Return to Transcripts main page

New Day

Clinton Prepares To Face Benghazi Committee; Father Facing Child Endangerment Charges; Tracy Morgan Makes Triumphant Return To SNL; Larry David Channels Bernie Sanders On SNL; Aired 7:30-8a ET

Aired October 19, 2015 - 07:30   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

MICHAELA PEREIRA, CNN ANCHOR: The first polls are in and an overwhelming number of Democrats believe that Hillary Clinton was the clear winner, but her poll numbers only slightly nudging up after the Democratic debate.

Look at the latest CNN/ORC poll, 62 percent of Democratic viewers thought Clinton won with 35 percent giving the nod to Bernie Sanders. The overall numbers, however, are not showing the bump that Team Clinton was hoping for. The former secretary of state holds a largely unchanged 16-point lead over Sanders.

ALISYN CAMEROTA, CNN ANCHOR: The nuclear deal with Iran now officially in effect. The United States is approving conditional sanction relief for Tehran. That relief will not take hold until the Iranians curb their nuclear program as required by the agreement. U.S. officials tell CNN actual relief from sanctions for Iran is still at least two months away.

CHRIS CUOMO, CNN ANCHOR: Cyber attackers linked to China's government attempted to hack into the networks of seven U.S. tech and pharmaceutical companies. That is fact, according to private researchers, who say the attempts happened regularly over a solid three weeks. The Chinese president vowed in Washington last month to crack down on economic espionage.

PEREIRA: Baltimore City Council today is expected to vote to approve Kevin Davis as police chief. He took over the helm on an interim basis in July. Davis replaced Anthony Batts, who was fired amid a spike in violence and unrest following Freddie Gray's death in April. Crime remained largely at all-time highs over the summer. The 25- year-old Freddie Gray died of a spinal cord injury while in police custody.

CAMEROTA: Blunt talk from the head of the House Select Committee on Benghazi. Congressman Trey Gowdy telling lawmakers on his committee to, quote, "shut up."

But that does not apply to our next guest. Congresswoman Susan Brooks is a Republican from Indiana who is a member of the committee on Benghazi. She has some real information to share. Congresswoman, thanks so much for being on NEW DAY.

REPRESENTATIVE SUSAN BROOKS (R), INDIANA: Good morning, Alisyn. Great to be here.

CAMEROTA: Let's talk about what's going to happen this week. Hillary Clinton is going to appear again in front of the committee. What do you hope to learn and what exactly do you plan to ask her?

BROOKS: We hope to really take the facts that we've been gathering from the witnesses that we've already interviewed, from the e-mails that we have received and ask her questions that have not been asked before, and also go into greater detail than past committees were able to do.

CAMEROTA: Were there things on her e-mail -- sorry to interrupt -- but were there things in her e-mails about Benghazi?

BROOKS: Well, certainly there were things in her e-mails about Benghazi and about Libya and we want to ask her a lot more questions about the security posture in Libya prior to the attacks in 2012.

We want to know what she knew about those security concerns in Libya. We want to ask her questions that we have found from Chris Stevens' e- mails, which we have just recently received. We've just been getting thousands of his e-mails as late as last week.

So we want to ask her a lot of questions about what they knew, what different people in her department knew, and ask what she did in response to those concerns. There were hundreds of security concerns raised about the security posture in Libya in 2011 and 2012.

CAMEROTA: What do her e-mails and Chris Stevens' e-mails suggest about her role? Do they suggest that she willfully denied enhancing security to protect Chris Stevens?

BROOKS: The secretary was the head of the agency. She was the head of the State Department. She was responsible as she has admitted responsibility for what happened. However, what we need to find out is, what was the environment within the State Department?

What were the security requests that were made? How were they decided? What involvement did she have in making those decisions? Who did she put in charge? How much information did she receive? What did she know, what did she not know?

So her e-mails indicate a bit of this, but we have further questions about what she actually knew, what she was involved in, what kind of briefings she had, who briefed her, and who didn't? What kind of questions did she have?

There are a lot of things we have to ask her. We're pleased she's billion of coming before us on Thursday willing to answer those questions.

CAMEROTA: One of your fellow Benghazi committee members, Adam Schiff of California said this weekend that he does not know what the purpose of this committee is any more beyond than just going after Hillary Clinton. Let me play for you what he said.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: How long till the final report? Is it going to be in the middle of 2016? Is it going to be after the election?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: A great question, Andrea. Maybe Mr. Schiff can answer that for you.

[07:35:06] UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Let me just follow up here.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The reason there's no answer is we don't know what we're looking for. We can't put an end date on it because we don't know what this committee is supposed to look for, apart for damaging Hillary Clinton it has no reason for existence.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CAMEROTA: Adam Schiff has said apart from damaging Hillary Clinton, it has no reason for existence. Congressman Kevin McCarthy suggested something similar. Congressman Richard Hannah, a Republican, suggested something similar.

And the investigator who had been let go from the committee, Bradley Podliska suggested something similar. So how can Americans believe the committee is still doing true investigative work and not just going after Hillary Clinton?

BROOKS: Well, we have interviewed over 57 witnesses, more than 40 of whom had never been interviewed by congressional committees before. Thirty witnesses had never been interviewed by anybody before including seven who were at the scene of the attack that had never been interviewed by anybody before.

These are new facts and that is what this committee has always been about, a very fact centric investigation, a serious investigation. And we've also gotten over 57,000 new e-mails.

So the committees that had investigated this before and while I applaud their work, they did it in a much shorter time frame. They didn't have the e-mails that we have. None of the committees had Chris Stevens' e-mails.

Chris Stevens' e-mails share with us what his concerns were, what his requests were, what was going on in the ground. They didn't have that kind of information. This is the kind of information we had.

Hillary Clinton, the secretary is just one fact witness. We have more witnesses to go after Thursday. This investigation does not end with Thursday. There are other leaders of other agencies that we need to interview.

CAMEROTA: Yes.

BROOKS: We've been at this a long time. We're not going to be done, Alisyn.

CAMEROTA: I just want to ask you on that very point because Hillary Clinton says that in fact you have foregone interviewing witnesses from the intelligence community as well as from the security community in lieu of going after her and looking at her e-mails. Do you plan to call other leaders from intelligence and security about what went wrong?

BROOKS: We absolutely do plan on calling more witnesses and we have interviewed some witnesses from other agencies. And so I assume that she's been informed by the other staff, the Democrat staff of the committee as to who we've interviewed.

We have interviewed some other witnesses from other agencies. We're not finished. We have continued to receive e-mails and communications from the other agencies. Of course, we're going to be interviewing the other agencies.

This investigation is not about the secretary. It is about gathering all of the facts that we can obtain providing a comprehensive look for the families, the colleagues we lost in Benghazi and State Department employees and other CIA and defense department employees to ensure that this does not happen again.

CAMEROTA: Yes.

BROOKS: This was a tragic incident where we lost an ambassador and we need to gather all of the facts.

CAMEROTA: Yes.

BROOKS: And so we have been doing that, it's taken us far too long because quite frankly it's taken the State Department far too long to get us the information. In fact, they still haven't given us everything we asked for. It's been very frustrating.

It's also very frustrating when our colleagues speak about it because they don't know what we've been doing, what the results have been. We are trying very hard to do a very fact-based comprehensive investigation. We will continue after Thursday and then we'll issue a final report.

CAMEROTA: Congresswoman Susan Brooks, thanks for all the information. We'll be watching closely what happens on Thursday. Let's get over to Michaela.

PEREIRA: A heartbreaking story, a Chicago father is charged in the shooting death of his 3-year-old son. The father didn't fire the shot. It was the boy's 6-year-old brother. Our legal experts weigh in.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[07:43:05]

PEREIRA: A Chicago father facing child endangerment charges after his 6-year-old son shot and killed his 3-year-old brother. Police say Michael Santiago left the gun in a spot where the kids could find it. Could he be held liable for his little boy's accidental death? Here to discuss it is Joey Jackson, HLN legal analyst and criminal defense attorney. This story is --

JOEY JACKSON, HLN LEGAL ANALYST: Gut wrenching.

PEREIRA: It's gut wrenching. It's horrifying. There are no winners. Everyone is a loser in this scenario. We have to talk about this because we're hearing differently let's say an accidental pool death or something like that that the father is being held responsible for this.

JACKSON: Yes.

PEREIRA: Explain to us what the liability is here given that he is not the one that pulled the trigger?

JACKSON: Here's what happens, Michaela. First looking globally and specifically at this case. You have about 27 states and the District of Columbia that have child access prevention laws. What that means is if you have a firearm, secure it. If you don't, you'll be criminally held responsible. Now prosecutors don't like to do that because it's a double whammy, right?

PEREIRA: You're grieving the loss of a child and on top of it --

JACKSON: Now you're getting prosecuted for it. This prosecutor said you have to draw the line because there needs to be some deterrent value. There has to be. So the law pretty much states because he's being charged with child endangerment, not specifically under the statute that says child access prevention, though, Illinois has one.

What he is being charge with is reckless endangerment so the critical legal question is, you're looking at a jury, did you create, knowingly create, a condition that could result in harm to your child?

PEREIRA: This is where we come back to the information that we know. The father told authorities that he had purchased the gun illegally off the street for protection because he had snitched on a former gang member at trial. So that he had this gun for protection.

We also know the prosecutor told the "Chicago Tribune" that he had showed the little boy where the gun was and that it was loaded.

[07:45:08] JACKSON: That's problematic. We could get into debate of whether someone should have a gun, whether they should own it for purposes of thinking they'll fear of gang retaliation another day, another time.

But in the event that you do have a gun and you think it's necessary for your personal protection, second amendment, OK. Should you have that gun in a place, which would allow a child who's 6 years old to access it and tell that child where it is, have it on top of your refrigerator --

PEREIRA: Wrapped in pajamas.

JACKSON: -- and you have a 3-year-old who's there. Children play every day.

PEREIRA: They were playing cops and robbers apparently.

JACKSON: Exactly. Children play every day. You have to -- as we said, it's gut wrenching. You don't want to see a person be held doubly accountable. Your child is gone, now you're prosecuted.

PEREIRA: In this case, not at the 60,000-foot level, in this case could that be a viable defense for this man, that he was using it as protection?

JACKSON: I don't think so. Here's why. As a defense attorney I wouldn't want to go that route. Yes, you're using it as protection but what does it have to do with the way in which you're storing it. You need a firearm. You think it's important for you to protect yourself, OK.

But you can do it in such a way so as to not endanger your 6-year-old, 3-year-old and cause a death here. That's the critical question and the problem.

PEREIRA: Dad was at work, mom was running an errand. Grandpa was taking care of them at the time.

JACKSON: Hears a shot downstairs.

PEREIRA: Hears a shot, runs downstairs so at the end of the say, a 3- year-old is dead, could this be changed to a murder charge?

JACKSON: I don't see that because with murder you're saying that the father actually aided, abetted.

PEREIRA: He didn't. He didn't intend for his child to be killed.

JACKSON: Not at all. But what you're looking at again, it comes back to focusing on the critical question. Did you knowingly create a condition that could lead to something like this happening? If the answer is yes then there's accountability.

PEREIRA: OK, speaking of accountability, follow the trail then so the people that he got the gun from illegally on the street? Could they be held liable, too?

JACKSON: Certainly prosecutors could take this to a logical conclusion. They often do. What happens is once they find a gun, they trace it. Where did it come from? How did you get it? Was it legal, illegal? Where did it emanate from?

Were there other deaths involved in the use of this gun, they get the serial number. But I think they're concerned here about what the father did and it has broader implications. You want to deter others.

If you're going to deter others, I don't you need to have standards where they hold people accountable so they know, secure that weapon, don't allow a child to gain access such that a tragedy like this, Michaela, can happen. PEREIRA: This will certainly fuel the current debate over guns right now in the nation. Horrible, nobody is a winner here. This is a terrible, terrible story to have to tell. Joey, thanks for weighing in -- Chris.

CUOMO: It didn't have to happen. This is one of the issues that can unite both sides in gun debate. You want a gun, fine, but store it properly. It's such a big factor in so many of these crimes.

We'll take a break now. When we come back, I don't know about you, but "Saturday Night Live" just about killed me. I almost choked to death on a macadamia nut while watching Tracy Morgan and wait until you see this, Larry David as Bernie Sanders.

It moved your heart when you saw Tracy and, man, did it make you laugh. You will laugh, I guarantee it, just don't eat macadamia nuts at the same time.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[07:50:27]

CHRISTINE ROMANS, CNN CHIEF BUSINESS CORRESPONDENT: I'm Christine Romans with CNN money now. Brand new this morning, China's economy grew 6.9 percent in the third quarter, the slowest growth since 2009. China is still growing the fastest of any major economy, but that growth is slowing and it's scaring investors.

A different sort of scary, "Goosebumps" wins big at the box office this weekend, the movie starring Jack Black as children's horror author, R.L. Stein brought in $23.5 million.

It beat tough competition from superstars like Tom Hanks and Matt Damon riding nostalgia for '90s children who obsessed over the books. We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CAMEROTA: OK, put down your coffee.

PEREIRA: I had to swallow this so I wouldn't choke.

CAMEROTA: I'm warning everyone because comedian, Larry David, going on "SNL" this weekend and revealing his true purpose in life, to nail an impression of Bernie Sanders.

Also, Tracy Morgan was back with a triumphant homecoming, appearing on "SNL" for the first time since his near fatal car accident so let's watch.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRACY MORGAN, COMEDIAN: Thank you so much! Thank you so much. I'm just playing. You thought for a minute, that was real, but I'm back. It feels so good, people are wondering, can he speak? Does he have 100 percent mental capacity? The truth is I never did. I might actually be a few points higher now.

LARRY DAVID, COMEDIAN: We're doomed! We need a revolution! Millions of people on the streets, and we have to do something. We have to do it now. I'm the only candidate up here who is not a billionaire. I don't have a super PAC. I don't even have a backpack. I carry my stuff around loose in my arms, like a professor between classes. I own one pair of underwear. That's it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CUOMO: It gets more funny. Listen to Senator Sanders with his own response to what Larry David did about him on "Saturday Night Live." They said he doesn't have a sense of humor. They're wrong.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SENATOR BERNIE SANDERS (D), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Yes, last week, I bought my second pair of underwear. That's a joke. Please don't write it down. That was a joke. I have an ample supply of underwear.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PEREIRA: Can we do a split screen? The two -- they were torn -- I mean --

CAMEROTA: Thank you. I can't tell which is which.

[07:55:03] PEREIRA: You know what makes me so happy? I've been like, there's a hundred something days until the election. We have more Larry David as Bernie Sanders. It's good.

CUOMO: He laughs at himself, keeps going.

PEREIRA: Good for him.

CUOMO: Boy, that was funny. I've been waiting for that for a long time.

CAMEROTA: That is great.

CUOMO: New poll numbers -- don't take my tease again. If I don't go right away, she's like, more for me. Democrats have a good message for Hillary Clinton. Is it good enough? What does it say about Joe Biden in our new CNN/ORC poll? What happened in this debate? How did it change the race? We have answers, ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Do you blame George W. Bush for 9/11?

DONALD TRUMP (R), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: When he said we were safe, that's not safe. We lost 3,000 people.

JEB BUSH (R), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: My brother responded to a crisis, and he did it as you would hope a president would do.

JAKE TAPPER, CNN HOST: You're scheduled to testify before the Benghazi committee.

HILLARY CLINTON (D), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: I don't know that I have much to add. This is, after all, the eighth investigation.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Unless you're on the committee, you have no idea what new facts we have found.

PEREIRA: Closing in on the notorious drug kingpin, Joaquin "El Chapo" Guzman.