Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Cheney Ends Senate Bid, Cites Family Health; New York Post Cover Sparks Outrage; Some GOP Back Unemployment Deal; Supreme Court Blocks Utah Same-Sex Marriage

Aired January 06, 2014 - 10:30   ET

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

CAROL COSTELLO, CNN ANCHOR: A pro-Hillary Clinton Super PAC has rented out the e-mail list of Clinton's 2008 presidential campaign. It's first reported by "Time" magazine. The Ready for Hillary Group wanted to connect with past supporters. And the plan seems to have worked, the group tweeted that it made the biggest one-day online fundraising hall Sunday. Clinton has not yet said whether she'll even run for the White House.

A political shocker this morning and first on CNN, Liz Cheney, Dick's daughter, is dropping her bid for the U.S. senate. In a statement, Cheney says quote, "Serious health issues have recently arisen in our family, and under the circumstances, I have decided to discontinue my campaign."

Now it's unclear what the health issues are. But we do know Cheney's campaign was not going well. She alienated Wyoming voters over residency issues and alienated her own sister when came out against same-sex marriage. Liz's sister Mary is gay and married.

CNN's national political reporter Peter Hamby broke that story. Also with me Ross Douthat a political commentator for CNN and columnist for "The New York Times" and Marc Lamont Hill who is also a CNN political commentator and he also writes for the "Huffington Post." Welcome to all of you.

PETER HAMBY, CNN NATIONAL POLITICAL REPORTER: Thanks Carol.

COSTELLO: That was not a very excited thank you.

HAMBY: It's negative 47 degrees you know.

COSTELLO: OK, I'll take that, I understand.

Peter, I want to start with you. Do we know who is ill in the Cheney family?

HAMBY: We don't yet. And that is sort of the big question that we have at the moment. She did make a reference to her children in the statement that she released. She has five children -- daughters and sons. But we do not know the real reason that she has decided to drop out of the race, other than citing these sort of personal concerns.

And as you mentioned I mean personal concerns have been thrust in the spotlight throughout this campaign. That dispute she had with her sister, Mary, over same-sex marriage played out in full view of the media. And Mary went on Facebook. Liz was on Fox News and Dick Cheney came out with a statement in the course of this saying that it was his family felt pained excuse me that this dispute was playing out in the public.

So the personal life has really overshadowed the campaign throughout. So perhaps it's fitting that it comes to an end this way -- Carol.

COSTELLO: Yes well, Marc, you heard Peter, Cheney was not doing well on the polls. Some accused her of being a carpet bagger. Others were upset she threw her own sister under the bus when she came out against same-sex marriage.

Is this surprising in light though of who her father is? Shouldn't the Cheney name carry weight?

HAMBY: Well that's really interesting question, I mean yes, technically, back home, Dick Cheney represented Wyoming in Congress for six terms. But Liz Cheney really came of age and grew up in Washington and Virginia. She only moved back to Wyoming in 2012. And there was this flap about her fishing license, which seemed like a minor thing last year.

But that sort of brought this back into the spotlight. Because she apparently illegally obtained a fishing license, because she hadn't lived in Wyoming for a year, which is what you need to do to get one of those licenses. So this is sort of like brought attention back to the fact that she was, you know quote, unquote, "a carpet bagger." And this was what her opponents in the race were sort of drawing attention to. That she wasn't from Wyoming and also actually ran a campaign ad stressing her family roots in Wyoming.

You now but to others, that kind of seemed like she was trying too hard. If you're actually from Wyoming, you don't need to go on TV and put your family in a TV and say, "Hey, I'm from Wyoming, I'm from Wyoming." So this is a real problem for her and the incumbent senator, Mike Enzi, really seemed to have an advantage. There weren't a lot of polls in the race but most GOP insiders really watching this campaign suspected that Enzi really had a pretty strong institutional advantage and the popular advantage.

COSTELLO: Right, right.

HAMBY: Even though we didn't see that too many polls Carol.

COSTELLO: So -- so, Ross, I was wondering, does this debacle, and some like you know describe it like that. Does the Cheney name lose some luster because of this?

ROSS DOUTHAT, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well it was always a very strange campaign. Because you know Liz Cheney was basically trying to run the kind of outsider-based, sort of Tea Party driven, grassroots campaign that we have seen run very successfully in a lot of states against incumbent senators, especially long-serving incumbent senators in the Republican Party. But on the one hand as you know, as we've been talking about, she wasn't really an outsider in any meaningful sense. And you know she has the Cheney name one of the most famous names in Republican politics. Her issue in some sense was that she was too much of an insider being associated with Washington, D.C.

But then there was also the fact that it wasn't always clear what issues she was running on. And part of the reason there was such a flap over the same-sex marriage issue, was that you know a lot of people assumed that she had sort of pivoted to a more conservative position on that issue in an effort to be more in tune with Wyoming's primary electorate. But mostly it just highlighted the fact that you know Mike Enzi while I think perhaps a mediocrity in certain ways, is hardly, you know, hardly a sort of moderate or squishy senator.

And Liz Cheney's main sort of issue area is foreign policy, where she is extremely hawkish, extremely interventionist and that isn't a perspective that actually plays that well with the Republican base right now. I mean this is more the age of Rand Paul where if you are running from the right in a Republican primary, you probably don't want to be associated with the Bush/Cheney foreign policy record.

So it was always a kind of muddled campaign. And you know it's -- it's surprising that it ended this way specifically but it's not surprising that it didn't end in victory.

COSTELLO: Interesting. OK, so you bring up issues as they apply to the Republican Party. And Marc, this question is for you. After that bruising 2012 election and the pledge to broaden their focus, I'm talking about Republicans here. It seems the party maybe trying to shore up their base because some RNC members, including the RNC chair are set to participate in the annual march for life during their winter meeting in January. Smart move?

MARC LAMONT HILL, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well it's an interesting thing here, right. On the one hand, the Republican Party is attempting to shore up its base. It's attempting to hold on to its fundamental core principles, whatever those are. The other in they do these autopsies where they decide they need to widen the tent where they need to not rely on ideological purity in order to push a campaign or push a particular candidate.

And as a result you see this internal tension. And I think the idea of pausing and having a -- and honoring a march for life actually makes sense if that is in fact where your ideology is positioned. But I think they have to be very careful not to reassert themselves and rearticulate themselves as the very thing they've been running from which is a party that don't want expand. That won't move with the times, that won't speak to the interests and ideologies of younger members of its party.

And that's why again you see like a Liz Cheney campaign sort of flutter out. Because once again she is not representing anything different. She is running against the establishment at the very same time that she in many ways is the establishment. And people are happy with the establishment in the state. COSTELLO: Well let's go back to the RNC because I just want to be clear the RNC is having its meeting in January and that's when this big pro-life rally is scheduled for.

So actually RNC is setting aside a few hours so its members can attend the pro-life rally. So --

DOUTHAT: I don't understand why this is even a story frankly. I mean this is -- this is not a case of the RNC staking out some kind of you know putting out a press release saying you know everything Todd Akin said was amazing and we need to be even more pro-life than ever before.

This a case of the Republican National Committee which represents the half of the country that opposes abortion, roughly speaking, letting it's members participate in a march that happens every year on the anniversary of Roe Versus Wade.

And frankly isn't a terribly partisan affair to begin with. I mean it's very ideological in the sense that it's clearly anti-abortion. But it's not a sort of you know Republican rally in the first place.

So frankly, this seems to be more of a case of sort of the media wanting to wag its finger at Republicans and say, "You know look, you are paying attention to your base." Of course they are going to pay attention to their base.

HILL: Exactly.

DOUTHAT: And you know the challenge --

HILL: But I do think it's a public gesture though. I do think it's a very deliberate public gesture to show that while we're trying to expand our tent we're not abandoning a particular traditional Republican thinking.

DOUTHAT: I agree but it's -- but it's the kind of gesture that a political party has to make. I mean it's no different from a Democratic Party saying "Well we need to reach out to the center you know we're also going to continue to stand for the principles that we've always stood for."

And so it's a balancing act and not I think a terribly controversial move in that balancing act.

(CROSSTALK)

COSTELLO: OK, I'm going to look at my -- you guys, can you guys pause just a second. I'm going to look at my e-mail box because we have a bit of breaking news coming from the Supreme Court. Let me just look at it. I'm trying to like turn my head off camera. OK, so the Supreme Court has -- the State Supreme Court of Utah has blocked marriage for same such -- same-sex couples there. Is that correct? I'm talking to my people in the booth. That is correct. So --

DOUTHAT: We can't confirm that. COSTELLO: Well, CNN has -- CNN has confirmed that the State Supreme Court in Utah has blocked same-sex marriages from taking place. And of course, there was a big victory for those who were in favor of same-sex marriage and now this obviously is a big loss for them, Marc.

HILL: Absolutely. And not entirely a shocker, as you know. Courts are, as much as they attempt to be impartial and distance, all courts are informed and shaped by the people who appoint them. And so in a state like Utah, it is not entirely a shocker but it is somewhat moving outside of the stream in the current of the rest of the country where you see people moving toward same-sex marriage. Marriage equality is probably an inevitability around the country. It's a little bit surprising that Utah is one of the outliers.

COSTELLO: All right Peter Hamby, Ross Douthat, Marc Lamont Hill thanks so much for being with me. I appreciate it.

And just to reiterate for those of you who didn't catch it I'm just going to read it right on my e-mail box, "Marriage licenses for same- sex couples in Utah can no longer be issued after the Supreme Court on Friday ruled in favor of the state's request to temporarily block the impact of a federal judge's recent ruling striking down as unconstitutional a ban of gays and lesbians from legal wedlock."

We'll have much more on this story after a break. We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COSTELLO: All right. Just to be clear about what I told you before the break the U.S. Supreme Court has temporarily blocked further same- sex marriages in Utah. So for now, the state can no longer issue marriage licenses for same-sex couples.

I'm trying to get a-hold of Jeffrey Toobin so he can parse this out for us. But I just wanted to be extra, extra clear.

Here are now the news this morning, outrage in New York City over this headline in the "New York Post." That's a picture of a millionaire Menachem Stark, a Hasidic Jew whose charred body was found in a dumpster on Friday. The headline beside his picture reads, "Who wouldn't want him dead?" The "Post" went on to label Stark as a slumlord who had shady business practices.

Well today Stark's supporters are demanding an apology asserting Osama bin Laden got better treatment from the "New York Post". CNN's Susan Candiotti joins me live from New York with more on this story. Good morning.

SUSAN CANDIOTTI, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Good morning Carol. It was a horrific death stunning those who knew real estate developer Menachem Stark here in New York. Stark a Hasidic Jew left work Thursday and his family never saw him again. His charred remains discovered in the next county over inside a trash bin. Police say he had several injuries. Now take a look at security video that is -- that was taken when Stark left work on a very cold and snowy Thursday night. If you look closely, police say you can see Stark being hustled into a van. We have another piece of video that was taken even before this one. The struggle goes on for at least two minutes. And it's unclear how many people are involved.

Who kidnapped him, why, how did his body get set on fire? There are so many questions.

But what's especially angering those who knew the victim is that front page of Saturday's "New York Post" with Stark's photo and that banner headline "Who didn't want him dead?" The newspaper alleges some of his tenants had ongoing complaints and that he had many code violations in buildings he owned and labels him a slum lord.

Now Stark supporters angrily denounced the headline charging it justifies his death. Hundreds came to his funeral saying Stark was a generous man who made charity a huge part of his life and tried to make sense of the senseless.

RABBI DAVID NIEDERMAN, UNITED JEWISH ORGANIZATION: It is basically a new culture, a new form of justice. If you have some grievances, there are two avenues. Until now, you knew that there is a justice system.

But now, there is no way to do that. That is basically, God forbid, destroy and kill a person.

CANDIOTTI: Now, police say they are looking at any number of possible motives, including his real estate business. As for the tabloid's shocking front page headline, a spokeswoman issued this statement. "The 'Post' does not say Mr. Stark deserved to die but our reporting showed that he had many enemies which may have led to the commission of this terrible crime.

Carol, detectives are, of course, working around the clock to try to solve this alleged kidnapping and murder.

COSTELLO: All right. Susan Candiotti reporting this morning -- live. Thanks so much.

Again, we're going to go back to that breaking news. The U.S. Supreme Court halting same-sex marriages in Utah -- could no longer, at least temporarily, issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. But let's go to our legal analyst, Jeffrey Toobin. He knows more than I do. Explain this ruling to us, Jeffrey.

JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: Well, it is actually pretty simple. What happened was the district court judge in Utah said, same-sex marriage is now legal in Utah. He declined to issue a stay so hundreds of people, same-sex couples, got married.

Today, just moments ago, the United States Supreme Court unanimously, that is with no dissents, said, we do want to stay in this case. So there will be no same-sex marriage while the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit considers this case. That could take weeks or even months.

So I think what's clear now is that there will be no same-sex marriages in Utah for some time. What remains -- what now is going to be unclear is what is the status of the people who did get married in Utah. Presumably, their marriages remain valid but this is one of the many unfolding legal issues surrounding same-sex marriage in Utah and around the country.

COSTELLO: I was just going to ask you that. As far as national implications, there are some, aren't there?

TOOBIN: Well, there really are. Because this case is really a very broad challenge to the issue you of forbidding same-sex couples from getting married. Basically, what the district court judge in Utah said was, the United States Constitution forbids the state of Utah from preventing same-sex couples from getting married.

If you were to extend that, the logic of his opinion, to the whole country, same-sex marriage would be legal everywhere. So unlike the two cases the Supreme Court decided earlier this year based on Proposition A in California and the Defense of Marriage Act, this is really a broad challenge to whether same-sex couples can get married everywhere.

That case is now working its way through the appeals court that covers the state of Utah and several other western states. But ultimately it could get to the Supreme Court. And it could be the challenge that a lot of people have been waiting for, which is does the United States Constitution guarantee a right to marriage for everyone?

That's the issue in this case. And it is now working its way through the courts. It could take quite some time. But it is now in the court of appeals. And it may wind up in the Supreme Court.

COSTELLO: Fascinating. Jeffrey Toobin, thanks so much.

Still to come in the NEWSROOM, you could call it the battle over benefits. Congress and the White House getting ready to face off over extending unemployment insurance -- CNN chief business correspondent Christine Romans is in New York. Hi Christine

CHRISTINE ROMANS, CNN CHIEF BUSINESS CORRESPONDENT: Carol these checks are about $300 a week and the fight over them still heating up. That will be the big battle for the week. I'll have that right after the break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

Checking our top stories at 51 minutes past the hour. Dennis Rodman is on his latest basketball diplomacy trip to North Korea. Rodman and six other former NBA players took a flight from the Beijing Airport today. The Americans are scheduled to play an exhibition game on Wednesday, believed to be North Korean leader, Kim Jong-Un's birthday.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) DENNIS RODMAN, FORMER NBA PLAYER: I'm going there to interact with him on what he loves -- sports. He loves sports. I like the guy. The guy is awesome to me. That's about it. No more.

One thing I'm showing people that we can actually get along. Let's get along as human beings, not politicians or nothing like that. I'm not trying to save the world. I'm not trying to save Kenneth Bae or all these people. That's not my job. My job is one thing, sports. They love sports. He loves sports. That's it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COSTELLO: The State Department says it has nothing to do with Rodman's visits to North Korea and said attention should be focused on the brutality of Kim's regime.

Earlier this morning, Pope Francis celebrated the Epiphany at the Vatican marking the wise men's visitation of Jesus. The Pope announced Sunday he will be traveling to the Holy Land in May.

As Congress returns to work, the White House is calling on lawmakers to extend emergency unemployment benefits for thousands of Americans. But extending benefits comes with a cost. CNN's chief business correspondent, Christine Romans, is live with that side of the story -- good morning.

ROMANS: Good morning -- Carol. Yes, the cost is about $26 billion. And in Washington, if you want to spend $26 billion for what is supposed to be an emergency program, you are going to have to find ways to pay for it, that's at least what the Republicans are saying.

So these 1.3 million people at the end of the year they started losing their benefits -- those benefits $300 a week. What are these benefits? These aren't the state benefits. When you lose your job, you get a jobless check. This is the emergency recessionary program that is prolonged benefits, up to 99 weeks of unemployment benefits.

And some Republicans have said this has gone from an emergency to being potentially, a new entitlement. It could be a crutch for people who are unemployed. But a lot of economists say this money goes right into the economy. It is not going to last forever. This is probably that last you're even going to see. But it is the right thing to do right now, to extend those benefits.

It is something the White House has said. But it's also something that Mohamed El-Erian told me. He runs the biggest bond fund in the world. Listen to how he explained it Carol

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MOHAMED EL-ERIAN, CEO, PIMCO: To cut them out at this point is bad economics. There's also horrible social policy. We know we have a long-term unemployment problem. We know that 38 percent of the unemployed are long-term unemployed. And it is through no fault of their own. It's that system itself is having problems generating jobs for them. (END VIDEO CLIP)

ROMANS: I think a lot of people sort of think of 99 weeks of unemployment and they say, at what point is this too much. You know, we can't go on giving checks to people that have been out of work forever. But at least from the economic point of view Mohamed El- Erian and others are saying, for right now, it still makes sense because the job market is slowly getting better.

Those long-term unemployed, things have not been getting better for them. The house ways and means committee had a report that says, it's already taken $400 million out of the economy -- the ending of those checks.

So I think that the betting on Wall Street and Washington is that they will somehow come up with a way to extend those benefits, Carol but it won't go on forever. Definitely, that program -- that emergency program will be done by the end of the year -- Carol.

COSTELLO: All right. Christine Romans, reporting live for us this morning. Thank you so much.

ROMANS: You're welcome.

COSTELLO: Still to come in the NEWSROOM, college football crowns a champion tonight. The BCS is going out with a bang, Rachel Nichols.

(AUDIO GAP)

RACHEL NICHOLS, CNN SPORTS: All about it coming up after this break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COSTELLO: Colin Kaepernick didn't let the Green Bay Packers or the brutally cold conditions at Lambeau stop him. San Francisco 49ers quarterback played slick bliss (ph) beating a game-winning drop (inaudible) into the next round of the NFL playoffs.

CNN's Rachel Nichols is here to wrap up wild card weekend. And what a weekend it was?

NICHOLS: Yes, absolutely. Three of the four games coming down to just three points or less. For my money, the most exciting, the Indianapolis Colts comeback win over the Kansas City Chiefs led by their young quarterback, Andrew Luck. This is a kid that a lot of people have tabbed as the next John Elway.

But he is the guy who showed determination, showed grit. We love sports, right Carol, when it is a metaphor for something bigger. And this kid told his team when they were down nearly 30 points at half- time, "You stay with me. I will get you there. We will win this game." We got to watch him do it.

He does have the hall of fame career we are all predicting for him. We are all going to remember this weekend as the point where it all started, where his legend really got going off the ground. COSTELLO: That was an awesome play. He was like a torpedo going into the end zone. That was amazing.

We have to talk about the BCS game because it's the last game ever and then they go to the college playoff system. This should be one exciting game, maybe the most ever.

NICHOLS: Yes. They are billing it as the Team of destiny versus the Team of Dominance. Florida State has had such a good record. Everyone is telling those Seminoles players, come on, you are never going to beat this Auburn team that has had so many Houdini-like escapes all season.

But I have to tell you, when you hear the Seminole players, they don't seem like they care about it. It reminds me of the Arizona Diamondbacks pitcher, Curt Schilling where he said about the Yankees once, "destiny, aura and mystique, those are just strippers I know."

The Florida State players -- they don't seem to care about Auburn destiny we'll have to see what happens tonight.

COSTELLO: Can't wait.

Thank you Rachel.

And thank you for joining me today. I'm Carol Costello.

"LEGAL VIEW" with Ashleigh Banfield starts now.