Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Newsroom
Obama Orders Investigation of Russian Hacking of U.S. Election; RNC Fights Back on Claims Russia Meddled in U.S. Election; Fallout from Trump Slamming CIA; Kerry Pushes for Ceasefire in Aleppo; Charleston Mass Shooter's Confession; Giuliani Takes Himself Off Trump's Secretary of State List.. Aired 1-2p ET
Aired December 10, 2016 - 13:59 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[13:00:00] BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN ANCHOR: Hey. It's just about 1:00 p.m. on the east coast. Thank you for joining me. I'm Boris Sanchez, in with Fredricka Whitfield.
We begin with 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 top Democratic in the top era, issued this statement, writing, quote, "The silence from WikiLeaks and others since Election Day is deafening. That any country could be meddling in our elections should shake both political parties to our core. It's imperative that our intelligence community turns over any relevant information so the Congress can conduct a full investigation."
And Senate minority leader, Harry Reid, is blaming FBI Director Comey, calling him, quote, "the new J. Edgar Hoover." Listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
HARRY REID, (D-NV), SENATE MINORITY LEADER (voice-over): The FBI had this material for a long time, but he, Comey, who is, of course, a Republican, refused to divulge this information regarding Russia and the presidential election. He violated the orders of the attorney general, president, and good taste, by getting involved in the election. I am so disappointed in Comey. He has let the country down for partisan purposes and that is why I'm calling him the new J. Edgar Hoover.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SANCHEZ: Meantime, the Trump transition team issued this defiant statement discrediting not just the claims but the entire CIA. They write, quote, "These are the same people who said Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. The election ended a long time ago in one of the biggest Electoral College victories in history. It's time to move on and make America great again."
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 on January 20th.
Joining us, CNN global affairs correspondent, Elise Labott.
Elise, the CIA is not commenting on the matter. Do you, and the sources you have spoken to, see this potentially fueling a feud between the future president of the United States and one of the country's most vital intelligence agencies?
ELISE LABOTT, CNN GLOBAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: Well, Boris, I think it remains to be seen if this is an isolated incident about these particular charges on the election. I think the Trump transition and the president-elect himself is very sensitive to any implication that he didn't win the election fair and square.
And to be fair here, this investigation that President Obama has ordered is not necessarily about whether Russia actually affected the election. I just spoke to a senior administration official just a short time ago and this person said it would be unknowable to know how many voters were affected by this kind of mix of leaks, fake news, what FBI Comey, Director Comey released in terms of information about Hillary Clinton. It would really be impossible to know how, why voters voted the way they did.
What the investigation is showing is -- will show is what Russia did, it's techniques, its tactics. It would also go back to several other elections. So, it remains to be seen if this is an isolated incident about the Russia meddling in the election, or does President-elect Trump have more serious concerns about the quality of the intelligence he is going to get from the intelligence community, the politicization, what some people in the transition feel, politicization of some of this intelligence. I spoke to people on the transition that say they have not gotten that far but are taking a strong issue with the idea that the election would have been affected in any way, Boris. That is what they're dealing with right now, this incident about Russia.
SANCHEZ: We heard Sean Spicer on with Michael Smerconish this morning saying he felt this was the work of a few people in the CIA that were unhappy with the result of the election. CIA sources maintain there is evidence that Russia was involved.
The president only has about 41 days to get this done but, ultimately, he is just handing it off to Donald Trump. What is the goal of this investigation ultimately?
LABOTT: I think it's a couple things. A, the administration is calling it a, quote, "lessons learned" about not just this election, but they are going to be looking back to 2008. There were some charges of hacking perhaps by the Chinese. They're going to see about 2012. It's to kind of look at what happened and look at some of these techniques, tactics, what could have happened. So, that future administrations, not just the Trump administration, but future ones can ward themselves off against these techniques.
I also think it's a way a little bit to kick the administration -- to kick the Russians on their way out the door. We understand that there is a parallel track, that the administration is considering some measures against Russia, could be sanctions, could be cyber issues. We probably won't know about that, it might be covert, but there could be some measures. And if this report is made public, it would give a little bit of legitimacy to any actions that the administration would take, because we know that President-elect Trump has said that he might overturn some of the executive orders that President Obama said he might -- he has instituted. That could include Russia. Trump has made no secret about the fact he wants better relations with Russia. But if this report is out there, it has uncontroverted proof about Russia meddling in the election, it would be politically difficult for Donald Trump to kind of blow off an intelligence assessment that is out there in the public domain -- Boris?
[13:05:44] SANCHEZ: It appears that is what he is trying to do with the initial reporting.
Elise, Thank you.
The Republican National Committee is fiercely fighting back against claims that Russia meddled in the election to help Donald Trump, and that the RNC was also targeted. In a heated exchange with CNN's Michael Smerconish, Spokesman Sean Spicer said the claims are the result of personal agendas and wrong intelligence. Listen to this.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
MICHAEL SMERCONISH, CNN HOST, SMERCONISH: 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 he put his thumb on the scale in our election. Instead, you look at the result of the election --
(CROSSTALK)
SPICER: -- we like the result of the election, therefore, we don't want to deal with this anymore.
SEAN SPICER, SPOKESMAN, REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE: Hold on. Wait. Wait. Stop for a second. I'm not suiting up. I'm actually using facts. 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 --
(CROSSTALK)
SMERCONISH: How do you know it's false?
SPICER: Because I work -- we work with intelligence agencies, Michael.
(CROSSTALK) SPICER: Hold on. Michael --
(CROSSTALK)
SPICER: 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 in "The New York Times" last night and said I will bring you inside, we'll give you access to certain things so that you can see we're 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 - respectfully --
SMERCONISH: OK.
SPICER: -- we are the folks that are actually trying to show this. 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.
SMERCONISH: You were saying, so I'm clear --
SPICER: That's not on me.
SMERCONISH: 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 am not a forensic computer person, so I can't say it with -- 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've tried to work with these media outlets to explain them and show them. They have chosen not to engage in that conversation. That's not my fault, Michael.
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 --
(CROSSTALK)
SMERCONISH: OK, there's an obvious answer to that which is -- they don't want the Russians to know of the way in which they assembled this case. Let me move to a slightly different aspect --
(CROSSTALK)
SPICER: Hold on. That's not true. No, no, no. No. Please don't make excuses for them. They did --
(CROSSTALK)
SMERCONISH: I'm not making excuses for anybody.
SPICER: 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 it wasn't true and people are willing to ignore it. On the flip side, there was a difference when it came to what happened on the DNC. And 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. I'm actually trying to get the truth out there.
SMERCONISH: I didn't say that to you. I didn't say that to you. Sean --
(CROSSTALK)
SPICER: The implication is clear.
(CROSSTALK)
SPICER: No. Michael, the implication --
(CROSSTALK)
SPICER: Hold on, Michael, with all due respect. You said that why won't we accept the facts and we're suiting up and taking our position. No, I'm actually trying to get the facts out. I'm trying to make reporters understand what is happening and bring them into the process.
[13:10:04] 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 is nothing to see here.
But I need to ask you an additional question.
(CROSSTALK)
SMERCONISH: Speak to the point that --
(CROSSTALK)
SPICER: Michael --
SMERCONISH: I'm also concerned. I'm being fair to you. I've got to get a word in every once in a while.
I'm also troubled by the idea that my president-elect -- he is going to be all of our president -- is already throwing under the bus the intelligence community, with whom he is 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 --
(CROSSTALK)
SPICER: No. No. Michael, "The New York Times" in their story said they based their conclusion on the fact that the RNC was hacked. 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 are basing something --
(CROSSTALK)
SMERCONISH: 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 Wassermann 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: First of all -- OK. There's a couple things. I'm outraged, I don't think any foreign entity, any individual.
SMERCONISH: Why don't you say that, and why didn't Trump say that.
SPICER: I'm saying, it Michael. I just said it.
(CROSSTALK)
SMERCONISH: That's what I haven't heard.
SPICER: 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 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 they affected the outcome? I heard zero.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SANCHEZ: A lot to talk about there.
Still ahead, the fallout from the president-elect slamming the CIA. Next, what Trump's move could mean for his relationship with the intelligence community.
Plus, "I did it." Those words coming from the man accused of unleashing a spray of bullets during a Bible study. More from his disturbing FBI confession, next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[13:15:34] SANCHEZ: Let's get back to the latest from transition headquarters. A stunning rejection of America's top spy agency by the president-elect. This all started after media outlets, including CNN, reported that the CIA believes Russia intervened in U.S. elections specifically to help Donald Trump.
Let's talk about this more with our global affairs analyst, David Rohde. Also, joining us, CNN national security analyst, Juliette Kayyem.
David, let's start with you.
You've met with several current and senior U.S. intelligence officials. First, do they agree that hacking took place, and that it favored Donald Trump? What have you heard about what they're looking at?
DAVID ROHDE, CNN GLOBAL AFFAIRS ANALYST: Well, there is two separate things. There was unanimous agreement in a statement October 7th there was an effort of Russia to undermine the credibility of the election. The news in the last 48 hours it was a step more, to influence Trump. But I have spoken with former George W. Bush officials and current Obama officials, and they believe there was no question they were trying to meddle in our election. The extent of it, as you have seen in the earlier exchanges, is debated. But just this meddling itself, what was agreed upon in this October 7th statement from more than a dozen intelligence agencies, is unprecedented. It's extraordinary that this went on and there was an effort to at least undermine the credibility of the election.
SANCHEZ: David, let's continue on that thread. At the time, the Obama administration has been revealed has known about this for months and they've been reluctant to go after Russia more aggressively. Now there is a talk of investigation and potential sanctions. How do you see this playing out, if on January 20th, Donald Trump takes over? What comes of the investigation then? Is it too little, too late?
ROHDE: I think it is too little too late. There were various law enforcement officials who, over the course of the summer, complained to me that they wanted to see more aggressive action against Russia to set a precedent, that there would be a price for this effort to meddle. The administration was very cautious. They didn't want to be seen as backing one side in the election and they waited. This is, in a sense, too little, too late. And I think Trump has said, in his statement, he will just, you know, he doesn't believe it, and I think he will push ahead with his administration and not really want to address the issue.
SANCHEZ: Juliette, let's talk about the Trump response. We saw the tweet and the statement from his camp essentially discrediting the CIA, pointing to the reports before the invasion of Iraq about weapons of mass destruction being wrong and the comparing this initial reporting of evidence that Russia meddled in the election. What does that tell you about his relationship moving forward with intelligence agencies? JULIETTE KAYYEM, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: Well, it's incredibly
dangerous, and it's also exceptionally unsophisticated. No president, no governor, mayor, wants to go to war immediately with their public safety apparatus, because they exist to protect him and the nation he will govern in January.
I want to take you back to 2008. President Obama got a lot of criticism from his progressive and left-flanked side for not going after intelligence and law enforcement agents who may have been complicit in some of the egregious behavior in the war on terror during the Bush administration. Obama's philosophy then, and I think he was right, he did not want to start his term essentially at war with the non-partisan professional intelligence and law enforcement agencies. Trump has now waged war against them and we're in unchartered territory in a way that I think is only going to harm President Trump in both the short term and the long term.
SANCHEZ: Juliette, I wanted to point out something you said, a non- partisan agency.
David, Republicans, specifically, Sean Spicer, has said this is really the work of just a few unhappy partisans upset with how the election turned out. In your experience, does intelligence have a political viewpoint? In other words, are there partisan officials within the CIA potentially distributing this information to discredit the election of Donald Trump?
ROHDE: This is a key thing about the importance of the CIA and why we go to war, it is vital. The CIA is not supposed to be partisan. The director is not supposed to give politically biased information. They're not even supposed to back certain policies in debates in the White House. So, this is a very serious charge that the Trump campaign is making. And it's dangerous for the country. If we can't agree on these basic facts that sort of helps our adversaries, and its unfortunate series of events, but all of this is unprecedented. I agree with Juliette, it's a risk by the Trump administration to potentially, you know, turn these agencies against him. The career CIA people, not affiliated with any administration, they believe this effort was unprecedented. They believe there is more to be investigated. And again, they've served Republicans and Democrats.
[13:20:41] SANCHEZ: Juliette, the question I asked David earlier, to you, this effort by the Obama administration to now go after Russia, do you think anything will come of it?
KAYYEM: Well, probably -- I think Trump will be president in January. If people are hoping otherwise, I wouldn't hold my breath.
But let me pick up on what David said as regards why are they doing this investigation. There is a limited number of theories of the case at this stage based on the new evidence that the CIA told the White House and the Senators. One is that there is illusion, so we don't know if there were conversations between the Trump campaign and Russia. That's not good.
Number two, is there some form of blackmail. We have this evidence that the RNC was hacked, e-mails hacked, but not released, something that will be released later. Again, just a theory, but a theory that has to be a part of the investigation.
The third is that we have evidence that the Russians were talking amongst themselves, because we're doing we're doing espionage against them, that they wanted Trump to win. We don't know at this stage. Every theory is plausible.
And I will tell you as American -- going back to David's point, the present director of the CIA worked for Bush. So, the idea this is some partisan thing is ridiculous. This is really scary stuff. Any of these theories is disquieting and upsetting from the perspective of American democracy.
So, I think if the investigation doesn't impact Trump in any way, I don't care. It's just very important to understand the extent to which Russia thought and was able to influence this election.
SANCHEZ: And important to point out that Sean Spicer has fought back on the notion that the RNC was hacked. We'll have to wait and see what the results of the investigation show.
David Rohde and Juliette Kayyem, thank you so much for spending your weekend with us.
Up next, the war in Syria. Secretary of State John Kerry working with diplomats to save civilians in the besieged city of Aleppo. We're live with an update when we come back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[13:26:23] SANCHEZ: As many as 200 more U.S. troops will be joining the fight against ISIS in Syria. American troops will train local forces as they drive toward the self-declared ISIS capital of Raqqa.
Meantime, Secretary of State John Kerry is focused on the humanitarian crisis in Syria and pushing the Syrian regime and Russia to stop bombing rebel fighters.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JOHN KERRY, U.S. SECRETARY OF STATE: The indiscriminate bombing by the regime, which violates international rules of law, of war, in many cases, crimes against humanity and war crimes, needs to stop, and those who support it, those in Moscow and elsewhere who have supported it, should do their utmost to bring it to a close. A meaningful ceasefire needs to be reached.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SANCHEZ: CNN international correspondent, Melissa Bell, joining us live from Paris.
Melissa, what did Secretary Kerry have to say about the opposition fighters on the ground? MELISSA BELL, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: This was a desperate
plea really to be heard by Moscow and Damascus and to let the rebel fighters still holed up in Aleppo safe passage out of a city that looks increasingly likely to fall, and this in the very near future, Boris. John Kerry asked that they be allowed out on the grounds, as they see things, given how desperate things are on the ground for them, if they don't die in Aleppo, it is -- they'll be facing certain death. That is because the diplomats gathered here in Paris today, the 10 foreign ministers who gathered to talk about Syria and the need for a political transition, even given the military might of Moscow and Damascus on the ground and their recent advances, what they know and fear is, once Aleppo has fallen, that Moscow and Damascus' eyes will turn towards Idlib Province in an attempt to take the west of the country, create a sort of de facto partition of Syria.
Here is what John Kerry had to say on the question of those rebel fighters still holed up in Aleppo and the need to allow them safe passage out.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KERRY: The choice for many of them, as they think about it today, is die in Aleppo or die in Idlib, but die. That's the way they see the choice. 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: It was an 11th-hour plea, both in terms of how things are going on the ground in Aleppo and in terms of John Kerry's future himself. He knows he has a matter of weeks left in this job, and that this is a matter of his legacy. He simply doesn't want to be remembered as the architect of failed policy on Syria. And as things stand at the moment, that is almost certainly what is likely to happen.
SANCHEZ: Daunting news when you consider the war in Syria has been happening for almost six years.
Melissa Bell, thank you.
Still ahead -
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DYLNN ROOF, ACCUSED MASS SHOOTER: The point is somebody had to do something.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SANCHEZ: The disturbing confession from the accused mass shooter who targeted a South Carolina church. This story and more, next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK) [13:33:17] SANCHEZ: Hey, thanks for joining me. It's about 1:33 p.m.
on the east coast. I'm Boris Sanchez, in for Fredricka Whitfield.
For the first time, we're hearing the haunting confession of the man accused of gunning down nine people inside a Charleston church. Dylann Roof laughs as he tells investigations that he opened fire last year on worshippers during a Bible study. In the FBI interrogation video, which was just played during Roof's murder trial, the defendant said that he, quote, "Had to do it." Listen for yourself.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FBI AGENT: Can you tell us about what happened last night?
DYLANN ROOF, ACCUSED MASS SHOOTER: Yeah, I mean, I just -- I went to that church in Charleston -- and, you know, I did it.
UNIDENTIFIED FBI AGENT: You did what?
(CROSSTALK)
ROOF: I mean -
UNIDENTIFIED FBI AGENT: I know it's tough sometimes to say it.
ROOF: It's not that I don't want to say it, because I don't want to make myself seem guilty. I just don't really like saying it.
UNIDENTIFIED FBI AGENT: Did you shoot them?
ROOF: Yes.
UNIDENTIFIED FBI AGENT: What kind of gun did you use?
ROOF: A Glock .45.
UNIDENTIFIED FBI AGENT: Did you say anything to them before or after or during?
ROOF: No. I didn't say anything to them before or anything.
UNIDENTIFIED FBI AGENT: Before. What about after?
[13:35:10] ROOF: Well, I think, like, during, I said, like, don't talk to me or something like that.
Well, I had to do it, because somebody had to do something, because you know black people are killing white people every day on the streets and they rape white women, a hundred white women a day. That's an FBI statistic in 2001. And that's two years ago. Might even be more down here.
UNIDENTIFIED FBI AGENT: So, what is your thought about those people, though? Because I think you kind of alluded to it earlier. In your mind, they're innocent people, right? They're church-going people, they were in a Bible study.
ROOF: Well, I try not to really think about it.
UNIDENTIFIED FBI AGENT: But I guess the question would be, because they were black, that really kind of overrode -- because you had to send that message?
ROOFT: Well, it's like this, you see, I'm not in the position, you know, by myself, you know, to go into, like, a black neighborhood, you know, or something like that and shoot, you know, a drug dealer or something like that. You see what I am saying? That is not going to do anything. You see what I'm saying? I had to go somewhere else. Do you see what I'm saying?
UNIDENTIFIED FBI AGENT: Do you wish there were more people in there.
ROOF: No. Like I say, if that were the case I wouldn't have shot anybody in there. You see what I'm saying? Afterwards, it was like, ah. That's why I didn't shoot that lady. I could have, but I didn't.
UNIDENTIFIED FBI AGENT: Do you remember telling that lady, "I will let you live so you can tell my story"?
ROOF: Yeah, I remember saying that. But it's not really my story.
UNIDENTIFIED FBI AGENT: Do you have any remorse?
ROOF: I think it's too soon.
UNIDENTIFIED FBI AGENT: What about regrets?
ROOF: Yeah. I would say so.
UNIDENTIFIED FBI AGENT: What do you regret?
ROOF: That's -- you know, I regret doing it a little bit.
UNIDENTIFIED FBI AGENT: A little bit?
ROOF: Yeah.
UNIDENTIFIED FBI AGENT: But part of you is glad you did, still? I kind of sense that from you, right? Part of you is proud. I mean, part of it --
ROOF: No. Like I said, I don't really know exactly what I've done, you know. You know, I --
UNIDENTIFIED FBI AGENT: What do you mean by that?
ROOF: I don't know how many people were killed or anything.
UNIDENTIFIED FBI AGENT: How many -- do you think -- anybody die? I mean --
(CROSSTALK) ROOF: I think somebody died.
UNIDENTIFIED FBI AGENT: If I told you nine people died last night, how would that make you feel?
ROOF: I don't really believe you.
UNIDENTIFIED FBI AGENT: It was nine.
ROOF: There wasn't even nine people there.
UNIDENTIFIED FBI AGENT: There was a little bit over nine.
But it is hard when you are looking --
(CROSSTALK)
UNIDENTIFIED FBI AGENT: You said when you went in there it could have been six, eight. You weren't certain, you know.
ROOF: Are you guys lying to me?
UNIDENTIFIED INVESTIGAGTOR: No.
UNIDENTIFIED FBI AGENT: No.
Would you consider this a crime and you are guilty? Can you say it again?
ROOF: I'm guilty. You all know I'm guilty.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SANCHEZ: Let's bring in our legal panel now, Avery Freidman, a civil rights attorney, in Cleveland; and Richard Herman, a criminal defense attorney joining us from Las Vegas.
Avery, you first.
The defense is admitting guilt in this case. Why is the prosecution playing these tapes?
AVERY FRIEDMAN, CIVIL RIGHT ATTORNEY: Well, the prosecution has to establish guilt. It's obligated by "beyond a reasonable doubt" to make sure they get these convictions. There are 33 federal pending charges, 18 of which are murder charges. So, in order to, you know prevail on this case, they're going to have to convince that jury. And let me tell you something. You saw the tape, you heard the tape, this is repugnant behavior, sinister, ghastly behavior. And I think there is no doubt that a conviction will be attained.
The more complicated part of this case will be mitigation. That is, how is that going to be handled. And to complicate it, the defendant wants to handle it without a lawyer. He has a lawyer in the guilt phase, but is going to try to do it, the mitigation phase, on his own.
SANCHEZ: That was really the gist of my question. Clearly, this is for the death penalty portion of this case.
Richard, part of the tape that stands out is the fact that, for example, he didn't know what month it was. He seemed kind of completely aloof. Clearly, no empathy whatsoever. Could the defense end up using that to their advantage to make the case that perhaps he didn't realize the extent of what he was doing. It seems like he does.
[03:40:04] RICHARD HERMAN, CRMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Well, you know, Boris, what is going on here is this is a conditioning portion of the trial. It's the guilt phase and the punishment phase. During the guilt phase, the government is trying to condition the jury to put him to death in the penalty phase, because, let's face it, as far as liability goes here, there were 77 rounds of hollow point.45 caliber shells on the floor, nine people murdered. He admitted it. He admitted it in his manifesto. The FBI did a surgical interrogation, which we just listened to. He admitted to the hate crimes and to the premedication, the mens rea needed for murder. So, you have an admission, nine murder convictions, federal hate-crime convictions. The question is, is there any mitigation for this individual. And in federal death-penalty cases, there is only about 60 inmates that are facing the death penalty, federally, in the United States right now, compared to 3,000 in state. Very difficult to get a death-penalty conviction and to have it put in play, federally.
SANCHEZ: So, Avery, does that play to the defense's advantage, the fact it's so rare to have a federal death-penalty conviction?
FRIEDMAN: I don't think so. I think each case turns on the merits of what the Justice Department puts forward.
And let me tell you something, the hardest-working person in that courtroom isn't necessarily the lawyers. U.S. district judge, Richard Girgle (ph), who is presiding over this case, has a very complicated job to do. He is dealing with the media. He has dealt with competence. And then you have the defendant saying I want to handle mitigation penalty on my own. And the question becomes, can a federal district judge permit that to happen, blow up the integrity of the process, because Dylann Roof wouldn't have the slightest idea how to do mitigation, and that is going to be a very complicated part of what is coming up here.
SANCHEZ: Richard --
HERMAN: Boris, the judge already made a ruling on that. He took a hearing and he ruled he is competent to do this.
The interesting portion here is this. Early on in the case, the defense attorneys, who are very competent death penalty attorneys --
AVERY: Right.
HERMAN: -- wanted to introduce evidence of mental instability. Dylann Roof said no. So, when we get to the punishment phase, Dylann will handle that himself. He will not put in a mental instability defense. There is not going to be mitigation. He is going to get the death penalty here, Boris.
SANCHEZ: Just on the merits of that, you have to question his sanity. What is he thinking, Avery? How is he going to be able to get out of this?
HERMAN: He's not.
FRIEDMAN: Well, you know, that was the -- that was the issue the judge had to decide. In fact, the hearing was so sensitive, because he wanted to make sure, the judge wanted to make sure that Dylann Roof got a fair trial, he had to balance that against the First Amendment rights of the media to cover competency. Heard testimony from experts, and the bottom line is the federal judge held that he was competent to stand trial. So, whatever mental issues are going to be introduced during the penalty, the judge has already concluded that he is competent to stand trial.
SANCHEZ: Avery Friedman, Richard Herman, thank you, gentlemen, for spending part of your weekend with us.
We'll be back with more news after a quick break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[13:47:55] SANCHEZ: Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani will not serve in Donald Trump's incoming administration. This morning, Trump sent this tweet, saying, "Rudy Giuliani, one of the finest people I know and a great mayor of New York, just took himself out of consideration for state," secretary of state.
We learned that Exxon-Mobil CEO Rex Tillerson is now the leading candidate for that position.
Ryan Nobles is at the site of today's Army/Navy game where Trump is set to attend.
Ryan, the big news, of course, was Rudy Giuliani. The reporting was that he took himself out of the running for secretary of state back in November. Is this just saving face now?
RYAN NOBLES, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, I mean, you could certainly look at the facts as we know them and ask that question, Boris. I think that is fair to say. Because Rudy Giuliani and the transition team saying in a statement yesterday that he took himself out of the running at the end of the November, but in the first week in December, there were transition officials that said that he was still on the short list, that was seriously -- a serious contender for the position of secretary of state. And CNN has some sources that say that the Trump transition told Rudy Giuliani he won't get the job of secretary of state. That's why the focus has really shifted to Exxon-Mobil CEO Tillerson as the clear front-runner at this point. We know that Tillerson was actually at Trump Tower this morning. He was not seen by reporters, but the transition confirms that he was, indeed, there.
As for Rudy Giuliani, he spoke this morning about the speculation about his exit, and who he would like to see in the position of secretary of state. Take a listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
RUDY GIULIANI, (R), FORMER NEW YORK CITY MAYOR: I think Rex Tillerson is an excellent choice. I think Josh Bolton. Had I been president in 2008, I probably would have appointed him as secretary of state, so. Josh Bolton, I think, is superior. I think Mitt Romney -- I mean, I voted for him, I supported him. I thought he would have been a better president than Barack Obama. But I think, like Mike Huckabee does, he should apologize, or at least explain what he meant by some of the comments, which hurt me greatly, when I was campaigning for my friend, Donald Trump.
(CROSSTALK)
GIULIANI: I think, actually, Donald is less troubled by it because --
(CROSSTALK)
GIULIANI: -- they I didn't want to put -- the campaign requested 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 are ready. When you are ready, then we can announce it.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
NOBLES: It's clear that Trump still thinks quite a bit of the former mayor of New York City. He will actually be with Trump here today at the Army/Navy game. And we don't expect the president-elect to say anything about the secretary of state search, but it seems pretty clear that Tillerson is the front-runner at this point.
And, Boris, when Trump comes to this game here today, he is going to spend half of the game on the Army sideline the other half on the Navy sideline as he prepares to become the next commander-in-chief for these men and women in uniform -- Boris?
[13:50:00]SANCHEZ: Certainly, just a fascinating backdrop for all of this controversy and political news.
Ryan Nobles, thank you so much. We hope you enjoy the game.
We'll be right back with your top stories.
NOBLES: Thank you.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SANCHEZ: Let's check on some of today's top stories.
(HEADLINES)
SANCHEZ: Some good news. The federal government is open for business this morning after the Senate narrowly made its deadline to pass a key spending bill.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED SENATOR: The yeas are 61. The nays are 38.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SANCHEZ: Senators agreed on a plan to fund the government through April, into the first months of the Trump administration. Democrats lost a fierce battle to extend a health insurance program for coal miners for an entire year.
Stay with us. CNN NEWSROOM continues after the break.
But first, here's this week's "Turning Point."
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
(SINGING)
[13:55:07] DR. SANJAY GUPTA, CNN CHIEF MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT (voice- over): Alex Jenkinson is an aspiring pop singer. But when she was born, doctors checked "male" on her birth certificate. Despite having some masculine traits, she was not a boy.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
ALEX JENKINSON, ASPIRING POP SINGER: I was diagnosed when I was about 4. It was partial androgen sensitivity system.
GUPTA (voice-over): It is one of many conditions classified as intersex, when a person's sexual organs do not physically fit the typical definition of male or a female.
JENKINSON: My parents raised me as just a person.
GUPTA: As a teen, Alex struggled with her identity and was bullied in school.
JENKINSON: In 2011, I attempted to take my own life. For so long, I carried the words people were saying to me. I kind of made myself feel like I wasn't worth anything.
GUPTA: Alex was treated for anxiety and depression, and slowly began to embrace her true self. She took steps to overcome her physical insecurities.
JENKINSON: I went through facial feminization surgeries and a breast augmentation. I finally felt alive for the first time.
GUPTA: Now, she is pursuing her dream as a singer under the name "Ali J."
(SINGING)
GUPTA: She's releasing her debut album early next year, and hopes to inspire others through her music.
JENKINSON: I want to share my story just showcasing we all have differences. And loving who you are through that, it is just so important.
(MUSIC)
(END VIDEOTAPE)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
