Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Possibly More Trouble For New Jersey Governor; Plane Lands At Wrong Airport; Tap Water Safe To Drink In Some Areas; Republicans React To Christie Scandal; High Court Rejects Abortion Law Appeal; Battle in High Court; Water Ban Slowly Lifting

Aired January 13, 2014 - 13:00   ET

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

SUZANNE MALVEAUX, CNN ANCHOR: Thanks for watching "AROUND THE WORLD." CNN NEWSROOM starts right now. Have a great afternoon.

WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: Right, more trouble for Chris Christie. Federal officials are investigating whether he misused Sandy relief funds. The timing couldn't be worse for the New Jersey governor.

Also right now, officials are trying to figure out why a Southwest Airlines plane landed at the wrong airport. The mistake could have sent 127 passengers over an embankment and onto a major highway.

And right now, a lot of West Virginians getting the news they have been waiting for. Tap water is safe to drink, at least in some areas.

Hello, I'm Wolf Blitzer in Washington. We start with talk of impeachment surrounding the New Jersey governor, Chris Christie. That's a word now being thrown around by the state assemblyman who leads the investigation panel into the traffic scandal. That panel ramping up on Thursday with increased resources to investigate the scandal, including the appointment of a special counsel. John Wisniewski is the head of that panel. He's a Democrat. He just told reporters that the first subpoenas could go out on Thursday. Meanwhile, Christie is facing another investigation. This one into money spent by his office in the wake of Superstorm Sandy. Our Investigation's Correspondent Chris Frates has this CNN exclusive.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

CHRIS FRATES, CNN INVESTIGATIONS CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): When hurricane Sandy hit New Jersey, Chris Christie led from the trenches and his skillful response to the devastating super storm rocketed him into political superstardom. But a new federal investigation into how the New Jersey governor spent some of the Sandy relief money could threaten to wash away the foundation of his political brand. CNN has learned that federal investigators will examine the state's $25 million tourism marketing campaign, a campaign that was paid for with Sandy recovery money.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The Jersey shore is open.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The word is spreading. GOV. CHRIS CHRISTIE (R), NEW JERSEY: Because we're stronger than the storm.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You bet we are.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

FRATES: A campaign that featured Christie and his family during an election year. Democratic Congressman, Frank Pallone, a vocal Christie critic, requested the investigation and tells CNN it's now moving ahead. But he says this is not about politics.

REP. FRANK PALLONE (D), NEW JERSEY: This was money that could have directly been used for Sandy recovery. And as you know, many of my constituents still haven't gotten the money that is owed them, you know, to rebuild their homes or to put their -- you know, to raise their homes or to help.

FRATES: Pallone says promoting New Jersey tourism after the super storm was a good idea. But he has a big question about how much taxpayer money was spent to make those ads. The winning bid, a $4.7 million campaign featuring Christie and family. The next lower bid that lost out was nearly half the price at $2.5 million and wouldn't have featured the governor.

The ads caused controversy as they hit the airways while Christie was running for re-election. Democrats slammed him, arguing it gave the incumbent governor an unfair advantage. At the time, Christie aides said the winning bid provided more value. But after an initial review of the sandy relief spending, the office of the inspector general at the Department of Housing and Urban Development has concluded that there is enough evidence to launch a full-scale investigation, according to Congressman Pallone.

PALLONE: Taxpayer dollars that could have been used for Sandy relief were used for ads promoting the governor, because he was in them with his family, during an election campaign.

FRATES: But as bad as the George Washington Bridge scandal has been for Christie, if the investigation finds he improperly spent Sandy funds, it could get far worse, tarnishing the signature achievement that has helped propel him toward the White House.

(on camera): And now, we've heard from the governor's office. In a written statement, his spokesman says the stronger than the storm campaign was part of an action plan approved by the Obama administration. The statement said, quote, "Federal agency reviews are routine and standard operating procedure with all federally allocated resources to ensure that funds are distributed fairly." He went on to say, quote, "We're confident that any review will show that the ads were a key part in helping New Jersey get back on its feet after being struck by the worst storm in state history." Meanwhile, HUD's inspector general office says that they are investigating and Congressman Pallone tells us the investigation will likely take months and that the report will be released to the public.

Chris FRATES, CNN, Washington.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BLITZER: Republicans initially were slow to comment on the Christie drama, even slower to come to his defense. But here's what we heard over the weekend.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. JOHN MCCAIN (R), ARIZONA: I thought he did an excellent job by the very lengthy press conference. Having gone through this, I know that you've got to answer every question. You can't leave any question unanswered. I think that he can now move on as long as another shoe doesn't drop.

RUDY GIULIANI, FORMER NEW YORK MAYOR: He's handled it the best way you can possibly handle it. He's held a press conference. He's flatly denied it. If for some reason it's not true, the man has put his political career completely at risk.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: Let's bring in our Chief Political Analyst Gloria Borger. She's here. So, these kinds of statements, the ones we heard from McCain and --

GLORIA BORGER, CNN CHIEF POLITICAL ANALYST: Yes.

BLITZER: -- Giuliani, how helpful are they --

BORGER: Look, --

BLITZER: -- to Christie?

BORGER: -- they're helpful because they're supportive of him, and they make the point that he's answered every question in a two-hour press conference. But they do leave a little wiggle room here, Wolf. You know, as Giuliani said, look, if for some reason what he is saying is not true, he has put his political career at risk and McCain says as long as another shoe doesn't drop.

So, you can see where Republicans are coming from. But you know, they're also making the case that the governor went out, had a two- hour press conference. They want to compare that to President Obama on issues like the IRS and Benghazi where they believe he has not been as forthcoming. So, they want to compare the two and say, look, Chris Christie answered every single question but they're all waiting to see what the investigation turns up in the state legislature.

BLITZER: Could there be sort of a plus side for him? All the media attention that's been devoted to this story, given the fact a lot of conservatives think there is a liberal bias in the mainstream --

BORGER: Yes, sure.

BLITZER: -- news media? BORGER: Running against the press is always guy idea. And as long as Christie continues to answer every question, I think that could clearly have an impact, particularly within the Republican Party for him. But again, he's still facing now an ongoing investigation. The legislature has got subpoenas out. And we're going to see more and more of this unraveling.

And the point for Christie and the problem is that he's known as a truth-teller. So, he's out there telling the truth. I didn't know about this. I -- you know, I asked my aides. You've got an hour to come back and tell me. And he's saying they lied to him. If it turns out that he didn't tell the whole story, then I think it's a huge problem.

BLITZER: Presidents give State of the Union addresses.

BORGER: Right.

BLITZER: Governors give state of the state addresses.

BORGER: Right.

BLITZER: He's supposed to give his tomorrow and that's going to be -- there is going to be a lot riding on that.

BORGER: There is a lot riding on that and I think, you know, just as we saw in the press conference, Chris Christie will take charge. He's that kind of a politician. He's going to dive directly into his State of the State. And whether he mentions this or not, remains to be seen. But I guarantee you, he's still going to say that job number one is doing what I can for the people of the state of New Jersey.

BLITZER: Are we going to hear from him today? Is there any indication?

BORGER: Don't know. Don't know, Wolf.

BLITZER: Still waiting. We haven't heard from him yet.

BORGER: We have not.

BLITZER: OK.

BORGER: Yet.

BLITZER: Well, maybe he's writing his speech. I assume he's working hard on that.

BORGER: I bet he is.

BLITZER: All right, Gloria, thanks. Thank you.

For the second time in two months, a jet lands at the wrong airport on a very short runway. This time the Southwest 737 missing its target by about seven miles, ending up at a tiny airport in Missouri. Rene Marsh is joining us. Rene, tell us what happened. RENE MARSH, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Wolf, really these passengers, they were within feet of going over a steep embankment at the end of that runway all because the pilot landed at the wrong airport. But how could they make such a serious mistake? Well, one pilot who knows both airports well says likely because the pilots weren't alert. They weren't using their GPS technology. They likely just looked out their window, saw a runway and assumed it was the right one.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

(voice-over): A hard landing and the smell of burning rubber, two indications to passengers on Southwest Flight 4013 that something was wrong after their plane landed at the wrong airport. Coming within 300 feet of a steep embankment at the end of the runway.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: We had like a really rough landing. We were all like moving pretty close to the seats as we were landing, because the runway, I guess, is too short for the plane.

MARSH: The plane, carrying more than 100 passengers, was scheduled to land at Missouri's Branson airport Sunday night, but instead showed up at Taney County Airport, about seven miles from the intended destination.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE (via telephone): The plane ended up landing at the Point Lookout Airport and needs mutual (INAUDIBLE.)

MARSH: The runway at Taney County Airport is about half the length of the runway at Branson.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And we got a call saying the plane has landed at an airport nearby. And we're thinking, surely not a jet plane could land there.

MARSH: Officials say, if the pilot didn't brake when he did, the plane could have overshot the runway and tumbled onto a highway. Passenger Scott Schieffer (ph) captured the aftermath on video. It shows passengers evacuating the plane before being bussed to the larger airport.

In November, a Boeing 747 cargo plane also landed at the wrong airport, this time in Kansas on a runway half a mile shorter than it usually uses. Despite fears the dream lifter would be stuck at the Kansas airport indefinitely, it eventually took off without incident. Southwest is hoping for a similarly successful outcome for their Boeing 737.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

(on camera): All right. Well, Wolf, the other part of this that really just makes you scratch your head, there are two pilots in the cockpit. Neither one of them realized that anything was wrong until it was too late. At this point, we should point out, we don't have an official cause of the mistake. It is all still under investigation.

But this has happened before. Since 2010, there have been at least six other similar incidents. We can tell you, that that plane is still there at the airport. We are paying close attention to what is happening there. And when it does take off, we will be sure to get those pictures turned around for you -- Wolf.

BLITZER: Do they believe they have enough runway to take off safely?

MARSH: Well, at this point, you know, it's all about doing math here. So, they're looking at the weight. They're looking at the length of the run way. And they're also looking at the weather conditions. The plan now, at last check from the airport manager, is that we could see this takeoff happen at 2:00 Eastern time.

So, the fact that they're planning for this takeoff means that they believe that they will have enough runway to successfully and safely do this. But, of course, it's all about those calculations. Again, we're waiting and watching for this to actually happen -- Wolf.

BLITZER: We'll wait and watch together with you, Rene. Thanks very much.

United States Supreme Court showdown. The court hears arguments in a high-stakes battle between President Obama and Congress. The case is a test of presidential powers under the U.S. Constitution. We're going to break it all down for you with our Senior Legal Analyst Jeffrey Toobin who is standing by live.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: A decision today by the United States Supreme Court means Arizona cannot enforce a law banning abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy. The high court refused to hear the state's appeal to reinstate the law it passed back in 2012. But a federal appeals court last year ruled the restrictions were unconstitutional. Twelve states have similar laws that shorten the time period for abortions. Legal challenges in other states are working their way through the courts.

A high-stakes legal fight between the White House and Congress played out before the Supreme Court today. At stake is the power of the presidency. At issue is the president's ability to make what are called recess appointments. The Constitution says the president shall make appointments, quote, "with the advice and consent of the Senate." But it also gives the president the power to fill vacancies, quote, "during the recess of the Senate." Notable recess appointments include Dwight Eisenhower as major general of the U.S. Army, Thurgood Marshall as a federal appeals court judge and Alan Greenspan of the Federal Reserve chairman. The case before the high court today involves three appointments President Obama made to an agency that handles labor disputes and labor unions.

Let's bring in our senior legal analyst, Jeffrey Toobin, to talk a little bit about what's going on.

You were there. You heard the arguments in court today. Historically speaking, this is a very significant case.

JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: It is. And you could see that in court. You know, there were lots of references to George Washington, to Thomas Jefferson, to James Madison, because the recess appointment power has been used by every president since George Washington. But the Supreme Court has never really addressed how constitutional it really is and under what circumstances. And you could tell that the court was fascinated by the case, but also a little intimidated by just the scope of the issue before it.

BLITZER: Now, the specific case that you heard arguments about today involves two agencies of the U.S. government, the National Labor Relations Board and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Talk a little bit about the specifics of the arguments here.

TOOBIN: Well, the case is really rooted in the partisan warfare we're so familiar with because, particularly when it comes to the NLRB, the National Labor Relations Board, Republicans in the Senate didn't want to confirm anybody so the Democrats, who were in charge of the Senate, kind of manufacture recesses. You know, the recess power came in the 18th century when the Senate would be out of session for seven, eight months at a time.

BLITZER: And it took a long time to get to Washington.

TOOBIN: Exactly. That's why they basically -- the framers of the Constitution said, look, we can't have the Senate out of session and the president unable to fill -- fill seats. So -- but now what's happened is that the presidents -- and Obama is not the only one to have done this by any means -- with his allies in the Senate, they basically do these quick recesses, put people in, and so they don't have to be confirmed by the Senate. They can serve for about a year. The constitutionality of those recess appointments during these sort of manufactured recesses, that's really what's at stake here.

BLITZER: Now, Mitch McConnell, the Senate minority leader, I take it he was hearing these arguments himself (ph) today.

TOOBIN: He was there. Senator Mike Lee was there. Senator Jefferson Sessions was there. They are very -- they care deeply about the power of the Senate and they believe that Obama has trampled over the Senate. And their lawyer today, Miguel Estrada (ph), did, I thought, a fabulous job arguing their case. And I think he -- they had a receptive audience for the argument they cared about.

BLITZER: Now, correct me if I'm wrong, and I'm sure you've done some research in this. When he was a United States senator, Barack Obama from Illinois, he wasn't happy with the recess appointment of John Bolton to be Bush's United Nations ambassador.

TOOBIN: Well, that's one of the delicious parts of this whole argument is that you have lots of Republicans now who are opposing recess appointments who liked it when George W. Bush was president. Barack Obama, he didn't like recess appointments when George W. Bush was president. Now, of course, he's defending the practice. It's a classic whose ox is gored situation (INAUDIBLE).

BLITZER: So if you're in the minority, you like one thing. And then when you become the majority, you like something else. TOOBIN: And, you know, the court -- my record on predictions is not great with the Supreme Court. But this is even tougher than most because you have conservatives who usually favor the executive, but they don't like Obama so much and vice versa. It's a very difficult case to call.

BLITZER: They only had one major mistake, right?

TOOBIN: Yes, but it's a pretty high-profile one.

BLITZER: Yes, OK. That's a prediction (ph).

TOOBIN: Everybody on Twitter remembers, I assure you.

BLITZER: Jeffrey Toobin, thanks very much.

Hundreds of thousands of people in West Virginia have been dealing with toxic drinking water. And now some are finally getting to the all-clear to turn on the taps again.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: Worrisome story coming into CNN right now from Katy, Texas. That's a city just west of Houston, Texas. You're looking at pictures there. The FBI and bomb squads, they are on the scene after what's been described as a suspicious package was found at the Katy, Texas, high school. The district - the local school district confirms that all the students and staff at Seven Lakes High School were evacuated for a safety issue around 10:00 a.m. local time earlier today. A following statement was posted by the school district's website. "Students have been evacuated to an enclosed area on the baseball and football fields. Water is being provided to students and staff as need. In order to avoid investigation interference, parents are being advised to not come to the school and pick up the students at this time. Life skill students have been evacuated to Seven Lakes Junior High."

This -- all this information, by the way, is coming in from our Houston affiliate, KPRC. So it's a disturbing story. We're told that the Harris County sheriff's office bomb squad is now on the scene. The FBI has been called in to help with the investigation. And once again, parents have been told not to come pick up their students. They're all on the baseball and football fields right now awaiting further information. We'll stay on top of this story, get you more information, but it's clearly a disturbing story out of Katy, Texas. That's just outside of Houston.

We're learning right now - we're also hearing that in the last hour or so, some people in West Virginia are being allowed to once again use their tap water. For the last four days, 300,000 people have been forced to live on bottled water after a toxic chemical contaminated their water lines. Alexandra Field is joining us now from Charleston, West Virginia, with the very latest.

What is the very latest, Alexandra? Some folks have now been told the water is OK, is that right? ALEXANDRA FIELD, CNN CORRESPONDENT: That's right, Wolf, 5,000 water customers are now being told that they can finally turn on those faucets and start letting the water run and cycle through. Those customers are mostly large customers, businesses here in Charleston, West Virginia, hospitals and office buildings. By the end of the day, 25,000 people should get the all-clear to start that flushing process. But there's still a long way to go until 300,000 people have fresh water running from the taps again.

The water company says that customers will be told when they can turn their faucets on according to what zone they are in. They're asking people to wait for confirmation that their zone is ready to go in order to avoid overloading a system that has been down for days now, Wolf.

BLITZER: So you say 5,000 customers have been told the water is OK for them. But we were told originally, what, 300,000 people were told, you know, you can use the water to flush a toilet, but that's basically it. You can't boil it. You can't drink it. Certainly you can't take a shower. You can't take a bath. You can't do anything with it. So 5,000 folks are told, go ahead, it's OK. What about the rest?

FIELD: Right. Five thousand sounds like a small number right now, but the goal here was, first just start with getting the hospitals up and running. And two of those hospitals got their water going this morning. That was a real priority because these hospitals have real needs when it comes to water. Everyone else is still being asked to be patient.

And this process of turning the water isn't just as simple as turning on your faucet and taking a swig from it. There are instructions that are going out to water customers. They've got to run the water for a certain period of time, let it filter through to ensure that it is safe. Even after that, customers are being warned that they could still smell that trace of licorice scent, but they are told that if they have followed the instructions, it should be safe for drinking. Still, to get 300,000 people using their faucets again certainly could be a matter of days right now, Wolf.

BLITZER: That storage facility where these chemicals were stored, was it regulated by anyone?

FIELD: That is the question that everyone is asking. And, Wolf, what I can tell you is that the DEP had not sent inspectors to that plant since 1991. That's when the plant was operating in a completely different way under different ownership. That facility now is a chemical storage facility. The DEP says there's a real difference between a storage facility and a facility that manufacturers chemicals. As a storage facility, the plant did not need water or air pollution permits so the DEP didn't have to send inspectors out there. That's raising a lot of concerns now.

Chief among those people who are concerned, the governor of West Virginia, who says it's certainly time to start talking about how to beef up regulation and oversight of similar facilities. Here's what he told us. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

FIELD: A county emergency services official has described the tank over there as an antique. Would you agree with that?

GOV. EARL RAY TOMBLIN (D), WEST VIRGINIA: I have not seen the tank personally. Obviously it had a problem if the liquids were escaping from it.

FIELD: Will you be calling for closer, tighter, stronger restrictions on these kinds of storage facilities?

TOMBLIN: Absolutely. We need to do what we can to see that this kind of incident never happens again. There's no excuse for it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

FIELD: The DEP says that at the request of the governor, right now they are inventorying other similar sites that exist across the state of West Virginia. And from there they will begin to draft proposals, Wolf, about how they can enhance or establish some regulatory oversight for these kinds of facilities.

BLITZER: So the DEP, what is that, the Department of Environmental Protection in the state of West Virginia, is that right?

FIELD: That's right.

BLITZER: So it's a statewide agency. I take it there were no local regulators, state regulators. Did the federal government get involved? Did any federal agency get in there and examine some of these storage facilities?

FIELD: Well, the U.S. attorney here says that this is an investigation that's going to involve all layers of government. It could take a number of weeks now to figure out what really caused this leak. We know that it started with a hole toward the bottom of the tank, that chemicals seeped into the soil, the material built up, it breached a wall. It's going to take some time, though, to understand, you know, who was taking a look at the infrastructure out there, what were the problems with the infrastructure, was anyone aware that these problems existed before the leak happened, could this essentially have been stopped before it got out of hand, turning off the water supply for 300,000 people.

The other issue here that we're looking at, Wolf, is what kind of chemical this really was. We know it's something that was used to clean coal, but it wasn't listed as hazardous or toxic. Therefore, the requirements for oversight of how it would be stored are different from, say, if it had been a listed as toxic type of material. So questions now about what kind of chemical this really was.

BLITZER: Right. And they've got to learn lessons from this, make sure they understand fully the blunders that occurred to ensure that it doesn't happen again. Three hundred thousand people in West Virginia for several days now without any water, except for some bottled water, which can be rather expensive. All right, Alexandra, thanks very much.

It's a deal designed to keep Iran from developing nuclear weapons and it's set to take effect a week from today. But a push for more sanctions could derail that, at least that's what the Obama administration is suggesting. We'll have the very latest right after this.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)