Return to Transcripts main page

Legal View with Ashleigh Banfield

Presidential Race; Trump and Clinton on Military; Wetterling Case. Aired 12-12:30p ET

Aired September 08, 2016 - 12:00   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[12:00:21] ASHLEIGH BANFIELD, CNN ANCHOR: Hello, everyone. I'm Ashleigh Banfield. Welcome to LEGAL VIEW.

We are, what, 61 days away now until the big day. And if you don't know what the big day is, don't be worried because there's at least one candidate who doesn't know a big thing, too. And I'm going to tell you about that in just a moment.

So the finish line a couple months away. About 90 minutes away, though, Hillary Clinton's event in Charlotte, North Carolina. The Democratic nominee expected to talk national security. That's the theme this week in case you missed it for both of the candidates.

So, Hillary Rodham Clinton's at Johnson C. Smith University. And for his part, Donald Trump is on route to Cleveland. That's Ohio. That's a big state for him. He's going to have an appearance set for 2:00 p.m. Eastern at the Cleveland Arts and Social Sciences Academy. We're going to bring both of those events to you live as they happen.

Because as it happens, big stuff tends to happen on the trail live. And it takes over the news cycle. And here was what was taking over the news cycle in the last 12 hours. Already today the candidates taking up where they left off in last night's commander-in-chief forum in New York.

As you may have seen this live right here on CNN, Hillary Clinton decided to hold a tarmac news conference where she attacked Donald Trump's salute to Russian President Vladimir Putin just this morning. Take a look.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

HILLARY CLINTON (D), PRESIDENTIAL NOMINEE: That is not just unpatriotic and insulting to the people of our country, as well as to our commander-in-chief, it is scary because it suggests he will let Putin do whatever Putin wants to do and then make excuses for him. I was just thinking about all of the presidents that would just be looking at one another in total astonishment. What would Ronald Reagan say about a Republican nominee who attacks America's generals and heaps praise on Russia's president? I think we know the answer.

(END VIDEO CLIP) BANFIELD: Yes, she went all Reagan all over the press. So, let's get the press on this one. CNN's senior media correspondent Brian Stelter is standing by with me here in New York, as well, CNN's senior political reporter Nia-Malika Henderson's here, and "U.S. News & World Report" senior politics writer David Catanese is live with us in D.C.

Nia-Malika, I'm going to start with you on this whole Putin business. Just in case anybody went to bed early last night and maybe missed what Donald Trump said about Vladimir Putin. I just want to replay what it was Hillary Clinton was just referring to. What it was that made her invoke Ronald Reagan's name as though he were spinning in his grave over hearing Donald Trump talk about Vladimir Putin. Here's what Donald Trump said last night.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP (R), PRESIDENTIAL NOMINEE: If he says great things about me, I'm going the say great things about him. I've already said he is really very much of a leader. I mean you can say, oh, isn't that a terrible thing he called him - I mean the man has very strong control over a country. Now, it's a very different system and I don't happen to like the system, but certainly, in that system, he's been a leader, far more than our president has been a leader.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BANFIELD: Far more than our president has been a leader. Look, that's the kind of thing that makes people go, what?

NIA-MALIKA HENDERSON, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL REPORTER: Yes.

BANFIELD: Did he really?

HENDERSON: Yes.

BANFIELD: Oh, my. But you know something, his supporters like the fact that he makes them say, what, really, good.

HENDERSON: Yes. I think that's right. And, you know, it would be surprising in some ways if we hadn't heard this kind of language from Donald Trump about Putin before. They have something of a bromance. He, at one point, said that he had - he'd met him at some point. Apparently they haven't really met. So there is this sort of -

BRIAN STELTER, CNN SENIOR MEDIA CORRESPONDENT: Right.

HENDERSON: Mutual admiration -

BANFIELD: They both were on the same "60 Minutes" episode.

STELTER: That's right.

HENDERSON: Exactly, which I guess counts as a meeting in some sort of way.

BANFIELD: But they weren't in the same country. STELTER: Which is a great example of how his -

BANFIELD: Yes.

STELTER: His supporters don't always view his words literally.

HENDERSON: Yes.

STELTER: I think we, in the media, take him more literally sometimes than his supporters do.

BANFIELD: So do a lot of foreign leaders, if you're in the White House, they take you literally. That's, I think, the issue that Hillary Clinton has. And when she was on the tarmac this morning doing the gaggle -

STELTER: Right.

BANFIELD: She was parsing almost item by item.

HENDERSON: Yes.

STELTER: Yes.

BANFIELD: And I have a question for you about the television nature of this. Here she is walking out before she gets on the plane, in White Planes, New York, and she talks to the press holding an actual press conference with an actual podium, answering actual questions. The Republicans can no longer say 270-some-odd days since Hillary held a news conference. There is some - there is some real strategy to this -

STELTER: Yes.

BANFIELD: In how this looks and how it appears to Trump supporters as well as Hillary Clinton supporters.

STELTER: Suddenly the media is convenient for Hillary Clinton. She wants to have these press conferences. She's had a couple of informal ones on her plane this week as well. I think what she was doing today was having the last word after the forum. Remember, she spoke first at the forum, then Donald Trump. So Trump sort of had the last word. She was able to then come out this morning and restart this conversation.

HENDERSON: Yes.

STELTER: Trump responded on Twitter. He'll continue to respond today I'm sure as well.

[12:05:03] Her performance at the forum left a lot to be desired, so she tried to change the topic this morning, make it all about Trump, which is really this entire election in a nutshell, right? Whoever we're talking about is the loser.

HENDERSON: Yes.

STELTER: Whoever we're not talking about is the winner. HENDERSON: And it's this really smart shift for her. I mean it was

sort of a last word, you're right, and the first word. So she's able to drive the narrative, drive the conversation.

BANFIELD: Oh - oh - oh, is she, because I've got news for you all.

STELTER: Ah, well -

BANFIELD: "Morning Joe" apparently drove the narrative.

HENDERSON: Oh, yes, Joe, this is right.

BANFIELD: Turns out that Gary Johnson -

HENDERSON: Gary Johnson.

BANFIELD: Who we don't often get a lot of headlines about. He wasn't in the forum last night.

STELTER: Right.

BANFIELD: He's not likely to be in the debates. You've got to have 15 percent in the polling. Well, he said something that got big, big headlines. He was asked about what's happening in Aleppo. And let me play for you what happened in that interview?

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What would you do if you were elected about Aleppo?

GARY JOHNSON (L), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: About?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Aleppo.

JOHNSON: And what is Aleppo?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You're kidding?

JOHNSON: No.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Aleppo is in Syria. It's the - it's the epicenter of the refugee crisis -

JOHNSON: OK, got it. Got it.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: OK.

JOHNSON: Well, with regard to Syria, I do think that it's a mess.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BANFIELD: Ouch.

HENDERSON: The - bad.

BANFIELD: I think it's an ouch moment. David, I want to get you in on this. You know, we have had moments in

elections before. Rick Perry had a big oops when he couldn't remember the EPA. Herman Cain, I think, said Uzbkibekiizatan (ph), something along those lines. And a lot of people say right away that's a big disqualifying moment and it ends campaigns. Is that a moment that we just witnessed a couple of hours ago?

DAVID CATANESE, "U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT": Nothing is disqualifying in 2016. We are witnessing that this year.

BANFIELD: Really?

CATANESE: I really don't think anything is.

BANFIELD: OK.

CATANESE: Well, look, imagine - imagine if Donald Trump had said that this morning on "Morning Joe." Imagine if he said, what is Aleppo? I believe he would have had a statement later that said he heard it wrong, that it was mispronounced.

STELTER: True.

CATANESE: He would have blamed - he would have blamed the questioner.

HENDERSON: The ISB (ph) or something.

CATANESE: And he probably would have gotten away with it. So I am going to give Gary Johnson a bit of a lifeline on this. He has put out a statement since that saying -

BANFIELD: Yes, he has.

CATANESE: Saying he misunderstood it.

BANFIELD: I got it.

CATANESE: And - and he basically said, look, I got it wrong. I'm sorry. It will probably happen again. I think a lot of voters will give him a pass. Remember, we have a president, a former president, George -

BANFIELD: You do?

CATANESE: I think voters will give Johnson a pass.

BANFIELD: OK. (INAUDIBLE).

CATANESE: And, frankly, we're all talking about him today. I'm surprised -

BANFIELD: Yes, but I don't want to be talked about that way, David. Oh, my God, I don't want to be talked about that way ever, and I'm just a dumb news anchor.

CATANESE: Well, but - but I - BANFIELD: Can I just read that statement, since you brought it up. I think it's important. You're right, David, he did account for it. This is total contrition. "Yes, I understand the dynamics of the Syrian conflict. I talk about them every day. But hit with the, 'what about Aleppo,' I immediately was thinking about an acronym, not the Syrian conflict. I blanked. As governor, there were many things I didn't know off the top of my head, but I succeed by surrounding myself with the right people, getting to the bottom of important issuers and making principled decisions. It worked. This is what a president must do."

Look, I get it, but -

CATANESE: And - and - well, can I - can I say -

STELTER: And this gets to how we judge the candidates differently. I think you're right, David, about how Trump would have handled this if it happened to him. And we know, let's be honest, even if you hate Hillary Clinton, this would not have happened with Hillary Clinton.

HENDERSON: It would not.

STELTER: We all know she knows all about Syria.

BANFIELD: I think she might have been there.

CATANESE: Yes, but - but let me -

STELTER: These candidates are judged very differently depending on the circumstances.

BANFIELD: David, last word. Go ahead.

CATANESE: But let me just say, George W. Bush, in 1999, sat for an interview where he couldn't name world leaders all over the globe, and he became a two-term president.

STELTER: True.

CATANESE: So to hold this over Gary Johnson, a guy polling 7 to 10 percent and saying well he's out of it now, I think it's too harsh. I think he was contrite. Trump has never been contrite on anything he's said wrong throughout this campaign, out of all his contradictions and he's still standing with his 40, 42 percent. So, I mean, this might be a good thing for Gary Johnson to get his name I.D. up all day on cable.

BANFIELD: I got to leave it there, but I will say this -

STELTER: Love that theory.

HENDERSON: Yes.

BANFIELD: That when that happened with George W. Bush, I remember watching it, and I remember it sort of coined the frame "gotcha journalism."

CATANESE: Right.

BANFIELD: We've seen that kind of tactic before, but then it became sort of a really hideous term and a very accusatory of press tactics, "gotcha journalism" for asking people important -

STELTER: We need - we need more tough questions, not less.

HENDERSON: Yes, Aleppo, great.

BANFIELD: I agree. I agree.

Hey, guys, thank you so much. Appreciate it. Brian Stelter, Nia-Malika Henderson and David Catanese.

STELTER: Thanks, guys.

BANFIELD: Up next, our panel of military and national security experts, they're going to weigh in on the Clinton-Trump war over words over America's armed forces. And, guess what, they know best because they are the armed forces. That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[12:13:25] BANFIELD: Hillary Clinton is coming out swinging after she and Donald Trump took part in a forum on national security. Candidates were clashing over this particular issue, especially after Trump leveled some harsh criticism against military generals in the Obama administration.

First, I want you to hear Donald Trump in his own words. And then I want you to listen to Secretary Clinton's reaction to Donald Trump's own words when she spoke about it this morning. Have a look.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP (R), PRESIDENTIAL NOMINEE: I think under the leadership of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, the generals have been reduced to rubble. They have been reduced to a point where it's embarrassing for our country.

MATT LAUER, MODERATOR: But you're going to convene a panel of general, and you've already said you know more about ISIS than those generals.

TRUMP: Well, they'd probably be different generals.

HILLARY CLINTON (D), PRESIDENTIAL NOMINEE: He trash-talked American generals saying they'd been, quote, "reduced to rubble." He suggested he would fire them and replace them with his hand-picked generals. He attacked dozens of former flag officers by saying that, quote, "we've been losing for us for a long time." That's how he talks about distinguished men and women who have spent their lives serving our country, sacrificing for us.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BANFIELD: I want to talk about this more with CNN political analyst and "Washington Post" columnist Josh Rogin, also CNN contributor and "Daily Beast" senior writer Michael Weiss, CNN military analyst Lieutenant Colonel Rick Francona, and CNN Pentagon correspondent Barbara Starr.

And, Barbara, I'm going to begin with you.

I thought that's what presidents-elect do, they start designing their cabinets. They start designing their inner circle and their joint chiefs as well. Isn't that effectively what Donald Trump was saying?

[12:15:10] BARBARA STARR, CNN PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT: Well, the military is just a little bit different than that. I mean these people don't disappear on Election Day. They are confirmed by the U.S. Senate to a term of office, three years generally. In fact, on Election Day, the current chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Joe Dunford, will still be in office with the job of being the president of the United States' senior military adviser. If Trump wants to fire them all, well, first of all, he's going to have to actually get their retirement approved by Congress. If he wants to put in all of his own generals that he likes better, he's going to have to get their appointment confirmed by Congress. This is, you know, this is how the legislative process works, the military reports to the civilian leadership and it is all confirmed by the Senate.

It would be an extraordinary thing if he were to do a wholesale house cleaning. And then he has to live with it. Any president would have to live with it. You have to consider the implications for what your relationship would be as commander-in-chief, what the - with whoever's left in the military in high positions. And you have to make the assumption, I would suppose, that the people who are in office right now as three and four stars are somehow either so frustrated they're not able to do their jobs or they are engaged in essentially dereliction of duty, not giving their best military advice and engaging in operations which they know can't be won. For myself, as a journalist, I haven't seen evidence of either.

BANFIELD: OK, I want to talk about troops in particular and what their future might hold especially when you look at the uneasiness in the Middle East. And last night during the forum, Hillary Clinton was fairly definitive about no boots on the ground in Iraq and Syria if she becomes president. And then this morning on that tarmac, the hastily organized news conference on the tarmac, she clarified that. I don't know that walking it back is the right way to say, but she certainly clarified what she meant because of course we've got boots on the ground, special forces that are there. But what about going forward? Here's what she had to say.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

HILLARY CLINTON (D), PRESIDENTIAL NOMINEE: I said it on numerous occasions, I believe it. I think putting a big contingent of American ground troops on the ground in Iraq and Syria would not be in the best interest of the fight against ISIS and other terrorist groups.

(END VIDEO CLIP) BANFIELD: So, Colonel Francona, I would like you to weigh in on this. I think you're the only person on the panel, maybe Michael as well, who's actually been in Syria. She's been called trigger happy by Donald Trump, but here she is saying I don't think that, you know, a mass ground force is the way to handle ISIS. Donald Trump, yesterday, talking about boning up his military. He said he wants to smash the hell out of ISIS, or knock the hell out of ISIS. So there is that whole argument about, you break it, you buy it. If you just smash the hell out of something, you own it and you own the people and you own the aftermath. We sort of are experiencing that with Iraq right now. From a guy in your position, how are you seeing those two people navigate that reality?

LT. COL. RICK FRANCONA, CNN MILITARY ANALYST: Well, you know, first on Mrs. Clinton's statements, you know, this is nothing more than a continuation of what Barack Obama has said. He's not interested in putting large combat formations on the ground. And I think she's just reiterating that policy.

The problem with saying things like that is, once you say that, you're wedded to it, just like red line. If you draw a red line, you have to enforce it. And when we didn't re-enforce the red line in Syria, it really cost us on the world stage.

On the other hand, you know, Mr. Trump saying he wants to crush ISIS. Everybody wants to crush ISIS. His statements that the generals have been reduced to rubble and we've been losing so far are - are a bit insulting. But considering the audience he was speaking to, I think he was trying to punish the administration rather than saying that the generals are at fault.

It's nuanced and I wish he would learn to be a little more articulate in these kinds of statements because, as a military person, you know, you know, it's very - very disenheartening (ph) when you hear people that want to be your commander-in-chief talk like that.

BANFIELD: There might be some of his campaign staff who agree with you because last night he was held to a 2013 tweet that he sent out about sexual assault in the military. If you'll indulge me, I just want to read it again. From 2013 Donald Trump wrote, "26,000 unreported sexual assaults in the military. Only 238 convictions. What do these geniuses expect when they put men and women together?"

Josh Rogin, if I can just ask you about this. Some people took that to be extraordinarily insulting, suggesting, if you put men and women together in the office, well, then you should expect rape. Other people took this to mean what Donald Trump tried to explain, and that is, there needs to be more prosecutions. Do you think he did an effective job of trying to get that message through when he was dealing with a tweet that perhaps he might have preferred not be out there?

[12:20:00] JOSH ROGIN, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: No, I don't think it was an effective explanation because I don't think that Trump, or the Trump campaign for that matter, has fully thought through the implications of this tweet and the statements that he made about this issue yesterday.

I mean, look, you can criticize Hillary Clinton for pledging details or being defensive against her record, but no one can say that she doesn't have a firm grasp of these issues and experience dealing with them. no one can say that about Donald Trump. I mean we talk about Gary Johnson being disqualified for not knowing where Aleppo is. Donald Trump makes a statement like that almost every single day. And when he talks about these issues, it ranges from sort of a cursory knowledge to absolute falsehoods. And some of these ideas like take the oil and, you know, bomb the hell out of them and kill the families of terrorists are just incoherent really and don't really make sense. So we're talking about, you know, piecing together parts of a policy that doesn't really exist. And this is why overall despite the complications in her record, Hillary Clinton is faring better than Donald Trump on foreign policy.

BANFIELD: Michael Weiss, I want to talk a little bit about ISIS and what Hillary Clinton is saying now regarding ISIS being fully behind the electing of Donald Trump. There's been a "Time" magazine piece that was pretty clear about actual interviews with ISIS supporters, ISIS members saying, that's exactly what they want because it just fuels the fire and helps their cause. Is - you have been there as well. I dare say you have sources. You've got actual sources, real ISIS people, who tell you the way it is.

MICHAEL WEISS, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: Yes, they're in ISIS.

BANFIELD: So what is the way it is? Is that true?

WEISS: Yes, it is.

BANFIELD: How so?

WEISS: They're pining for a Donald Trump victory because the dichotomy that he has established is us versus them. You know, the west is not a place that can be hospitable for Muslims because they are fifth columnists (ph). They bring with them jihadism. They bring with them the sort of sense or mission of conquest. They don't fully integrate into American society.

Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi and his dearly departed spokesmen, Abu Muhammad al-Adnani, could not have said it better themselves. For them it is two lands, the land of disbelieves and the land of Islam. The land of Islam is embodied by ISIS.

I interviewed a - I profiled a former member of one of ISIS' spy divisions who's now defected and is fighting ISIS and he told me all the jihadis here want to see Donald Trump elected. They cannot wait. They think this will be the sort of inaugural moment for the collapse of the United States. And he said, and this is the reason. They want - they think Trump will destroy America much more expeditiously than they can ever do. So that assessment is absolutely accurate.

BANFIELD: I just want to end on one thing and I'm going to ask the military guy, I'm going to ask Colonel Francona this, because I was really offended by this and I think a lot of women were. Reince Priebus tweeted out after the commander-in-chief forum - I will remind everybody, it was a commander-in-chief forum - that Hillary Clinton was angry and defensive the entire time. No smile. And uncomfortable.

Rick Francona, does one need to smile more to be the commander-in- chief?

FRANCONA: I got nothing.

BANFIELD: I got nothing either. I had a feeling that's what you'd say.

Anybody on the panel, if you feel that she needed to smile more, you can have a comment. But I dare say I think the segment's over.

Thank you all.

WEISS: I'm smiling now if that helps.

BANFIELD: Josh Rogin, Michael Weiss, Barbara Starr, Colonel Francona, I will smile because I'm a TV anchor and that's what we do. Presidents, I don't care. Thank you all. Appreciate it.

WEISS: Sure.

BANFIELD: Coming up next, you're going to meet the brave man who helped to crack a 27-year-old murder case. He, too, was sexually assaulted by the same man who viciously and violently murdered a little 11-year-old boy named Jacob Wetterling. And he's going to join me with how he fought the battle and why no one believed him. And if they had, might Jacob be alive today?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[12:28:14] BANFIELD: A tragic ending to a 27-year-old mystery with the discovery of a young boy's remains just this past weekend. But this is by no means the end of this story. Nine months before Jacob Wetterling was kidnapped, sexually assaulted and then violently shot to death in October of 1989, there was another boy named Jared Scheierl. Jared was also attacked by the man who did the killing, Danny Heinrich. Danny kidnapped and sexually assaulted Jared, but Jared survived that attack. Investigators zeroed in on Heinrich way back then, but Jared could not identify him in a police lineup.

Last year, however, using modern technology, the Minnesota State Crime Lab linked DNA from Jared's case to Danny Heinrich. Police got a search warrant for Heinrich's home and there they found a huge stash of child pornography, leading to a plea deal that led them to Jacob's remains. Remember, from 27 years ago.

This week, Jared faced Heinrich in court as he confessed to everything. But because of the statute of limitations, and it had expired, 27 years, the prosecutors could not file charges in Jared's case.

I'm honored to be joined by Jared right now, Jared Scheierl and his attorney, Doug Kelly, who also represents the Wetterling family, are with me live now from Minnesota. Jared, thank you so much for being with me. You, as I understand it,

went to Jacob's grave site this morning. Tell me about that.

[12:29:59] JARED SCHEIERL, SEXUAL ASSAULT SURVIVOR LINKED TO WETTERLING CASE: Yes, it was something I just felt the need to do in light of all the details that we gathered over the past few days.