Return to Transcripts main page

CNN TONIGHT

Dylan Roof: I am Not Sorry; Sources: Trump in Top Intel Chief; Declassified Intel Review to be Released Monday, WikiLeak's Assange: Russia Didn't Give Us Emails, Trump's Feud with Intel Agencies; Shocking Crime Caught on Facebook Live; Suspects shout Anti-Trump Slurs; Four Arrested In Beating Broadcast On Facebook Live; Suspects Shout Anti-Trump Slurs; Roof: There's Nothing Wrong With Me Psychologically; Prosecutors Reveal Roof's Jailhouse Journal. Aired 11p-12a ET

Aired January 4, 2017 - 23:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.


DON LEMON, CNN ANCHOR: Donald Trump taking his battle with American intelligence to the next level.

This is CNN TONIGHT. I'm Don Lemon.

The president-elect reportedly planning to limit the power of this country's top intelligence adviser. But what's behind his feud with the Intel community.

And the shocking crime captured on Facebook live. Four black suspects apparently assaulting a white victim while shouting anti-Trump slurs. Is it a hate crime?

[23:00:01] Inside the mind of mass killer. The convicted killer of nine people in the Charleston Church Massacre, in his newly revealed Dylann Rroof writes, I am not sorry. I have not shed a tear for the innocent people I killed." Should he get the death penalty? We'll discuss all of that.

But I want to get right to the standoff between Donald Trump and America's intelligence agencies. Here discussing the contributor Michael Weis, co-author of ISIS: Inside the Army of Terror, CNN National Security Analyst Juliette Kayyem, author of Security Mom. Bob Baer, former CIA Operative and the author of The Perfect Kill: 21 Laws for Assassins and CNN's Chief National Security Correspondent Jim Sciutto. Good evening to all of you. Jim, I'm going to start with you. Tonight, there is new reporting about when the classified -- declassified version of the intelligence review on Russia's ties to the election hacking will be released. It's been the subject of the escalating dispute between Donald Trump and intelligence community. What can you tell us?

JIM SCIUTTO, CNN CHIEF U.S. SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: We're learning tonight that that will be released to the public on Monday, just a few days away. The president -- the current president will be briefed on this on Thursday, President-elect on Friday. The question is then what does President-elect Trump do with this information? Does it, you know, allay his own concerns about this and his own doubts about the hacking and the intelligence agencies' assessment that Russia is behind this hacking. But we know that you and I and public going to get our first view of the review that the President Obama ordered of this intelligence. We're going to see it on Monday.

LEMON: Jim, If Donald Trump isn't listening to U.S. Intelligence then, who is he listening to?

SCIUTTO: It's a fair question. We don't know. I mean, I talked to people inside the intelligence agencies. Keep in mind, this is not democrat or republican issue, right? I mean, the Obama administration says Russia is behind the hack but also -- so the republican speaker of the house, the republican majority leader in the senate, other republicans, McCain, Graham, et cetera. So, why is Donald Trump doubting that assessment, we don't know. But it's been very public. And I'll tell you, I speak to folks inside many intelligence agencies, they're alarmed by this and they're concerned and dismayed by the President-elect questioning their assessment of what they have judged to be the origin of these hacks on the U.S. Election.

LEMON: Ambassador R. James Woolsey was on hour before and said that there was some politics that were playing into this, Bob Baer, do you agree with that?

BOB BAER, CNN INTELLIGENCE AND SECURITY ANALYST: Exactly. Well, I mean, Trump doesn't want to admit the possibility that possibility that Russian could have tipped the election in his favor. He does -- he doesn't even want to consider that. And fact that 17 U.S. Intelligence Agencies have said the Russians hacked with intention of helping him, he can't admit that. He doesn't see a way around this and he's reacting by turning to credible sources like Julian Assange or Vladimir Putin who of course are denying the hacking as they would. I mean, you know, frankly, he's on a tough spot. I mean, if he admits the Russians helped him, I mean, what's that going to do for this presidency for the next four years?

LEMON: There was a side, Juliet when he mentioned Julian Assange at least, why was that?

JULIETTE KAYYEM, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: I think, Bob is right. I mean, you have a President-elect you woke up this morning praising julian Assange, no one should have any sort of heroics about Julian Assange. He released the names of military personnel serving in Afghanistan, he released hundreds of thousands of classified documents. Even Trump's own party says he is an enemy of the United States and Julian Assange views the United States as an enemy.

And so the theatrics have gone from a guy who sort of became president because he was disruptive to essentially a disruptive one. And I don't know the end game here. I mean, I try to be pretty calm on your show, I don't know the end game here, this one is little bit disconcerting how Trump can get agencies to not be undermined as he's doing and to support an effort that's not about Trump. This is the United States intelligence agencies, they're for you and me. They're not -- they're not his.

LEMON: Mike, I'm going to drill down on Assange with you in just -- in just a moment but do you know what the end game is here? WEISS: No, well, I mean, the President-elect declaring war on his own intelligence services, I mean, this is unprecedented. And, you know, I joked today, who's going to be the first to release compromising material on Donald Trump, the FSB, the Russian Security Services or CIA? You know, you don't -- you don't go after your own spies. This is Commander in Chief who's going to be in charge of a network of personnel that spans in the hundreds of thousands, many of whom put their life on the line. And, you know, one thing that stood out to me about the assessment that all 17 Intelligence Agencies made about this.

They state it with high-confidence. The CIA included with high- confidence that Russian government was behind the hacking. Mike Morell, former CIA director gave interesting interview. He says, we don't do that in the intelligence community unless we know. We have absolute copper-bottom proof that that's the case. And the analogy I'm seeing from skeptics they're banded about is, oh, this is just like Iraq WMD. Donald Trump himself said that. Excuse me, I mean, you have a former CIA operative on air. The CIA never thought Saddam Hussein with high confidence was reconstituting his nuclear weapons program or his chemical or biological.

That was a complete misconception. So, this is unprecedented, you know, and Donald Trump again siding with Australian anarchist who called is Afghan informers, you know, expendable. He said F them, he didn't care if he disclose their identities and somebody who is out to get to undermine American national security interest over his own intelligence services. I mean, I don't know what kind of assessment you make about this man.

LEMON: Bob, is he right about WMD?

BAER: Yes. He's absolutely right. The CIA was asked, do you think that Saddam kept his WMD? And said, yes, we guess. We -- that was an assessment, it was a guess and the White House asked for guess so Trump is absolutely wrong. They didn't get it wrong. They just said, well, our best guess. . And I ran Iraqi operations, I know what we have and I know what the White House briefings were. The Bush administration went in and said, "All right. We're going to war in any case, give us whatever you have to make talking points." And that -- that's the truth of it. So, this is not comparable.

This is forensics. This is the National Security Agency, the FBI, DHS, have all come down the Russians did it to help Trump. And that's the end of the story and that's as good as intelligence and evidence ever gets.

LEMON: Jim, there are so many hotspots all over the world. How dangerous could things get if Donald Trump continues to be at odds with the intelligence community in the future?

BAER: Here's the issue, you know, when the IC comes to him says, North Korea has a nuke, it could -- it could put on the tip of ICBM to hit the west coast of the U.S., when it comes to him and says, there was eminent terrorist threat to U.S. Homeland? What does he say? Does he accept that assessment? And what does he say when he goes to American public and says, the IC has told me X about this threat and yet for weeks and weeks, I said the IC is not credible on Russian hacking. Why do they believe him when he says I need to commit U.S. Troops to this problem or I need to get the American population on alert for a threat to, you know, the U.S. Homeland?

Why did they believe him then if for weeks now -- let's be honest, it's not one day or one week, for weeks now he's been undermining his own intelligence community. We don't know why but he has. And when I speak to folks inside these agencies, that's the concern. That has consequences, you can't reel that back in in one week or a month or a year's time. People -- that has an effect when you publicly undermine your own intelligence agencies. That's the real concern.

LEMON: You, you know, Juliette, you and everybody on the panel especially Michael, we're sort of aghast, you said you don't know what the end game is. I don't know any other way to ask. But do you think the President-elect understands in how serious this is? The severity of undermining the intelligence agency about going to Twitter for -- with 140 character diplomacy and intelligence? Do you think he understands that?

KAYYEM: I can't speak for him because I don't -- I don't really get this. I will say, you know, his proxies were on your show and his -- others and people around him, you know, will say, well, you know, he needs to shake things up and he's asking questions. Look, everyone agrees that's legitimate but -- by doing so publicly, right? On Twitter, you know, the long-term impact on the intelligence community is grave and will affect morale. Look, everyone knows Twitter is disruptive.

I have teenage kids, right? So I get the social dynamics of Twitter and, you know, but he's -- the President-elect, right? And, you know, my kids can roll their eyes. He has access to nuclear weapons. There is a -- there is a difference. And I think it's just very important that the people around him, you know, and you're starting to see this. Pence, you know. Vice President-elect Pence was not on the gravy train today in terms of throwing the IC under the bus and at I think at least some of the people around him understand it.

It is going to make for a very interesting series of confirmation hearings for those who are going to be asked directly, the secretary of defense, secretary of homeland security, their assessment of the intelligence.

LEMON: Michael, I want to read something. This is from George Little, he's a former CIA Spokesman and he said -- that he says, "Let's stare this reality square in the face, that POTUS President- elect or POTUS President-elect of the United States is Pro-Putin and believes Julian Assange over the CIA. On January 20th, we will be less safe, do you agree with that?

WEISS: Yes. And by the way, that's a euphemism for saying that the United States of America just elected a fifth columnist. That spook speak for, I don't trust this man, I think he's compromised, I think working on behalf of a foreign government.

LEMON: Who is that -- is that Bob of Jim who just sighed? Who wanted to weigh in?

LEMON: Am I wrong or that's how i read it? I mean, you know --

SCIUTTO: I know George Little, he worked Leon Panetta and the CIA. I mean, the thing is here, it is not political, right? It's not democrats coming out and saying Donald Trump is beyond the pale here, right? It is republicans. The Republican Speaker of the house, the Republican Senate Majority leader, Tom Cotton, Lindsey Graham, John McCain. This is a thing. And, you know, we are Americans at end of the day. This threat from Russia not just on election but in in Crimea, in Syria, regarding, you know, their hacking capability, buzzing U.S. Aircraft and, you know, warships across the world.

This is not something that one party says is happening, this is happening. So the question is how does the next President of the United States address this threat? And I talked to a lot of folks, you know, on both sides, both parties certainly in the agencies who are -- who are dismayed at this reaction.

LEMON: Bob, I want to give you the last word because Jim spoke about this a little bit earlier in the show. I wanted to go down more. Is there a risk that at some point the intelligence community begans tailoring the intelligence they present to Donald Trump to essentially to draw his ire? And if so, how dangerous is that?

BAER: They will -- they will rewrite intelligence at top but at the same time the intelligence community, that's the FBI and the CIA, Trump will regret this going after them. Just as Nixon did. Let's remember Watergate was undone by an FBI agent. Then you'll see the same thing. If he wants to fight with the intelligence community four years -- for four years, he'll pay for it.

LEMON: Yes. Thank you panel. I appreciate it. We come right back. Caught on camera, a young white man apparently assaulted by four black suspects shouting anti-Trump slurs. The whole thing broadcast on Facebook live, Chicago police call it sickening but what's the motive here?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

LEMON: It is a crime that Chicago Police call sickening, and it is, and I think we can all agree with them on that. An 18-year-old white man beaten by four teenage black suspects shouting is anti-Trump slurs. The whole thing broadcast Facebook Live. And I just warn you, this is very disturbing to watch. CNN's Rosa Flores is covering this story for us from Chicago. Rosa, it's disgusting, this disturbing video out of Chicago tonight. Tell us the latest.

ROSA FLORES, CNN CORRESPONDENT: you know, Don, it really is disgusting and according to Chicago police, they believe that this man was targeted because he has mental health challenges. They also believe that he knows at least one of the suspects and at least initially he was with them willingly. But that obviously changed and like Don said, we have to warn you, this video is very graphic.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (INAUDIBLE)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Watch out fool. Watch out.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: His ass, his ass ugly bro.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Cut this (BLEEP) cut if off, bro.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (INAUDIBLE)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (INAUDIBLE)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I'm going to make your (BLEEP) walk home bloody (BLEEP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (INAUDIBLE)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (INAUDIBLE) Donald Trump (BLEEP) Donald Trump. (BLEEP) white people boy (BLEEP) white people boy.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: His (BLEEP) is gone.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (INAUDIBLE)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Ugly.

(BLEEP)

FLORES: You can tell from the video that the victim is white, that the suspects are black and they're speaking with anti-Trump type of language as well. And so obvious question of course, Don, is this a hate crime? Is this racially motivated? We've asked the police at this point, they're still investigating the motive.

LEMON: And they said they do believe the victim knew the attackers. So, how long was the victim with the offenders?

FLORES: You know, that's one of the things they're also investigating but they do believe he was with them for 24 to 48 hours. So you still have to wonder exactly what transpired in that time because right now only seeing a small window that was caught on video. And now, they do say that the offenders stole a van from a suburb because this is victim from suburb not from Chicago and they brought him to Chicago and initially, he was with them because he knew one of them. But that obviously changed.

LEMON: They're in custody tonight, all -- it's four of them, right?

FLORES: Yes. Four of these offenders are in custody. We're expecting charges to be filed within 24 hours. And when we see those charges, Don, we'll get a better picture of exactly what transpired here because those charges will tell us a little more as to what happened.

LEMON: Do we know how old they are? FLORES: Or what police believe that happened. They're all 18 years old. According to police they know each other from school. At some point one of these suspects went to the same school as the victim and that's how they know each other.

LEMON: Who is raising these kids? It's unfathomable. How --

FLORES: It's disturbing.

LEMON: It's really just vile and there's no excuse for it. What is the -- how is the victim doing tonight, Rosa?

FLORES: You know, the police say they can't get into the extent of his injuries, Don, but say he's highly traumatized, he's even having trouble just talking to the police about what transpired. The police say they had trouble just talking to him because he's so traumatized.

LEMON: Well, we hope he's going to be OK. Rosa, thank for that awful, awful, story.

FLORES: You're welcome.

LEMON: I want to bring in now CNN Senior Legal Analyst Jeffrey Toobin. Jeffrey, the video is difficult to watch. Your immediate reaction?

JEFFREY TOOBIN, STAFF WRITER, THE NEW YORKER: You know, I mean, we can talk about this in the -- in the legalities but, you know, you just have to wonder like how can human beings be so awful. And just, you know, as you said, who raised them, what motivates people to treat a disabled defenseless person like this, this way? And, you know, unfortunately in our line of work, we see a lot of evil and this just looks like evil.

LEMON: And just dumb, stupid, behavior here that's obviously -- I mean, I don't know, no home training because no one I know who is raised by any parent would even dream of doing something like that. My mom would probably beat me worse than that kid. Is this -- you know, we've been talking to the police, police say they still -- they're still investigating. They won't classify it as hate crime. Is this a hate crime?

TOOBIN: Well, I don't know. And I don't want to prejudge too much because, you know, frankly even the video has so many bleeps that you would need to hear what he said because, you know, racial epithets perhaps might have been bleeped and that's something that would be relevant. I'm not sure everyone knows but, you know, that racial motivation can be black versus white, white versus black. And so it is certainly possibly a hate crime. Everyone should be clear it's illegal under any standard. Hate crime -- hate crime laws merely enhance penalties, they don't create something that wasn't criminal into being criminal.

This is obviously an assault of some kind. It's only a question of how prosecutors would charge it. And they certainly would want to do a full investigation, talking to any witnesses who might be listening to the tape without the bleeps, all of that would have to be involved in a measured decision about what precise crimes to charge.

LEMON: I watched -- I did watch the unedited version of this and there's an unedited, unblurred version and they use the N word but the kids I see, there could be other kids there, the kids I see are black kids using N word and you do hear some of them -- by the way, you can't help to feel sorry for the victim, you see him, they're -- you know, he's being choked, he's being hit, he just looks awful but you hear some of the offenders shouting F Trump, F white people. Do you think that was politically motivated -- a politically motivated crime or these just stupid kids?

TOOBIN: You know, I'm going to say the three words you're never allowed to say on cable news which are "I Don't Know." I mean, I just don't -- you know, what goes into the heads of people who are doing something like this? You know, I just -- I can't fathom it. And whether you can say it was political, racial, I don't know.

That's why you have to do a full investigation of, you know, the whole circumstances surrounding this event. I, you know, I just really don't know how to characterize at this stage what the motivations here. Is racial animus, hostility? Certainly a possibility and you would have to consider that.

LEMON: Well, the fact they would put it live on Facebook which is why, you know, many people don't put any credence into social media because these are sadly the type of people you get responses from, the people who think it's OK. And I wonder if because you can go on anonymously and do things like that that people feel free to be able to put something like this on social media which is just beyond the norm of anything.

TOOBIN: Well, but I mean, just how stupid, I mean, you know, to put a -- to put your committing a crime on social media, I mean, just, you know, the master criminals these people were not. But I mean, in a way, I'm grateful that they did put it on social media because now their definitely caught. If there hadn't been a social media, who knows how this investigate might have gone. So, I mean, the perversities are many in this story, but I mean, it certainly seems like that we're not going a case, a mistaken identity in terms of the arrests that went on.

LEMON: We're not done discussing this terrible offense, we're going to dig deeper. Thank you, Feffrey. We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

LEMON: Four black teens under arrest in Chicago in connection with the beating of a white teen. The suspects shouting anti-Trump slurs as the attack was broadcast on Facebook live. Let's discuss now with CNN political commentator CNN political commentators, Peter Beinart, Alice Stewart, and Matt Lewis, also Symone Sanders, the former press secretary for Bernie Sanders. OK. So, listen.

There's certain things that we -- I can't say that it's a hate crime because Chicago police won't say it. They're saying they're still investigating it. They're not investigate -- they are not done with their investigation. But when you look at this Symone, they're saying F white people, F Trump. How can you say it's not a hate crime against the white person?

SYMONE SANDERS, FORMER PRESS SECRETARY FOR BERNIE SANDERS: So, first I want to say this is absolutely sickening. It's unfathomable that so much hate and anger can fill up a person where they go out and they think that this is OK. And then it was stupid to do it on Facebook live but that's a whole another story. So this is absolutely sickening but I'm going to say something that's probably not very popular. We cannot callously go about the classifying things of the hate crime. Motive here matter, so was this for hate for Donald Trump, the President-elect because I think that he said was this for pure hate of white people?

That matters because if we start going around and anytime someone says or does something egregious, really bad and sickening in this instance in connection with the President-elect or Donald Trump or even President Obama for that matter because of their political leanings, that is slippery territory. The is not a hate crime, hate crimes are because of a person's racial ethnicity, their religion, their gender, disability, it is your political leanings because someone doesn't like your political leanings and they do something bad to you. That is not the case. --

LEMON: But Alice, even hate crimes, aren't all hate crimes motivated by stupidity?

ALICE STEWART, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: They're motivated by a lot of things. Stupidity, heartlessness, thoughtlessness, carelessness, so many things but clearly I agree with Symone, this is sickening to watch, sickening to think that some careless, thoughtless thugs would do something like this to someone who appears to be so innocent. But look, not to get too far ahead of the legal skits here, based on what we hear in the video, it does sound as though that this was a hate crime.

The language they used without referring to the poor victim as a white person in the different language they used. And I hope it is classified as that, because therefore the penalty will be much greater and they deserve the harshest penalty they can get. I'm with you, Don, I have fear with what my parents would do to me much more than what the law would do to me if I was caught doing something like that but I never would.

LEMON: I just wonder, when you see the -- these are 18-year-old kids and you look at the video, you're like, what is going on? What on earth -- why would anybody ever think that it was OK to treat another person like that for any reason regardless of it, you know, if it's a disabled person, if it's a mentally and physically incapacitated or white or black person, whatever, why on earth, Matt, I just don't understand it.

MATT LEWIS, AUTHOR, "TOO DUMB TO FAIL": It's man's inhumanity to man. It's brutality is what it is. I think that fact that this is a vulnerable person who was probably duped into going along with them it appears, somebody who was mentally disabled makes it even more sickening but at end of the day, you just try to wrap your head around evil. That's what this is, evil, brutality, man's inhumanity to man --

LEMON: I don't think it's evil. I think these are young people and they have bad home training. I think -- and I say who is raising them, I have no idea because no one I know on earth who is 17 years old or 70 years old would ever think of treating another person like that. It's inhumane and you wonder at 18 years old, where is the parent or guardian?

(CROSSTALK)

LEMON: Let Peter answer, Symone, and then I'll bring you in. Go ahead, Peter.

PETER BEINART, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: I don't know. This isn't -- epidemic of violence in American society, Robert Kennedy spoke about it very eloquently decades and decades ago. This is a horrific example, sickening disgusting example of a kind of senseless violence that exists throughout American society.

Look at number of people murdered every year in the United States compared to other societies around the world. This is one particularly grotesque example of casual violence we just take for granted in the United States.

LEMON: Symone?

SYMONE SANDERS, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: I just want to remind folks that we can't sit here and ignore that for at least last year on public display worst parts of America have been brought from the fringe into the mainstream so that affects people on both sides.

We've talked about white nationalists and with supremacists and the KKK, but there are also this inflammatory rhetoric is out there when someone is repeatedly telling you that your community is the worst of the worst, it brings out the worst of the worst in people.

And so I'm not defending what they did, what these young people did was sickening. I would argue that they also need some help in addition to consequences, but this just didn't come out of thin air. Some of the nastiest and worst things have been dragged into the mainstream.

LEMON: These young people probably never watch the news.

SANDERS: I don't think that's fair you have to give young people more credit.

LEMON: No idea of the political process. I'm just saying that's my point of view. I don't think that they really understand -- if they don't understand the ramifications of tying someone up and beating them and putting it on Facebook live, then they certainly don't understand the ramifications of a presidential election.

ALICE STEWART, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: I don't think this is about a presidential election. I think this is symptomatic of what we're seeing across the country with the breakdown of the American family. Unfortunate, heartbreaking and tragic and we will find out the motives as this continues to unwind and we find out more of it.

The disgusting language they use and girl in the video is laughing about it and egging her friends on. For them not to have the moral fortitude to realize this is absolutely wrong, something is going wrong it appears at home and for them to think this is OK, we've got a lot of teaching to do with our children. And think as I said it stems from the breakdown of the American family.

LEMON: Symone, do you think I'm being too hard?

SANDERS: I am very hesitant to cast these young people as supposed to come from broken homes. For all we know they have a mother and a father who are very good hardworking jobs and tried to instill good moral values in them and the young people just aren't listening.

So I think one, we need more facts and I think two, we have to be very careful to cast our young people, particularly our young of color, to the side. Look, this was wrong, it was sickening, grotesque.

They need help. They need to be punished, but we also have to have an elevated conversation about the things surroundings and the things that our young people are dealing with every day and the images that they are seeing.

They might not watch the news, but they are on Twitter with the president-elect is, on Facebook, listening to the Breakfast Club and radio and all of these nasty, nasty things that we've talked about and witnessed over the last year have seeped into our children, in our schools and it is coming to bear its ugly head in very, very egregious ways.

LEMON: Matt, she's saying and Peter is saying that, they are not making excuses for these kids. This didn't just happen in a vacuum.

[23:35:08]LEWIS: Well look, I think it's -- I mean, it's fair to have a conversation about our culture. I think that whether it's video games or violent movies that those things, music, whatever, I'm not a prude but those have all impact.

I'm a little bit concerned though about the way that this conversation is going right now. I think that if this was a different situation, if you had white teens tortured and brutalized an African-American young man.

And those white teens who talked about Obama and had been laughing, I don't think would be having a conversation about how our political discourse is so toxic. Maybe these kids saw things on Twitter about Obama and so --

LEMON: Symone, he's talking to you.

SANDERS: I would say that's true because you know what, the relationship of black people to America is very different than the relationship of white people to America. We're talking about years -- 200 plus of slavery, 87 plus of Jim Crow.

I'm not making excuses for these things, but it is not exact same thing. We have to talk about these at elevated levels and can't boil it down to someone saying something disparaging about the first black president of the United States of America when the current president- elect questioned his authenticity as American? That had some layers to it.

LEWIS: I just think in context, having watched video and second thing you bring up is inject, well, maybe -- the impression I'm getting from you, correct me if I'm wrong, is that, you know, maybe they were asking for this -- maybe Donald Trump --

SANDERS: Let me clear this up. I've never said no one was asking for it. The first thing that I said was this is sickening, (inaudible), but I did say we don't know if it's hate crime. That is very important.

LEMON: And Peter has been sitting here absorbing this.

BEINART: It's so disturbing that I have difficulty having a conversation about it. I think two completely different conversations. There is a conversation about the horror of what these kids did, a horror period, end of conversation.

There's a totally different conversation about where we're heading as society where we're becoming more racially divided than we were even a few years ago which is tragic.

And I think, yes, Donald Trump bears some of the blame for that in a way that another Republican candidate or president wouldn't because of some of the frankly racist things that he's done.

That has nothing to do however with in any way mitigating the horror of what this event was.

LEMON: That's going to have to be the last word. I'm out of time. Thank you very much.

When we come right back, a dramatic day in court today as convicted Charleston church killer, Dylann Roof, faces a jury that will decide whether or not he gets the death penalty.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[23:41:47]

LEMON: Convicted Charleston church shooter, Dylann Roof, began presenting his case in court today as jurors decide whether to give him the death penalty. Roof was convicted last month of federal murder and hate crime charges for June 2015 massacre at Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church that left nine people dead.

CNN's Martin Savidge is in Charleston. He's been covering the story for us. Hello, Marty. Dylann Roof addressed jurors for the first time today and began making his case in courts. Tell us what happened? MARTIN SAVIDGE, CNN CORRESPONDENT: You know, Don, I would have to say it's one of the most remarkable days I have ever spent inside of a courtroom and that says a lot covering all the different trials that I have.

What made it so was the fact that -- I mean, just picture it, you have a man who was a convicted mass murderer at this point, a self- acclaimed white supremist, who is standing up in front of the courtroom and talking to the same jurors who had convicted him who now are considering whether or not to put him to death.

And in listening in that courtroom are several survivors of that horrific attack and many family members who lost loved ones in that attack. Then you got the prosecution that stands up and says if ever there is way person that deserved to die, it is Dylann Roof.

If there was ever a perfect case for the death penalty to be applied, it is this case. Then they drop a bombshell by saying that while he was in jail, six weeks after the shooting, Dylann Roof if you thought had a change of heart was keeping what was then a secret jailhouse diary and it was written in there by his own words.

He said, "I do not regret what I did, I am not sorry, I have not shed a tear for the innocent people that I killed." So you have all of that and then Dylann Roof gets up and speaks, walks to podium and faces that jury. He doesn't express remorse or ask for any mercy.

He says I'm not crazy. Despite what you may have heard, I do not have any mental deficiency or illness. It was over in 90 seconds essentially, what he had to say, and then he sat down. It was just a remarkable day and that just day one.

LEMON: And what's remarkable, Martin, is that he has been adamant on representing himself during the sentencing phase of trial with his defense team staying on as legal advisers, how has this part gone?

SAVIDGE: Well, this is another weird part of this. They are there. The two very acclaimed defense members of his team, but in essence they are now standby attorneys. They are not allowed to question anybody in the courtroom, not allowed to talk directly to the judge.

Dylann Roof is his defense attorney. Now they can talk to him and he can talk to them if he wants to, but he's already made it pretty clear that he doesn't really like them.

He feels deceived by them because they brought up a mental defense and he cannot stand that as possibility. In fact, he feels very much like he was betrayed by them.

LEMON: Interesting. It's not surprising now that some people walked out -- I understand that three people walked out of the courtroom while Roof was speaking. Who were they and why?

SAVIDGE: Yes, these are all people that are in the U.S. Attorney's Office section. [23:45:05]So this would be family members or very close friends or you know it's hard to tell exactly, three people brushed by very quickly. They were all women.

And they all were obviously disgusted, just to hear Dylann Roof as he began to speak to the jurors and one of them said quote, "This is just crap," as she went out.

There were other emotions that were expressed. You saw people openly sobbing as the prosecution went through talking about the victims. Some people doubled over in grief and others had to come to their aid. It is just such an emotionally packed day and as I say, we still have many more to come.

LEMON: Martin Savidge in Charleston, South Carolina. Martin, thank you very much for that.

When we come right back, inside the mind of a mass murderer. What we learned today about Dylann Roof and why he slaughtered nine people.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

LEMON: Convicted Charleston church shooter, Dylann Roof, told a jury today, quote, "There's nothing wrong with me psychologically." Here to discuss that is forensic psychologist, Xavier Amador, the founder of LEAP Institute. Doctor, thanks for joining us. Dylan Roof, gave an opening statement today in court. What did you make of that?

[23:50:04]XAVIER AMADOR, VISITING PROFESSOR, STATE UNIVERSITY NEW YORK: Well, he is not representing himself. What he's clearly representing is a delusion that I talked about on your program before.

He has this delusion that the black race is inferior and like a soldier he is out there to defend the white race and begin a race war. What he described was in no way a case.

It was in no way relevant to a death penalty phase. It was about I'm not sick and I'm not mentally ill. My lawyers are wrong, and what the prosecution present side not a surprise.

LEMON: Why is this so important for him to present himself this way? There's nothing psychologically wrong with him.

AMADOR: The most likely diagnosis he has is schizophrenia. I say that without being certain, but I am certain he has paranoid delusions. I've discussed this previously. When you look at his manifesto, he developed racist beliefs and this fight for the white race in a matter of hours. Not over years.

If you look at experts who study these kinds of terrorists and white supremacists, it incubates over years and typically white supremacists are much older than Dylann Roof. We are talking in their 50s, 60s, and 70s.

They associate with other white supremacists. So that's not the picture here. In fact, Don, I don't think anyone has commented on this yet. Not one prosecution witness was an expert on white supremacy.

Nobody got on that stand and said we profiled Dylann Roof and he is a classic white supremacist. The prosecutors are saying that, but nobody who was profiled him was saying that.

LEMON: It's interesting. You've heard of suicide by cop.

AMADOR: Of course, people have done that.

LEMON: People want to go out in a blaze of glory. People said he was suicide by trial. He is looking for the death penalty.

AMADOR: They are trying to read something rational into something that is wholly irrational. I love what Martin was saying. This is weird and remarkable. For me this is common place when you're dealing with somebody with a serious mental illness who has no clue that he is mentally ill.

He fires his attorneys. He is intelligent. He can be mentally ill and intelligent. He is not in treatment so of course, he is not expressing remorse. Would a soldier express remorse for killing an enemy?

His delusion if you read his manifesto is one that really places him at war, a life or death struggle. He killed the enemy. Now this is a horrible tragic crime and I in no way want to diminish or excuse it, but we do need to understand these things in order to stop them from happening again.

LEMON: You do believe he is racist.

AMADOR: Of course, he is racist as a consequence of delusion.

LEMON: He can be racist and he can also be bright at this point.

AMADOR: Yes, but there are two kinds of racism we are talking about here. He is racist as a human being. That's he's gleath (ph) or you give him anti-psychotic medication for his delusion and he is no longer a racist.

You know, I worked in the Jared Loughner case. He shot and killed six people. He developed genuine, true, deep remorse after this horrific -- what did the prosecution say today? He planned it and had months of planning and has no remorse. He killed people because of the color of their skin.

Jared Loughner had his reasons or months or weeks of planning. Same exact scenario but the difference is he got treatment and was found incompetent to stand trial and he had remorse.

LEMON: He wrote a journal for six weeks, right? And so let's talk about this. In it, part of it, he said, "I do not regret what I did. I am not sorry. I have not shed a tear for the innocent people I killed. I do feel sorry for the innocent white children forced to live in this sick country. I do feel sorry for the innocent white people that killed daily at the hands of the lower races. I have shed a tear of self-pity for myself. I feel pity that I had to do what I did in the first place. I feel pity that I had to give up my life because of a situation that should never have existed."

So besides that being completely odious, what do you make of this?

AMADOR: Again in the context of all the behavior I have seen, the observations of him in court and the flat affect that we see in people with schizophrenia, he's firing his attorneys. He's fighting the mental health defense -- and the delusion that I uncovered in his manifesto and other statements, I mean, four hours of interrogation I watched.

This young man is delusional. He is at the classic age of the onset of mental illness. So of course, he did not shed a tear. Would you shed a tear if you shot a terrorist that was about to set off a bomb here in New York City? I wouldn't.

I would shoot that terrorists and I would stop them. So if you -- if you climb inside his mind, what do we know about it so far? We know his attorneys had him evaluated. He had to endure two mental health evaluations.

He has a mental illness is my view. If you look at what you read through the lens of paranoid psychosis or schizophrenia. Of course, he feels no remorse. Of course, he is not shedding a tear because he is sick. If he was treated, he may very well feel a tremendous amount of remorse. It's not being treated.

LEMON: And there is difference when -- from innocent people and for shooting a terrorist, you should feel remorse for shooting innocent people. You should not feel remorse when shooting someone who --

AMADOR: I've work with Iraqi veterans, Don. The one in particular who shot and killed a family running through a roadblock. They ignored the warnings. They had three warnings. He followed the rules of engagement and he killed innocent people. He felt terrible about it, but not as terrible as if he had done something truly, truly wrong. He was vindicated and not court-martialed. He understood it was a horrific accident and it's a different kind of guilt.

LEMON: Is he simply -- the prosecutors said he wanted to start a race war? He was a racist and that was his motivation.

AMADOR: I would love to have seen some expert witnesses from the prosecution saying he is definitely a racist and guess what, he is not associated with anybody. So how is he triggering a race war? What's his big plan there?

LEMON: Thank you, Dr. Amador. I appreciate that. That's it for us tonight. Thanks for watching us here. Right back here tomorrow.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)