Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

What's Next for Children Detained at the Border; Interview with Senator Ron Johnson; Israeli Ground Offensive Possible in Gaza; Sarah Palin Urges Impeachment for Obama; Germany Annihilates Brazil at World Cup

Aired July 09, 2014 - 09:30   ET

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

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN ANCHOR: Good morning. I'm Brianna Keilar in for Carol Costello. Thank you for joining me.

A high-profile and heavily scrutinized trip to Texas begins today for President Obama as the White House faces growing criticism for its handling of the border crisis.

And the border has become a focal point of the president's trip mainly because he no plans to visit it. That is despite numerous calls from Democrats and Republicans to do so. However, the president is scheduled to meet with faith leaders and with Texas Governor Rick Perry to discuss this issue.

Now one way the president is attempting to address the crisis is through a multibillion-dollar emergency funding request that is currently in the hands of Congress. That money designed to help with everything from immigration hearings to medical care for the thousands of children currently living in detention -- yes, detention sites.

CNN's Ed Lavandera joining me now from Dallas.

Ed, this is really -- these detention sites, these centers, they're the first stop in what can be a very long process for these children. You have a really interesting look into sort of what this whole process is for them.

ED LAVANDERA, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, you know, Brianna, you hear so many calls about why can't these children just be quickly deported, well, that is just simply not the way the system works. And it is a complicated system and it's also a very slow process.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

LAVANDERA (voice-over): Fifty-two thousand, that's how many unaccompanied children the Department of Homeland Security says have crossed into the United States just since October. It's right at double the amount from the same period a year earlier. Many are caught by Border Patrol and placed here, at detention facilities where they are held, screened and cataloged, but then what?

A 2008 law passed with bipartisan support and signed by then President Bush in the final days of his presidency is complicating the issue. It's called the William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act. The law prohibits a quick deportation for children from non-bordering countries and requires they receive an opportunity before an immigration judge to determine their future status.

JAIME TREVINO, ATTORNEY, CATHOLIC CHARITIES OF DALLAS: It could be anywhere from a year to a little more than a year before the kids actually end up going to immigration court and seeing a judge. They can have several hearings their entire immigration court process. So it really just depends on the child and the remedies and, you know, what is -- if they have representation.

LAVANDERA: It was intended to prevent child sex trafficking but the recent flood of migrants has produced unintended consequences. The Obama administration says the law is limiting its ability to deal with the crisis and is asking Congress for changes to help expedite the deportation process.

The hearings will determine if the children will qualify for humanitarian relief and be allowed to stay but according to White House officials, most will not so they will be deported. But that's not expected to be easy either. A judge's deportation order must be carried out by Immigration and Customs Enforcement which has its own priorities on who should be deported.

TREVINO: Children are going to generally be on the lower end of the spectrum because, you know, what's a 5-year-old kid -- what kind of crime can he really commit in the United States versus, you know, maybe somebody who drug trafficking or some other undesirable crime?

LAVANDERA: Meaning these children could be --

(END VIDEOTAPE)

LAVANDERA: So, Brianna, this is a situation that in many cases could take anywhere from at least a year but given the backlog of the immigration court system, some of the lawyers that we spoke with say it could very likely take as long as two years to get most of these cases through the system -- Brianna.

KEILAR: Two years, that is unbelievable.

Ed Lavandera, thank you.

And joining me now is Republican Senator Ron Johnson of Wisconsin. He is a member of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee. The committee that's holding a hearing on the border crisis next hour.

Senator, thanks for being with us. And just tell us what you're hoping to accomplish with the hearing.

SEN. RON JOHNSON (R), WISCONSIN: Good morning, Brianna. Well, first of all, let's get the actual facts. I mean, what do we really have in terms of the number of children right now. They're saying about 52,000, what has been the inflow -- what are these kids really being subjected to. But, you know, my background is in accounting. If, say, you look at

this request by President Obama, $3.7 billion, and let me put it another way, $3,700 million divided by 52,000 children, that's about $71,000 per child.

Now I went online earlier today, and their airfares as low as about $207 to return these kids in a very humane fashion. We can put them up in a hotel room, give them some food but do this expedited procedures like we do in the contiguous countries, Canada and Mexico. We need to establish that procedure. It'd be the number one signal we can send to parents, don't subject your children to the beast, the train system, the depravity of that arduous journey.

(CROSSTALK)

KEILAR: Well, but let me ask you about that.

JOHNSON: Because they're not going to be able to stay here. Right now we're sending the signal that they're able to stay.

KEILAR: So you're focused on the cost being too much in terms of when you break it down by child.

JOHNSON: No. No --

KEILAR: But some of the proposal is also to try to combat some of that misinformation that smugglers are propagating in Central American countries, telling people that their kids will be able to get into the U.S., and they won't be deported. Some of it is trying to crack down on smugglers as well, so it's not just getting these kids processed and put out. I mean, in sending them back.

JOHNSON: But, Brianna, Brianna, listen to your last report. They said it's going to take two years to be deported. That's if they're actually deported. So really the propaganda is true. You can get your kid into the United States. Right now they're able to stay in the course of President Obama's deferred action on childhood arrivals. That's exactly the -- that's the actual message we're sending right now.

The more powerful message would be, in a very humane way, send those children immediately back to their country of origin. If we have to spend some money, let's spend some money on those immigration systems down in Honduras and Guatemala and El Salvador, to make sure that they -- those children be treated well in their country of origin.

That would be the most important message we can send, that if you -- if you send your children over here, it's not going to be worth the risk. They're going to be sent right back. That's what we ought to be doing instead of creating incentives and inducements for parents to send their children to the United States which is what's happening right now.

KEILAR: So, Senator, you think that the deportation hearing requirement should be waived? JOHNSON: Yes, that's exactly what we do. According to that 2008 law,

we created expedited procedures for immigrants from -- or illegal immigrants from Mexico and Canada. I don't know why we segregated other countries. We ought to have the same expedited procedures so that we're not creating those incentives.

The number one way of securing our border is stop incentivizing people to come to our country illegally. That's what we're doing right now. And so we have to stop that and again, the great - the best thing that we could send would be to send those kids back in a very humane and safe fashion, take them back to their countries of origin so they'll stop being sent here by their parents.

KEILAR: Many Democrats say there's a reason for having a deportation hearing, that in certain cases, there is a claim for asylum that should be heard and that this is something that, for some folks who come to the U.S. and they have a claim like that, that you don't just send them back, you have a deportation hearing. What do you say that?

JOHNSON: Brianna, the anti-trafficking law was a well-intentioned law but it has very negative unintended consequences, so now what we're seeing is we're actually almost incentivizing human traffics, aren't we? These kids are being smuggled through. They are paying these drug lords to smuggle their children.

Isn't that human trafficking? So again, you have to actually -- if you want asylum, you ought to go to your consulate or the U.S. embassy in the country of origin and stake your claim. That's the legal way of doing it, not coming into our country illegally. And again, just look at the inhumanity of the system that's set up now. We're incentivizing --

(CROSSTALK)

KEILAR: But doesn't --

JOHNSON: We're incentivizing parents to send --

KEILAR: And I hear you on that but doesn't --

JOHNSON: OK. Well, that's the most important point.

KEILAR: Doesn't the fact that Congress has not been able to achieve anything on this, many would argue that's incentivizing some of this. Doesn't some of this lay at the feet of Congress for not passing reform?

JOHNSON: Now I would say the Senate immigration bill created additional incentives. Part of the Senate bill, and one of the reasons I voted against it, it included in that bill was $262 billion of welfare benefits for non-U.S. citizens. That's an inducement, that's incentive to get in the country under the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals. You're not going to be tossed out. So now you've got child tax credits that illegal immigrants are claiming.

So we have created so many incentives for illegal immigration, that's the first thing we have to do, is reduce or eliminate those incentives for illegal immigration. So no, I would say all this talk about comprehensive reform without first securing the border is what set up the situation.

KEILAR: All right, really appreciate you being with us this morning. There are so many points of view on this and we appreciate getting yours, Wisconsin Senator Ron Johnson.

JOHNSON: Have a great day.

KEILAR: And NEWSROOM is back in just a moment.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KEILAR: Israeli officials tell CNN a ground offensive may be needed to stop attacks from Hamas in the Gaza Strip. Israel stepped up airstrikes overnight in response to rocket fire coming from Gaza.

CNN's Diana Magnay is live near the Israeli/Gaza border.

Israel says that it's intercepted dozens of rockets, Diana. What could you see from your position?

DIANA MAGNAY, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, we're near the Iron Dome Missile Defense System. We can't actually show it to you now for strategic reasons because it's being reloaded, but it is this system which has intercepted more than 50 of the rockets coming over from Gaza, especially the ones that have been targeting big civilian areas, such as Tel Aviv and Jerusalem. And just today a rocket or sirens sounded 140 kilometers away from Gaza, which gives you a sense of the long range that some of these missiles are capable of, that Hamas and other militant groups there in Gaza have.

And that is why the Israeli Defense Forces say that they don't want just to stop these rockets from coming over but they want to target Hamas' organizational structure also, and this is why we're seeing them target militants' homes as well as concealed rocket launching sites, for example, and the tunnels, terrorist tunnels. All three, so as to really cripple Hamas' ability to engage in this kind of rocket terrorism.

All the while, Brianna, of course, Israeli airstrikes are pounding these targets in Gaza and the body count, the death toll is going up -- Brianna.

KEILAR: Diana Magnay, thank you.

And still to come, frustration and finger-pointing in Washington, even a call for President Obama's impeachment over what many say is a humanitarian crisis along the border.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KEILAR: We're now about 10 minutes away from the start of a hearing on the border crisis by the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, and now Sarah Palin is weighing in, in perhaps her most direct attack on the president. The former Alaska governor saying this, that it's time for impeachment.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SARAH PALIN (R), FORMER ALASKA GOVERNOR: Well, enough is enough of the years of abuse from this president. His unsecured border crisis for me is the last straw. It makes kind of the battered wife saying no more. This lawlessness will not be accepted anymore by the people who hired you to do your job. Your job is to protect the Constitution. You're not doing it.

We're in a lot of trouble and things are only going to get worse until we send this message that it is time to impeach.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KEILAR: Now Sarah Palin clearly not mincing words there.

Let's bring in Susan Page, she is the Washington bureau chief for "USA Today."

Good morning, Susan. Thanks for joining us.

SUSAN PAGE, WASHINGTON BUREAU CHIEF, USA TODAY: Good morning.

KEILAR: And you know, it's interesting. We know the border crisis, it's sparking frustration in Washington, in both parties. How would you gauge the mood? Are lawmakers willing to give the White House any more time on this? Do you think they're going to approve the president's funding request?

PAGE: You know, I think the idea that Sarah Palin is critical of President Obama really not a surprise.

KEILAR: Yes.

PAGE: What's more surprising is that you are hearing from some Democratic members of Congress and other Democrats who are concerned that this is, number one, a humanitarian crisis, number two, a big political problem for President Obama, and potentially for Democrats running in the midterms in November.

KEILAR: Well, and to that point, you spoke with Congresswoman Donna Edwards. She is a Democrat from Maryland. You talked to her about the trip and the president's trip, whether he should visit the border. Here's what she said.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. DONNA EDWARDS (D), MARYLAND: I have to tell you, I'm much more of a hands-on person so for me visiting the border would make sense in terms of my ability to make decisions. People do things differently. I think if I were advising him, I'd advise him to go to the border. But I respect the fact that he's decided otherwise.

He's calling on Congress to actually do something about it. And all the visiting in the border in the world is not going to change the fact that Congress hasn't done anything yet. And that is at the feet and the hands of John Boehner, of the Republican Party that refuses to bring immigration reform to the floor for a vote. It would pass.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KEILAR: A big supporter of President Obama's. And we're sort of a seeing a split here, right, among Democrats? Some saying hey, you need to get there, this is going to be your Katrina moment. And then others saying what we also -- we heard Edwards say part of this, too. How is he really going to help if he's there?

Talk about this split that we're seeing.

PAGE: Well, I think there's a lot of concern even among some people in the White House about the optics of him being in Texas today and not going down to see the situation and this crisis, and the White House has been pretty defiant and saying he will not go to the border. That there's not a value in him doing that.

You know, another thing we heard Congresswoman Edwards say, and notable because she is, as you say, a big Democratic loyalist, she's a -- she's a head of a big program at the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee aimed at winning over Republican seats. She also expressed concern about the idea the White House raised about pulling back some of those protections for migrant children from Central America that has forced the administration to have hearings before deporting them.

She says she'd be concerned about doing that. So you see this delicate line the president is going to have to walk between demands that he do something about this and concerns among his core supporters that he not do things that seem anti-immigrant.

KEILAR: Do you think, Susan -- could he go to the border? I mean, one of the arguments is he could draw resources away from dealing with the problem. We also heard that argument, not to say it's apples to apples, but you also have Democrats and Republicans saying Katrina. That was one of the arguments, when it came to President Bush. He didn't want to pull resources away.

Does it sort of stand here?

PAGE: Well, you do hear people who were hurt by Katrina objecting to any comparison to Katrina. But it is true, that one of the things that he got -- President Bush got very criticized for was not being on the scene. It's certainly true that presidents draw resources when they visit some place, and that in some ways it's a photo op, but it's also an expression of concern and it's an ability to look at a situation firsthand.

So I think this is a tough one for the White House, I am I think a little surprised that they did not -- they do something so that he would be at the border, have a round table, meet with sheriffs, do something at the border to show that he is very focused on this crisis.

KEILAR: Yes, and he's talking about it in Dallas, and he's meeting with Governor Perry, but it's not the same as being at the border.

A lot of folks look at Eric Cantor losing his race and they say that was the nail in the coffin of immigration reform. You might have said that it was well on its way out of not going through this Congress even before that.

When you look forward here, is there a chance that -- when's the next chance? Is there a real chance in 2015, do you think, for immigration reform?

PAGE: No, I think it's tough with this Republican Party, and with their suspicion of President Obama. And I would think that even though we thought in the 2012 election that that was the thing that propelled immigration reform to get through Congress, I think we're now looking at another presidential election, a 2016 election before this issue gets seriously considered in a comprehensive way by this Congress.

KEILAR: Wow, we're talking years and years.

Susan Page, Washington bureau chief for "USA Today," thanks so much.

PAGE: Thank you.

KEILAR: And still to come, the agony of destruction. Brazil fans, they just cannot believe that their team got hammered at the World Cup, but while they weep, others are having a good time.

CNN's Laura Rutledge has that story.

LAURA RUTLEDGE, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yes, Brianna. Social media had a great time at the expense of Brazil. We've got all the latest on that, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KEILAR: World Cup shocker, Germany did not just beat Brazil, it beat them down. Seven goals. Count them. Seven. Brazil's defense was like Swiss, and not the Swiss team, we're talking Swiss cheese. They were just shredded.

How big was this 7-1 pounding? Well, it was the biggest ever in a World Cup semifinal. The worst loss for a World Cup host country and Brazil's first loss at home since 1975.

The Brazilian fans rocket for the team's other matches turned quiet as church mice during this one and they were still stunned long after it was over.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We had like five goals in 30 minutes, and everything, everything ruined after that.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I think that Brazil was going to win this game. Like, but if Brazil lose, I would think like 2-0, 2-1, but 7-1 is unbelievable.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It's a shame for Brazil.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KEILAR: That little boy. He got it so right. Unbelievable.

CNN's Laura Rutledge joining us now to help put this all into perspective.

I mean, some people -- this is bad.

RUTLEDGE: Yes.

KEILAR: This is 7-1 in soccer, unheard of.

RUTLEDGE: Exactly, Brianna. And you're completely right. I think Brazil fans are probably waking up this morning thinking, did that really happen? But it did happen. And Twitter definitely knew about it.

There were over 35.5 million tweets about the match which is a record for the most tweeted about single sporting event. So just how bad was it? Well, these numbers from ESPN Radio give you an idea of how Germany's seven goals were compared to other sports. There you see it. It would be like been NFL team scoring 236 points, NBA teams scoring 438 points. Major League Baseball teams scoring 22 runs or an NHL team scoring 14 goals. So pretty bad.

And the odds of Germany scoring that many times were obviously slim at just .022 percent or one in 4,520. Now Germany will play the winner of today's match between the Netherlands and Argentina. So as I said, twitter was on fire and of course took the opportunity to poke some fun at Brazil.

Let's take a look at some of these means that came through. There's the iconic Christ redeemer statue, that overlooked real breaking, live pic of the Christ the Redeemer status at this point. He looks very disappointed. And of course Ron Burgundy, always classy. He chimed in when Germany was only up five-nil, saying this escalated quickly.

And well, we always have to get Oprah involved. She's very generous.

(LAUGHTER)

RUTLEDGE: And she says, you get to goal, you get a goal, everyone gets a goal, and I guess you can check under your seat for some goals.

(LAUGHTER)

KEILAR: Not everyone gets a goal. But you know what, it just makes me think, Laura, when we were watching that match, U.S. lost to Germany, but it was a 1-0 game. I mean, I look back and think of that game, and I think wow, the U.S. -- I mean, Germany is great and the U.S. really held its own. RUTLEDGE: Well, definitely. And it's certainly more credit due to

Tim Howard, the United States goalie that we've talked about so much. I mean, he really was so crucial to what the U.S. was able to do in the World Cup this year, and he deserves so much credit, but as you mentioned before, I mean, Brazil's defense was Swiss cheese.