Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Americans at Olympics; Heating Fuel Shortage; Interview with Rep. Michael Grimm; Woman Confronts Former Teacher, Alleged Molester; New Questions about Politician's Background

Aired January 21, 2014 - 09:30   ET

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

CAROL COSTELLO, CNN ANCHOR: Good morning. I'm Carol Costello. Thank you so much for joining me.

Happening now, investors are feeling upbeat as the markets open after the holiday weekend. Stock futures were higher this morning. Stocks ended last week mixed with the Dow down for the year.

A storm system punched up by lake effect moisture is dumping up to 10 inches of snow in Chicago. The system is rapidly rolling eastward and will spread snow from the nation's capital through New England. Blizzard warnings are also up for Cape Cod. Flightaware.com reports more than 2,000 flights have already been cancelled nationwide.

So do you go to the Olympics in Sochi or do you stay home? The Russian president, Vladimir Putin, insists the games will be safe, even though a manhunt is now underway for a terrorist dubbed the black widow. The U.S. military is doing what it can. It will send warships and aircraft to Sochi just in case American athletes need to be evacuated. Safe to say, this is no ordinary Olympic experience. Representative Michael Grimm of New York, he's also co-chair of the House Russian Caucus, joins me now.

Good morning, sir.

REP. MICHAEL GRIMM (R), NEW YORK: Good morning.

COSTELLO: Should Americans go to Sochi to watch the Olympics?

GRIMM: Well, my natural instinct would be to say yes, because you don't want the terrorists ultimately to win. You know that's what - you know, the -- one of the main goals of terrorism is to invoke fear and stop people from living their daily lives. And we don't ever want to completely give into that.

But I would be disgenuine not to say that I have serious concerns. And if you are asking me, would I send my family there, I would have trepidation because there are serious and credible threats that we know about and I'm not completely convince that the Russians will be able to completely keep us safe.

And that being said, it's not a slight against Russia. No one can completely keep you safe, not against terrorism. There's just too many vulnerabilities. COSTELLO: Well, as we speak, Russian special - and I just got this over - in my e-mail box from our international desks. Russian special forces are currently conducting two operations -- terrorists operations. We don't know exactly what they're doing, but it seems like the Russians are on it. Are they?

GRIMM: Well, I think they are. I think they're doing the very best they can. But let's analyze it a little bit. First of all, I think there's a lot of questions that need to be answered. But let's start at the beginning, the basics. When you talk about security, it's basically like an onion. And the very center of the onion is the area most protected. So if you're going to be in the venue watching the actual competitive games, that's probably the safest place to be because that's where the concentration of security will be.

But as you go out and you start to peel away the layers of that onion, the outer most layers are your most vulnerable areas. So for people that are going, obviously they want to see the games. But they also want to see Russia. They want to enjoy the culture. They want to do what most tourists do. And I don't believe you're going to be able to make sure that every restaurant, every museum, all the tourists spots that could be a mile, two miles away from the actual competitive games and from these stadiums, there's absolutely no way you can keep all of those safe.

Now, we know that we have possibly three black widows that we're looking for. We understand this guy, Doku Amarov (ph), who was one of the leaders of the Chechnyan terrorists, may be planning and plotting as we speak. So there are certainly credible threats and it's impossible to be completely safe, especially when you get outside of the main venue, or as I said, the center of that onion.

COSTELLO: The United States, they're sending warships and helicopters, they're sending C-17 transport planes and they'll all be ready to move Americans out of Sochi if need be. The United States has also offered full support to the Russian government, you know, in relation to security. Is that enough?

GRIMM: Well, here's the question with that. First of all, is it enough to keep people safe? No, of course not. Actually that's just a reaction. If something happens, we want to have a contingency plan and absolutely we must.

But, number one, will Russia allow us to use the air support, the naval support in their sovereign nation? It really is up to them to make that decision. So that's the first thing that makes me a little uncomfortable.

The second thing is, I worked, you know, deep undercover with the FBI. And when you have a backup team, they often tell you that if something goes wrong, or as we say if something breaks bad, the most that backup team will do is give you a proper burial because the truth is, if there's an explosion of some sort, yes, can we evacuate those that survive? Sure. But, unfortunately, once that explosive device goes off, the casualties already have been had. And that's the part that really the United States cannot do that much about. I hope that we are collaborating and working in conjunction with the Russians so that we can help them any way we can to beef up their own security in their sovereign nation.

COSTELLO: Well, last question. In hindsight, was Sochi the right city to host the Olympics?

GRIMM: You know, it's very difficult to pick a venue like this for anyone. I don't want to second guess the commission. I do think it is a difficult venue. It certainly is a bit out of the way. So from that perspective, I think Russia is going to have a difficult time getting people regardless of all the terrorism concerns. It's just a little bit remote. And I think it's going to be difficult to attract people to go there and to spend a long period of time to enjoy these games.

COSTELLO: Congressman Michael Grimm, thanks so much for joining me this morning. I appreciate it.

GRIMM: Thank you.

COSTELLO: Ohio is running dangerously low on propane and heating oil. The situation so dyer the governor has now declared a state of emergency. Now, keep in mind, the high across Ohio today will be a very balmy six degrees. Oil suppliers say they haven't seen it this bad in 20 years.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SCOTT ZURA, PROPANE RETAILER: I'm concerned. I'm concerned now because we don't know when we're getting it. We don't know if we're getting it. And all the propane companies are kind of in the same boat.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COSTELLO: Ohio's not alone. Close to 25 states are expecting the same problem. Our chief business correspondent, Christine Romans, is live in New York.

Is there anything anyone can do about it?

CHRISTINE ROMANS, CNN CHIEF BUSINESS CORRESPONDENT: Well, you know, the Department of Transportation and the states are relaxing some of the commercial truck driver rules, Carol, so that these truck drivers can drive more hours and consecutive days so that they can fill up those trucks and get them where they need to go. That should help a little bit. You've got the suppliers, the LP suppliers, who are, you know, if you want to come and fill up you're tank, they're not going to fill up your tank. They're going to give you 100 gallons, not going to fill up a 500 gallon LP tank and they're going to say, you know, call us again in a few weeks and we'll see where we stand.

So this is a real problem for rural communities that use LP gas, fill up an LP tank to heat their homes. It's about, you know, 13 million American families we're talking about here and an awful lot of businesses and industrial uses for this LP gas. You've got car washes that have shut down. You know, they heat with the LP and they just can't get enough of it to keep going. So we'll watch sort of the economic knock on effect of this.

One thing that's interesting. It's been this cold, cold weather, but it was super wet weather in the Midwest in the fall, Carol. They dry corn in these corn driers in the ag industry with propane, and sometimes heating oil, but mostly propane. And so you had a big use of it in the fall in harvest time and now this cold weather and it's really putting a pinch on some of these states. Ohio, Michigan, lots of parts of the Midwest. A lot of people who heat with propane are saying, this cold weather is just the last in a long series here. And we've got, you know, a good eight to 10 weeks of winter left. So it bears watching, Carol.

COSTELLO: All right, Christine Romans, many thanks to you.

Still to come in the NEWSROOM, a woman confronts the teacher she says sexually molested her as a child. And she posted their dramatic conversation online.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JAMIE CARILLO, POSSIBLE ABUSE VICTIM: Did you realize that you brainwashed me and you manipulated me and that what you did was wrong?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes, and I regret it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COSTELLO: Heart wrenching and harrowing, the video prompts swift action. We'll have that story for you next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COSTELLO: A sex abuse victim confronts her alleged abuser on YouTube. It's a powerful example of a damaged person taking control, and scary for any parent who has a child in school. Now the victim's name is Jamie. She's now 28 years old with children of her own. But when she was 12 years old, she was allegedly abused by a teacher. When Jamie heard that teacher was now an assistant principal in California, she decided it was time for justice. So she called up that assistant principal and recorded it all on YouTube.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JAMIE CARILLO, POSSIBLE ABUSE VICTIM: So what happens when a student comes in and says that they're having a sexual relationship with a teacher?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: That I would involve law enforcement.

CARILLO: So how is that any different from what you did when I was at Chamwa (ph) Middle?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It's not.

CARILLO: So why are you excluded from the law? I mean, why did you do that? Why -- I was only 12 years old when I met you. Do you realize that you brainwashed me and you manipulated me and that what you did was wrong?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes. And I regret it.

CARILLO: Do you know that I am completely messed up, that I have so many issues because of you?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I only - I just wanted to help you.

CARILLO: How is having a sexual relationship with a 12-year-old student helping?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It wasn't anything that I intended and I didn't (ph) know what happened.

CARILLO: It's completely shocking to me that you are an assistant principal. Are you doing this with other students too?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No.

CARILLO: Is that how you help them?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No. Not at all.

CARILLO: You ruined my life. You ruined my childhood. Do you realize that?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No.

CARILLO: You sicken me.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No.

CARILLO: You sicken me. And every day when I think about what you did, you sicken me. I have kids of my own, and I'm the age now that I pretty much met you at and I could never think about doing the things that you did. You should be so ashamed and so disgusted with yourself.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I am. I am.

CARILLO: How (EXPLETIVE DELETED) dare you.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And I (INAUDIBLE) every day. Every day.

CARILLO: You're disgusting. Bye.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COSTELLO: Now the assistant principal resigned and California police are now investigating. With me now is psychologist Jeff Gardere and CNN legal analyst Paul Callan.

Thanks to both of you for being here this morning.

JEFF GARDERE, CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGIST: Sure.

PAUL CALLAN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Good morning, Carol. COSTELLO: So, Jeff, how strange is this to confront your abuser and post hit on YouTube? If you can tell, she has this - she has a deep anger inside her.

GARDERE: Well, of course -

COSTELLO: Did this help her, do you think?

GARDERE: I think it helps her tremendously because she's now empowered enough. It took her 10 years to be able to discuss this and to confront the person who molested her. And what we often see with patients is that it does take a number of years to be able to get there. What's different about this one is that she put it on YouTube, which tells us that not only is she empowered, but she is also very angry and she wanted to get retribution and she wanted to out this teacher in this way, which I think is very healthy.

COSTELLO: I was amazed that the alleged abuser didn't just hang up.

GARDERE: Well, I don't think she could hang up for the simple fact that she knew that she did something wrong and she was probably waiting for this to happen for years. And now that it happened, she took some amount of responsibility for it, but still is rationalizing by telling this young woman, by telling Jamie, well, I just wanted to help you. And that's part of the denial of a sexual predator.

COSTELLO: If it - well, you say sexual predator. I was just going to ask you about that. Because is it logical that this woman would have only molested this one kid and never again in 12 years?

GARDERE: Well this is the -- this is the part that that I do regret that this teacher or assistant principal now wasn't brought on charges of this earlier on because there is a very good possibility, we don't know for sure, that there were many before this young -- this young woman or many after because she continued working with children and again used that rationalization, I was only trying to help you.

Well how many other children, was she quote, trying to help.

COSTELLO: Paul is there anything legally this young woman can do?

PAUL CALLAN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Well she's in a tough situation Carol. Unfortunately in California there's a statute of limitations for bringing cases like this in the criminal justice system. In aggravated rape there's no statute you can bring at any point but that involves rape with a weapon, and injury caused to victim and a variety of other things that are probably not present in this case.

In a normal sexual abuse case, the statute at that time when this happened was six years. She's 28 now. So the statute of limitations criminally probably expired two years ago. The California legislature has tried to change this retroactively. But the appellate courts have pretty much so far said "No you can't do that."

And I just want to throw in one thing. That my quick research has disclosed in this which I find to be kind of shocking. The only person who could be prosecuted in this case appears to be the victim at this point because under California law it's illegal to tape record another person surreptitiously they have been eavesdropping law it's called the two party consent law where both parties have to consent to the eavesdropping.

So I don't -- she would never be prosecuted for this but technically she's probably violated a California law by taping the principal.

COSTELLO: So if California is investigating this teacher, now an assistant principal, can they even investigate her because of that?

CALLAN: Yes they can because the violation of law has occurred by a civilian and not by a police officer. If a police officer or a law enforcement official was involved in illegal taping the evidence would be thrown out and it would not be usable.

So this will not hurt a criminal investigation in any way, shape or form. Although I will note at one point the principal does say this never happened. She said that's not what happened when the young woman refers to a sexual relationship. So the assistant principal's lawyer will argue that although this looks bad for the assistant principal, she was just sort of going along. Yet but when confronted with the specific sexual relationship allegation she denied it.

COSTELLO: Paul Callan and Jeff Gardere many thanks to both of you.

CALLAN: Nice being with you Carol.

COSTELLO: Nice having you here. We'll be back in a minute.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COSTELLO: Wendy Davis skyrocketed to political super stardom with a lengthy filibuster last summer against Texas abortion laws. In a story of triumph they go through considerable personal odds. But being in the national spotlight has shed new light on Davis's background as she seeks the Democratic nomination for Texas Governor.

Our national political reporter Peter Hamby is in Washington with more on this story. Good morning.

PETER HAMBY, CNN NATIONAL POLITICAL REPORTER: Hey Carol how are you?

COSTELLO: I'm good. So why is Wendy Davis is suddenly facing questions about her up from the bootstrap story?

HAMBY: Well you're right this is the filibuster last year sort of rocketed her to fame. But the center piece of her campaign for governor in Texas is her up from the bootstrap story. She has talked about how she waited tables, she was a divorced, a single mother, living in a trailer park, who put herself through Harvard using student loans and hard work.

It turns out, according to Wayne Slater at the Dow's Morning News, in a piece published over the weekend this isn't actually completely true. Some of the details here were misleading. Wendy Davis apparently was divorced when she was 21, and not 19. She only lived in a trailer park for a couple of months. And her husband, her now ex-husband, Jeff Davis, actually helped pay for her Harvard Law School education by cashing out a 401(k) -- she didn't do it by herself.

Now Carol the broad contours of her life story remain true. But again one truism of political campaign is you go right at your opponent's biggest strength. And Wendy Davis's biggest strength is this compelling life story. So any time details of your biography are blurred, it is a real problem for any candidate -- Carol.

COSTELLO: Well you have to wonder I mean why blur your background at all? Because even with, you know, I guess what's true in its truest form, she is still admirable, right?

HAMBY: Yes absolutely. I think -- I think again the bigger picture here is that the story is generally true. Any time a politician is answering questions about whether the story they present to the public is accurate, that's a problem.

But to your point, her Republican opponent, Greg Abbott, kind of has to tread carefully here a little bit. Because if you start pressing Wendy Davis on the details of her life story, imagine, picture a debate in this governor's race a few months from now, if Greg Abbott starts pressing Wendy Davis on the details of her biography. When did you move out of a trailer park, when did you go to Harvard Law School, et cetera, et cetera, how did you pay for it? Wendy Davis you know theoretically could come back and say you know, no matter what about the details my life story is you know, I worked really hard and I think she might be able to generate sympathy in that way.

So the -- her Republican opponent has to tread really a little bit carefully. But make no mistake Carol this is still a very bad story for Wendy Davis right now.

COSTELLO: Absolutely, Peter Hamby many thanks to you.

Still to come in the NEWSROOM, the NFL may take the extra point out of the game. Andy, Andy, what's going on here?

ANDY SCHOLES, BLEACHER REPORT: Hi Carol. Roger Goodell saying the extra point has become so automatic, why even do it? We'll discuss after the break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COSTELLO: What? No more icing, no more last-minute dramatics or embarrassing misses?

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: This time, I'm going to kick that football clear to the moon.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COSTELLO: Ok, so technically, that's not an extra point. But who cares? I love that video. It does illustrate the extra point's possible demise. Say it isn't so, Andy Scholes?

SCHOLES: Yes, Carol. NFL commissioner, Roger Goodell, was talking to the NFL Network yesterday. And he says the extra points become so automatic. I mean kickers only miss 5 out of 1,200 this season. They have a 99.1 success rate since 2004. They are really missed.

It is probably the most boring play in the game. It's basically why Roger Goodell is saying, it's the extra point. It happens, it goes to the (inaudible) every time so basically why waste the time. They are going to propose this to the competition committee and they're going to see if it gets through. Now take away the extra point.

So for a touchdown, you just automatically get seven points. Then, you have the option if you want to run the play -- like a two-point conversion play as we know it now, you can do it and you would get an extra point so you get eight points. But if you fail, you go to six.

So it's kind of like a wager. It is kind of like you are betting a point on a play, which I think is cool. I was kind of against it. And I thought about it. I was like, this would probably save about 10-15 minutes per game because they have to try out the extra point team, they have to kick it. Sometimes someone gets hurt. That takes even more time. So I am actually for it.

The only thing I really think it could mess up is football. Everyone's got a kicker, they have to get those extra points for the extra points so that might be a little snafu there but I'm kind of for this. What do you think?

COSTELLO: I'm still -- I'm a traditionalist although, you know, when they try to ice it, it is so stupid. And you say they're not going to miss anyway why are you even doing that?

SCHOLES: the point I am making this morning. After the touchdown score, that's when I go get a beer at the fridge or I go to the bathroom or something. I don't wait around for the extra point. I know it is going to get made.

COSTELLO: Well, we'll see if they do it because usually when they come up with these things, it takes about 10 years for them to actually do it.

SCHOLES: Yes, it does take a while to push these things through.

COSTELLO: Thanks Andy.

SCHOLES: You're welcome.

COSTELLO: The next hour, of CNN NEWSROOM starts now.

Good morning. I'm Carol Costello. Thanks so much for joining me.

It is inauguration day in New Jersey but Chris Christie is sharing the spotlight with scandals that are casting long shadows on him and his presidential ambitions. Just minutes ago, we learned that the state assembly and senate will form one committee to investigate allegations of abuse of power.

At Christie's side today and at the center of the latest controversy, his lieutenant governor, Kim Guadagno. She is fiercely denying claims she tried to strong arm Hoboken's mayor on Christie's behalf. Hoboken's mayor a Democrat, brushed off her denial in an exclusive interview with Anderson Cooper.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ANDERSON COOPER, CNN HOST: So when you see the lieutenant governor, I mean in a press conference now saying, point blank, your memory and recollection of this conversation is offensive, is completely inaccurate. And as a victim of Sandy, she is offended. What are you -- you're saying she is lying?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Yes.