Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Scalia's Death Yesterday At The Age of 79 Immediately Set Off A Bitter Political Battle In This Election Year; Another Disease Linked to Dirty Water in Flint, Michigan; President Obama Makes A Call to Russian President Putin. Aired 5-6p ET

Aired February 14, 2016 - 17:00   ET

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

[17:00:15] JIM SCIUTTO, CNN HOST: Good afternoon. You are looking at live pictures of the U.S. Supreme Court where the flag today is flying at half-staff in honor of associate Justice Antonin Scalia, the leader of the court's conservative wing and intellectual power house.

Thank you for joining us. I'm Jim Sciutto in today for Poppy Harlow.

And the shocking news of Scalia's death yesterday at the age of 79 immediately set off a bitter political battle in this election year. On one side, Senate Republicans who say the next president should fill his vacancy, on the other President Obama who says the country cannot afford to wait a year. Although we have learned he will wait until after the Senate returns from recess.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I plan to fulfill my constitutional responsibilities to nominate a successor in due time. There will be plenty of time for me to do so and for the Senate to fulfill its responsibility to give that person a fair hearing and a timely vote.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCIUTTO: Fair hearing and timely vote.

The battle over replacing Scalia became a major talking point in the last night's Republican presidential debate. As you are about to see, things certainly got heated.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP (R), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: I think it is up to Mitch McConnell and everybody to stop it. It is called delay, delay, delay.

JEB BUSH (R), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: There should be a consensus orientation on that nomination. And there's no doubt in my mind that Barack Obama will not have a consensus picked when he submits that person to the Senate.

SEN. TED CRUZ (R), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: If the next president is going to appoint one, two, three, four Supreme Court justices, if Donald Trump is president he will appoint liberals. If Donald Trump is president, your second amendment --

TRUMP: Let me tell you.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Hold on, gentlemen, I'm going to turn the car around.

TRUMP: Ted Cruz, with your brother wanted John Roberts to be in the United States Supreme Court. They both pushed him. He twice approved Obamacare.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCIUTTO: Heated words and that's within the Republican Party, before you get Republican versus Democrat. We are covering every angle of the partisan showdown.

Joining me now is CNN Supreme Court reporter Ariane de Vogue and CNN senior political report Manu Raju.

Looking at this really just a remarkable events.

Ariane, first to you. When you look at the newspaper headlines about Scalia this morning praises such as powerful voice, lasting legacy, a force for conservatism. You covered him on the Supreme Court for years. You know this first hand. You certainly get a sense of the hole that he leaves behind on this court, particularly in the conservative wing. Tell us what happens with the cases, just in the meantime, while waiting for a replacement if we get that before the next election. What happens with this crucial cases that are before the Supreme Court right now?

ARIANE DE VOGUE, CNN SUPREME COURT REPORTER: You are absolutely right. This is a monumental shift on the court and it comes half way through this major turn. The Supreme Court is hearing really controversial cases, abortion, affirmative action, the president's immigration actions, and what happens usually when now there is only eight members on the court, if there is a 4-4 split that means the lower court decision is upheld. So in this case, for example, let me tell you about one big case, it is the public union. It is a challenge to public unions and it's come to the court. It's been argued. And beforehand, the lower court ruled in favor of the union. But after oral arguments it seems like conservatives lead by Scalia, Kennedy, et cetera, were poised to strike that down, to reverse that decision.

Well, if it's going to be a 4-4 tie that means that it is going to be an unexpected victory for the union. They will be able to claim that lower court decision and that will be a victory. It could be different for two other cases, one having to do with abortion in the immigration case because be lo those a conservative results.

But we are looking at these big cases that haven't been decided that could cause real confusion. And the Supreme Court could do one thing. They could say, OK, let's push this off and not make a decision now. But the problem with that is when would they be able to? When is this court going to have nine members again? SCIUTTO: I mean, that's a great point because by delaying this,

Republican-controlled Senate, you imagine you keep the Republican agenda or the conservative agenda but you have cases which might then go to the more liberal side.

But Manu, I want to ask you this. Let's say you have Republicans who control the Senate saying, and many presidential candidates, let's wait until after the elections. You have Democrats, you heard the president saying listen this is my responsibility. The Senate should give a vote and that's their responsibility. Is there any chance, at this this point, that the president can find a candidate for the Supreme Court, a nominee who will -- the Senate will then allow a vote, a straight up or down vote or, or is the country so divide at this point, we have an election year that is hard to imagine?

[17:00:15] MANU RAJU, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL REPORTER: I think there's a chance, Jim, there is very small chance, you know. If you look at what senator McConnell's majority leader said yesterday and Chuck Grassley, who is the judiciary committee chairman, which the committee that will oversee the nomination, both of them said that the next president should nominate the next Supreme Court justice but did not say absolutely, no way, no how will there be a vote. There will not be a vote on the Senate floor. There will not be a hearing in the Judiciary Committee. They are keeping the powder dry on that particular aspect of it. And one reason why that they want to see who the president nominates first. If there is potentially a consensus nominee and there a lot of pressure, particularly from Senate Republicans working tough reelection race this year. This is a big fight for control of the Senate that could flip. If there are a lot of vulnerable Republicans who are nervous about it, maybe that changes McConnell's calculation, maybe a force to put a consensus nominee on the floor and at least give them a vote. But it is right now, very hard to see if there is someone who could get that kind of widespread support. And even if there were some vulnerable Republicans who wanted a vote on the Senate floor, there -- they still need to get these 14 Republicans to overcome likely filibuster on the floor. And that's very hard thing for Obama and the Democrats to achieve at this point, Jim.

SCIUTTO: I mean, as divide as the country is, as divided as this presidential race is, it is just hard to imagine a scenario, the death of a conservative Supreme Court justice that could set up a more divided line on the hill.

Thank you Manu and Ariane. Please stay there. We are going to bring you back.

President Obama promises he will nominate a replacement for Justice Scalia. If he does and successfully, it would be his third appointment to the bench after justices Kagan and Sotomayor.

I want to bring in our CNN political commentator Ben Ferguson. He is host of the "Ben Ferguson show."

So Ben, let me ask you this question, because you are familiar with the Republican position at this point from the Senate. But when you look at history here, and you will hear Senator Mitch McConnell saying this is an election year. You should wait until after the election. Reagan nominated Kennedy within a year of election, Ford nominated Stevens, Nixon nominated Rehnquist and Powell. These are Republican presidents going back 40 some odd years. Why is it different for President Obama?

BEN FERGUSON, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well, I think a couple of different things here. One, he is going to appoint one. It doesn't mean that the house or the Senate is going to allow it to move forward at all. And so, I think that's what you saw from Mitch McConnell saying you don't have the votes. You can either compromise with us and it would be pretty obvious that Barack Obama is not going to compromise or we are willing to wait it out and see who the next president is and allow them to do this moving forward.

This is a very important seat on the Supreme Court. There is no doubt about that. And so, when you look at, you know, the Republican winning control of the Senate, they are going to use this. Now, they have had a lot of Obama's appointees and a lot of people that went through and a lot of lower court judges. But this is the Supreme Court. I don't think this in an election year where you have a new person is going to be taking over the White House, the president can nominate his person. It doesn't mean the Senate is going to move on this. They will wait and delay. I think that probably smart move. This is going to be an election year issue. No doubt about it.

SCIUTTO: Ben, I want you to have a listen to what Sen. Patrick Leahy, Democratic senator Patrick Leahy, the top ranking Democrat on the Senate judiciary committee, of course, powerful role in this process, said about the political cost if Senate Republicans refuse to consider the president's nominee. Have a listen to what he said.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. PATRICK LEAHY (D), VERMONT: If the Republican leadership refuses even to hold a hearing, I think that it's going to guarantee they lose control of the Senate.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

FERGUSON: That's what you should hope for, right?

SCIUTTO: An issue some Republicans are concerned about. But do you agree with him? I mean, there are -- this year is not as friendly of a year for Senate Republicans as the last cycle. I mean, is there any truth to this?

FERGUSON: Look. If he believes this and he should be thrilled about this possibility moving forward and congratulations to the Democrats if they think it is that easy to win back the control of the Senate. I don't see that. And I think, if anything, it would be for -- if Republicans do not put up a fight on this one they would be voted out of office because they did not fight for a Supreme Court justice spot and to see what will happen with this election.

Remember, Republicans aren't saying that we are not going to put someone on the court until a Republican-backed White House. What they are saying is we want the next president, whoever it may be, to decide who the next person is going to be. That's a completely different than saying we're not going to give anybody the Supreme Court for this year plus another four if Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders wins.

They are saying the next president should decide. The Democrats have a fair shot at winning the presidential election. And for him to say that somehow this is going to be, you know, political suicide for Republicans running for election in the Senate, then I would assume he would probably welcome that because he would have a higher position of power.

[17:10:12] SCIUTTO: Well, let me just play devil's advocate. This president won reelection in 2012, the year before he is replaced or a little less than a year. You have Republican presidents who have nominated in the last year successfully. Didn't the Democrats get their shot at this? Why wouldn't the president have the prerogative to nominate someone? Why does the Senate not have the responsibility then to at least do an up or down vote as opposed to say, you know, the filibuster has been laid out there as a possibility?

FERGUSON: Look. I will be candid and throw the politics in to this. This is going to be a political process. It always has been. If you don't believe me, just ask Clarence Thomas, how political and vile the process can be.

SCIUTTO: You have to vote, though. Clarence Thomas, as divide as it was, he got a vote.

FERGUSON: Dirty tricks that were played to try to destroy him. If you also remember, there were problems that came forward with some of George Bush 43's nominees. He had to withdraw one name. That even was problems from his own party, from Republicans. So this is political in nature. And this is going to be --.

SCIUTTO: They got up or down votes. I mean, that's the difference, right?

FERGUSON: Well, he had to withdrawal a name before he got up or down vote. Remember --.

SCIUTTO: That goes backing to the Reagan years.

FERGUSON: What I'm saying is when you look at this process, this is going to be one where both sides are trying to fight for an advantage on the Supreme Court. I think Republicans can go to their constituents and they can say when they are up for election that I'm fighting for the next person to name person of court and the people are going to support him that. If I'm wrong and if they are wrong, they are going to end up losing their seats at the Senate level. That means Democrats will control the Senate. I don't see that happening. I think there is a lot of voters that say they want to wait this out. Let's see who the next president of the United States of America is and let them decide who it is going to be.

This is a battle that I think Democrats and Republicans in the situation, if it was a Democrat I think they would be saying the same thing if they are in control of the Senate. If it is Republican in the White House, they would have done probably the same thing. This is where we are right now. And I don't think there is a real big problem with it.

SCIUTTO: Ben, I want you to stick around. Thanks for taking the hard questions.

FERGUSON: Absolutely.

SCIUTTO: When we come back to this we will talk about the Republican presidential race next and a fiery debate certainly last night.

(VIDEO CLIP PLAYING)

SCIUTTO: The audience booed at times. The candidates brawled a number of times. Welcome to the new look of the Republican race.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[17:15:50] SCIUTTO: It was the most explosive Republican presidential debate yet. That's saying a lot. Candidates insulted one another, called each other names, even attacked their family members.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: George Bush made a mistake. We can make mistakes, but that one was a beauty. We should have never been in Iraq. We destabilize the Middle East. They lied. They said there were weapons of mass destruction. There were none and they knew there were none. There were no weapons of mass destruction.

BUSH: I'm sick and tired of him going after my family. My dad is the greatest man alive in my mind. While Donald Trump was building reality TV show my brother was building a security apparatus to keep us safe and I'm proud of what he did.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCIUTTO: I want to bring back our CNN political commentator Ben Ferguson.

Ben, I got to tell you, of many exchanges last night that was one that really caught my attention because he is hearing Donald Trump arguing against the Bush legacy, as George W. Bush legacy, particularly on the Iraq war. It sounded to me like something you may hear in a general election debate from the Democrat from either Hillary Clinton or, if she voted for him, but Bernie Sanders.

FERGUSON: If you close your eyes, it almost sounded like a Democratic presidential debate between Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders insert Donald Trump and they would have all agreed with one another. I don't understand know the reasoning behind this or the logic behind Donald Trump in saying these things. Here's the other thing that I think is so interesting thing about Donald Trump last night when he got booed is the fact what he was saying is basically implying that he would have a foreign policy that would allow for these types of individuals to continue to be terrorists and stay in power. It is also an incredible Monday morning quarterbacking. And to attack George Bush the way he did, especially going in to South Carolina I think was a really dumb political maneuver. I don't understand this (INAUDIBLE).

SCIUTTO: Let's be honest, though, Ben. I mean, Monday morning, we are talking about a ten-year war that had enormous consequences there. I mean, this is not sort of Monday quarterbacking something less insignificant. And the fact is that Trump has been able to mobilize members -- we're not talking independents here, but members of the conservative base who feel the same way as about George Bush's legacy.

FERGUSON: Look. He has absolutely been able to do that. But one of the other things last night is that -- another example I say of this Monday morning quarterback is all of a sudden Donald Trump is out there talking about how important the Supreme Court justice is and how we must have someone who is hard-core conservative.

I would remind people, you know, and then he criticizes George Bush for who he put on the court. During that same time, Donald Trump was supporting Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats in the Senate to the tune to a six figure donation to Democrat Senate committee to reelect Democrats. He was supporting far worse people to be on the Supreme Court than what he is now criticizing Jeb Bush and others and also Ted Cruz saying John Roberts and others that were put on the court were horrible judges as he put it last night. Yet I would remind people he was giving money to Democrats during that same time period that would have put people on there like Barack Obama put on there.

So again, when I say this is -- I don't understand the logic behind this. Donald Trump seems to go on stage and attack whoever is at that moment he think could be a threat to him and he does it through attacking their family and basically saying anything they have ever done in their life is incompetent and/or stupid and not enough people look at what he was actually for during that same period where real issues were brought before us.

SCIUTTO: The fact the strategy has worked for him so far.

Let me ask about -- at least so far in the primary season. Let's talk about this Supreme Court vacancy and how it may affect the election because until last night, the big question had been Ruth Bader Ginsburg by declining health, the thought that, you know, this is one of those demonstrations of how important this election is. Because that could further direct the future of the court. But now you have, you know, the leading conservative voice to be replaced by the next year or possibly after this election.

On the Republican side, how does this change the direction of things there? Does it play to Ted Cruz's advantage? I mean, he has got strong conservative credentials.

[17:20:02] FERGUSON: If you are Ted Cruz, you remind people and you go out every single day in South Carolina, Nevada, going in to SEC primary. That I was fighting for conservatives while Donald Trump, who is basically his main opponent right now was given six figures in 2006, 2005, 2004 to Democrats to flip the Senate and they would be in charge of the nominee.

So let's not be fooled by Donald Trump now all of the sudden claiming that he is some great conservative for justices on the Supreme Court. That's his biggest advantage I see in this election moving forward.

I also think that place well for Jeb Bush and Marco Rubio. They need to do a better job of reminding people when they were in the actual fight and what they are getting criticized for right now is the complete opposite of what Donald Trump is now saying. That's really probably the only vulnerability where I think because of the Supreme Court argument, in the Supreme Court battle now, is the focal point where people will be willing to listen to their ideas without the noise of Donald Trump yelling at them. This may be their best opportunity to remind people of his record.

SCIUTTO: So Ben, there were so many, as you know, hot moments in this debate last night. I want to play an exchange between Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz. It speaks for itself but I want your thoughts. Have a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

RUBIO: I don't know how he knows about what I said on Univision because he doesn't speak Spanish. And second of all, the other point that I would make --.

CRUZ: (SPEAKING SPANISH)

RUBIO: This is a disturbing pattern now because for a number of weeks now Ted Cruz has just been telling lies. He lied about Ben Carson in Iowa. He lies about marriage. He is lying about all sorts of things and now he makes things up.

The bottom line this is a campaign and people are watching and if they see the truth behind all these issues. And here's the truth, Ted Cruz supported legalizing people that were in this country. And only now --

CRUZ: That is simply false. That is knowingly false.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCIUTTO: So, a blistering attack on Ted Cruz from Marco Rubio. Did he draw blood there? Did Marco Rubio draw blood?

FERGUSON: I don't think he did. I think he took a play book out of Donald Trump's play book which is call him a liar. And Marco Rubio honestly knows that his biggest liability is his gang of eight. And he is trying to say, well, Ted Cruz is almost as bad as I am on amnesty and I just don't think that is going to work well for him. But it is his biggest liability. And this is probably the best play he can have moving forward to say you are basically just like I am. So don't act like you are better on immigration issues than I am.

SCIUTTO: Well, Ben Ferguson, great to have your thoughts on all these things.

FERGUSON: Thanks, Jim.

SCIUTTO: It is the last debate before Super Tuesday. Join Wolf Blitzer live from Texas for the CNN Republican presidential debate. That will be Thursday, February 25th at 8:30 p.m. eastern only here on CNN.

They put their politics aside and remained friends for decades. Today, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg is mourning the loss of her best buddy on the bench, Antonin Scalia. Next more on the fond memories the two shared.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[17:26:50] SCIUTTO: Justice Antonin Scalia shared a unique friendship with his ideological polar opposite on the bench. He and Ruth Bader Ginsburg loved to wine and dine together, even taking vacations together overseas. Today, she made a statement saying in part quote "I was my great good fortune to have known him as a working colleague and treasured friend."

Our Pamela Brown has more on that unlikely friendship between two Supreme Court justices from opposite ends of the ideological divine.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

JUSTICE ANTONIN SCALIA, U.S. SUPREME JUSTICE: Why don't you call us the odd couple?

PAMELA BROWN, CNN JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Justices Antonin Scalia and Ruth Bader Ginsburg, two polar (ph) opposite legal mind with the closest friendship on the bench.

SCALIA: You know, what's not to like except her views of the law, of course.

BROWN: Sharing a laugh about Ginsburg's sleeping habits at the state of the union.

JUSTICE RUTH BADE GINSBURG, U.S. SUPREME COURT: The audience for the most part isn't awake because they are bobbing up and down all the time. And we sit there stone faced, sober judges. But we're not, at least I wasn't, 100 percent sober because before we went to the state of the union, we had dinner together. And Justice Kennedy brought in --

SCALIA: That's the first intelligent thing you have done.

GINSBURG: So I got a call and I came home from one of my granddaughter's and he said, bubby, you were sleeping at the state of union.

BROWN: The sharp as attack 81-year-old even admitted she has had some occasional help staying away from now retired justice David Suitor.

GINSBURG: He had an acute sense of when I was about -- so he would give me pinch.

BROWN: Ginsburg, nicknamed notorious RBG and Scalia known as Nino, have long vacation together with their families. Scalia admiring his pint sized partner's taste for adventure.

SCALIA: And Ruth, honest to goodness, went up behind a motor boat in a --.

GINSBURG: Parasail.

SCALIA: I mean, she's so light you would think she would never come down.

BROWN: Their political differences, an elephant in the room, they aren't afraid to confront or ride as they did in India.

GINSBURG: That was a rather bumpy ride.

SCALIA: Some of her feminist friends gave me a hard time, or her a hard time because she rode behind me on the elephant. Big deal. I'm not kidding.

GINSBURG: It was -- the driver explained it was a matter of distribution of weight.

BROWN: Pamela Brown, CNN, Washington.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

SCIUTTO: Great and unlikely friendship.

Well, Marco Rubio is making a strong claim about the Supreme Court. Rubio says it has been more than 80 years since a lame duck president nominated a Supreme Court justice. Is Rubio's statement true? Our ace fact checker Tom Foreman gives you the answer after this.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[17:33:12] SCIUTTO: We learned today that no autopsy will be performed on late Supreme Court justice Antonin Scalia. The 79-year- old passed away yesterday from natural causes in his room at a Texas ranch. Sources tell CNN that Scalia's family and the Texas justice of the peace made the decision to forgo an autopsy. His body was taken to a funeral home in El Paso, Texas, today. Scalia was known as a colorful man and iconic conservative justice.

In a CNN interview, Scalia explain how he viewed his role as a Supreme Court justice. Let's have a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SCALIA: I sleep very well at night knowing that I am doing what I'm supposed to do, which is to apply the constitution. I do not always like the result. Very often I think the result is terrible. But that's not my job. I'm not king.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCIUTTO: Some disagree with him but everyone respected him. News of Justice Scalia's death hit the campaign trail like an earthquake. Several presidential candidates on the GOP used last night's debate to demand that the Senate block anyone nominated by President Obama. Most GOP candidates believe it is the next president who should nominate a justice instead. Marco Rubio claimed it had been 80 years since a lame duck president appointed a Supreme Court. Is that accurate?

Tom Foreman has the fact check.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

TOM FOREMAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Marco Rubio made it clear he does not think that President Obama should try to replace Justice Scalia because of precedent.

RUBIO: It has been over 80 years since a lame duck president has appointed a Supreme Court justice.

FOREMAN: Eighty years. Let's take look at the record here. We know that Franklin Roosevelt appointed one at the end of his second term but it ended up getting a third term. There were no term limits then. We know that Lyndon Johnson tried to do it in the '60s. He did not succeed. And we know Reagan named Justice Kennedy in 1987. Kennedy was approved in 1988. That was the end of the Reagan's presidency. So were these lame duck appointments here? It depends how you define "lame duck." There is no legal definition. In any event, it is rare so we are going to say that Rubio's claim is mostly true.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

[17:35:32] SCIUTTO: Thanks very much Tom Foreman, our reality check.

The next nominee for the Supreme Court has become one of Marco Rubio's lead talking points in the last 24 hours. Listen to what he said on state of the union this morning.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DANA BASH, CNN CHIEF CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: You talked about what kind of nominee you would be OK with. One name that has been floated for the Supreme Court for President Obama to nominate is district circuit court judge Sri Srinivasan. And in 2013, the Senate confirmed him, 97-0. You were one of those 97. You voted to confirm him. So President Obama were to put forward his name, why not support him since you have done it in the past?

RUBIO: Well, there's a different criteria, obviously. It is heightened level of scrutiny. They have to go through judiciary. I usually don't comment on nominees until they have gone through the process. The next president will have a chance to appoint somebody. And when I am president of the United States. I'm going to look for someone like Justice Scalia.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCIUTTO: CNN's correspondent Phil Mattingly joining me now from South Carolina where the Republican candidate held a rally earlier this afternoon.

Phil, was Rubio touting the same message there? Is this become central to his message as the primary approaches?

PHIL MATTINGLY, CNN CORRESPONDENT: It took about five minutes for Marco Rubio to get right on to this subject. And you know, actually it was one of his biggest applause lines. Take a listen, Jim.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BASH: You talked about what kind of nominee you would be OK with. One name that has been floated for the Supreme Court --

RUBIO: I don't think the Senate should confirm anyone that Barack Obama tries tie point in his office to a lifetime appointment.

(APPLAUSE)

RUBIO: So the next president of the president of the United States will fill that vacancy.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MATTINGLY: Jim, as you heard there, the crowd actually kind of eating that up here. And I think it's something that Republican candidates Marco Rubio first among them recognized this has become is a major issue on the campaign trail. And they think at least amongst the Republican base, this is a winning issue for them. The expectation I have been talking to political operatives kind of across the campaigns is this is going to be an issue that you will hear a lot about, especially in South Carolina over this next five days before voters go to the polls for the primaries.

SCIUTTO: Well, let me ask you, Phil. Because all of the Republican candidates have been saying the same thing. It should be a Republican president or the next president, certainly not Obama who gets to choose who gains the advantage. Because it is easier for them - it is easy for all of them to make that same promise in South Carolina for instance who are voters going to trust to be the one who can to fulfill that promise?

MATTINGLY: I think you talk to different campaigns, a lot of people are pointing right now to Ted Cruz. Obviously, he has a background in this area. He has a judicial background. He has a background in arguing in front of the Supreme Court. He has a background as being a clerk for a Supreme Court justice. Last night he made this a big issue on the debate stage and it is one that he and his team feel like they can absolutely use to their advantage going forward.

I think what is going to be most interesting to watch, Jim, as this week plays out is if anybody can differentiate themselves. Obviously, Ted Cruz thinks based on his career, based on his record he can do that. But all of the candidates so far have been saying the same exact thing, who can actually spin this to their advantage going forward? It is an interesting element. I have probably been to 30, 40, 50 town halls over the last couple of weeks, couple of months in Iowa and New Hampshire. And maybe one out of every four question about a Supreme Court nominee or where a candidate stands on would actually come up.

This moves it straight up the ladder. No longer is kind of 10th or 11th than abstract issue. This is now a very real issue on this campaign and each candidate's team is trying to figure out how to use it to their advantage before voters come to the polls.

SCIUTTO: Yes. I mean, until last night the issue was Ruth Bader Ginsburg, issue of declining health, the next president, but now Antonin Scalia another vacancy.

Listening to last night's debate, there was a level of vitriol. And listen, it is not new to this campaign. You and I both know. But there was - there was a degree of vitriol does seem new. I mean, the number of accusations of he's a liar, he's a liar going back and forth. Is this the beginning of a new stage in terms of that degree particularly in South Carolina? Are we just going to keep seeing this get amped up?

MATTINGLY: Yes. I think it is definitely going to go more in that direction than receding from it the next couple of days and probably over the next couple of weeks. But Jim. Look. The reality is that things are getting urgent for candidates. Candidates need to make moves now. The idea of aligning with one or a come of candidates and trying to keep the peace is no longer a strategy when there is only six people left. We have warned viewers for the last couple of weeks that things get nasty when you get to South Carolina and that was certainly the case last night. And Jim, you are only going to see that increase in the days and weeks ahead.

[17:40:13] SCIUTTO: Fight club in the Republican side (INAUDIBLE).

Phil Mattingly, thanks very much for joining us from South Carolina.

And with six days to until the next votes are cast in South Carolina, all six remaining Republican candidates will be right here on CNN for back-to-back town halls in South Carolina. Watch as they answer voters' questions with Anderson Cooper on Wednesday and Thursday night this week at 8:00 p.m. right here on CNN.

And coming up, another disease is linked to the dirty water in Flint, Michigan. On top of that one state supervisor says the deaths from the sickness could have been prevented but the feds were kept from doing their job. That's right after this.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[17:44:29] SCIUTTO: A CNN investigation shows just how much the toxic water disaster in Flint, Michigan, was manmade. As you know the choice not to use an anti-corrosive agent to treat the Flint River as led to the mass lead poisoning of people, including children, in Flint.

Now, our Sara Ganim has learned the Flint River maybe linked to one of the largest outbreaks of an entirely different illness. Legionnaires disease which can be fatal. On top of that, a state official said that the state deliberately stopped the feds from looking in to the areas of Legionnaires' cases.

Here is Sara Ganim with the CNN exclusive.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

[17:45:11] SARA GANIM, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Troy Kidd measures his loss when he looks at his 3-year-old daughter, Jocelyn.

TROY KIDD, MOTHER DEAD OF LEGIONNAIRES DISEASE: (INAUDIBLE). She's never going to have the opportunity.

GANIM: His mom, Deborah Kidd, died of Legionnaires' disease in August after going to Flint McLaren (ph) hospital for a migraine.

KIDD: Still wasn't sure exactly what was going on, you know. Just thinking, OK, it is heat stroke, trying to wrap your head around it. What's going on? Why is she, you know, sick? Wasn't until that Tuesday, I think that they said Legionnaires.

GANIM: Had you heard of it before?

KIDD: Never heard of it.

GANIM: The outbreak ended up being one of the largest in U.S. history and it began around the time the state switched the city's water source to the Flint River and failed to properly treat the water. Experts believe the corrosive water was giving the Legionnaires bacteria a chance to flourish. Cases soared eventually reaching 87. People were dying.

JIM HENRY, DIRECTOR, GENESEE COUNTY, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH: Our whole team at the health department thought it is more than a coincidence that these cases started happening, these increase in cases started happening around the same time frame as the switch to the Flint River as the water source.

GANIM: The cause of the outbreak may never be determined. State officials knew of the spike in cases but were worried about perception, as documented in this email. Quote "there have been numerous complaints about the Flint Water. Any announcement by public health about the quality of the water would certainly inflame the situation."

About two months before Debra Kidd died the state department of health declared the outbreak over and declined to call in help from the centers for disease control telling CNN quote "we were able to meet the epidemical logical case investigation need in the county.

KIDD: I think it is a cover-up. I think it stinks. I think they knew more was going on than they wanted to really let on. GANIM: The state of Michigan says it is now investigating, saying it

engaged to support the local health department in accordance with the law.

Kidd is now suing the state and the hospital and he is not alone.

Coney Taylor also got sick after visiting McLaren ER. But she said doctors never told her it was Legionnaires' disease.

CONEY TAYLOR, RECOVERED FROM LEGIONNAIRES DISEASE: They did not tell me that or my family that.

GANIM: It wasn't until she demanded the hospital turn over her medical records that she learned the truth. The hospital told CNN it acted in accordance with all statutory regulations and after discovering the outbreak it installed filters and secondary water disinfectant system. Taylor has improved but her kidneys failed. Now she is on dialysis and hoping for a kidney transplant.

Who you blame for all of this?

TAYLOR: I blame McLaren. I blame them for the legionnaires. That they should have announced it to people, made it public and then I blame our government for the water situation because it all could have been prevented.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

SCIUTTO: Sara Ganim, thank you.

Michigan's Republican governor today asked for more federal dollars to help with Flint's water crisis. Rick Snyder submitting an application to expand Medicaid to those up to the age of 21 and pregnant women who used Flint's water system. The governor says that would add about 15,000 more people to the 30,000 in the Flint area who are already on Medicaid.

Overseas, President Obama makes a call to Russian president Putin. Next, what they talked about shortly after Russia likened its relationship to the west to a "now cold war."

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[17:52:37] SCIUTTO: President Obama called Russian president Vladimir Putin on Saturday, urging him to stop bombing moderate rebels in Syria. But Russia maintains the airstrikes are aimed at extremists groups. According to White House Obama also stressed the importance of rapidly implementing humanitarian access to besiege area in Syria and initiating a nationwide cessation of hostility.

CNN's global affair's analyst Kimberly Dozier joins me now.

So Kimberly, the call comes a day after the Russian Prime Minister Dimitri Medvedev likened Russia's relationship with the west to a new cold war. So you have sharp disagreements over Syria policy. In Ukraine, you have labeling of a new cold war. What is President Obama trying to do here with this call, pull the relationship from a brink perhaps?

KIMBERLY DOZIER, CNN GLOBAL AFFAIRS ANALYST: I think so. I think he's trying to tamp down the rhetoric and say, look. We both want the same things here. We want to be ISIS back. We want to stable Syria that doesn't fall into the hands of various different militant groups or out-and-out anarchy.

The thing is, U.S. officials have made these comments before. And while both sides and other parties to the agreement have said they have agreed to a cessation of hostilities as they're calling it by the end of this week, the rebel factions within Syria are also publicly saying why should we stop fighting when Russian jets continue to bomb us, and when the forces of Assad are encircling the last major city, the Syrian rebels hold. They have no reason to put their arms down.

SCIUTTO: You know, I was speaking to John Kirby the other day, state department spokesman. I said, you know, what is a ceasefire when several parties - party to the war do not cease-fire? I mean, you still have Russian airstrikes. You have several of the groups fighting.

I just wonder, I mean, you say the president's message was we both want the same things here, but is that actually true? I mean, Russia wants Assad to stay in power or at least to have the upper end and the U.S. does not, you know. Is there any real meeting of the minds possible between U.S. and Russia on Syria?

You put your finger right on it. They want different goals ultimately. Bashar Assad just this past week said that he intends to take back all of Syrian territory and it really looks like on the ground, Russia is it going to back them in doing that. It's the same sort of thing that it's the Russian playbook out of Ukraine have diplomacy at a high level, but on the ground continue to work with the forces that are pushing forward in taking territory from the other side.

The last time you saw the U.S. and Russia really work on something that worked was when they helped take the WMD, the chemical weapons away from Assad and they did that when the U.S. was threatening the use of force. You don't have that now. I don't see that there is it really a lever to force Russia to force Assad to stop fighting.

[17:55:40] SCIUTTO: Right. Lot of strong words, especially where the leverage is.

Kimberly Dozier, great to have you on as always.

Coming up, Supreme Court justice Antonin Scalia never backed down certainly from an argument on the bench. So it might be a surprise or no surprise that his death has sparked what could be an epic battle in Washington. A fight where the victor could control the fate of the court. That's right after this break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[17:59:51] SCIUTTO: Welcome back. You are watching live pictures of the U.S. Supreme Court, where the sudden passing of associate Justice Antonin Scalia has pushed the issue of traditional nominations to the for front of this year's presidential race.

Thank you for joining us. I'm Jim Sciutto in today for Poppy Harlow.