north carolina, a huge, huge battleground for the race for president for 2016. keep in mind the backdrop of these rallies, this is the day when we've seen the director of the fbi, jim comey, coming out recommending no criminal charges against hillary clinton for her personal use of those e-mails servers, those multiple devices while she served as secretary of state, though he did multiple times use the word careless in describing her usage of said servers. i mentioned just down the road in raleigh, there is a rally, where donald trump will be speaking in a couple of hours. so north carolina. let's begin right now with sara murray who is there in raleigh,
north carolina. sara murray, talk to me about donald trump. >> well, brooke, obviously this is a chance for donald trump to change the narrative. we were talking all day yesterday about how he sent off this tweet with anti-semitic overtones, his campaign was dealing with the fallout from that. today they are trying to stay focused on hillary clinton and on this decision and they sort of see it as a gift that hillary clinton will be traveling with president obama today, that she appeared on air force one. that's a way for donald trump to continue to make the case that the system is rigid in the favor of the clintons, that they benefit from privileges that average americans don't. for instance, just look at how she's traveling with president obama. just look at how these charges against her have gone away. think we'll hear a lot of that from donald trump today as he attempts to pivot away from his own controversy and turn the heat up on clinton. >> sara, stay with me. tim, let me bring you back in. as we watching north carolina, and in charlotte, you were
saying just as a historian, that you think this is the first time that we've seen a sitting president campaigning with a potential -- i think presumed nominee preconvention? >> yes. ordinarily when you have a retiring president, that person if they like their party's nominee will start campaigning with that nominee after the convention winning the official nomination. i'll have to check and i'm sure people out there can help us find this but i don't believe that there is an instance where you had the presumptive nominee with the sitting president campaigning together before the convention. anointing that person. >> your take-away, given what we heard from director comey, no indictment is the headline for hillary clinton, although you know that the trump campaign will take pieces of this today and turn into an attack ad. >> look. first of all, i believe that we will discover some day that the timing of mr. comey's statement
is not an accident. you wouldn't want the president of the united states to be campaigning with somebody who is under the threat of indictment. the very fact that the fbi director did something that no fbi director's ever done before to basically wipe away this issue makes it possible for the president of the united states not to worry about a sudden indictment. ordinarily it is the justice department that would issue an indictment or seek an indictment. the fbi is is not in the prosecution business. it is in the investigatory business. but mr. comey has bipartisan respect. >> he does. >> he stood up for american privacy in the george w. bush administration. he was embraced by both parts of the house and the senate. he's a man with a great deal of respect. and he has a legacy which he doesn't want to lose. so this is probably the only person in the justice area of the obama administration who could have said what he said. the fact that he said it today is very important. he says it before the president of the united states appears for the first time with the
presumptive democratic nominee. this has been a great day for hillary clinton. there will of course be a lot of talk about her carelessness and indeed it was enormous and that of her staff. but it is noise now. there won't be an indictment. and it is the indictment that would have been the killer for her campaign. >> indeed. instead she gets to walk out on the stage in charlotte, being embraced with the president of the united states on the stage who has impressive approval ratings in his final months in office. donald trump also campaigning in north carolina today. under the veep stakes file, i know he's meeting with tennessee senator bob corker. newt gingrich will be campaigning with him what? tomorrow? >> yes, that's right, brooke. it is sort of an unusually public audition of potential vp candidates. of course in the past we've seen presidential nominees campaign with people that we speculated will be the vp candidates. but this is a little clearer. there are sources telling us that donald trump could roll out
his vp as early as the end of next week. to see him make stop after stop. today it is corker, tomorrow it is in ohio with newt gingrich. obviously these aren't the home states of these folks. it is a chance for donald trump to get a spend a little bit more time with these people. there are a lot of people who think bob corker could be a great fit for donald trump. he brings a little more foreign policy gravitas to the ticket. he is obviously a senator in washington sew no he knows how work the levers of power that donald trump does not and in a way he's admitted he wants help from in a running mate. newt is a little more of a loose cannon. it will be interesting to see him o you the on the trail tomorrow. >> the public audition noted. interesting to watch this whole thing play out on the trump side. sara be with thank you. michelle kosinski is standing by -- inside. she's in that charlotte event there where we are waiting to see the president and secretary clinton. we did hear, michelle, from the white house from josh earnest.
we will hear nothing from the president as it pertains to anything fbi director jim comey said today. correct? >> i mean they just completely punted on this. i guess you could say it was somewhat unexpected. oh, here they come. ♪ ♪ ♪ [ i still got a lot of fight left in me ♪ ♪ this is my fight song ♪ take back my life song
♪ prove that i'm right song ♪ i'll be strong ♪ i'll play my fight song ♪ and i don't really care if nobody else believes ♪ ♪ because i still got a lot of fight left in me ♪ ♪ a lot of fight left in me ♪ this is my fight song ♪ take back my life song ♪ proof ♪ prove i'm all right song ♪ i'll be strong ♪ i'll play my fight song ♪ and i don't really care if
it is so great to be back in north carolina with so many frien friends. with congresswoman alma adams and congressman david price and congressman g.t. butterfield. and your next u.s. senator, deborah ross. and your next governor, roy cooper. and of course, with our president, barack obama! i feel very privileged because i've known the president in many
roles. as a colleague in the senate, as an opponent in a hard-fought primary, and the president i was so proud to serve as secretary of state. but i've also known him as the friend that i was honored to stand with in the good times and the hard times, someone who has never forgotten where heame fr from. and, donald, if you're out there tweeting -- it's hawaii. so over the years, we've had
some memorable experiences together, like storming a secret meeting of foreign leaders at a global climate summit. that was fun. >> that was fun. >> you should have seen the chinese guards try to stop us. now they put their arms out and the president just went right through. then they put their arms out, and i went right under. and the president, with that amazing smile of his, says, hey, we've been looking for you. now through it all, and we went from political rivals to partners to friends, my esteem for him just kept growing. and so did my admiration for his brilliant wife, michelle. [ cheers and applause ]
and those two amazing daughters that they have raised. you know, my husband and i know a little bit about how hard it is to raise a child in the public eye, in the fish bowl of the white house. but the obamas have done a fabulous job. [ cheers and applause ] >> malia, who just graduated from high school and celebrated her 18th birthday yesterday, and sasha, who has the energy and enthusiasm of a wonderful young woman. now, i happen to think those two young women may be the most impressive accomplishment of all of our president. and it's one of the many reasons
why it means so much to me personally to have the president's support in this campaign. after all, he knows a thing or two about winning elections. take it from me! [ cheers and applause ] and he also knows that, despite all the progress we've made under his leadership -- and yes, we have -- [ cheers ] -- we still have a lot of work to do. president obama's job, one that he did not ask for, but was handed to him, was to save us from a second great depression. and that is exactly what he did. [ cheers and applause ] >> actually, i don't think he gets the credit he deserves for saving our economy. [ cheers ]
we've added 14 million private sector jobs. the auto industry just had its best year ever. 20 million people now have health care. clean energy production has soared. i could go on and on, but you get the idea. that is what leadership looks like. so our next president has a different job to do, building on the progress that president obama has made. we have to continue to take on deep structural challenges that existed long before the great recession. we see it here in north carolina and across the country. inequality is too high. wages are too low. and it is just too hard to get ahead. we need an economy that works for everyone, not just those at the top.
[ cheers and applause ] so we're setting five big ambitious goals. first, under president obama and vice president biden, we've had 75 straight months of job growth. [ cheers and applause ] i want us to see 75 more. so in my first 100 days as president, we'll make the biggest investment in new good paying jobs since world war ii. [ cheers and applause ] and when i say good paying jobs, i mean exactly that. donald trump thinks wages are too high. he actually stood on the debate stage and said that. and he wants to get rid of the federal minimum wage all together. >> boo! >> well, i think anyone who is
willing to work hard should be able to find a job that pays well enough to raise a family. so we're going to increase the federal minimum wage and give the middle class a raise. [ cheers and applause ] that's good for our families, good for our economy, and, boy, is it good for our country. now, second, we're going to make college debt-free for all. [ cheers and applause ] and we're going to build on the president's idea to make community college free. [ cheers and applause ] and we're going to help millions of people struggling with existing student debt save thousands of dollars. [ cheers and applause ] third, we're going to rewrite the rules and crackdown on companies that ship jobs
overseas and profits to go with them. let's reward the companies that share profits with their employees instead. and we're going to defend and strengthen the tough reforms president obama put in place on the financial industry. not tear them up like donald trump says he'll do. we need to make sure that wall street can never rec mawreck ma street again. [ cheers and applause ] fourth, we're going to make sure that wall street corporations and the super rich pay their fair share of taxes. [ cheers and applause ] it is just plain wrong that a millionaire can pay a lower tax rate than their secretaries and we're going to stop it. and, oh, by the way, we're going to keep asking to key donald trump's tax returns!
starting right now we're going to respond to how american families actually live and work in the 21st century. our families, our workplaces have changed, so isn't it time that our policies change, too? >> yes! >> now donald trump can accuse me of playing the woman card all he wants, but if fighting for equal pay and affordable child care and paid family leave is playing the woman card, then deal me in! [ cheers and applause ] and you know, most of all -- most of all -- >> hillary! hillary! hillary! hillary! hillary! hillary! hillary! hillary!
hillary! hillary! >> you know, most of although, we're going to build on the vision for america that president obama has always championed. a vision for a future where we do great things together. not as red states and blue states, but as the united states. [ cheers ] when i look at president obama, i see a leader with heart, depth and humility. someone who, in spite of the obstruction he's faced, still reaches for common ground and common purpose. [ cheers and applause ] now some of you might remember that he and i competed against each other as hard as we could back in 2008.
but when it was over, i was proud to endorse him and campaign for him. and i'll never forget when he called me the sunday after the election asking me to come to chicago. it turned out, he wanted me to be secretary of state and i don't think anybody saw that coming, especially me. and as i traveled on behalf of our country, a lot of people would ask me how president obama and i could work so well together after being such fierce competitors. in some places, you know, the person who loses an election gets exiled or execute, not asked to be secretary of state. but president obama asked me to serve and i accepted. you know why? we both love our country. [ cheers and applause ]
that is how our democracy is supposed to work. we just celebrated 240 years of independence. in america we put common interest before self-interest. we stand together because we know we are stronger together. that is the kind of president barack obama has been. he's made difficult, even unpopular decisions for the good of our country. i've sat with him in the situation room and seen him make the hardest choices a president faces. he does it with steady, principled leadership. he's a statesman, leading not just our country, but the entire world. it was his vision -- it was his vision and diplomacy that secured a historic global agreement on climate change, put
a lid on iran's nuclear program, opened up cuba, and rallied the world to curb the spread of nuclear weapons. [ cheers and applause ] i saw him go toe-to-toe with the toughest foreign leaders and to give the order to go after osama bin laden. this, my friends, is a president who knows how to keep us safe and strong. compare that to donald trump. >> boo! >> can you imagine him sitting in the oval office -- >> no! >> -- the next time america faces a crisis? the world hangs on every word our president says. and donald trump is simply unqualified and temperamentally
unfit to be our president and commander in chief. [ cheers and applause ] so here in north carolina, this election is our chance to say our country is better than this. in america, we don't tear each other down, we lift each other up. we build bridges, not walls. [ cheers and applause ] we don't call the country we love a disaster or a laughingstock. we know already is the greatest country on earth! [ cheers and applause ] just think about those early patriots who met in philadelphia that hot summer of 1776. they knew we would all rise or fall together. now, nobody who looked like
barack obama, or me, would have been included back then. but we're here today because the story of america is the story of hard-fought, hard-won progress. [ cheers and applause ] >> hillary! hillary! hilla hillary! hillary! hillary! hillary! hillary! hillary! >> so i want you to remember that for 240 years, our history has moved in that direction, slowly at times, but unmistakablely. as the president has reminded us, the arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice. so if you believe, along with me
and with the president, that our best days as a nation are still ahead of us, please join this campaign. take out your phone right now. take out your phone and text join to 47246, or go to hillaryclinton.com. we are hiring organizers right here in north carolina. we're going to fight for every vote in this state. and with your help, we're going to win it! [ cheers and applause ] so i don't know about you, but we are fired up and ready to go! ready to win this election! please join me in welcoming the president of the united states, barack obama! [ cheers and applause ]
>> hillary! hillary! hillary! hillary! hillary! hillary! hillary! hello! how you doing, charlotte? [ cheers ] >> are you fired up? [ cheers ] >> ready to go? >> ready to go! fire it up! >> fire it up! >> i'm fired up. hillary got me fired up. she got me ready to do some work. so i hope everybody had a great fourth of july. i love you back. first of all, let me just say, i like any excuse to come to north
carolina. [ cheers ] i just like north carolina. i love -- i love the people of north carolina. i used to -- when we used to campaign here, i used to say, even the people who aren't voting for me are nice. you know, that's not true everywhere. so you got great people here. and then you got great food. north carolina's got some food. in fact, i will find someplace to stop and get some food before i head back to d.c. i know y'all have recommendations. i know i can't go to your house to get the food. although i'm sure you are an excellent cook. and then, you've got great basketball. [ cheers ] you've got great basketball. we all know that. we all know that. but i'm not going to get in
between all the tar heel and wolfpack and, you know. blue devils. yeah. see? deacon. see? i'm not going to get into all that. you just have great basketball in north carolina. so i love an excuse to come to north carolina. but, i'm happy to be here. i'm glad you've got an outstanding candidate for governor and i'm going to be working for are them, too. but i'm here today because i believe in hillary clinton. [ cheers ] and i want you to help elect her
the next president of the united states of america. that's why i'm here. [ cheers ]. >> hillary! hillary! hillary! hillary! hillary! >> as hillary mentioned, this is not the first time we campaigned together. we went up to new hampshire after our primary in 2008. we went to unity, new hampshire, just in case people missed the point. that was the name of the town. unity, new hampshire. and we had gone through what was one of the longest, toughest primaries in history. and primaries are always tough. because you're arguing with your friends instead of the folks you disagree with. sometimes you got to find things to disagree about, even though you don't really disagree.
so we were crisscrossing towns from new hampshire to nevada. and as much as i had admired her when we served together in the senate, i came away from that primary admiring her even more. because during that year-and-a-half, i had had a chance to see up close just how smart she was and just how prepared she was. especially since i had to debate her a couple dozen times. [ laughter ] and let's be clear, she beat me like -- in the first -- now you don't have to rub it in. you don't have to rub it in now. [ laughter ] she beat me at least the first half, and then i just barely could play her to a drum. i always had to be on my game because she knew every fact. and she knew every detail. and then during those 18 months, i saw the passion that she feels
for anybody who's experienced in justice. anybody who's faced discrimination. anybody who does everything right and still can't seem to get a fair shot. whether it was workers who had lost their jobs or kids unable to afford college. and you could tell it was personal to her. because she had seen struggles in her own life. she had known challenges in her own life. and she could identify and empathize with people who were doing the right thing and wanted to make sure that they got a fair shake. and then during the primaries again and again i saw how even when things didn't go her way, she just stand up straighter and come back stronger. [ cheers and applause ] she didn't give up. she didn't pout. she just kept on going. she's the energizer bunny.
she's just kept on. and the bottom line is, she had to do everythinggoing. and my point is she didn't go backwards immediately. and at the end, i saw the grace and the energy with which she threw herself into my campaign. >> not because she was not disappointed about the outcome of the primary she was concerned about the direction of our country and how can we make sure all of the people counting on us can see a better life. we stood shoulder to shoulder for the ideals we shared. i was not surprised when i asked
her to represent our interests and values around the world. as america's secretary of state. i knew she would do a great job. i knew she would perform. i knew she would fulfill the job with a stature and seriousness that would immediately mend some of the challenges we were having around the world at that time. let me tell you, north carolina, my faith in hillary clinton has always been rewarded. i have had a front row seat to her judgment and her toughness and commitment to diplomacy. and i witnessed it in the situation room. where she argued in favor of the
mission to get bin laden. i saw how the former senator from new york, she knew, she understood because she had seen and witnessed it. what it would mean for thousands that lost loved ones when the twin towers fell. i benefitted from her savvy and skill in foreign capitals where her diplomacy lead to new participatpips. helped to reduce the nuclear threat. we all witnessed the work she has done to advance the lives of women and girls around the globe. she has been working on this since she was a young woman working at the children's defense fund. she is not late to the game to this, she has been going door to door to make the sure kids got a fair share making sure kids with
disabilities could get a quality education. she has been fighting those fights and she has the scars to prove it! we shared a big hug after we finally realized one of the grease causes of her career, affordable insurance for every single american. and we picked it up and we were able to get it across the finish line. she was a great secretary of state and that is not just my opinion, that was the view of the american people during the time she was serving as secretary of state, before the whole political machinery got moving. you remember that?
it wasn't that long ago. it's funny how that happens. everyone thought she was doing a great job. it is fun anyhow the fill sher changes a little bit. that is a powerful thing. it was not just what happened in the limelight that made me grow to admire and respect her. it was how she acted when the cameras were not on. it was knowing how she did her horm work. making sure america was represented in corners of the globe that people don't know about.
she treated everyone with respect. it is how you judge somebody. how do they treat someone when the cameras are off and they can't do anything for you. do you still treat them right? do you still treat them with respect? do you still listen to them? are you still fighting for them? i saw how deeply she believes in the things she fights for. i saw how you can count on it and show she will not waiver, back down, or quit no matter how difficult the challenge and no matter how fierce the opposition. those things matter, i am here
to tell you, and the truth is nobody only understands the challenges of the job of president until you have sat at that desk. everybody has an opinion. and nobody knows the job until you're sitting behind the desk. nobody knows what it takes to do the job until you sit behind the desk. sasha tweets, but she doesn't think that she is -- that she should not be sitting behind the desk. you can't fully understand what it means to make life and death decisions until you have