Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Interview With Utah Senator Orrin Hatch; Senate Changes Filibuster Rule; London Rescue

Aired November 21, 2013 - 15:00   ET

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

BALDWIN: So here is a quick explainer on the math behind the so- called "nuclear option." There are 55 Democrats in the United States Senate right now, 45 Republicans. Before Democrats voted, just a couple of hours ago, to change the rules here in this historic moment, you needed a supermajority, about 60 votes, to overcome a filibuster. Filibuster, that's when the minority party puts the brakes on Senate business.

This nuclear option blew that up, totally changed the rule, lowered that number from 60 to 51. That's a simple majority. This is for most nominees, except Supreme Court nominees specifically; 51 votes wins simple majority.

Let's talk to two folks on this, chief political correspondent, host of "STATE OF THE UNION," Candy Crowley, and joining me on the phone is our CNN senior legal analyst Jeff Toobin to help put this in perspective.

Candy, before we talk about the history that was made, I'm just curious, why even call this a nuclear option? Where did that come from?

CANDY CROWLEY, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: The nuclear option is the nuclear option because everybody knew that if the rules were changed, if the filibuster rules were changed, it would cause an explosion on Capitol Hill in terms of ill will, that -- and, you know, you can say, how much worse can it get? I guess we will see.

But the truth is you now have people, I think, as our Dana Bash was reporting, people like Lindsey Graham and John McCain, who have been willing to work across the aisle on issues like immigration, et cetera, going, you're going to regret this.

(CROSSTALK)

BALDWIN: This is going to pay a heavy price. This is what John McCain said.

CROWLEY: Yes, absolutely, absolutely. And so that's how it got its name, because everyone knew it would just blow up the aura on Capitol Hill.

BALDWIN: OK.

And, Jeff Toobin, this is a big deal. This is a big deal when you think big picture in terms of the president's legacy. I heard you on the air earlier saying this could be maybe, maybe almost as a big a deal as say his signature piece of legislation, as big as Obamacare, yes?

JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: Absolutely, because the D.C. Circuit is the most important court in the United States.

President Obama has had five nominations. Four of them have been filibustered. That's for the Supreme Court. There are four current Supreme Court justices, John Roberts, John Thomas, Antonin Scalia, and Ruth Ginsburg, who used to serve on the court. As a result of today's decision, Obama is going to have to four of those five confirmed. That's an enormous (AUDIO GAP) and those judges will all serve long as Barack Obama is back in private life.

Just enormous power and enormous power. It's all over the country. It will (AUDIO GAP) it will be a big part of his legacy.

BALDWIN: OK.

Candy, let's make this point because, to be fair, this is something that the Democrats, I talked to Richard Blumenthal, Democrat from Connecticut. He said this is absolutely a step in the right direction. Obviously, we heard from the president at the top of the hour saying this is going to end this trend of obstructionism, but it was Republicans not too long ago who wanted the same thing, correct?

CROWLEY: Yes, yes. We have a lot of bipartisan hypocrisy, you will be happy to know.

When during the Bush administration -- and we should say the Democrats are right. It has certainly escalated during the presidency of Barack Obama, the -- obstructing judges, obstructing other nominees that have to go through Capitol Hill. But, nonetheless, Republicans felt very much the same way during a portion of the Bush administration.

And Democrats were arguing against it, including those that you're hearing today arguing for it, saying this has just gone too far. They're taking it a whole new level, et cetera, et cetera. One of those was then-Senator Barack Obama. So it is like all politics. You know, the shoe's always on the other foot because eventually, everyone knows that the Democrats will be in the minority in the Senate at some point.

And I think one of the things that, yes, it is about, that we should never underestimate what Jeffrey was just saying, which is courts are so important in the long term, in terms of the legacy of a president, not just the Supreme Court, but the circuit courts and on down.

And you're able to put folks in there that are liberal or conservative, depending on your presidency, but we should also say that minorities have used these nominees sometimes, not because they're against the nominee, but because they need something. Lindsey Graham recently started a thing where he said, look, I'm going to put a hold on all nominations until they give me more Benghazi information.

BALDWIN: Right.

CROWLEY: So it's leverage. And so, why would you do that? What does one have to do with the other? He said it's the only leverage I have got. It takes a powerful tool away from the minority, not just a blocked nomination, but to get some stuff done.

BALDWIN: And that's what the president said not too long ago. He said, look, some of these filibusters, it's not over substance. It is just to gum up the system. It's about politics and, to your point, it goes both ways.

Candy Crowley, always a pleasure. You can watch Candy of course each and every Sunday on "STATE OF THE UNION," 9:00 a.m. here on CNN, and, Mr. Jeffrey Toobin, appreciate you as well.

Let's continue to talk about this, because this controversial and let me add historic rule change in our nation's Capitol, it may actually make things worse in terms of bipartisanship in Washington, D.C., because for years and years, people in the nation's capital, they have bickered about problems stemming from filibuster rules.

Now, as we are reporting, Democrats have taken action. This is an unprecedented maneuver, so how are Republican senators reacting?

Let's talk to one, Republican Senator Orrin Hatch.

Senator Hatch, pleasure to have you back on. Nice to see you, sir.

SEN. ORRIN HATCH (R), UTAH: Well, nice to see you. Nice to be on with you.

BALDWIN: What about the president's point? We heard him from the White House not too long ago talking about the increased gridlock, saying there have been too many filibusters in his terms by the minority party, that your party, as I mentioned, doing this not for substance, but to gum up the system. What say you?

HATCH: I don't think so.

As a matter of fact, this whole exercise, look, this is a use of just raw political power to get what they want on the part of the Democrats. And there's one reason they did it. They wanted to get away from being pummeled on Obamacare, where they're getting shredded alive by people all over the country because of the lousy bill that they passed.

And they passed it by a totally partisan vote. So this is just another way of creating some controversy, so they can get by on Obamacare and get through and not have the American people really realize how bad things are.

(CROSSTALK) BALDWIN: Is this not is this not something that your party wanted to do under President Bush not too many years ago? The shoe is just on the other foot now.

HATCH: Not really. Not really. We didn't pass a bill with 60 Republicans that everybody knows is a lousy stinking bill that is gumming up the country and hurting our country, and no, that's what's behind all of this.

And these people were willing to change the rules, break the rules to change the rules. Let me tell you, nobody's ever done that before. And, you know, in all honesty, filibustering judges started with Democrats. I know that Jeff Toobin mentioned John Roberts. It took 11 years for us to get Roberts through the Senate Judiciary Committee.

And I can tell you, almost 75 percent of all filibusters have been by Democrats. And so it's really hypocritical for them to seize this moment and use it in this way, so they can hopefully get the public off their backs with regard to Obamacare.

(CROSSTALK)

BALDWIN: I hear you. You call it a lousy stinking bill. I talked to a Democratic senator last hour who says -- he says, no, that's not in case. But let me play some sound. This is Richard Blumenthal, senator, Democrat, Connecticut. Roll it.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. RICHARD BLUMENTHAL (D), CONNECTICUT: It will enable the Senate to get things done. It will promote government working as the majority of Americans expect it to work. The overwhelming majority of Americans expect majority rule. I'm very glad that we now will be able to avoid a constitutional crisis.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BALDWIN: What do you make of his point, that most Americans support that?

HATCH: Well, spoken by somebody who hasn't ever been in the minority. See, that's the problem here. A high percentage of Democrats have never served in the minority. They don't realize how important these bills are -- these particular rules are.

And, of course, they're suffering because the American people are turning against them because of Obamacare. If they can create a false issue here, which it really is, then -- and get people off of Obamacare, they wanted to do that.

I happen to like Senator Blumenthal, but, you know, you have to talk to people who have been here year after year after year. And there are a number of Democrats who are very, very concerned.

(CROSSTALK) BALDWIN: I know. That was Senator McCain -- that was Senator McCain's point earlier today, right, specifically talking about these freshman members of the Senate.

But let me just ask you this.

HATCH: Yes.

BALDWIN: Let's flash-forward and play the what-if game and then I will be finished. In 2016, let's say your guy wins the White House. Let's sigh your party wins control of the Senate. Wouldn't you be singing another tune?

HATCH: Well, I hope not, because, in all honesty, we wouldn't be using it to cover up something that we're afraid the public finding out about, which is exactly what they're doing.

And they're doing it in a shameless fashion. I have got to tell you, it was raw political power. There was a lot of misinformation on this. The rules are really important. They were the first to gum up the rules in this area.

BALDWIN: OK.

HATCH: And, frankly, what they did today was shameless, and all because they want to get off the subject of Obamacare. And that's really what's behind all this.

BALDWIN: OK, Senator Orrin Hatch, I appreciate your time. Thank you very, very much, Republican from Utah.

Coming up, it sounds eerily similar to the Ariel Castro case out of Cleveland, but this time, the story is that police rescued these three women appeared to have been held captive for 30 years -- how a television show helped in that rescue. That is coming up.

Also, 50 years ago, Kennedy assassin Lee Harvey Oswald was arrested. He was shot while he was in handcuffs, and that Dallas police officer who was handcuffed to him, he joins me in mere minutes. Do not miss that.

Also, have you seen this? Police are calling it the knockout game, teens punching random people in the face. They're obviously rolling on it on video and cameras. What kind of trend is this? Is this a bunch of hype? Is this real? A lot going on today. Stay right here.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BALDWIN: One woman's desperate phone call to a charity has revealed the unthinkable. She and two other women were being held captive, imprisoned in this home in South London for more than three decades.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) KEVIN HYLAND, METROPOLITAN POLICE: Three women, a 69-year-old from Malaysia, a 57-year-old from Ireland, and a 30-year-old British woman were all rescued.

All three women were highly traumatized and were taken to a place of safety, where they remain. We have established that all three women were held in this situation for at least 30 years. They did have some controlled freedom.

The Human Trafficking Unit of the Metropolitan Police deals with many cases of servitude and forced labor. We have seen some cases where people have been held for up to 10 years, but we have never seen anything of this magnitude before.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BALDWIN: Police say the youngest of the victims, a 30-year-old British woman, spent her entire life as a slave, had zero contact with the outside world until that call came into the Freedom Charity.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ANEETA PREM, FREEDOM CHARITY: Well, they basically told us that they were being held and they needed support to come out of a very difficult situation. As a charity, we take every call very seriously. We have a 24/7 help line which they contacted. So, from that moment onward, it was very sensitive negotiations in order to assist them in escaping.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BALDWIN: Atika Shubert joins me London.

Atika, just hearing from the detective that they're highly traumatized, no shock there, but what can you tell me about the women? What can you tell me about these 30 years in captivity?

ATIKA SHUBERT, CNN CORRESPONDENT: We don't have that many details, except for what we heard from the police and the charity.

But, again, that phrase controlled freedom, it's not clear exactly how they were held against their will, but according to the charity that negotiated their way out, they say they were extremely terrified of the couple that was arrested earlier this morning, and this couple sort of apparently were kind of like the head of the family there.

We don't know much about the suspects either, other than the fact it's a 67-year-old man and a 67-year-old woman, and they were arrested at 7:30 in the morning. What we do know about the women is that they do not appear to be related to each other in any way and that the 30- year-old, as you pointed out, seems to have grown up entirely in the house. We don't know if she was born there or brought there as a very young infant.

BALDWIN: Just as we learned with Cleveland, the details will eke out. What about the home itself, though, Atika? Was this in a remote area of South London? Did they have neighbors? Could people have seen them?

SHUBERT: They had plenty of neighbors.

Lambeth is a very densely populated part of London. A lot of people live there. And the way it was described by the charity is that it was an ordinary home in an ordinary street. None of the neighbors seemed to have any idea that was going on. And again it's not clear exactly what the conditions were inside the house.

BALDWIN: Wow.

SHUBERT: One of the interesting things is the charity actually had to have prearranged phone times to talk to these women and then basically coax them out of the house.

And they walked to their freedom, where the charity and the police were standing by. So we're still really trying to understand what exactly kept them in the house.

BALDWIN: Atika Shubert, thank you so much for us in London.

Coming up, Congressman Trey Radel headed to rehab, instead of jail, after being charged with misdemeanor cocaine possession, and he's kind of following a familiar template, apology, rehab, redemption. But should he have apologized at all? We will discuss that.

Also, 50 years ago tomorrow, President John F. Kennedy was assassinated in Dallas. His assassin, Lee Harvey Oswald, he was arrested and shot while in handcuffs, and the man whose hand was handcuffed to that of Lee Harvey Oswald joins me live with a pretty incredible story next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BALDWIN: This is an incredible story. One Dallas detective dedicated his career to catching killers. But, for decades, Jim Leavelle has regretted not being able to save one. And this killer was the man who thrust the nation into deep mourning 50 years ago tomorrow, when he shot and killed President Kennedy.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: He's been shot. He's been shot.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BALDWIN: Jim Leavelle, he is the man in the white hat and suit who was handcuffed right there to Lee Harvey Oswald when he was shot. Leavelle nearly died that day himself.

Now, at age 93, he's part of this fascinating new documentary to be aired on the military channel that chronicles the capture and killing of JFK's assassin, really impressive detective work on behalf of Dallas P.D. It's called "Capturing Oswald." It comes from a unique perspective. Leavelle's granddaughter produced it.

And Jim Leavelle and his granddaughter, Kate Griendling, join me now live from Dallas. Welcome to both of you.

KATE GRIENDLING, FILMMAKER: Thank you.

JIM LEAVELLE, HANDCUFFED TO LEE HARVEY OSWALD: Thank you.

BALDWIN: I should point out, just talk about incredible circumstances, Mr. Leavelle. You were also at Pearl Harbor when it was attacked, just an aside for our viewers. Here you were, you were handcuffed to Oswald, and once again, you escaped death, and you believe, sir, let me hear the story from you, it's because of Lee Harvey Oswald's rib that you lived. Explain.

LEAVELLE: I was handcuffed to him because we had so many threats that they were going to take him away from us and do all sorts of bad things to him, so I decided to handcuff myself to him.

If they tried to take him, they would have to take me, too. And I wasn't going willingly, so they were going to have a little problem. And that was the reason for me being handcuffed to him.

BALDWIN: And so that shot, sir, it came through Oswald's, was it stomach and hit a rib? And had it not hit the rib, what would have happened?

LEAVELLE: Well, it went through him on him -- went through the stomach, back, and hit that -- cut an artery over on the right side and then hit the end of the seventh rib, I believe, bounced off and then it landed about three inches to the right of his navel.

And had it not hit that rib, it would have come on through and hit me roughly in my left side, just above the hip joint.

BALDWIN: My goodness. Can you just take me back, sir, to the moment that the shot was fired? This man you're cuffed to goes down. What did that feel like?

LEAVELLE: Well, it felt like I ought to be somewhere else, but that I wasn't.

So the fact is, when he fell, went down, of course, he lapsed into unconsciousness immediately. I reached over and grabbed Ruby by the shoulder and shoved back and down, and the other officers then jumped on him and crushed him onto the ground. But my big concern was trying to save my prisoner. And that was the reason I handcuffed myself to him, to try to save him.

BALDWIN: Ruby, the man who fired the shot that killed Oswald.

And, Kate, I promise I'm going to get to you, but I'm fascinated by your grandfather.

GRIENDLING: Most people are. BALDWIN: So, Mr. Leavelle, let me just ask you, let me just ask you this. At what point did it dawn on you that you had been talking to the man who assassinated the president?

LEAVELLE: When I began first talking to him, no, I did not realize he was a man who assassinated the president.

He was assigned to me because I was assigned to the murder of Officer Tippit. So anybody arrested in connection with Tippit's murder was assigned to me. And that's how come I was his officer that questioned him. And when I was talking to him, he had denied shooting anybody. But at that time, I didn't realize that he was going to be the suspect in a presidential assassination.

BALDWIN: And in terms of the detective work, Kate, this is I understand part of really the thrust of your documentary, "Capturing Oswald," on the heroism on behalf of the Dallas Police Department following that day 50 years ago, because this was 1963, right? The technology wasn't what we have today.

GRIENDLING: Correct.

I mean, it's an astounding accomplishment to capture anyone in 88 minutes, but to capture the assassin of the president in 88 minutes in 1963 is remarkable. And the men in the story are largely overshadowed and overlooked by conspiracy theories, and there's never been something that chronicles the perspective of the Dallas Police Department.

And what we were able to do is talk to the vigilant citizens that aided in the capture, my grandfather and his colleagues and the police beat reporters that really made this possible.

BALDWIN: And, Mr. Leavelle, will you be in Dealey Plaza tomorrow? I understand this is a really emotional day for so many. How will you be spending the day tomorrow?

LEAVELLE: Well, much like I am right now, I will be making a live interview tomorrow. And I also will be talking before a group of people in the city of Garland who gather on the square. And I will be talking to them also.

BALDWIN: What does this feel like, though, sir, 50 years later, talking about this moment that went down in the nation's history? You were so intrinsically linked to this in so many ways. What does it feel like right now in 2013 for you?

LEAVELLE: Well, I don't know how to explain that. I have been questioned about this for the last 50 years. So this is nothing new, really.

Everywhere I go, I get questioned about it. I even get recognized on the street and stopped and questioned about it. I get recognized in airports when I fly.

BALDWIN: Wow. LEAVELLE: So it's nothing new. It's all the same.

BALDWIN: All the same. What a role you played. Little did you know 50 years ago, Jim Leavelle.

Thank you so much.

And, Kate Griendling, thank you very much as well for spending the time with us today here at CNN.

America changed forever 50 years ago tomorrow, and now CNN puts you on the ground in Dallas, Texas. Please watch "The Assassination of JFK." It airs tonight at 9:00 p.m. Eastern and Pacific here on CNN.

And later, charges have been dropped against two teenage girls accused of bullying a Florida girl who later committed suicide. After being accused of a crime like that and then having the charges dropped, what happens now?

And Congressman Trey Radel apologizing for his recent arrest for cocaine possession and not stepping down. Will the American people forgive him? Does there need to even be an apology to his constituents in the first place? We're going to tackle that.

You're watching CNN.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)