Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Trump Slams CIA Over Claims Russia Hack Swayed Vote; Admitted Gunman In Confession: "I Had To Do It"; U.S. To Send As Many As 200 More Troops To Syria; Trump: No Trump Cabinet Post For Rudy Giuliani; Army Versus Navy Game Today. Aired 11a-12p ET

Aired December 10, 2016 - 11:00   ET

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

[11:00:01] CHRISTI PAUL, CNN ANCHOR: Look who's here.

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN ANCHOR: You guys are kind of my heroes. You deserve some hero awards yourself. Love to see you up there.

(LAUGHTER)

PAUL: It's good to see you in person.

SANCHEZ: Same, yes. We've never actually met.

BLACKWELL: Yes.

SANCHEZ: I wore my flashy socks for today.

BLACKWELL: The socks are flashy. You can see --

PAUL: Yes, I see the socks. They're awesome.

BLACKWELL: Can we pan down and see the socks? There they are.

PAUL: Can you put -- yes, I love it. That's a man that knows how to dress.

SANCHEZ: Thank you, guys, so much.

PAUL: Have a great few hours here.

BLACKWELL: You got it. Sure.

SANCHEZ: Appreciate it, thank you.

It is 11:00 on the East Coast. I'm Boris Sanchez and CNN NEWSROOM starts right now.

It's the agency that informs the president about national security intelligence. It monitors terror plots overseas, investigates nuclear weapons violations, and now the president-elect says it can't be trusted.

This all started after media outlets, including CNN, reported that the CIA believes Russia intervened in U.S. elections, specifically to help Donald Trump. In response, the Trump transition team issued this defiant statement. Quote, "These are the same people that said Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. The election ended a long time ago, and one of the biggest electoral college victories in one history. It's now time to move on and make America great again."

The communications director for the RNC is echoing that statement. Sean Spicer issuing this fiery demand on CNN earlier this morning.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEAN SPICER, RNC CHIEF STRATEGIST AND COMMUNICATION DIRECTOR: I don't think, Donald Trump doesn't think, no one thinks that a foreign entity should be interfering with the U.S. elections, bottom line, full stop. I said it. Now let's get to the next thing. What proof does anyone have that they affected the outcome? Because I've heard zero, OK? So show me what facts have actually shown that anything undermined that election.

Donald Trump won with 306 electoral votes, 2300 counties, 62 million Americans voted for him. So what proof do you have or does anyone have that any of this affected the outcome of this election?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: We'll have more from Sean Spicer in a moment. Meantime, President Obama is ordering a full review to investigate whether Russian hacking affected the election's outcome. And he wants it done before Trump's inauguration.

A spokesman for the Kremlin tells CNN there's no evidence that Russia hacked Democratic groups. So let's talk more about this with CNN global affairs correspondent, Elise Labott.

Elise, the CIA obviously not commenting on this, but you've talked to your sources. Do you get the feeling that this could spark an early feud between the intelligence community and the Trump White House?

ELISE LABOTT, CNN FOREIGN AFFAIRS REPORTER: Well, I've just talked to people kind of anecdotally, and yes, I mean, there is a concern, Boris, that, you know, President-elect Trump does not trust the intelligence agencies. That will be not only under his command, but are going to be informing him with the intelligence, to make these monumental national security decisions.

Now I think what the Trump transition and President-elect Trump himself is taking issue with is any implication that he did not win the election fair and square. I don't think what the intel community is actually arguing that he didn't. It was a decisive victory and even election officials, when we talk to them over the course of the campaign and leading up to election said Russia couldn't affect the election if it tried.

I think what the intel community has been saying is that there was an effort by Russia to meddle in this election. The CIA went a little bit further than some of the other intel agencies, saying specifically that they were trying to influence it on behalf of Donald Trump. Not that they actually succeeded. Now, if this is an isolated incident, if it's about this particular

sensitivity about the election, then they could probably move on. But if it's a larger issue about concerns by the president-elect, his team, that the intel coming from the intelligence community is faulty, if it's politicized, if there is going to be some larger issues of intel reform, that's a larger conversation that's going to have to take place.

And I think that's the anxiety in the intelligence community, that they don't really know what's coming next.

SANCHEZ: Yes, certainly, a tense start to what's supposed to be a working and functional relationship.

Elise Labott, thank you.

Now the Republican National Committee is fiercely fighting back against claims of Russian hacking, including reports that the RNC was also a target of hacking. In a heated exchange with CNN's Michael Smerconish, spokesman Sean Spicer called the claim a result of personal agendas and wrong intelligence.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SPICER: Let me just start with before the election, it was the Democrats and the media who questioned if Donald Trump lost, would he accept the results of this election, he won overwhelmingly, 306 electoral votes, 2300 counties, nine of 13 battleground states, and it is now the Democrats and the media who are questioning the validity of this results. So it's amazing where we've come.

But let's get back to where we are now. The report that "The Washington Post" put out and Elise said this that all 17 agencies agreed on this, false. Here is what "The Washington Post" said. The report fell short of a formal assessment because minor disagreements among the official agencies had some questions remaining. The CIA then refused to comment.

[11:05:08] So let's be honest about what's going on. Then let's look at what "The New York Times" reported. They based that conclusion, meaning the intelligence agency, on part on another finding that the Republicans hacked the Republican National Committee's computer system in addition to their attack. That's false. So the intelligence is wrong. It didn't happen. We offered "The New York Times" conclusive proof that it didn't happen. They refused to look at that. They ignored it because it didn't fit the narrative.

The bottom line, Michael, is the intelligence is wrong because they're writing that the conclusion that they came to was based in part on the RNC was hacked. It wasn't hacked. We have intelligence agencies that we work with that we're willing to help sort this out.

They refused to look at that because it didn't fit the narrative that "The New York Times" wanted to write. It is reprehensible what they have done. And so I do question so many of these things. One, if that's how the intelligence was based, then it clearly is wrong and we were willing to offer proof to that point. Second, the report was not conclusive among the 17 intelligence agencies. They admit that.

Three, if the CIA is so -- so convinced of this, why won't they go on the record and say that it was as they did with the DNC? This is -- I mean, I believe that there are people within --

MICHAEL SMERCONISH, CNN ANCHOR: OK.

SPICER: -- these agencies that are upset with the outcome of the election and are pushing a personal agenda. But the facts don't add up. And I think that the idea that the media immediately sides with these unnamed sources is a problem. You guys are willing to run with whatever comes out as unnamed sources from unnamed agencies, and yet the CIA itself won't go on the record.

SMERCONISH: So I'm now -- OK. Sean, come on.

SPICER: Go ahead.

SMERCONISH: I am sitting here as -- first of all, to your first point, to your first point, the reason that Donald Trump was questioned so often as to whether he'd accept the result, if I have to remind you of this, is because Donald Trump himself was casting doubt before the election on whether he was going to accept the result of it. That's why all the questions came his way.

I'm not sitting here as a Democrat, I'm not sitting here as a Republican, I'm not even sitting here as an independent. I'm sitting here as an American who is so frustrated by the idea that people are suiting up in their usual jerseys on this issue, respectfully including you, and instead of uniting against a common enemy, in this case Putin and Russia, and being pissed at the idea that he put his thumb on the scale in our election, instead you look at the result of the election --

SPICER: Wait, hold on. Stop. Stop.

SMERCONISH: -- and you decide well, we like the result of the election and therefore we don't want to deal with this anymore.

SPICER: Hold on. Wait, wait. Just stop for a second. I'm not suiting up. I'm actually using fact. Facts that "The Washington Post" even put in there. This is what they wrote. They wrote that the 17 agencies couldn't conclude with certainty what happened. They wrote that, not me. They also wrote -- "The New York Times" wrote that the RNC had been hacked. That's false. Why is the disposition that you want to defend them?

SMERCONISH: How do you know it's false?

SPICER: Because I work with those intelligence agencies. We were -- hold on. Michael --

SMERCONISH: OK. So --

SPICER: Michael, hold on.

SMERCONISH: Go ahead.

SPICER: We were willing to offer "The New York Times" inside access to know what happened. We were willing to offer them proof. They chose not to engage in that conversation, not us. I sat there with senior folks from "The New York Times" last night and said, I will bring you inside, we will give you access to certain things so that you can see that we are telling the truth that we are -- that we can prove this. They chose not to engage in that conversation because it didn't fit their narrative. So when it comes -- respectfully --

SMERCONISH: OK.

SPICER: We are the folks that are actually trying to show this. So please don't turn around and put it on me. This is what we are trying to work with these agencies and these reporters to get it right. They are choosing not to look at that.

SMERCONISH: You are saying -- just so I'm clear.

SPICER: That's not on me.

SMERCONISH: OK. I really -- all right. I want to understand. I want to understand facts. You are telling me that you know to a certainty that the RNC was not hacked by the Russians or anyone else and so to the extent whether it's "The Post," "The Times," CNN, to the extent that anyone reports including the CIA that the RNC was hacked, Sean Spicer knows that to be a falsehood?

SPICER: I know that we have worked with intelligence agencies right now that are saying that we have not been hacked, our own systems show that we have not been hacked. I'm not a forensic, you know, computer person, so I can't say it with -- but I know that the intelligence agencies that we are working with tell us with certainty that we haven't been hacked. We've said it before and we tried to work with these media outlets to explain that to them and to show them. They've chosen not to engage in that conversation.

That's not my fault, Michael. So -- and again, look at what the reports. If they're so certain it happened, why won't they go on the record and say it? I don't understand it. It doesn't make any sense. Go out there and say this is what happened.

SMERCONISH: Well -- OK. There's an obvious answer to that which is -- there's an obvious answer to that, I imagine, which is to say that they don't want the Russians to know of the way in which they've been able to assemble this case. Let me move to a slightly different aspect of this.

SPICER: But they did with the DNC -- hold on.

SMERCONISH: Why --

SPICER: No, that's not true. No, no. But -- no, please don't make excuses for them. They did when they -- when they came with the DNC. SMERCONISH: I'm not making excuses for anybody.

[11:10:02] SPICER: They came out -- and hold on, Michael, they came out and said with respect to the DNC and the DNC confirmed it, OK? So I don't understand why -- look, there is questions on that side. We've been willing to talk to people to show that it wasn't true and people are willing to ignore it. So on the flip side, there was a difference. When it came to what happened on the DNC -- and I'm not -- I'm just trying to get the facts out there. And somehow it's well, you must be lying. You must not be accepting the facts. No, I'm actually trying to get the truth out there.

SMERCONISH: Didn't say that to you. OK. Sean, different aspect of this --

SPICER: The implication is clear. No, Michael, the implication --

SMERCONISH: I am --

SPICER: Hold on, Michael, with all due respect, you -- you said that why won't we accept the facts and we're suiting up and taking our positions. No, I'm actually trying to get the facts out. I'm trying to make reporters understand what's really happening and -- and actually bring them into the process.

SMERCONISH: No, I'm making a different point. I'm actually making a different point. I'm casting doubt on whether Sean Spicer could definitively know the answer to the question of the extent of the Russian hack and my frustration is at the idea that until this thing is fully developed already President-elect Trump is saying move on, folks. There's nothing to see here. But I need to ask you an additional question.

SPICER: No, but --

SMERCONISH: Speak to the point that I'm -- wait. Wait. I want you address this.

SPICER: That's not true. Michael --

SMERCONISH: I'm also concerned -- come on. I'm being fair to you, but I got to get a word in every once in a while. I'm also troubled by the idea that my president-elect, he's going to be all of our president, is already throwing under the bus the intelligence community with whom he's going to have to work on life and death matters. Wasn't that a troubling thing to do at 9:34 last night in that very --

SPICER: No. No. Michael, "The New York Times" in their story said that they based their conclusions on the fact that the RNC was hacked. OK? If the RNC was not hacked, then that casts doubt on their conclusions. I don't understand why this is that difficult to understand. If you're basing something on --

SMERCONISH: OK. Regardless of whether -- regardless of whether the RNC was hacked and that would be a big and new development, I think we know to a certainty, given Podesta and Debbie Wasserman Schultz, that the DNC was hacked.

Why aren't we, as Americans, upset about the fact that a foreign hostile actor apparently put its thumb on the scale in our election and why doesn't Donald Trump want to get to the bottom of that as he takes office? That's the issue.

SPICER: Well, first of all -- OK. There's a couple things. One, is I am outraged. I don't think any foreign entity, any individual, any --

SMERCONISH: Well, why don't you say that? And why didn't Trump say that?

SPICER: I'm saying it, Michael. I just said it.

SMERCONISH: That's what I haven't heard.

SPICER: I've said it -- stop and let me -- OK. I just said it. Let me actually take yes for an answer. I said it. OK. I don't think, Donald Trump doesn't think -- no one thinks that a foreign entity should be interfering with the U.S. elections. Bottom line, full stop, I said it.

Now let's get to the next thing. What proof does anyone have that they affected the outcome? Because I've heard zero. OK. So show me what facts have actually shown that anything undermined that election. Donald Trump won with 306 electoral votes, 2300 counties, 62 million Americans voted for him, so what proof do you have or does anyone have that any of this affected the outcome of the election?

SMERCONISH: I'm just an American who is trying to discern all that I'm reporting on and reading.

SPICER: No. Then answer the question, Michael.

SMERCONISH: Yes.

SPICER: You're asking me, show me what --

SMERCONISH: I want the -- OK.

SPICER: Give me one fact that an outcome was changed.

SMERCONISH: Ask Debbie -- I can't say that it impacted the ultimate outcome, but that it took place, go ask Debbie Wasserman Schultz.

SPICER: Thank you. Thank you.

SMERCONISH: To be continued. I do appreciate your being here. I really do.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: A lot to look at there. We should tell you Senator Chuck Schumer is calling for a congressional investigation into the allegations that Russia hacked the election. We have a panel of experts that's itching to talk to us about this.

We're going to get with them and break this all down when we return from a short break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[11:17:03] SANCHEZ: Before the break, we heard RNC communications director, Sean Spicer, saying that if Russia interfered with U.S. elections, it did not help Donald Trump win the presidency. But our sources say the CIA has found otherwise and the pursuit for truth is gaining steam.

Senator Chuck Schumer, who will serve as the Senate's top Democrat in the Trump era, just issued this statement, writing, quote, "The silence from WikiLeaks and others since Election Day has been deafening. That any country should be meddling in our elections should shake both political parties to their core."

Let's talk about this more with former CNN Moscow bureau chief, Jill Dougherty, and CNN intelligence and security analyst, Bob Baer. Bob also a former CIA operative.

Jill, the first question to you. Russia has made a swift denial. The line coming from Moscow is, show us the evidence. But what's really the end game for Russia for Trump to win? We saw them popping champagne the day he won. Why?

JILL DOUGHERTY, GLOBAL FELLOW, WOODROW WILSON CENTER: Well, let's start with the denial. I mean, this is not really a denial. What it is, is a challenge to the United States to show its cards. Prove it. Tell us how you got that information. And right there, that is a challenge that the United States really would find it very hard to answer because if they do say how they got that information, they reveal sources and methods. In other words, the very secret ways that they collect this information.

So the Russians know that. They collect information, the United States collects information, they know that the United States can't meet that challenge, unless it spills the beans about what they are doing. So that's number one.

Now why would they want Donald Trump to win? You know, maybe you reverse it. Maybe you say, why would they not want Hillary Clinton to win? I mean, that might be a more interesting way of putting it, because there is a lot of animosity between Russia and President Putin, specifically, and Hillary Clinton. He personally blamed Hillary Clinton for giving the signal to the crowds here in Russia, in Moscow, for demonstrations back in 2012 against his government.

He said she gave the sign and those demonstrators came out. So there's a lot of, as I said, animosity. So you could look at it that way, or you could look at it as Donald Trump, who said nice things about Putin, and wants a better relationship.

But I do think, Boris, it's important, and I would like clarification on this, whether the government is actually saying that any alleged hacking had an impact or whether it was simply done. And it feels to me as if they're saying more it was done.

Now, if it had, you know, implications or changed the election outcome, then that gets much more serious because then the United States has to really think about retaliating.

SANCHEZ: Certainly, without question, we know it's something the Obama administration is contemplating right now. Instead of just going out publicly and saying that Russia did this.

[11:20:03] Bob, to you now. Yesterday in Trump's tweet against the CIA, he pointed out one of the agency's biggest failures. The assumption that there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. We all remember Colin Powell with the United Nations presenting very convincing evidence about WMDs in Iraq. That turned out not to be true. There have been minor disputes about this information already about Russia. How reliable do you think this evidence is?

ROBERT BAER, CNN INTELLIGENCE AND SECURITY ANALYST: Well, Boris, Trump -- I mean, Trump is right. The CIA got it wrong. But you have to remember that the books were cooked in the White House. It was the White House's demand for information that he still had weapons of mass destruction. I used to do -- I was in charge of Iraqi operations. And the rank and file knew that we didn't know. And it was just guesswork. The White House didn't care. They put it out.

So Trump is half right, but we have to look at is the fact that the Russians, it looks like to me, did interfere in our elections. We'll never be able to decide whether they changed the outcome. But I'll tell you, having worked in the CIA, if we had been caught interfering in European elections or Asian elections or anywhere in the world, those countries would call for new elections. Any democracy would.

And I just -- I don't see it any other way. I mean, the electoral college, before the 19th, has got to know whether the Russians had an effect. Whether they went to WikiLeaks, whether they hacked e-mail, and whether they affected American opinion. And they had a good reason not to go out -- to go after Hillary Clinton because Putin hates her for the Ukraine.

SANCHEZ: Bob, if I'm hearing you correctly, you're saying we should have another election? How would that work? Is that plausible?

BAER: When a foreign country interferes in your election and the outcome is in doubt, the legitimacy of the government, I don't know how it works constitutionally, I'm not a lawyer, constitutional lawyer, but I'm deeply disturbed by the fact that the Russians interfered. And I would like to see the evidence because if the evidence is there, I don't see any other way than to vote again. I mean, as an American citizen.

SANCHEZ: Now to the relationship between the intelligence agencies and Trump, obviously, from Trump, this wasn't just an off-the-cuff remark at a rally. This was a thought-out, tweeted out statement, questioning the reputation of the CIA. How do you think Mike Pompeo, the brand-new head of the CIA is going to handle this, Bob? BAER: Well, I wouldn't -- I frankly can't trust him because he's a

political appointee. He's coming out of Congress. He has an agenda, as well. What we need to do is see the forensics on this and we need to see it fast. And I want to see the detail. The CIA at this point can't say we have to protect sources and methods. The outcome is too important. Sometimes you have to sacrifice sources. And I think now's the time.

SANCHEZ: Now, Jill, the division in the U.S. between Trump and the CIA, this has to be something welcomed there in Moscow by Putin, right?

DOUGHERTY: Well, I think, you know, any disruption, any chaos in the United States actually plays in Russia's favor because what they say is just look at the United States. They hold themselves up as a paragon of virtue in the world. And look at their election. Look at what's happening. Look at the political chaos. So it works for them. I think on many levels, it works for them. And that's one of the theories, too.

You know, as to why they would do this which is to undermine faith in the American system, both for Americans, and then spreading that message abroad. This is something that Vladimir Putin has said, he constantly is criticizing the American way of democracy. He, himself, has said that the electoral college is not democratic. So, again, this works very well with the message that the Russian government wants to get out.

SANCHEZ: Yes. And tailing off that, we just got a response off Twitter from Brian Fallon with the Hillary Clinton campaign writing, quote, "Putin got just what he wanted, Trump as POTUS and America turning against itself over this intrusion rather than standing together with Russia."

It really goes to exactly what you were saying, Jill.

Bob, how does this play out on an international stage with Russia sowing this kind of chaos and essentially showing that perhaps the American democracy isn't perfect?

BAER: Well, I think it's catastrophic. We have an aggressive Putin. He's going after Europe, as well, supporting far-right parties, knowing it's going to disrupt Europe, even break up the -- I mean, we are being had by the KGB. I have never seen them so successful in all the years I've been in intelligence. And I'm talking about going way back to the Second World War. They know what they are doing and they are disrupting our political system.

Again, I go back, the only way we're going to know the truth here is if we get the facts out and we absolutely have to, at any cost. And the sooner, the better, because, frankly, once the Trump administration takes over on the 20th of January, anything coming out of it, we just have to assume, is politicized.

[11:25:03] SANCHEZ: It's a fascinating discussion. Jill Dougherty and Bob Baer, thank you so much. I'm sure we'll see you both again later in the day.

Ahead on CNN NEWSROOM, plenty of news to get to. Trump filling out his Cabinet, leaving out one close aide. What Rudy Giuliani is saying about being Trump's pick for secretary of State.

And the nation's current top diplomat, John Kerry, weighing in on the U.S. sending more troops to Syria. Why he thinks this is the first step toward a peaceful resolution.

And then the alleged Charleston church gunman, Dylann Roof's taped confession revealed. You'll hear it in chilling detail.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DYLANN ROOF, ACCUSED MURDERER: I had to do it because somebody had to do something.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: This just into CNN moments ago. The Hillary Clinton campaign responding to that CIA report that Russia intervened in the election to help Donald Trump. Former Clinton press secretary, Brian Fallon, sending this tweet just minutes ago, quote, "Putin got what he wanted, Trump as POTUS and America turning against itself over this intrusion rather than standing together versus Russia."

It is a controversial story. We'll have more on that throughout the day. But first, we're hearing for the first time the haunting confession of the man accused of gunning down nine people inside a Charleston church.

Dylann Roof laughs as he tells investigators that he opened fire last year on a group of worshipers during an evening bible study.

[11:30:03] In the chilling, FBI interrogation video, which was just played for jurors in Roof's death penalty trial, the defendant also admits that he's a white supremacist and he said that, quote, "He had to do it."

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DYLANN ROOF: I was sitting there and I was like just thinking about whether I should do it or not and that's why I was sitting there for 15 minutes, just like, oh, you know, like because I know I could have just walked out because they didn't say anything to me about, you know, the thing on my belt. I wouldn't say spur of the moment, but I just -- I just finally decided I had to do it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: CNN's Polo Sandoval join us now live from Charleston. Polo, tough to listen to that video. How did people in the courtroom respond? POLO SANDOVAL, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Obviously, many people had been waiting for this footage to actually get played, Boris, and just to add some context and set up yet another clip here, keep in mind, this is a video that was shot between federal agents and Dylann Roof a day after that unholy summer day here in Charleston when he walked into that church and cut short the lives of nine innocent people.

And I have to say, being in court yesterday, watching this video yesterday for the very first time along with jurors, it was very difficult to watch. You are about to see a very cold, callous and calculated killer say he did it.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ROOF: I went to that church in Charleston and -- I did it.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Did what?

ROOF: Well, I had to do it because somebody had to do something. Because you know, black people are killing white people every day.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: So you're deal, is it like --

ROOF: To agitate race relations.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: To make it worse.

ROOF: Right. It doesn't mean you have to kill black people. Just, you know, just make things better.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: But in your mind, making things better, right, because you said in the very beginning, going back to segregation, white people are -- white people would need to be running the country, right?

ROOF: Yes, sure.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Right. I mean, like no more black presidents. No more black politicians, right?

ROOF: Right. No more black president, sure. We don't need a black president.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANDOVAL: And of course, what we can expect in the coming days, come Monday, that testimony will continue, and I should add, really, one of the main questions here, Boris, is you have a videotaped confession of an individual. So why is there a need for a deal fix in this proceeding?

Well, the answer here is that ultimately you have the defense who is trying to essentially save the life of their client. They had offered a guilty plea in exchange for a life sentence. The government declining that offer. And as for prosecutors, this is an opportunity, Boris, for them to show this kind of evidence for a jury who will, everybody expects, will convict this individual, but the question here, Boris, in Charleston is, what will they decide during the punishment phase?

SANCHEZ: Right, Polo, especially showing that video in court has to have an impact on the jurors. Watching him respond that way in cold blood, laughing, as he said, I did it. I'm curious, what was his demeanor like in the courtroom?

SANDOVAL: Right. Clearly, a lot of emotion from everybody in -- many people in that court, except for Roof himself. I kept an eye on him while this video was playing, since there are no cameras allowed in court, and I can tell you that Roof would simply sit at the defense table, his eyes fixed on the table, looking down, but no emotion whatsoever, something we've seen the last couple of days. It will be interesting to see what happens as we hear from other witnesses in the days to come.

SANCHEZ: Certainly. Polo Sandoval reporting from Charleston. Polo, thank you.

Still to come, the U.S. sending more troops into Syria. We'll discuss their mission, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[11:38:13]

SANCHEZ: The time is 11:38. This is CNN NEWSROOM. I'm Boris Sanchez and we thank you for joining us. The U.S. is getting ready to send as many as 200 more troops into Syria. The goal to help train local forces in the war against ISIS.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ASH CARTER, SECRETARY OF DEFENSE: I can tell you today that the United States will deploy approximately 200 additional U.S. forces in Syria, including special operations forces, trainers, advisers and explosive ordinance disposal teams. These uniquely skilled operators will join the 300 U.S. special operations forces already in Syria to continue organizing, training, equipping and otherwise enabling capable, motivated, local forces to take the fight to ISIL.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: U.S. troops will help local forces that are driving towards the self-declared ISIS capital in Raqqah. At least 50,000 ISIS fighters have been killed since the effort to annihilate the terror group began.

CNN international correspondent, Melissa Bell, is joining me now from Paris. Melissa, what does this escalation tell you about where we stand in the fight against ISIS?

MELISSA BELL, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, it suggests that the United States does belief this claim by the Syrian democratic forces, this group of Kurdish and Arab fighters who have been saying for a few weeks now, that they are engaged in this offensive for Raqqah and that they will take back this city.

What was interesting today, as Ash Carter explained that he was sending these extra troops, was that he also took the opportunity to criticize Russia, to take this opportunity to express his frustration, really, at what had been Russia's lack of focus on the fight against ISIL.

He reminded his audience that, after all, when Moscow had begun its intervention just over a years ago, Boris, it had said that this was in order to ensure a smooth democratic transition and to help fight ISIL.

[11:40:02]Neither of those things that Ash Carter today had been done. Now, of course, the question of Russia's influence and its fight in Aleppo, meanwhile, was also raised here in Paris today, by the American secretary of state, John Kerry. He was meeting with some of his counterparts.

Those who have backed the Syrian opposition throughout this and who hope still to be heard, despite the military might of Damascus and Moscow, and their gains on the ground. Here's what he had to say.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOHN KERRY, SECRETARY OF STATE: The choice for many of them, as they think about it today is, die in Aleppo or die in Idlib, but die. That's how they see the choice. And it seems to me that the regime and Russia have a fundamental responsibility here, that if they are trying to affect a genuine transition, they need to provide guarantees and allow guarantees to be put in place that make certain that people are not marching into a massacre.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BELL: John Kerry there, hoping that those who are driving that route in Aleppo, the regime in Damascus combined with the forces of Moscow, will be heard, and allow some people to get out of Aleppo before the city falls altogether.

But it was a reminder, really, Boris, of the weakness of the United States' position on this question of Syria, and really, the strength of Moscow. Something that has grown consistently since the start of that intervention in September of 2015 -- Boris.

SANCHEZ: The years of failed negotiations and the bloodshed continues. Melissa Bell reporting from Paris, thank you.

Ahead, Donald Trump's cabinet is taking shape. So could his choices help us better understand his blueprint as president or is there a blueprint?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[11:45:21]

SANCHEZ: Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani will not serve in Donald Trump's cabinet. The transition team in a statement said Giuliani took himself out of consideration for a position. Then Trump tweeted, quote, "Rudy Giuliani, one of the finest people I know, and a great mayor of New York just took himself out of consideration for state."

CNN has learned that ExxonMobil CEO Rex Tillerson is now the leading candidate for secretary of state, among some others. CNN White House producer, Kristin Holmes joins us now live from outside Trump Tower.

Kristin, the reporting is that Rudy took himself out of the running in a meeting with Trump in late November. Is that just saving face?

KRISTEN HOLMES, CNN WHITE HOUSE PRODUCER: Yes, you know, Boris, that is -- directly contradicts exactly what we have had sources tell us. That he was told himself that he would not get secretary of state and this whole thing was done kind of as a saving face, as you mentioned.

Now, if you look at it, the whole entire note from the transition team did allow Rudy to do that, an ever Trump loyalist, they gave him the opportunity to protect himself. They said that he, himself, took himself out of the running.

He said that Donald Trump then lavished praise on him, in the same statement, and third, Reince Priebus said that he had been vetted and it was fine. If you'll remember, there was some concern as to whether or not Rudy Giuliani could get confirmed, as secretary of state, because of his international business deals.

Now, we have had confirmed to CNN's Jim Acosta that Tillerson is in the lead. Rudy Giuliani addressed both Tillerson and his, taking his name out of the race today, on "Fox and Friends." Let's take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

RUDY GIULIANI, TOP TRUMP ADVISOR: I think Rex Tillerson is an excellent choice. I think Josh Bolten -- had I been president in 2008, I probably would have appointed him as secretary of state, so. I think Josh Bolten is superior. I think Mitt Romney, I voted for him. I supported him. I thought he'd been a much better president than Barack Obama.

But I do think like Mike Huckabee does, he should apologize, or at least he should explain what he meant by some of the comments, which hurt me greatly when I was campaigning for my friend, Donald Trump. So I think, actually, Donald is less troubled by it --

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Until a couple days ago.

GIULIANI: The campaign requested that we withhold it. Plus, they didn't accept it, immediately. They said they wanted to keep me in the running. And I said, well, I don't want to be, but they said they wanted to keep me in the running. So we agreed that, I'll wait until you're ready. When you're ready, then we can -- we can -- we can announce it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HOLMES: Now, not breaking with that loyalty, Rudy Giuliani even after being taken out for secretary of state is traveling with Trump today to the Army/Navy game. And also there will be Trump's nominee for the CIA director position, Mike Pompeo.

So this will be their first meeting since last night, the transition team sent an insulting note out about the intelligence community. So we'll see what happens there.

And again, Trump has another busy week coming up. He will be filled with meetings in Trump Tower, as well as heading to Wisconsin and continuing his "Thank You Tour" -- Boris.

SANCHEZ: All right, Kristen Holmes reporting live outside Trump Tower. Thank you.

A bit of news about another Trump cabinet pick, the date for the confirmation hearing of president-elect Trump pick for attorney general has been set.

Alabama Senator Jeff Sessions will face the Senate Judiciary Committee on January 10th. The hearing will mark one of the earliest showdowns between the incoming administration and Senate Democrats over the president-elect's nominees.

Still ahead, we're live from the Army/Navy game in Baltimore. What you can expect, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[11:52:50]

SANCHEZ: Donald Trump and members of his transition team are attending the Army/Navy football game today. He will not be taking sides. The president-elect will sit with Army fans during one half of the game. Navy fans the other half.

CNN's Coy Wire is at the game in Baltimore. He's on the field right now. This is one of the most intense rivalries in college sports, Coy. Who you got?

We just lost Coy, unfortunately. We'll hope to get him back. Stick around, the next hour of NEWSROOM starts after a quick break.

COY WIRE, CNN SPORTS CORRESPONDENT: All right. Here we go. Listen to this, Army-Navy games going to take place hours from now behind me. Every year and one of the greatest displays of tradition in American sports, Army and Navy with the utmost respect, stair each other down and fight for a victory that will earn them bragging rights for a lifetime.

But what do you do if you run the ball for Navy and your dad is one of the greatest running backs for Army of all time. I caught up with Calvin Cass Jr. to ask him about this intriguing family dynamic.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

CALVIN CASS JR., NAVY RUNNING BACK: I have a very tangible goal to achieve with my father being the great running backs at my rival school. So it's something that gives me added motivation when I have the ball in my hand, to get that extra yard or catch, something like that. Knowing my dad was doing it a couple years ago for the opposition, so I have to do this.

WIRE: Where does mom stand in all of this?

CASS JR.: Well, I think she is supposed to be impartial, her husband graduated from Army, her son is about to graduate from Navy. It seems she is a full-on Navy fan right now. If anybody looks at her at the game, see what she is wearing, full Navy gear head to toe.

She goes above and beyond and getting her gear ready for her son and you know, representing for the family and my dad is just sitting there like, you forgot about me, I graduated, you know. I'm her son, first born son, only son and I think her loyalties lie on this side as far as the football rivalry is concerned.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

[11:55:04]WIRE: And I have played in some big games. College bowl games, NFL playoff games, but this is hands down the greatest rivalry in all of sports. You have guys who normally in football you respect each other, but in this game there is a level of respect for the opponent that you will see nowhere else in sports.

These men know that they will be fighting as foes for a win today, but they've committed their lives to protecting and serving their nation as brothers.

Just hours from now, the Army/Navy game, America's game, where men play not only for the love of the game, but for the love of their nation. I think now I'm going to see if I can get on this field and warm up a little bit. You don't go anywhere, you stay tuned, more NEWSROOM coming up after the break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: Hello. Thanks for joining me on to this hour of CNN NEWSROOM. I'm Boris Sanchez.

We begin with a crescendo of calls for the truth, transparency and a full investigation into claims that a Russian espionage operation helped Donald Trump win the election.

Senator Chuck Schumer who will serve as the Senate's top Democrat in the Trump era issuing this statement, writing, quote, "The silence from Wikileaks and others since election day has been deafening. That any country could be meddling in our elections should shake both political parties to their core. It's imperative that our intelligence community turns over any relevant information so that Congress can conduct a full investigation."