Return to Transcripts main page

New Day

Republican Hopefuls Square off at New Hampshire Forum; Democrats Block Planned Parenthood Defunding; Deputy Sued Over Handcuffing Third-Graders in School. Aired 7-7:30a ET

Aired August 04, 2015 - 07:00   ET

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

[07:00:10] JONES: Senator Lindsey Graham used his time onstage positioning himself as the best candidate to take on Clinton.

SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM (R-SC), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: As to the Clintons, I've been dealing with this crowd for 20 years. I'm fluent in Clinton speak. When he says, Bill says, "I didn't have sex with that woman," he did.

When she says, "I'll tell you about building the pipeline when I get to be president," means she won't. And when she tells us, "Trust me, you got all the e-mails that you need," we haven't even scratched the surface.

So I understand this crowd, and I can beat them. And if we can't beat them, it doesn't matter.

JONES: Noticeably absent from the stage, the current GOP front- runner. Donald Trump is still surging above the rest in three new polls out by Bloomberg, FOX News and Monmouth University. In fact, he's leading the next closest candidate, Jeb Bush, by double digits.

On Sunday, the Donald told NBC News he doesn't think you can "artificially prepare" for something like a debate. The unconventional debate prep from an unconventional candidate further fueling the intrigue around his performance in this Thursday's debate.

But fellow candidate, Governor John Kasich, says he's not worried.

GOV. JOHN KASICH (R-OH), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Maybe I'll give him a hug. I don't know. I don't think about all of that. It's not important. I mean, what's important for me is what I say. And let people kind of see, there's going to be so much time between now and then.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

JONES: Now, Trump did not come up at all during last night's forum. The candidates were more focused on talking up their own views and policy positions. It's a sign that those sharing the stage with Trump on Thursday night are going to try to do their best to keep the focus on them, and not on the front-runner -- Chris.

CUOMO: All right, Athena. Another big issue going on in politics right now is Planned Parenthood. Fifty-three GOP senators passed a bill to defund the organization. But they need 60 to overcome a filibuster and obviously, 67 to override an expected veto by the president. So they lost for now.

But we do have GOPers who are threatening to derail an upcoming spending bill that would effectively shut down the government if that bill includes one cent for Planned Parenthood.

So let's get the latest in the state of play from CNN senior Washington correspondent, Joe Johns.

I thought this was going to start with an investigation. What happened to that strategy?

JOE JOHNS, CNN SENIOR WASHINGTON CORRESPONDENT: There are people still calling for an investigation, Chris. But look, this was blocked on a procedural vote of 53 to 46, well short of the 60 votes needed to push this measure along.

But that issue of defunding Planned Parenthood is not likely to go away, if conservative critics of the organization have anything to say about it. Two Democrats, Senator Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Joe Donnelly of Indiana, sided with Republicans on the vote. The proposal would have taken away more than $500 million in federal funding from Planned Parenthood.

The initial legislative reaction to those controversial videos from anti-abortion groups that put a spotlight on the use of fetal tissue in research. And yes, it's likely to come back again in September. And now, especially because many on the right see an opening and believe this issue could swing the abortion rate in the Republicans' favor and for the White House.

Underscoring that, several Republican candidates who are members of the Senate left the campaign trail to vote on the Senate floor, including senators Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz, Rand Paul. They'd been scheduled to attend that voters' forum Athena Jones was just talking about in New Hampshire, but ended up deciding to participate by way of satellite TV.

Two other Senate Republicans, Collins of Maine and Kirk of Illinois, are calling for the Department of Justice to investigate Planned Parenthood. So Chris, there could still be an investigation.

CAMEROTA: OK, Joe. I'll take it here. Thanks so much for all that background.

Joining us now for reaction is Dawn Laguens. She's the executive vice president at Planned Parenthood Federation of America. Dawn, thanks so much for being back on NEW DAY.

DAWN LAGUENS, EVP, PLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA: Good morning.

CAMEROTA: So you won last night. You won the latest round. But as we just hear our correspondent, Joe Johns, say, GOPers say that the battle is not over for them. Do you feel, Dawn, as though the tide, at least on Capitol Hill, is turning against Planned Parenthood?

LAGUENS: Absolutely not. And I'm just thrilled, Alisyn, that today, 2.5 million Americans can continue to get their important, excellent, preventive healthcare at Planned Parenthood. So thankful for those champions.

You know, what we're seeing is very little about women's healthcare or even fetal tissue research and has everything to do with Republican primary politics.

CAMEROTA: I mean, what they would say is it has everything to do with abortion. I mean, you're right, it's not about women's healthcare. They don't talk so much about that, but they do talk about abortion.

And, you know, it was these videos, these controversial videos that sparked this latest round on Capitol Hill. I know that you believe the videos are deceptively edited. However, on this group's website, the group that produced the videos, they say that they have put them in their entirety, unedited, on the website. And in fact, they've released transcripts that they say are the full entirety of the transactions that transpired.

[07:05:14] LAGUENS: That's actually not a fact. And since we know that, for years this has been a strategy, to deceptively edit in inflammatory ways these kind of videos, put them out; claim that they've put out the full tape. We can tell that those are still edited tapes.

But if we go back to the facts about the vote and the, quote, "defunding" of Planned Parenthood, that has nothing to do with abortion, as abortion is not paid for with federal funds. And so what we were talking about was cutting funds for birth control, STD testing, teen pregnancy prevention, cancer screenings.

CAMEROTA: Well, I mean, sure...

LAGUENS: This is how you know that it has nothing to do with abortion in terms of the votes that they were taking.

CAMEROTA: But Dawn, you know the argument on the other side, which is that what Republicans say, who don't want to fund Planned Parenthood, is that funds are fungible. And so if you give a half a billion dollars to Planned Parenthood, that then they can do whatever they want with it.

But Dawn, I want to get back to the videos for a second. Because it does appear from the snippets that have been seen in the public as though something unscrupulous is happening. And I just want to play -- it's very short. It's just a six-second clip that sort of captures the essence of what people believe these videos represent. So listen here to one of your medical directors.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DR. DEBORAH NUCATOLA, SENIOR DIRECTOR OF MEDICAL SERVICES, PLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION: And a little bit better than break even in a way that, you know, seems reasonable.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CAMEROTA: That's where they're talking about the sale or the compensation for fetal tissue. And she says, if they can do a little better than break even and if it seems reasonable, they're happy to do that. How do you explain what's happening there?

LAGUENS: Well, we don't know -- we don't know exactly what she was responding to. That's the thing about these videos. They move around tape, one in front of the other so that you're not clear if she's even talking about fetal tissue. So that's one thing.

The second thing is, as you and I have discussed, they cut out nine or ten times where she absolutely clearly says, "This is not about profit. This is a small program where women can choose to make this donation. And it is only allowable and only Planned Parenthood's policy to be able to be reimbursed at cost."

CAMEROTA: Yes.

LAGUENS: Period.

CAMEROTA: In fact, when we read the transcript, they do say that over and over again. Planned Parenthood representatives do say, over and over again, "We're just trying to recoup our costs." You're right about that.

However, above and beyond that transaction, what has gotten the public's attention is perhaps the sort of attitude with which some of these -- these transactions are conducted. Even Hillary Clinton. I mean, even people in the Democratic Party have called these videos disturbing.

As a result of these videos, Dawn, is there any soul searching that's going on in Planned Parenthood today? Not, obviously, about the mission statement of what Planned Parenthood does, but perhaps about the method or the means of talking about it?

LAGUENS: Well, we've reiterated that our commitment to compassion and sensitivity, we expect that from everyone. And we are doubling our commitment to that in all ways.

But our care is excellent. As you saw, polls came out last night that actually showed Planned Parenthood's favorability, even after all this and all of the deceptiveness and the conversation in the Republican primary about this, more favorable than any political candidate. More favorable than the president. More favorable than the National Rifle Association. Top of the list, Planned Parenthood.

And that's because real Americans come to Planned Parenthood for care. And outside of the Beltway, they know what Planned Parenthood is. They know the compassion of our doctors and staff. And they know that a lot of these political games are not intended to help them. They are to score political points. CAMEROTA: So, nothing -- so in other words, nothing will change

within Planned Parenthood as a result of these videos and people feeling as though they're at least disturbing?

LAGUENS: Well, I think I've just said, Alisyn, that Planned Parenthood takes seriously our commitment to do all things with compassion and sensitivity. And if anybody in our organization doesn't feel like they are doing that or we're not doing that for the people we serve, we take a look at that; and we make lots of changes, all the time, to improve.

CAMEROTA: OK.

LAGUENS: What we're seeing here are attacks on people's ability to get healthcare. We're seeing attacks that are intended, in their end analysis, to get rid of safe, legal abortion in this country and destroy Planned Parenthood, who stands up for the reproductive health rights and freedom of women and all people in this country.

CAMEROTA: Dawn Laguens, thanks so much for being on NEW DAY and explaining all of this to us. We appreciate seeing you.

LAGUENS: Thank you, Alisyn.

CAMEROTA: In our next hour, we will hear from David Daleiden. He is the anti -- he is the face of the antiabortion group behind the controversial undercover videos that ignited this debate.

PEREIRA: Want to show you a situation happening right now in India. Heavy rain and flooding proving deadly there. At least 178 people have been killed by raging waters that have affected some 10 million people across India. Not the only place hit, though. Flooding also hit China hard, even washing away this road. It collapsed straight down. The flooding has also killed 47 people in Myanmar and 23 people in Vietnam.

CUOMO: Wow. Look at those pictures.

All right. So funny woman Amy Schumer, you know here. Well, she's going to bat for a new gun control bill. She's joining her cousin, Senator Schumer. Did you know they were related? Now you do. The New York Senator and Schumer are calling for stronger background checks on gun buyers. Schumer, the actress, says she joined the fight after a gunman killed two people inside a Louisiana movie theater that was showing her new film, "Trainwreck." Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

AMY SCHUMER, COMEDIAN/ACTRESS: My heart goes out to Jillian and Mayci, to the survivors, to the families, and everyone who is tied to the tragic, senseless and horrifying actions of this man, who shouldn't have been able to put his hands on a gun in the first place. I'm not sure why this man chose my movie to end these two beautiful lives and injure nine others, but it was very personal for me.

(END VIDEO CLIP) CUOMO: Schumer says she actually received a letter from a Sandy Hook family member, calling on her to be a voice for women against gun violence. The comedian responded with a tweet saying, "Don't worry, I'm on it."

CAMEROTA: Well, there's outrage this morning after a Kentucky sheriff's deputy is caught on tape, handcuffing an 8-year-old boy above the elbows for allegedly misbehaving in class. The boy has ADHD. And now the ACLU and a children's advocacy group are suing on behalf of that boy and a 9-year-old girl also restrained by the same officer. CNN's Martin Savidge is live in Atlanta.

Tell us more, Martin.

MARTIN SAVIDGE, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Morning, Alisyn.

This lawsuit -- you point out the video you're about to see -- actually occurred in November of 2014. The lawsuit was filed on Monday. And it alleges the children were traumatized as a result of being punished for behavior that they really couldn't control. Take a look.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

KEVIN SUMNER, SHERIFF'S DEPUTY: Now you need to behave the way you know you're supposed to or you suffer the consequences. And it's your decision to behave this way.

SAVIDGE (voice-over): This controversial video is difficult to watch.

SUMNER: You don't get to swing at me like that.

SAVIDGE: The sheriff's deputy, now facing a federal lawsuit by the ACLU, restrains the third-grade boy with handcuffs. According to the complaint, the boy's arms pulled with excessive force behind his back. He can be heard crying out in pain.

The small, 8-year-old child who, according to the lawsuit, suffers from disabilities related to ADHD and a history of trauma, is shown in the 15-minute video cuffed at the biceps. His wrists apparently too small for the adult-sized restraints.

SUMNER: You can do what we've asked you to, or you can suffer the consequences.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It hurts!

SUMNER: Now sit down in the chair like I've asked you to.

SAVIDGE: That officer, who works at Latonia Elementary, identified in court documents as Deputy Kevin Sumner of the Kentucky Sheriff's Office. Also named in the lawsuit, the sheriff of Kenton County, alleging his failure to adequately train and supervise Sumner.

SUMNER: If you want the handcuffs off, you're going to have to behave and ask me nicely. And if you're behaving, I will take them off. But as long as you're acting up, you're not going to get them off. Are you done yet?

SAVIDGE: The complaint was submitted on behalf of the young boy from the video, identified only as S.R., as well as another special needs student, a 9-year-old girl, who was also handcuffed in the same manner by Officer Sumner on two separate occasions, causing pain and trauma, according to the lawsuit.

HOWARD: There was no legitimate law enforcement purpose there. Neither child had committed a crime. And all of their behavior was related to their specific disabilities.

SUMNER: Look at me for a minute. Look at me for a minute. Look at me. If you want the handcuffs off, you've got to stop kicking. Do you want them off or not?

(END VIDEOTAPE)

SAVIDGE: We reached out to the sheriff's office. They had no comment on this case at this particular time. We've also reached out to the school district. But so far, we have not heard back from anyone.

It should be pointed out that in that lawsuit, there is a statement that tries to explain the officer's actions, saying that this child apparently refused directives that came from the vice principal, also from teachers and that at one point, that deputy says that the child actually took a swing at him with his elbows. So there it is.

Back to you guys.

CAMEROTA: So hard to watch.

PEREIRA: Very difficult to watch.

CAMEROTA: The little boy wailing.

PEREIRA: I can't get out of my mind that it's an 8-year-old child, an 8-year-old.

[07:15:05] CUOMO: And the cuffs are high. He doesn't have restraints made for the kid. The school policy is not to have restraints. The officer says he had to use them. It's a no-win situation for the officer.

CAMEROTA: Right.

CUOMO: He actually works there.

Look, I think the message it shouts is you have to do better than this.

CAMEROTA: Yes.

CUOMO: This is a regular school. These kinds of kids only make up 12 percent of the population, but there's 75 percent of the kids that get restrained this way.

CAMEROTA: I mean, you had a debate about it in the past hour. You're having another one coming up about so what is the answer?

CUOMO: Do better.

CAMEROTA: But I mean, if a child is unruly, what is the procedure?

PEREIRA: It seems to me that there's sort of white, black, and there's a lot of gray area in the middle. They have untrained...

CUOMO: They have -- before you get to cuffs. Remember, this school doesn't allow it. What does that mean? They've learned there are better ways to do it.

PEREIRA: Which they failed here.

We're going to have more on this video ahead. What is the possible fallout for the officer? We'll put that question to our legal panel, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No! It hurts.

SUMNER: Now, you're going to behave the way you know you're supposed to or you suffer the consequences. It was your decision to behave this way.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CUOMO: It's exactly what it looks like. It's an 8-year-old handcuffed up above the elbows, in pain. The boy has ADHD, and it is now the subject of a lawsuit. A complaint filed by the ACLU that that officer handcuffed a kid, and he actually handcuffed another little girl twice before. Both of them had ADHD. The sheriff says the key question is why he had to do it.

Let's figure out if this is legal and if it's appropriate and when. CNN legal analyst, criminal defense attorney Danny Cevallos and CNN legal analyst, Paul Callan -- he's a criminal defense attorney and a former prosecutor.

Paul, is what the sheriff did legal under these circumstances?

PAUL CALLAN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Well, we're going to have to see what happens in federal court.

CUOMO: Don't hedge.

CALLAN: The law -- the law says that the amount of force applied has to be commensurate with the threat posed. So if the child is a danger to himself, he's going to run out into the road or he's going to hurt somebody else, yes, you can restrain him.

But the second question is were those restraints appropriate? Obviously, they had improper equipment, since they had to handcuff him at the elbows. They need something better to deal with elementary- school kids.

CUOMO: Danny, the school says, "We do not allow handcuffs, because we've learned to do it a better way, especially with these kids. That we have behaviors and techniques and holds so that you don't have to treat them like a perp on the street." What do you say?

DANNY CEVALLOS, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Well, for the most part, Kentucky is in a very permissive legal framework when it comes to using restraint and/or seclusion on school children. And up until very recently, there was virtually no legislation governing the use of restraint and seclusion on school children, while there was plenty involving children in hospitals, children in juvenile detention facilities.

But I will -- I will make a bet that Mr. Callan will not, and that is that this may -- this is a strong case for liability. Because these cases, while they are very difficult to win, often turn on the distinction between was this for -- was this restraint for discipline and punishment or was it related to safety?

And, my Exhibit A would be that video where you hear the officer's voice saying, "Are you going to behave? Are you going to stop misbehaving?" or whatever it is he's saying. That would be my Exhibit A to demonstrate that this was not to protect anyone; this was not safety. No one was concerned about these alleged elbows that were -- that apparently were in a statement.

In reality, this was about discipline. This was about misbehavior. And it appears, while again, cases against schools are very difficult to win, this, potentially, could meet that bar, under a what we call Section 1983 claim or a due process clause 14th Amendment claim.

CUOMO: While they're hard to win, Paul, isn't it in part true, at least, that one of the reasons we have this situation with a resource officer, who's really just a sheriff there, is because the schools are trying to shift liability away from themselves because of lawsuits?

CALLAN: Yes, it's really -- we're turning everything in this country into a federal lawsuit, it would seem. You know, I'm thinking back to when I was in school, and probably when you were in school, when corporal punishment was rather commonly used, especially in parochial schools. We have gone beyond that now. And we're very -- we try to be very, very careful about when we use it.

But second-guessing every situation where a child has to be restrained, should it lead to a federal lawsuit? I don't know. You have to look at the specific facts.

And one thing -- I hate to disagree with Danny, because he may be right that the force here was not appropriate. But there are two things you have to prove in a lawsuit. You have to prove long-term injury or damages; and was this child permanently injured by this?

You know, I can remember a few things, punishments that were administered to me when I was a kid, and I seem to have survived them. And hopefully, this child will survive this. CUOMO: As we both know, that's not the bar. The bar should be, can we do better?

What I think is missing in this situation, guys, is -- and Danny, I'll direct this at you. This is about failure all the down the line. These kids, ADHD, whatever group you want to put them in, are about 10-12 percent of the population of your school kids. They are 75 percent of the cases where this kind of restraint is done. So Danny, that makes the question about the system. Long-term damage to the kid is one factor. Where were the teachers? Where was the training? Where was the training for this resource officer? Where is the dedication to dealing with these kids who need special help?

CEVALLOS: I'm going to add to what you said, Chris. And I found that an Office of Civil Rights survey found in 2009, in Kentucky, out of about 900 of these restraints or seclusion, only 20 were not -- were children without disabilities. So take your number and even inflate it more for the Commonwealth of Kentucky.

But look, to play devil's advocate to what you're saying, Chris, at the same time, a lot of these teachers may be articulating legitimate safety concerns. I think, as someone said just a few minutes ago, there is some gray area. And when we're talking about the distinction between safety and mere misbehavior, it's easy for us in retrospect, with hindsight, to say this moment required this amount of force.

But at the moment, at that time, believe me, those teachers faced also liability, if that child hurts another child. So it's one of those darned if you do, darned if you don't. And teachers are left making split-second decisions. And then we have federal lawsuits with respect to any level of damages.

[07:25:08] CUOMO: Right. You've given -- you've given the benefit of facts to a situation that we don't know it applies yet. I mean, one, this kid was held in these restraints for 15 minutes. It was a cop, not a teacher. We don't see what was this threat of this elbow or something.

CALLAN: What we know about this cop...

CEVALLOS: The cop has more right to restrain than the teacher.

CALLAN: This cop supposedly is a former teacher. And he was trained. So...

CUOMO: Well, he wasn't trained to handcuff a kid above the elbow.

CALLAN: And I think we get back to the equipment thing. If you're going to have kids with disabilities, some of whom act out, you better have the proper equipment and trained people available. Obviously, the training and equipment was inadequate.

CUOMO: Danny, Paul, thank you very much.

I will just add this to home. When you're analyzing this situation, Mick, imagine if it were your kid, and then see what you think about the situation.

PEREIRA: And the other thing that we keep going back to, 8-year-old. That's a little child. A little boy. It's hard to watch. All right, Chris. Thanks for that conversation.

Well, today we know is the cut-off day for the first GOP debate. Who's in? Who's out? And how will those candidates fare against the Donald? John King previews the very crowded 2016 GOP debate ahead, "Inside Politics."

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)