Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Dangerous Smog Chokes Beijing; Clinton, Benghazi and 2016; Out- of-Control Fire Near L.A.; Bridge Probe Panel Hires Special Counsel; 10 or 20 Subpoenas Expected Today; Three in Custody in L.A. Area Wildfire; Benghazi Report; Iran Sanctions; Interview with Dan Coats

Aired January 16, 2014 - 13:00   ET

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

WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: Right now, a special committee, a special counsel and subpoenas. It's a critical day in the day Chris Christie investigation and both sides right now are gearing up for a major fight.

Also right now, Hillary Clinton under scrutiny, is she unbeatable in 2016 or could Benghazi still cost her the presidency?

And right now, 500 firefighters are trying to contain a fire outside of Los Angeles. Homes are in danger and mandatory evacuations are now underway. We're going to the scene for a live report.

Hello, I'm Wolf Blitzer reporting from Washington. We start with new information on Chris Christie and the traffic scandal investigation in New Jersey. A special investigative committee will begin its first session at any moment now. Well, we have learned that it could issue between 10 to 20 subpoenas today. The governor, meanwhile, spent the morning at the Jersey shore talking about the hundreds of millions of dollars spent on Superstorm Sandy recovery. He promised to stay focused on the job at hand.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GOV. CHRIS CHRISTIE (R), NEW JERSEY: No one, I can assure you, ever told me or anybody on my team that it's going to be easy. Hadn't been up to this point, and there's all kinds of challenges, as you know, that come every day out of nowhere to test you. But I want to assure the people of New Jersey one thing, I was born here. I was raised here. I'm raising my family here. And this is where I intend to spend the rest of my life. And whatever test they put in front of me, I will meet those tests because I'm doing it on your behalf.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: Our Erin McPike is standing by. She's in Trenton, New Jersey right now. Erin, let's talk about the investigation, specifically the powers this new committee will we -- will have. Do we know what the first order of business will be?

ERIN MCPIKE, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Wolf, as you mentioned, that committee has just formed. They are about to start meeting and they will vote so that they do have subpoena power. Now, as you mentioned, we expect they will issue between 10 and 20 subpoenas. However, our understanding from the head of that committee, John Wisniewski, is they will not be naming those names. We should get those names, he has some sort of press release later today. But we will be watching that for you. Ten to 20 names means, obviously, top political advisors and other officials who were involved in the bridge closures.

But, Wolf, I would point out that last week David Wildstein, who was that port authority official who was subpoenaed and was appearing before the transportation committee, he chose to plead the fifth and they did not get much information out of him last week. So, we will have to wait to see what happens as this investigation goes forward but that is something to keep in mind.

BLITZER: Yes, they didn't get any information directly from him because, as you say, he pleaded the fifth. He wouldn't answer any question.

Erin, there's also a state Senate investigation. Are the investigations really different? Are they looking at the same things? What's going on?

MCPIKE: Well, Wolf, we expect that committee will also have subpoena power. And that committee will be led by Loretta Weinberg. She is a Democrat who represents Fort Lee. So obviously, she'll have an interest in getting to the bottom of this investigation. But they will have about the same powers. And they will be looking at the same things.

But we expect that the real action will come from the assembly and that committee hearing there was a special counsel appointed, Reid Schar. You'll see him pictured there. He was a former assistant U.S. attorney in Illinois, and he led two corruption cases against Rob Blagojevich who was the governor of Illinois who is now, of course, in jail.

But the Christie administration has also lawyered up. They have Randy Mastro who was also Assistant U.S. Attorney in New York. And he is there to lead the internal review that Chris Christie has ordered of his own administration as well as to help respond to the inquiries from the U.S. attorney of New Jersey -- Wolf.

BLITZER: Erin, thank you. Erin McPike on the scene in Trenton.

Now, let's bring in our Chief National Correspondent John King. John, you've been doing a lot of reporting on what's going on. This Reid Schar, what do we know about this special prosecutor who's coming in right now?

JOHN KING, CNN CHIEF NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: In a word, serious. In two words, thorough and serious. He put Rob Blagojevich in jail. That was a very political investigation. You have a lot of politics involved in the New Jersey investigation. He's serious. He's also tried some terrorism cases. Has a lot of experience before grand juries, Wolf. He's known as someone who's a good digger, a good staff builder, very thorough, also viewed as very fair. I mean, there's a lot of politics involved here.

So, this is a very serious move by this committee to go outside of New Jersey, hire somebody with a lot of federal -- a dozen years as an assistant U.S. attorney, so 12 years in a federal prosecutor's office, now in private practice. This tells you this is a very serious investigation.

And that's why, today, he's been working with the staff, members of the assembly on these first round of subpoenas. A lot of them will be for documents but some of them will be for the members of the governor's inner circle, including people whose names have not shown up yet on any of the e-mails or text messages about the now infamous Fort Lee George Washington Bridge traffic snafus. I'm told including the governor the body guy. Every governor has a body guy who carries his bag, puts his speech up on the podium.

(CROSSTALK)

KING: Right. And the committee has information. It believes that when Governor Christie communicates with his staff, he often uses his body guy, a guy named Dave Robles (ph), as his intermediary. So, it tells you the thoroughness and it tells you how quickly they're going to get very close to the governor to try and compel testimony.

BLITZER: And these -- all these individuals who have been subpoenaed, unless they've pled the fifth and don't answer any questions, if they start answering questions, they have to be really, really precise because if there's any indication of perjury, these special prosecutors, they hate perjury. They're going to go after them. They may not have done anything wrong up until now, but if they lie about what they think happened and that's proven, that could be disastrous for them.

KING: It's always the risk in these investigations. Again, politics, loyalty involved. That's why the committee wants to build a document case first. They want all the documents in, then they'll bring the witnesses in. They'll be looking for any contradictions.

Governor Christie had his news conference last week and, again, in his State of the State said, we're going to fully cooperate. He's brought in his own lawyers. We know this from our days covering the Clinton White House. When these investigations start, they're about covering issue A. Well, they often become about other things as the investigation unfolds.

And the one interesting thing about this is everyone says they want to move as quickly as possible. But the document, the resolution empowering this special committee with that special prosecutor, Reid Schar, it has, if necessary, until January 2016.

BLITZER: That's two years.

KING: So, if necessary, this could go on. We And, again, we remember the days when -- you know, whether it was the white water investigation of governor Clinton, or then Ken Starrs' investigation of President Clinton. These things start with a narrow focus and sometimes -- and this is the risk for Governor Christie, I'm not saying they've done anything wrong. The risk is it becomes a distraction even if, in the end, you've done nothing wrong. It could go on a long time and have a lot of people around you having to pay the lawyers.

BLITZER: And he's trying to change the subject now. He's out on the Jersey shore. He skyrocketed in his popularity the way he handled the Superstorm Sandy. He's back there now. He's trying to show that he can move on, do other business. And this weekend, he'll be in Florida doing some political fund raising as the incoming chair of the Republican Governors Association.

KING: Major test of his political skills, his leadership skills, his focus and his discipline in the sense that he's trying to advance his second term agenda, school reform, tax reform, the continued recovery from Superstorm Sandy, some other things. At a time when Democrats, who right after his big re-election when you might think they'd almost be, you know, rolling over to support him, now they feel emboldened in state Democrats to challenge him more.

So, can he sell his agenda at home? And when he travels the country, is there any pause, any hesitation, any step back from national fundraisers because 2014 is about electing other Republicans, not Chris Christie. But if you can raise a lot of money and make a lot of friends, boy does it help him when he goes into 2016.

So, he has to prove that as he cooperates with these investigations, which again could go on for months if not a year or more, they can also handle both his state agenda and his national ambition.

BLITZER: And if he were thinking, and I think he is still thinking of running for president, --

KING: Oh, he is.

BLITZER: -- of going to Florida, now that's a pretty important state in a presidential contest whether in a primary or in a general election.

KING: If you look at the three dozen governors' races this year, he's going to go to all of the key states --

BLITZER: Yes, he certainly will.

KING: -- in presidential politics.

BLITZER: All right, John, thanks very much. John King reporting.

In southern California, meanwhile, firefighters are pouncing on a quickly spreading wildfire just outside of Los Angeles. Look at these flames fed by dangerously dry conditions and hot dry winds.

Casey Wian is joining us now about 20 miles outside of Los Angeles. Casey, we just learned, what, that three people are now in custody. What's going on? CASEY WIAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: That's right, Wolf. The latest information we have from the Glendora Police Department is that three people are now in custody in connection with this fire which has been burning for a little over four hours now. Officially, still at about (INAUDIBLE) fight this fire (INAUDIBLE) to grow. You can see some of the black smoke on this hill behind me and you can see these homes in the foreground, obviously that's the concern.

We've got 500, officially, fire-fighting personnel battling this blaze, in the air mostly. Helicopters and fixed wing aircraft dropping water and flame retardant on this fire which continues to advance, slowly I must say right now, toward these homes in this area. There have been some homes burnt to the east of here. We do not have an update on the number.

They say, as I mentioned, 500 personnel. I think that number's going to go up. I just saw two fire engines go by me from Newport Beach and Huntington Beach which is -- if you know southern California, that's probably 50 miles from where we are.

So, a lot of fire agencies coming in to try to knock this fire down as quickly as possible. The main concern unseasonably warm temperatures and high winds are forecasted for this afternoon. We've got temperatures forecasted in the 80s and we're talking it's January. So, obviously, it's unseasonably warm, unseasonably dry. California now in its third year of drought. So, authorities making a very aggressive push to try to get this fire contained and under control before it hits some of these neighborhoods -- Wolf.

BLITZER: Yes. It's pretty worrisome. I assume where you are, Casey, you can smell the smoke. Are you close enough to really feel what's going on behind you?

WIAN: Well, you can -- I mean, we were in another neighborhood just a little while ago where the flames were about 100 yards from the homes there as people were evacuating. And we were there for, I don't know, maybe half hour, 45 minutes and I mistakenly left the window of our van open. It was -- the inside was covered in ash. Maybe you can see it on the camera, you can see some of the ash that's falling from the sky. So, it's definitely a concern in terms of these neighborhoods, health -- a health issue with all this smoke and soot and ash in the air. A couple of schools have been closed. So, obviously, authorities taking this situation very seriously, Wolf.

BLITZER: And quickly, Casey, what -- once again, suspect arson? Is that what they suspect the cause of this fire?

WIAN: There is a news conference that is scheduled in less than an hour. So, we'll be able to find out, hopefully at that news conference, what the specific charge that these three people are being held on. We don't know. No one has mentioned to us the word arson. That's obviously the first thing you think about when three people are taken into custody in connection with the fire. But we just don't know what the specific charge is yet -- Wolf.

BLITZER: All right. We'll clarify as soon as we know. Thanks very much. Casey Wian on the scene, a very disturbing fire outside of Los Angeles.

Meanwhile, here in Washington, anger and frustration on the U.S. Senate floor today over a new report on the Obama administration's handling of the attack in Benghazi, Libya. We'll bring you that plus a live interview with one of the senators who helped write this highly critical report. Dan Coates is standing by live.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: Heated reaction today to a new report on the 2012 attack in Benghazi, Libya. Scathing report for the Senate Intelligence Committee concludes that the attack on the U.S. Diplomatic Compound was most likely preventable.

It says the Obama administration was aware of security weaknesses in Benghazi over -- the compound was warned about the deteriorating situation on the ground. Four Americans, including the U.S. ambassador to Libya, Chris Stevens, were killed in the attack by militants described as being loosely aligned or linked to al Qaeda. The Senate report calls out the State Department for failing to increase security at the facility.

Earlier today, two leading Republican lawmakers took to the Senate floor insisting the report didn't go far enough. Listen to this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. JOHN MCCAIN (R), ARIZONA: That in this intelligence report -- committee report, which is very encompassing, that except for one mention in the minority views, there is no one, no individual, who is held responsible. So now we have a situation where bureaucracies are responsible but individuals are not. I find that intriguing.

SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM (R), SOUTH CAROLINA: You want to know what Chris Christie did? Fine. Absolutely fair game. We know what he did when he found out what his people did about the traffic jam. He fired them. And he got up in front of the whole world and said I'm embarrassed, it's my fault, I'm going to fire the people who did this bad thing. Name one person that has been held accountable for this bad thing called Benghazi.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: All right. Let's get some reaction. Joining us from Capitol Hill, Senator Dan Coats. He's a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee.

Senator, thanks very much for coming in.

SEN. DAN COATS (R), SENATE INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE: Thank you. Thank you.

BLITZER: Well, do you want to respond to what we just heard from your Republican colleague, what Lindsey Graham and John McCain said?

COATS: Well, it sounds like the 2016 presidential race has now started. But what happened here and what's reported in this report that we spent hours and hours investigating and coming to the conclusion that this could have been prevented, there were pleas from those on the ground in Libya who wanted more security that was denied. And this question about responsibility, I think, is an important one. What happened to the buck stops here? In this case, there's a lot of finger pointing elsewhere as to failures of the process and failures of the agency, et cetera. But no one really has stood up and said, I take responsibility for this. That's important. The American people want justice done here and closure to this issue and we've not gotten there yet. And this report, I think, just reaffirms what a lot of us have thought, and that is, there still are unanswered questions.

BLITZER: Listen to this exchange I had yesterday with the chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Senator Dianne Feinstein.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: Who should be held responsible for what clearly was a failure?

SEN. DIANNE FEINSTEIN (D), INTELLIGENCE CHAIR.: Well, let me say why the report says very likely preventable. And that's because there was adequate intelligence. I personally went through a stack like this of intelligence that forewarned. And we know there were a number of events -- attacks that took place in the six months prior to Benghazi. We also know that there was discussion about added security. We know the ambassador did not want added security. We know there were concerns about Benghazi. We know there were training camps around that area. And it is something that I think the State Department has to really come to grips with.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: But clearly she's not blaming the secretary of state at the time, Hillary Clinton. She just issued a statement a few minutes ago saying, "statements on the Senate floor this morning intubate that the report assigns culpability to the former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for the tragedy. This is patently false." Dianne Feinstein says, "I want the record to be clear, I condemn any effort to use this report for political purposes." Do you agree with her, senator?

COATS: Well, it shouldn't be used for political purposes. It will be, but it shouldn't be. What's at stake here is the fact that we lost an ambassador and three others that should not have been subject to this, particularly given the fact that they made pleas for support and it was rejected by the State Department.

But again, it is going to be looked at in terms of, well, who's in charge of the State Department? And is somebody going to step up and take responsibility for this? Just getting justice done and getting closure to this, I think it's important. That's an important component of it.

But the chairman's views show that this is not a partisan issue. This is a bipartisan report signed by the chairman of the committee, who's a Democrat, and supported by Republicans. And it raises questions that I think need to be answered before we can put this to rest.

BLITZER: Well, what about Chris Stevens himself, the deceased U.S. ambassador? The report lays out a whole bunch of recommendations against increasing security that Chris Stevens himself put forward and that he was willing to go to Benghazi even though some others said it was too dangerous. What role did he have in this entire affair?

COATS: Well, that's a good question. Chris was known to be kind of an adventurer, someone who took risk on behalf of his country in representing his country. Nevertheless, once you submit requests for support and it comes through the channel, I've served as a former ambassador, I know how it works, it gets into the State Department, you need responses. And if the response is, we're not going to do that, then I suppose the ambassador has some role in terms of deciding where he goes and where he doesn't go. But it doesn't dismiss the fact that these requests were made. This could have been prevented. I hope we learn lessons from this. But we also have to find closure to this and bring justice to those who perpetrated this.

And then you have the whole video issue in the massaged (ph) talking points. So it continues the thinking and the concerns that there were some politicization of the decisions made here. That's what needs to be put to rest or it's going to continue to be a political effort and political responses.

BLITZER: The report, though, and you're a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, does blame the intelligence community for the mistake in talking points, if you will, about that anti-Muslim video that may have sparked some of the riots outside that compound in Benghazi. When Susan Rice, the then-U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, was on those Sunday talk shows, she was reading from some of those intelligence reports. Isn't that included in your own conclusion yesterday?

COATS: That is included and should be included. There's still some questions regarding how and who made the changes that caused Susan Rice to go forward and say what she did about, this was all the result of a YouTube video, when people knew at that time that that was not the case. We struggled with that question to find out just how all that happened. This is going to go before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. I think they'll be asking the same questions. But again, it points to the fact that this has not been resolved and potentially could continue to be a political issue going forward.

BLITZER: Certainly could be. It's by no means over with yet.

Senator, thanks very much for joining us.

COATS: Sure enough, thank you.

BLITZER: President Obama makes an appeal to Democrats in Congress. He urges them not to pass any new sanctions against Iran, at least not yet. What arguments did he make? How are the lawmakers likely to respond? We have details. We're going to the White House when we come back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: President Obama's urging Democrats in Congress not to impose any new sanctions on Iran. He made the appeal during a closed-door meeting designed to rally Democrats and fire up the base. Our senior White House correspondent, Brianna Keilar, is joining us right now from the White House.

Brianna, this was a pretty unusual meeting. The president invited all these Democratic senators to the White House. They had some cocktails. What happened specifically as far as the desire among many members of Congress to impose new sanctions against Iran right now?

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Yes, Wolf, they did talk about this. We're told by one senator who was in the meeting telling my colleague, Dana Bash, that the president gave a detailed, impassioned plea for Congress to not impose new sanctions on Iran. The White House very much in odds, not just with congressional Democrats - or, pardon me, congressional Republicans, but also Democrats. There's a bipartisan bill in the Senate that would say to Iran, if you don't come to a deal here during this six-month time period, if you don't come to a longer term deal in that time, you're going to have sanctions come down on you after that.

The White House and President Obama feel very strongly that that's a bad idea, that that could actually make Iran walk away from the table. So that's what we're told by senators in this meeting last night, Wolf, that the president made this case. That he said, hey, you can't do this. You're going to have President Rouhani walking away from the table because he also has some hardliners in Iran who are saying -- who don't really want to negotiate here. So there -- President Obama trying to win over some Democrats here, Wolf, but unclear if he was able to do that.

BLITZER: Because there are, what, 16 Senate Democrats, in addition to almost all of the Republicans, who want to go forward with this new sanctions against Iran legislation right now, and the president is trying to whittle away that number.

KEILAR: That's exactly right. We're told that the informal vote count on supporting what's a bipartisan bill that is authored in part by the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, a Democrat, Bob Menendez, that the informal vote count at this point is 75 votes. That's a big hurdle for President Obama, but he's certainly trying to make his case. It would be a huge achievement for him if he is able to strike some sort of a deal with Iran in the next six months, as you're seeing the U.S. government agree to the lessening of freezing some overseas funds of Iran's, and Iran sort of curtailing in a small way its nuclear program, trying to set the groundwork for a longer term negotiation. But it's really a difficult lift for President Obama when he's facing a vote count like that, Wolf.

BLITZER: You know, the argument that these senators, the Democratic senators and the Republican senators, make is that these new sanctions wouldn't take effect for six months and would only take effect if the Iranians didn't comply with the negotiations with the terms of this deal. And they say the Iranians are bluffing. That if this legislation were to pass, the Iranians would, if they walked away, they'd lose billions and billions of dollars in revenue that they're about to receive over the next six months as an easing of these sanctions take place. What's the White House response to that specific argument that the Iranians won't walk away from the deal?

KEILAR: Well, Democrats think, obviously, that there's sort of a slippery slope, in a way, that if you start lessening sanctions against Iran, even in this small way, that that could continue. The White House feels that if Iran does walk away, that you will actually have international allies of the U.S. wanting to put more sanctions in place. That's their argument. So you're seeing these two completely countering arguments coming from the White House and from Congress, not just Republicans but Democrats, but at this point President Obama feeling very strongly that it's in Iran's interest, obviously, to broker a deal, but that they're going to walk away if there is kind of this sword hanging over Iran.

The White House says that, you know what, it's pretty obvious that there's a threat of more sanctions. You don't need to go as far as to pass legislation. The threat is enough in passing legislation may just force them to walk and lose all of the progress that the White House feels they may have made for these negotiations for the long-term to keep a nuclear weapons -- to keep Iran from getting a nuclear weapon, Wolf.

BLITZER: We'll see what Harry Reid, the Senate majority leader, decides to do about it. Whether or not he'll even allow this legislation to come up for a vote, but -

KEILAR: Oh, and - and, Wolf, if I can say to that -

BLITZER: Go ahead.

KEILAR: Harry Reid just saying to our congressional producer a short time ago, he was sort of asked -- he asked him, are any Democrats won over here? And all Reid would say is ultimately what's going to happen is Iran is not going to get a nuclear weapon. So we're still trying to figure out if the president is winning over any Democrats.

BLITZER: Good point.

Brianna is at the White House.

Thank you.

Waiting on Hillary Clinton to declare. Is she already an unstoppable force on the Democratic side? We're taking a closer look. Coming up next, "Time" magazine's Michael Scherer is standing by.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)