Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Alabama Court Forbids Same-Sex Marriage; North Korea H-Bomb; Birther Questions; San Bernardino Killer Friend Pleads Not Guilty. Aired 2-2:30p ET

Aired January 06, 2016 - 14:00   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:00:10] ANNOUNCER: This is CNN breaking news.

BROOKE BALDWIN, CNN ANCHOR: Here we go. Top of the hour. You're watching CNN. I'm Brooke Baldwin.

Breaking news now. It appears the chief justice in the state of Alabama essentially defying the United States Supreme Court, telling judges there to stop issuing same-sex marriage licenses. What does this mean? How is this even legally possible? Let me bring in CNN legal analyst Paul Callan and our justice correspondent Pamela Brown.

So, Pamela, let me just begin with you. Talk to me about what has just happened.

PAMELA BROWN, CNN JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: Well, I have to be honest with you, Brooke, we were reading through this administrative order and it's pretty confusing here because we know how the Supreme Court of the United States ruled last summer, saying that same-sex marriage in the United States is legal. However, this judge, this controversial chief judge of the Alabama supreme court, is administering this order saying essentially all probate judges should hold off on giving same- sex marriage licenses until the supreme court in Alabama can sort out what the Obergefell ruling actually means for the state. And it's basically saying that these judges should follow state law, that it is the duty of these probate judges to follow state law and not issue same-sex marriage licenses while it's still being sorted out. And he's saying that since the Obergefell ruling, there's been confusion in Alabama that some probate judges have been issuing these same-sex marriage licenses, while other judges have not. And so he says, while the Alabama supreme court figures this all out, they should hold off on issuing anything. But it is confusing because, Brooke, we know how the Supreme Court of the United States has ruled on this issue.

BALDWIN: You were there on the steps.

BROWN: That's right.

BALDWIN: You were there on the steps last summer. We all watched it come down. There were different challenges and I know between different states. One would think, here you go, the U.S. Supreme Court, law of the land, boom, done.

Paul, straighten me out. Explain.

PAUL CALLAN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Well, I'm not surprised in some respect because this is such a controversial social issue, has been in the United States.

BALDWIN: Of course.

CALLAN: If you look back to Brown versus the Board of Education, when we integrated schools in this country, there were local judges who tried to obstruct the law of the land and that's exactly what's happening here. Roy Moore, who is the -

BALDWIN: Chief justice of the Alabama supreme court.

CALLAN: Chief justice of Alabama, this is not his first road show fighting the federal government. He was ordered to take down a Ten Commandments monument from the Alabama judicial building by order of a federal judge, and he refused to do so. So he's been, you know, violating federal court orders for a long time. And I think what you're going to see here is lawyers are going to go into federal court and they're going to get an order requiring the Alabama supreme court to abide by the Supreme Court decision, because that's the law of the land.

BALDWIN: So, let's back up a half step. So what's happening here? This is coming from above, within the state of Alabama, to these different probate judges, we're talking statewide, saying, do not issue same-sex marriage licenses, correct?

CALLAN: Yes, absolutely.

BALDWIN: So since the Supreme Court has ruled, how, then - who steps in and says, this is not - this is not acceptable legally?

CALLAN: Well, there are two ways that this can go. First of all, this is only his individual order. The Alabama supreme court has not heard the case yet. So they may decide to convene and act quickly and overturn Judge Moore's order by majority vote. Now -

BALDWIN: If he's the chief justice, what - how is he even -

CALLAN: Well -

BALDWIN: What is he standing on? What grounds is he standing on to do this?

CALLAN: Well, when - usually in courts like the supreme court of Alabama, Supreme Court of the United States, a petition goes to an individual judge before the court convenes, and they can issue an interim order, a temporary order. That's what this is, a temporary order advising probate clerks, continue to issue to only heterosexual couples marriage licenses until the Alabama supreme court hears the case. But, of course, we had a very similar case with - was it Kelly (ph) -

BALDWIN: Kentucky. CALLAN: In Kentucky when the court clerk there.

BALDWIN: That's exactly what I was thinking of. Yes, who didn't want to issue the same-sex marriage licenses.

CALLAN: Yes. And what happened there was, a federal judge issued an order requiring all of the clerks to issue those orders. I think that's going to be a faster route and I think that's what you're going to see happen. Probably a federal judge will intervene to make sure the Supreme Court law of the land is enforced.

BALDWIN: Meantime, I want to hear how people in Alabama are reacting to this.

Paul Callan, thank you so much here at the top of the hour with this breaking news out of Alabama.

CALLAN: OK. Thank you.

BALDWIN: Let's move along. More breaking news. Let's talk North Korea right now, as North Korea is claiming it has, quote, "successfully" detonated its first H-bomb, hydrogen bomb, overnight. The White House is now saying there is absolutely no evidence to support those claims.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOSH EARNEST, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: This is a serious subject. The initial analysis that's been conducted of the events that were reported overnight is not consistent with North Korean claims of a successful hydrogen bomb test. There's nothing that's occurred in the last 24 hours that has caused the United States government to change our assessment of North Korea's technical and military capabilities. Now, I hasten to add that we're continuing to - the work necessary to learn more about the nuclear test that North Korea conducted last night.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

[14:05:25] BALDWIN: So there you have the White House perspective. Of course, NATO and many world leaders are also condemning these claims. U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon called an emergency meeting today. The blast in North Korea first registered as a 5.1 seismic event. Many thought it was an earthquake. These images, we'll show you here in a second, show commuters in South Korea watching this news report on a purported nuclear test, all huddled around the TV there in South Korea. A hydrogen bomb would be the most powerful warhead Kim Jong-un has ever tested.

With me now, CNN correspondent Tom Foreman.

And so, Tom Foreman, this would be the fourth self-reported nuclear test here in North Korea. Why - why would this potentially be, you know, the most concerning?

TOM FOREMAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Because if this was a hydrogen bomb up here, despite what the White House thinks right now, it would put North Korea in the big leagues. Hydrogen bombs are what the U.S., Russia, France, China and Great Britain have. The other four nuclear powers might have them, but they may also simply have atomic bombs.

Let's talk a little bit about the difference between them and why that matters. An atomic bomb is basically a fission bomb. A hydrogen bomb is a fusion bomb. What that means is, this is splitting atoms, this is forcing atoms together. This produces a bigger blast.

This is a single explosion. It's a fairly simple procedure. Not easy, but still simple by nuclear terms. And then if you move over to hydrogen, it's a two-stage explosion. Essentially what you're doing is setting off an atomic explosion, which then forces this fusion of atoms. So this is a more complicated bomb to build here.

And this is an important part. The atomic bombs are generally bigger, physically larger and produce smaller blasts in atomic terms, while hydrogen bombs can actually be smaller, producing a bigger blast. And that matters because it's easier to get them on missiles and get them somewhere. So they're more deliverable with a bigger punch.

In the end, what matters about all of this has to do with the results. If you look at a blast like back from a 1940s style atomic bomb and you said it had this much power, that's been approved on - improved on in atomic bombs. But beyond that, this is the comparative power of a hydrogen bomb. Is it a much, much bigger league weapon, Brooke. And in the end, what they're saying is that this blast, the reason the White House doesn't think that this was an H-bomb, and some scientists don't think is, we're really talking about a scale that would indicate something more down in this area, much smaller, not this kind of enormous power out there. Nonetheless, if it is a step, if there's something that was accomplished in this blast that gets them closer to the technology of an H-bomb, you can see why it's such a concern.

BALDWIN: Wow. I want to stay on this. Tom Foreman, thank you so much for the explainer here.

Joseph Cirincione, let me bring you in. You are author of "Nuclear Nightmare: Securing the World Before It Is Too Late." You're also a member of the Secretary of State John Kerry's advisory board and president of Plough Shares Fund. Good to see you back here, sir. Welcome.

My pleasure, thank you.

BALDWIN: All right, so let's get to it. You just heard Josh Earnest over at the White House, you know, essentially saying, no, that based upon analysis, this was not an H-bomb. So you saw what it registered on the Richter Scale, Joe. What the heck would this have been?

JOSEPH CIRINCIONE, "NUCLEAR NIGHTMARE: SECURING THE WORLD BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE": I think this is a nuclear hoax. I think North Korea is trying to claim credit for having a bomb they do not have. They succeed today. There are headlines all over the world saying they've got an H-bomb. I think the evidence indicates they do not. This was quite a small seismic event, equivalent to about six to seven kilotons, 6,000 to 7,000 tons of TNT that's actually smaller than their last test. Even a failed hydrogen bomb test would give you a yield of 10,000, 20,000, 50,000 tons of TNT, a 50 kiloton blast. So that's the primary reason right now most of us don't believe this is a hydrogen test. We'll know more over the next couple of days as we start to get atmospheric sampling. The comprehensive test ban treaty organization has a worldwide monitoring system of seismic monitors, sonar monitors and atmospheric monitors that can detect the emissions from even an underground test. And we'll start to get that isotopic signature that will tell us much more clearly what this was.

BALDWIN: OK. All right, so before we get that isotopic signature, you know, oftentimes when we talk North Korea and bluster goes hand in hand.

CIRINCIONE: Yes.

BALDWIN: But if you're saying - if you're calling it, you know, right here saying, listen, nuclear hoax, why - why go out of the way? Why now? Why, Joe?

[14:10:07] CIRINCIONE: Well, this is part of a pattern. I mean just last year they announced that they had successfully launched an underwater missile.

BALDWIN: That's right.

CIRINCIONE: And they showed us a clip that looked like a missile coming out of the water. It turns out it was one stage, went about 100 yards and that's all it went. You know, so they have a history of exaggerating. You know, the - they score 11 holes in one in a golf game, that kind of thing. So - so what they're trying to do is puff themselves up, particularly as Kim Jong-un is still a new leader, still a -

BALDWIN: About to be his birthday. Got to make headlines.

CIRINCIONE: Got to make headlines. Got to show that he's the powerful leader going forward. And it's part of the fatal attraction syndrome. You cannot ignore me. The world has been ignoring him. The U.S. has not been talking with him, not been negotiating with him. He said, you can't ignore me, I'm still going to make trouble. That's part of the - unfortunately the lesson we learn here. We do have to engage with North Korea. If we do not, they will continue to take these kinds of provocative acts.

BALDWIN: Excellent perspective, as always. Joe Cirincione, thank you so much.

CIRINCIONE: Thank you for having me.

BALDWIN: You got it.

Coming up next, Donald Trump goes birther again, only this time it's a tad different. The frontrunner raising questions about Ted Cruz's citizenship and, well, Ted Cruz just responded. Again, the back-and- forth here between these two, next. Also ahead, as the feds investigate what the terrorist/murderous

couple did during a mystery stretch of 18 minutes after the San Bernardino attacks, their friend appears in court today. Hear what happened inside.

And one of Chicago's top lawyers up and resigns after a federal judge says that he hid evidence, key evidence, involving a fatal police shooting in Chicago and lied about it. The mother of the man killed by police joins me with her emotional story coming up.

You're watching CNN. I'm Brooke Baldwin. We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:15:24] BALDWIN: You're watching CNN. I'm Brooke Baldwin.

Donald Trump. Donald Trump is going after the man polls say is his closest and best competitor there in the state of Iowa, Ted Cruz. Trump is not questioning if Cruz should be president, but rather asking whether Cruz can be president. Remember how Trump went all birther on President Obama a couple of years back, casting doubt on whether the president was, in fact, born here in the United States? Well, flash forward to today, the Republican frontrunner has again raised the fact that Cruz was born in Canada. And according to the Constitution, the president must be a natural born citizen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP (R), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: People are worried that if he weren't born in this country, which he wasn't, he was born in Canada, and he actually had a Canadian passport along with a U.S. passport until just recently, I mean like within the last couple of years. So I don't know what it all means. I know that other people are talking about it. The problem is that if the Democrats bring a lawsuit, the lawsuit could take years to resolve, and how do you have a candidate where there's something, you know, over the head of the party and that individual?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BALDWIN: All right, Sunlen Serfaty, let me bring you in with this back-and-forth in a snowy Spirit Lake, Iowa. So that's what Trump threw down. We know that Cruz has just responded. Tell me what the latest is that the Texas senator has said.

SUNLEN SERFATY, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Brooke, it's very clear that Ted Cruz really doesn't want to get dragged in and bogged down in the back-and-forth with Donald Trump over this. He called it this morning the circus sideshow of politics, these questions over his citizenship. But he did provide a lengthier response today to reporters in Rock Rapids, really going point by point, making a few points of issues where this has come up with past politicians and why he doesn't think it's an issue for him. Here's what he had to say.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) SEN. TED CRUZ (R), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: As a legal matter, the question is quite straightforward and settled law that the child of a U.S. citizen born abroad is a natural born citizen. People will continue to make political noise about it, but as a legal matter it's quite straightforward. I would note that it has occurred many times in history. John McCain was born in Panama, but he was a natural born citizen because his parents were U.S. citizens.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SERFATY: Now, those comments were interesting because they were a little meatier than what he first offered up. Cruz almost immediately responded to Donald Trump last night over Twitter, but responded it to bringing a little humor into the situation, potentially to defuse the situation. He tweeted out a link to a YouTube clip from Fonzie, from the TV show "Happy Days," a cultural reference, a metaphor to when Fonzie jumped a shark, indicating a gimmick, a part where that TV show first went into decline. So trying to make that metaphor, trying to defuse it with a little humor. But certainly Ted Cruz will face continued questions over this, especially as Donald Trump, at numerous occasions this morning in TV interviews continues to double down on this.

Brooke.

BALDWIN: Sunlen Serfaty, thank you, in Iowa.

Let's get a little political analysis, shall we? Joining me, Bob Cusack, editor in chief at "The Hill," along with American University law professor Steve Vladeck.

So, great to see both of you.

On the law, Steve, let me just kick it off with you. I mean you agree with what we've heard from Senator Cruz. I mean explain to everyone watching, you know, in legal terms, why, you know, Ted Cruz, even though he was born in Canada, becoming president, totally fine.

STEVE VLADECK, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: Sure. I mean the relevant point is exactly what Ted Cruz, it's what Sunlen said in her report. The term is natural born citizen, and that's been understood really since the founding not to mean born in the United States, but rather to mean a U.S. citizen at the time you are born, in contrast to folks who become U.S. citizens later in their lives through naturalization.

There's no question, Brooke, that Ted Cruz was a U.S. citizen automatically when he was born because his mother was a U.S. citizen born in Delaware. And so the term in Article II, Section I, Clause V, natural born citizen, covers anyone who's a U.S. citizen at birth. Ted Cruz was. This is really just another one of Donald Trump's constitutional wild goose chases.

BALDWIN: Yes. And that said, let me just - let's be precise because we just heard Ted Cruz bring up a couple of names, you know, past nominees, McCain, born in Panama, George Romney, born in Mexico. But one difference would be, you know, none of those men ever became president. And so if Cruz, you know, were to become president, this, you know, natural born citizen requirement, it's never been tested in the courts, correct?

VLADECK: It's never been tested against a sitting president. That's true. But, you know, I don't know that anyone would be in a big hurry to bring it. I'm not sure the courts would hear it. I mean the courts have held that presidents have absolute immunity from civil litigation while they're in office. So, you know, yes, there's no Supreme Court decision squarely answering this question. But honestly, Brooke, we don't need one. I mean George Romney's a good example. You know, he was born in Mexico, but his, you know, he still - the citizenship still follows from the fact that your parents are a U.S. citizen at the time you're born. There's no Supreme Court decision, but we don't need a Supreme Court decision to tell us that tomorrow is, you know, Thursday either.

[14:20:18] BALDWIN: OK. Ah, politics.

Bob, let me pivot to you and talk specifically, you know, Donald Trump in all of this because, you know, he's sort of said one thing and then, you know, said, ah, actually I think it was with ABC News, you know, as recent as last year saying, hang on a section, actually I don't think, you know, Cruz's birthplace will be a problem, and now he's reversed back again. To me it seems a little, I don't know, third grade, flip-flopping. Why - what's at play here?

BOB CUSACK, EDITOR IN CHIEF, "THE HILL": Well, I think he is jabbing at Ted Cruz, getting him off his message. And certainly when he has to answer questions like this, he's not talking about his policies. And that's what Trump wants. And we interviewed Trump yesterday. Basically he's not landing haymakers on Cruz. They're just - they're little jabs here. Because he knows that Cruz is a threat to him in Iowa. And so I think you're going to see that over the next several weeks. I don't think these guys - they really haven't gone at each other, but they're starting to be some more conflict because these are, without a doubt, the two frontrunners in the first race in Iowa.

BALDWIN: I was reading - obviously reading your interview with Mr. Trump and he was saying, you know, he's a closer kind of guy.

CUSACK: Yes.

BALDWIN: And he also talked to you specifically about different battleground states. Here's part of your exchange with him.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP (R), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE (voice-over): See, I'm so used to looking at these Republicans that have to win Ohio, have to win Florida, have to win Pennsylvania and Virginia.

CUSACK: Yes.

TRUMP: If they don't win every one, it's over, right?

CUSACK: Yes. TRUMP: With me, I'm going to win them anyway, but I - I have a lot of

other places. I think I'm going to win Pennsylvania, as an example, which they don't count on winning, OK? I think I have a real good shot at winning New York. Now, how big is New York?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BALDWIN: Does he believe this is his?

CUSACK: He does. He's more confident than ever. We interviewed him over the summer, and I asked him, are you going to be the nominee? And at that point he was actually winning and just surged to the top. He said, that would be too presumptuous. Yesterday he said, as you said, he's a closer. He knows how to close. He's been closing all his life. So I think that he is more confident. And, listen, he's been on top of the polls for nearly six months. He should have some confidence. And he's saying this is - he's going to close this out.

Now, winning Iowa would be big because then he's got a huge lead in New Hampshire. Certainly the establishment in Washington's getting very nervous with the two frontrunners, and that's Cruz and Trump, because they're not fond of either one of them.

BALDWIN: It is fun to watch it all play out, isn't it? Bob Cusack and Steve Vladeck, thank you both so much.

CUSACK: Thanks, Brooke.

VLADECK: Thanks, Brooke.

BALDWIN: And speaking of - you're welcome. Speaking of Donald Trump, he will be joining our own Wolf Blitzer today. Do not miss this interview on "The Situation Room," 5:00 Eastern, only here on CNN.

Also ahead here, Ben Carson's former campaign manager speaking out today with us here at CNN about why he left that campaign and whether he still thinks Ben Carson is fit to be president and who he thinks will ultimately become the Republican nominee.

And next, he is the only person charged in connection with the San Bernardino terrorist attacks, the friend of that husband/wife murderous duo who bought the guns used in the shooting facing a judge today. All of this as the feds are zeroing in on what that couple was doing during this mysterious 18-minute stretch after the shooting. Stay right here.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:27:06] BALDWIN: Moments ago in a California courtroom the former neighbor and friend of one of the San Bernardino terrorists pleaded not guilty to buying assault weapons used in that massacre from a couple of weeks ago. Prosecutors say Enrique Marquez bought rifles used by that husband/wife killer duo to carry out the attack killing 14 people. Marquez also pleaded not guilty to other charges. Stephanie Elam was in that courthouse. She joins us live from Riverside now.

Stephanie, what happened?

STEPHANIE ELAM, CNN CORRESPONDENT: It was very quick, Brooke. It was only a couple of minutes long where he stood shackled, his wrists and his ankles, in a white jumpsuit before the judge, answering each one of her questions very clearly, very politely. He seemed relaxed through the whole transaction as we watched him before everything started when court was called to session. But really here just the idea that he did plead not guilty to the five counts against him. And then the trial date was set for in February, much as we expected. The U.S. saying that they expect the trial to go for about 12 to 14 days, Brooke.

BALDWIN: What about also the chronology of events from that murderous day? I know the FBI sort of made this unusual plea to the public because there's this piece of time, right, this 18 minutes in which they don't know what the husband and wife were doing, and they need to know details.

ELAM: Right. They want to know exactly what they were doing throughout that whole four-hour window. They know what - where they started, what transpired inside the IRC building where the shooting first started. But then there's a window of time from 12:59 p.m. to 1:17 p.m. where they don't know where the couple was. And they want to find that out for multiple reasons. The main one being, they want to make sure that they tie up any loose ends. If there was anyone that this couple was interacting with, that may have been helping them, they want to know that. They want to turn over every stone to make sure that every - anybody who could have had any part in this knows. So they've looked at surveillance videos. They've looked at videos of - from traffic. They've had witness accounts. And if there's anyone out there that knows something about that time frame on December 2nd, they want them to come forth and tell them that because they just want to make sure that they know everything, even though those two assailants are dead, if there's anybody else who knows anything or helped them, they want to know about that.

BALDWIN: Stephanie Elam, thank you.

Coming up next, with the Iowa caucuses more than three weeks away, here's a question, could Bernie Sanders surprise and pull off victories in the first two contests? We'll discuss that on the Democratic side.

Plus, a former close adviser to Ben Carson speaking out to CNN today. Why he says there is no way that Donald Trump doesn't become the Republican nominee. Stay here.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)