Return to Transcripts main page

New Day

South African Judge: Oscar Pistorius Not Guilty of Premeditated Murder; Interview with Sen. Marco Rubio; President Delivers Primetime Speech on U.S. Strategy to Combat ISIS; New Video Surfaces Regarding Ferguson Police Shooting of Teen;

Aired September 11, 2014 - 07:00   ET

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

JIM ACOSTA, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Looking forward, expect more debate over the Syrian rebels that will take the fight to ISIS on behalf of the U.S. Senior administration officials say they're being vetted, but Republicans were skeptical before the speech.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

ACOSTA (on camera): As for a timeline for the air strikes in Syria, senior administration officials say the White House is not going to telegraph its punches. But there are other questions being asked this morning Chris and Kate, first among them, what other countries will be involved in the air strikes on ISIS in Iraq and Syria. At this point administration officials are not specifying. But there will be briefings for lawmakers in the House and Senate on Capitol Hill later today.

CHRIS CUOMO, CNN ANCHOR: Two big things that you point out, that's huge, What you just said, because if the U.S. isn't going to lead the fight on the ground, who will? And who has more to lose technically than those countries in that region who have been many say too quiet for too long.

ACOSTA: And they're not saying who is vetting the Syrian rebels, either. That's another question we asked in the conference call with senior administration officials. They did not have a specific answer to that. That is a work in progress.

CUOMO: Also a strong point, and Senator McCain all fired up. Remember, he got caught in a photograph with someone he thought was a friendly who turned out to be bad guy, just showing the complexity, not to criticize. And it takes you to the second issue, which is today is 9/11. Nobody will ever forget. But also don't forget this is the fourth consecutive president to address the United States people and say we're going into Iraq. Obviously more easily said than done. Jim Acosta, thank you very much.

ACOSTA: Hard to get out.

CUOMO: Absolutely, sir.

Now, when we come up in the show a little bit later on, Republican Senator Marco Rubio will join us. He's been a big voice about ISIS. And then later on we're going to have Senator John McCain. So stay with us for the debate this morning. Kate?

KATE BOLDUAN, CNN ANCHOR: Also new questions this morning concerning what the NFL knew about the Ray Rice elevator video and when they knew it. Commissioner Roger Goodell announcing that former FBI director Robert Mueller will lead an independent investigation into the league's handling of the domestic violence case. It comes as a new report surfacing. Some say it's damning, because it's saying an NFL executive received a copy of the graphic elevator video five months ago. That seems to contradict what Roger Goodell has been saying. CNN's Miguel Marquez has been following this for us and has all the details. Miguel?

MIGUEL MARQUEZ, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Boy, oh boy, what started off as a stream of questions and doubt has turned into a river of criticism. Both the NFL and the Ravens now trying to staunch the flow.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

MARQUEZ: The NFL tapping former FBI director, Robert Mueller to lead an independent investigation looking into how the NFL handled evidence in the domestic violence case against Ray Rice. Mueller's probe will be overseen by two NFL owners and will be made public.

The announcement comes hours after the Associated Press reported a law enforcement source told them the tape of Rice violently striking Janay Palmer was sent to an NFL executive five months ago. In an interview with CBS news on Tuesday, NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell maintained the league never saw the video until it went viral on Monday.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: So did anyone in the NFL see this second videotape before Monday?

ROGER GOODELL, NFL COMMISSIONER: No.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: No one in the NFL?

GOODELL: No one in the NFL to my knowledge.

MARQUEZ: The AP says their source sent a DVD of the video unsolicited, because he wanted them to see it before deciding on Rice's punishment. The AP also saying the source played a 12-second voicemail message that came from an NFL office number on April 9 confirming the vide had arrive with a female voice saying "You're right, it's terrible."

The NFL issued a statement following the potential bombshell. "We have no knowledge of this. We are not aware of anyone in our office who possessed or saw the video before it was made public on Monday. We will look into it."

Baltimore Ravens owner Steve Bisciotti admitting they dropped the ball in handling the incident after seeing the initial video.

STEVE BISCIOTTI, BALTIMORE RAVENS OWNER: I was picturing her whaling on him and him smacking her and maybe her head was this far from the wall, and with her inebriation, dropped. So why did I conclude all that? Because I wanted to. Because I loved him, because he had a stellar record, and the cops had already seen the video. So I assumed it wasn't a forceful blow that moved her head three feet into that wall.

MARQUEZ: The league continues to insist that it reached out multiple times to police and the prosecutor's office for the video but couldn't get it. Yet Rice's own attorney had a copy. In a letter to NFL club executives on Wednesday, Goodell says it would have been illegal for the league to get the video from either law enforcement or the casino itself once a criminal investigation begins.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

MARQUEZ (on camera): And we should point out that the initial video came out February 19th. The incident itself was on February 15th. The initial video of just seeing Janay Palmer dragged carelessly out of the elevator also around that time, just days after it all happened. The initial complaint clearly says that Mr. Rice struck her with his hand, rendering her unconscious. All of the facts were there in front of the NFL if they had wanted to see them. Kate?

BOLDUAN: More keeps coming out creating more questions about exactly who knew what when. Miguel, thank you so much. Chris?

CUOMO: All right, Kate, we have new information in the Michael Brown shooting. Wednesday night police arrested 35 people who tried to shut down a major interstate near Ferguson for four-and-a-half hours, the same amount of time Brown's body was left in the street after he was killed by a police officer. And now we get to what may be motivating outrage -- exclusive video has surfaced from that day taken just minutes after Brown was shot. Listen as two contractors who happen to be white, and that's relevant here, be honest, they describe what they saw. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: He had his hands up.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CUOMO: We understand it's not the actual event, obviously, but it's these two men saying what they saw. And the big thing is, "his hands were up." Why is that important? It's all about the moment of the shooting and why the officer felt that it was reasonable to use deadly force.

Let's bring in people with real perspective from the ground, Lizz Brown, criminal defense attorney and a columnist for the "St. Louis American," and Chris King, the editorial director for the "St. Louis American." Thank you very much, Lizz. It's good to have you here. Chris, it is good to see you again. Let's talk about this video. Lizz, I put something out there that is inherently racial but I also think inherently relevant. What do you make of what these men say, and does it matter that they are white?

LIZZ BROWN, COLUMNIST, "ST. LOUIS AMERICAN": Well it matters that they're white, obviously, because this is a political issue as well as a legal issue. This is an issue that arises out of a predominantly African-American community, an African-American child, teenager being shot by a white police officer. So it is racial.

And it is relevant, given the racial component of it, because if you're looking for witnesses, if this particular prosecutor is truly seeking an indictment, it matters where the testimony comes from. They're white and, most importantly, they're not connected to Michael Brown at all. They're not a friend, they're not a cousin, they're not a resident in the same place where he lives. So it's very, very, very important, and it adds credibility and it adds believability to the accounts we have heard heretofore.

But we also have to acknowledge that simply because this evidence is out here does not mean that the prosecutor is going to introduce it to the grand jury.

CUOMO: It's his choice. It would be an odd choice not to seeing how he's supposed to put the broadest swath he can of inculpatory and exculpatory proof, that's proof that show a crime was committed and proof that shows a crime was not committed. Chris, let me ask you something. You understand the ground very well and where people's hearts and minds are. You end an editorial in your newspaper this morning with the notion that because of what we see on this tape and everything else that we understand from the situation, that the officer involved, Darren Wilson, should be arrested. Why do you believe that's OK?

CHRIS KING, EDITORIAL DIRECTOR, "ST. LOUIS AMERICAN": Well, it's a shame we're having mock trials in the media, Chris. There's ample evidence to bring charges against Officer Wilson. I would probably -- in our editorials we've urged second-degree murder. We probably would plead to manslaughter if he thought he was guilty. If he thinks he's innocent, and he says he is and if his supporters think he's innocent, at this point in time I would welcome a criminal trial, because his name is being dragged through the media. If it was done systematically in an adversarial context in court, it would be much clearer to all of us if he's innocent or guilty. And I don't know if he's guilty. I think there's ample evidence to bring him to trial.

CUOMO: Ideally it would be wonderful if the world worked and the justice system worked in a way where it needed no urging. I would suggest that that is not true. I would suggest that the information is good to have out there because it pushes for a good process. And Chris, you have to remember, there's a little bit of irony in that you're suggesting what charges would be appropriate, but you don't like that we're having a mock trial in the media. You're part of the same situation you're condemning.

Liz, let me ask you this, though, arresting an officer under these circumstances, highly unusual. It sounds right, arrest him. I would be arrested, you would be arrested. It's different with police officers, isn't it?

BROWN: Well, it is, but it shouldn't be. A police officer has no more rights than any other citizens. And that's the challenge to the entire criminal justice system, and that's the challenge to continuing to have Bob McCullough as the prosecutor on this case. He has a relationship not just with this police officer, but with the entire police force. He cannot be fair. He cannot be impartial. That's why there has to be a special prosecutor on this case.

And it is very important for the public to understand and even the conversations that we have should not be that he should be, Darren Wilson, should be treated any differently. The grand jury determination is a probable cause determination. There is probable cause to charge this man. If it's probable cause to charge a citizen, a citizen, then it's probable cause to charge a police officer.

CUOMO: Right, but you understand, we just don't want to mislead people and give false expectations. Officers are given the benefit of the doubt in situations where they use force because it's part of their job. They are very rarely arrested before an investigation finds that they were unjustified in use of force, and then they are arrested. That's all I'm saying. Chris, let me ask you something -- yes, go ahead, please.

BROWN: But whether or not, whether or not they are entitled to that, there aren't any special rules that apply to citizens by virtue of their job choice.

CUOMO: True.

BROWN: So if that's the case, it shouldn't be.

CUOMO: True. True. I'm just saying how it is. We'll deal with how it should be. Let's deal with the problem in front of us.

And Chris, you have been very articulate in saying you have to get this right. You have to investigate it thoroughly. But you must do more in Ferguson and other places. Do you see proof on the ground in Ferguson that the police are reaching out, that local politicians are getting more involved to try to change the culture and communication between the black community that's relevant here and the people who are supposed to keep them safe?

KING: Well, there's been, what I call a community of conscience that streamed into Ferguson and the Canfield Green area. It's been beautiful to observe. Our region has come together in a way that was unimaginable before this tragedy. As for the local authorities, you know, they're on defense. The county police chief is on defense. The prosecutor gave a story to the "Washington Post" that sounded like he's shown the grand jury everything, including everyone's baby pictures. So the conservative side is they're playing defense right now. I don't think it's sincere, but they're making an effort to clean up their act at least for the media glare.

CUOMO: And again, that gets us back to whether or not the situation demands attention. Hopefully, let's be optimistic and say let's take progress where we find it. Chris King, I know you will stay tuned in. Please keep in touch with us so we can understand what's happening on the ground. Lizz Brown, thank you very much for the perspective as an attorney and columnist. Appreciate it. BROWN: Thanks.

CUOMO: A lot of news out there, so let's get to you Michaela.

MICHAELA PEREIRA, CNN ANCHOR: All right, Chris, we begin with some breaking news here. A South African judge has said that Oscar Pistorius cannot be found guilty of murder in the death of his girlfriend, Reeva Steenkamp. But while summarizing the case, Judge Thokozile says other charges are still on the table.

We want to get to Robyn Curnow who is outside the courtroom in Pretoria. Robyn?

ROBYN CURNOW, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Hi there, Michaela. Well, I've just come out because it's a lunch break. And what a morning, four hours the judge has been reading her verdict. And the last half an hour to an hour she came out with that information, that she had decided that Oscar Pistorius was not guilty of premeditated murder, and murder. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The accused therefore cannot be found guilty of murder. That, however, is not the end of the matter as culpable homicide is a competent verdict.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CURNOW: So we going to be going back after the lunch break and she's going to deal with the culpable homicide. Our legal analysts believe that the indications, the kind of messages she sent in the verdict indicate she might convict him of culpable homicide, of negligence. What is important about the not guilty murder decision is that she has basically ruled that Oscar Pistorius did not foresee that Reeva Steenkamp was in the bathroom and therefore he did not intend to kill her. Back to you, Michaela.

PEREIRA: Robyn Curnow. Again, February 14th, 2013, up until now we've been hearing about this case. The verdicts are coming down as we hear them from the courtroom in Pretoria. Robyn, thank you so much for that.

President Obama serves notice to Islamic terrorists, but can the U.S. count on the broad coalition he described to help wipe out ISIS? What one prominent Republican is saying about the president's speech, Senator Marco Rubio is next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CUOMO: Today is 9/11, our thoughts and prayers with those who were affected and certainly today, none of us will ever forget. Also a bitter benchmark to remember a especially on this day, President Obama is now the fourth consecutive president talking about military action in Iraq. His pitch to the nation last night, he presented what he calls a comprehensive and sustained strategy to take the fight to ISIS. He guaranteed they would find no safe haven and took apart their very name.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Now let's make two things clear -- ISIL is not Islamic. No religion condones the killing of innocents. And the vast majority of ISIL's victims have been Muslim. And ISIL is certainly not a state. It was formerly al Qaeda's affiliate in Iraq and has taken advantage of sectarian strife and Syria's civil war to gain territory on both sides of the Iraq/Syrian border.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CUOMO: Now, the main question will be, so what do we do about them? Forget about what we call them. Let's bring in Senator Marco Rubio, Republican of Florida, who sits on the Committee on Foreign Relations and the select Committee on Intelligence.

Big task in front of you, you've been critical coming into this. About needing to do more with ISIS. You've heard the plan, are you on board?

SEN. MARCO RUBIO (R), FLORIDA: Generally, we're in a much better place with the president than we were previous to the speech, a week ago, a month ago. He's come a long way, he called the ISIL a JV team a few weeks ago and now he's acknowledged the serious threat that they are. And that's good. A few weeks ago he said it was a fantasy to be able to arm a bunch of bankers and pharmacists and turn them into an effective fighting force, talking about the moderate rebels in Syria, and now he wants to arm them.

So these are good things, I do have a couple of concerns about the speech last night. First, I think it was a mistake to equate this conflict to what we've done in Yemen and in Somalia. We've certainly had success in those places, but those remain very unstable and dangerous places and threats to our national security. I also think ISIL poses a risk that's very different from the risks posed by terrorists in those two countries.

ISIL is a terrorist group, but it also has insurgent elements to it. They are working with people on the ground. They control territory. They've got funding, they've got military, they carry out military- style operations. They pose a much different risk. And here's my last concern. What I didn't hear the president say last night is we're going to defeat them no matter what it takes. And that's important. Because the cornerstone of this strategy is that we're going to work with local forces, the Kurds, the Iraqis, the moderate rebels in Syria, to defeat them on ground.

What if that doesn't work? Does that then mean that ISIL gets to stay? Does that then mean that ISIL gets to continue to expand? And I think it was important for the president to say that no matter what it takes, we hope we can do it with these local forces, I agree that should be the first effort. But ultimately, we will do whatever it takes to defeat them. I thought that was important, he didn't say that last night. Certainly, I believe we're in a better place today than we were a week ago with regards to our strategy. CUOMO: Good. So, if you agree that it will take whatever it takes, if

you understand that it will be a long fight where this first plan may not get it done, then you are basically laying out the rationale for why Congress must vote. Anything that is extended in duration is fundamentally war under the Constitution. And requires a congressional vote. Your brothers and sisters are running away from a vote and we both know why. You're not up in the mid-term. But I know you have your eyes on 2016. Will you push for a vote? Will you vote?

RUBIO: First of all, I think the president has the authority to immediately act on this crisis that we're facing. I don't think that should slow him up and I agree with the president, that he has the authority right now not just to conduct operations in Iraq, but in Syria. This is an emerging threat and this will be a long-term process, we're going to have to address it. I think it's wise for him to come to Congress and seek authorization. No. 1 because we're stronger when we do it in a way. No. 2 in order to have a prolonged, sustained operation that it's going to require, it's important to have that congressional support. They're going to have to pay for it, they're going to have to be committed to it.

CUOMO: You are they, by the way, Senator. You are they. Are you going to push for a vote and will you vote yes?

RUBIO: Of course, I think it's important. As I said repeatedly. I will vote to authorize this action. But I don't think he needs authorization to act today or tomorrow or next week. Because this is an emergent crisis. But absolutely, we should vote, we should give him authority to move forward on this. This is a critical national security issue. We should put politics aside, it's not about embarrassing the president or mid-term elections or anything else. It's about the national security of Americans. Republicans, Democrats, Independents, everybody, is threatened by this group.

CUOMO: Again, not because you're not clear, but so many people down there have not been clear, have been skirting it. The president asked for authorization last night. That should trigger a request for a vote. If there's a request for a vote, you say yes we should vote, you should vote right away.

RUBIO: I've answered it four times.

CUOMO: You know how many people are ducking the question, right, Senator?

RUBIO: I can't answer for them, you should interview them and ask them why they're ducking it. I've been calling for action on this for the better part of two or three years. I'm glad that many of the voices who have expressed skepticism about being involved here, have finally come around. And so absolutely. Look, this is a national security threat. We shouldn't -- it's okay to hold the president accountable for mistakes he's made. It's okay to hold Congress accountable for mistakes they've made. But this is a national security threat. If anything should be above politics, it should be an issue like this that threatens our national security. And if there's any day of the year that should remind us of that, it's the anniversary of the September 11 attacks. Because when terrorists come after Americans, they don't ask for your voter registration card.

CUOMO: No small irony, that on 9/11, 13 years later, we are having the same discussion we had on the day after it happened. Was how do we stop the threat coming out of that part of the world? And when you talk about what you need to do to take care of that threat, you get to a very tricky issue politically and practically. You've been outspoken saying we have to take out ISIS, it's going to be harder than we think. Do you think you can beat the foe without the best fighters in the world on the ground? And those would be the U.S. fighters.

RUBIO: That's an open-ended question. We don't know the answer to that. Now certainly, I don't think you can beat them without the cooperation of ground forces from Iraqis, from Sunnis themselves, who have to reject this group as they did in the awakening, in the mid 2000s, without moderate rebel elements in Syria. Think about this for a moment. If you defeat ISIL in Syria and there's not a moderate, more reasonable group there to replace them, then that void will be filled by another radical Islamic group, like al Nusra. Or any of the other host of groups that now operate in that space.

So I think it's critically important that we do have viable partners on the ground. It may very well, I hope it doesn't, but it may require at a minimum special operations forces and potentially ground troops. But I don't think that's something we need to do right away. I think the ideal outcome would be that, on the ground it would be local forces that do the work. But we need to be honest with the American people. It could require that. And the choice there is not whether we want to go to war or not. The choice there is whether we want to accept ISIL as a permanent fixture or not.

CUOMO: Well, Senator Rubio, appreciate you being on NEW DAY this morning, this is all about leadership now. The president inarguably showed it last night. Now it becomes what does Congress do to back him up on this, we'll be watching very closely. We look forward to your actions going forward.

RUBIO: Thank you very much for having me.

CUOMO: As the Senator pointed out there, and you already know, today is 9/11 and the Secretary of Homeland Defense is at the memorial site right now. We're going to go to him live coming up.

There are also some surprising new numbers showing who is more fearful of terror attacks, and it could impact some critical Senate campaigns this fall. Find out why on "INSIDE POLITICS" ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)