Return to Transcripts main page

New Day

Interview with Republican Oklahoma Senator James Lankford; Sources: Paris Terrorist May Have Escaped to Syria; Christie Responds to Trump's Criticism. Aired 6:30-7a ET

Aired December 01, 2015 - 06:30   ET

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

STEPHANIE ELAM, CNN CORRESPONDENT: -- when Dear has his next hearing.

[06:30:04] He is being held without bond. But we are learning more about his past, his interactions with law enforcement, and just to give you an idea of who Robert Dear is.

We know in 1997, his wife accused him of domestic assault. This is when he lived in South Carolina. But charges were not pressed in that.

2002, he was accused of being a peeping tom. But those charges were dismissed. And in 2003, he was arrested and charged with two counts of animal cruelty but he was found not guilty in those cases.

But in keep in mind with what has happened here at the Planned Parenthood shooting that he is accused of, three people have died, two civilians, a police officer, and nine people wounded including five police officers. You have a lot of witnesses who saw him in this action. So, his fate is likely that he will not see freedom again.

Alisyn, I'll send it back to you.

ALISYN CAMEROTA, CNN ANCHOR: OK, Stephanie, thank you.

We will talk more about this in the program. What exactly set off that suspect in the Planned Parenthood shootings? Is the political rhetoric on the campaign trail to blame? We take a closer look at that, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[06:35:03] CAMEROTA: Investigators have yet to release a motive in the shooting at that Colorado Planned Parenthood but some believe the gunman was influenced by overheated political rhetoric.

Joining us now to discuss this and more, Republican Oklahoma Senator James Lankford.

Senator, thanks so much for being here on NEW DAY.

SEN. JAMES LANKFORD (R), OKLAHOMA: Good morning. Good morning, Alisyn.

CAMEROTA: I know you reject the idea that this gunman was somehow influenced by all of the heated rhetoric around the abortion topic. But since we do know from police that he was ranting about baby parts, how can you be so certain that there wasn't something in the rhetoric that ignited him?

LANKFORD: Well, there's no way to know for certain, obviously. It's all speculation based on the comment that's been made out there. But no one knows a motive as you just mentioned before.

I do absolutely grieve for the families that are in Colorado, as everyone else does in the nation. But I find it completely irrational to say someone who stands up for life for children is taking the life of adult. It's completely inconsistent with the values of the pro- life movement that are very passionate about protecting life, not taking life.

To say someone is somehow on board with the pro-life community and is going out and killing people is very, very inconsistent with the values. This is a loner who lived in a trailer by himself, who had, as you had mentioned in previous report, domestic violence issues before. So, we don't know what set him off or if this was the latest.

But I find it very difficult to even fathom the conversation to say that people should not talk about the protection of children because someone may go out and kill an adult. Those two don't connect.

CAMEROTA: The president of Planned Parenthood, Cecile Richards, was on Anderson Cooper's show on CNN last night and she does see a link between the rhetoric and the action. So, listen to what she had to say.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CECILE RICHARDS, PRESIDENT OF PLANNED PARENTHOOD: We've seen increased harassment at women's health centers, including Planned Parenthood. We've seen rhetoric that I haven't ever seen in a national presidential election before, again demonizing women and many of the health care providers that provide services to women. I just think it behooves all of us in this country to look at these kinds of incidents and take stock of what we can do to prevent them in the future.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CAMEROTA: Senator, I mean, obviously talking about abortion is just one of the most heated topics we could ever talk about. You in Congress are working to try to defund Planned Parenthood and, of course, that is your prerogative as a lawmaker. This is what lawmakers do, try to figure out who to invest in, what not to invest in.

But does she have a point that it would behoove everyone to take it down a notch in terms of rhetoric?

LANKFORD: I would think anything that comes across as acoustic or attacking women -- her comment there was a little confusing to me to say this seems to be demonizing women. I haven't heard ever any comment that demonizes women. What I hear is the rhetoric to say, why don't we consider children in this? These are individuals who have ten fingers and ten toes and unique DNA, and we're trying to find a away to be able to protect the life of children that are moving into the next generation here, rather than just trying to deal with the issue of convenience now.

So, the real challenge for us is, we do need to talk about these issues. Like I mentioned, I don't hear people demonizing women in that comment. I would absolutely reject that.

But this is something similar to saying, you know what, if the president and others talk about climate change, then there's the shooting in a coal mine, then the president's comments about climate change is certainly be blamed for shooting in a coal mine. Those two don't connect. You got an irrational person that does something.

These are political statements and these are statements that America actually needs to talk about. If there's any push back to say, you know what America doesn't need to talk about infants and children anymore, I would just disagree with that. I think America does need to talk about the life of children and how to protect children in the days ahead.

CAMEROTA: Senator, I want to move on to something I know that's near to your heart is a report you put out called "Federal Fumbles". It's about federal waste. You have doozies in here that you've highlighted.

I'll put some up on the screen, $65,000 to study what happens to bugs in the dark. That is sort of curious by the way. $2.6 million, weight loss program for truck drivers. $43 million to build a gas station in Afghanistan.

How does -- honestly, how do these things get through Congress?

LANKFORD: Not just slip through Congress, slip through the administration, slip through everyone. Sometimes it's the incompetence of an individual that's making a decision that wasn't paying attention to the rest of what's happening. Sometimes, it's lack of oversight from Congress. Sometimes, it's a failed project that's been failed for a long time and no one stepped up to actually lead and to be able to correct this.

One of the big issues is IRS ID tax fraud. There is a way for the IRS to be able to have a double check to make sure individuals don't file on your Social Security number early and try to get a tax return and make it chaotic for you to file your own taxes. That's not been done.

So, we'd try to identify a hundred different ways that the federal government has dropped the ball, either in oversight, either Congress not doing their job, or the administration not basic oversight on it. But to say -- these are not criticisms. These are lighting real inefficiencies that we need to attack.

And my concern is, a lot of people have taken their eye off of the debt issues.

[06:40:02] CAMEROTA: Yes.

LANKFORD: We still have a major problem in debt with America that we have to find efficiencies in government to get us back to a balanced budget. We're still $450 billion in spending deficit this year.

CAMEROTA: We're out of time, but I do urge people to go online and look at your report, because there's also a $40 million expenditure of taxpayer dollars to help Donald Trump build one of his luxury hotels. That's also an eyebrow raiser.

Senator James Lankford, thanks so much for being on NEW DAY.

LANKFORD: You bet. Thanks, Alisyn.

CAMEROTA: Let's go to Chris, who is live for us in Paris.

CHRIS CUOMO, CNN ANCHOR: All right, Alisyn.

Obviously, we're here for the cop21 but we're also following the massive manhunt and terror investigation surrounding the summit here. The eighth attacker still at large, investigators now operating under the theory that he may have slipped through the dragnet and rejoined ISIS in Syria.

We're going to explore that possibility, and also what's going on in this intelligence battle or the allege one between Belgium and France? We'll take you through it.

(COMEMRCIAL BREAK)

[06:45:05] CUOMO: French intelligence officials suspect that the eighth Paris attacker may have escaped to Syria and rejoined ISIS. Belgian authorities say they have no indication of this, although they've always thought he might be headed there.

All right. What does all this mean?

Let's bring in counterterrorism expert and former French commando, Fabrice Magnier. It is good to have you. How would they know where he is if really all they know is where he isn't, right? They can't find him. But what's the theory?

FABRICE MAGNIER, COUNTER TERRORISM EXPERT: I think people are trying to understand what he's doing. So, I think if we had the information about him being in Syria, we should have it 100 percent. The question is, that guy should have exploded himself during the Paris attack. He didn't do it.

CUOMO: He was supposed to be one of the vest bombers.

MAGNIER: Sure, because we found his vest in the trash. So, that means he did not finish the job. And also, it looks like he didn't have a plan "B" because some guys from Belgium -- very quickly. So, maybe he's in Syria.

But my question is, this guy is enemy number one in Europe.

CUOMO: Right.

MAGNIER: I think he doesn't have many friends who want to help him because there's radar on him. So, first, it's no so easy to quit Europe in that case. Secondly, what could be the attitude of his leaders in Syria?

CUOMO: Of the ISIS guys.

MAGNIER: The ISIS guys, yes.

CUOMO: When he comes back and they say you didn't finish the job, that could go well or very badly for him, right?

MAGNIER: Exactly. Why did you not finish the job? Looks like he didn't have the courage to do it. So, first thing, it's not so good for him. But they will have to protect him for a while before sending him back to Europe to finish the job. You know?

CUOMO: So, you think they might use him again?

MAGNIER: Sure, sure. So, the question is now, is he in Syria or not? Nobody knows.

CUOMO: So, they're looking for him. Then we have the process of the manhunt. The Belgian officials say we don't have word that he's in Syria. The French say, well, we think he may be there. The Belgians say we're not getting enough intelligence soon enough from the French.

What is the dynamic here? What works? What does not work well enough?

MAGNIER: Those two countries have to try to work together because they have to do it. We understand, you know, in France, intelligence is quite huge. In Belgium, it's not that case. It's much more different size. There are no so many dimensions.

So, we can imagine French intelligence service more a little bit aware about the ongoing situation. But for sure, we try to work together. They always try to do it, to work together, especially for the direct traffic, because all those terrorist guys are linked with drug traffic. They're all ex-drug trafficker.

CUOMO: Drug trafficking is usually a common activity with these guys who get radicalized.

MAGNIER: Exactly.

CUOMO: Why? Because it's criminal behavior and it's the criminals they look for?

MAGNIER: Exactly. All those guys coming from the ghettos, stop to deal with drugs because it's easy money. This is a way to become much more powerful and then they start to radicalize themselves and then they become activists. OK?

So, if it isn't Syria, nobody should know. Maybe it will be the first one to say, look, I'm here. I'm in Syria. You know what I mean? So --

CUOMO: It's very interesting, if he exploded the vest, he's a coward in the eyes of anybody who looks at it. To those guys when he goes back, he's a coward because he didn't do it.

MAGNIER: Exactly.

CUOMO: So, it will be interesting if word surfaces of him being anywhere else than in the vicinity.

MAGNIER: Sure.

CUOMO: Fabrice Magnier, we know you keep telling us. They've keep this summit safe so far. But the task is far from over these two weeks and we'll be on. France has a new reality for terrorism.

MAGNIER: Yes.

CUOMO: Thank you very much for being with us as always.

MAGNIER: You're welcome.

CUOMO: All right. Let's head back to you, Michaela, in New York.

MICHAELA PEREIRA, CNN ANCHOR: All right, Chris. Thank so much.

Governor Chris Christie taking on Donald Trump's controversial 9/11 claims. We have his one-on-one interview with CNN, coming up next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[06:53:05] PEREIRA: Good to have you back with us here on NEW DAY.

New Jersey Governor Chris Christie now one of Donald Trump's latest targets. After picking up a key endorsement from a New Hampshire newspaper, but Christie is trying to turn the negative attention back on Trump saying his most recent comments about New Jersey Muslims celebrating on September 11th are just wrong.

CNN special correspondent Jamie Gangel sat down with Christie. She joins us now.

You'd been doing a great job with these interviews.

JAMIE GANGEL, CNN SPECIAL CORRESPONDENT: Thank you.

PEREIRA: You had a sit-down with New Jersey governor.

GANGEL: Right. And it is game on between these two men. You're going to see Trump taking to Twitter and Christie calling out Trump for his recent comments but we started by asking about Christie's new big endorsement.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

GANGEL: Does this make you the comeback kid?

GOV. CHRIS CHRISTIE (R-NJ), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: We'll see. You know, that will be determined on February 9th when we see how the votes come in. But I think what it shows is that the work we've been putting in here in New Hampshire, the plans we laid out that people are taking them seriously and taking them to heart. And we're thrilled to have the endorsement.

GANGEL: Prediction today: Chris Christie could win New Hampshire?

CHRISTIE: Sure, of course. I could win New Hampshire. And anybody who is up here and watches any of it knows that I can.

GANGEL: Apparently, this endorsement is enough to worry your friend Donald Trump. Up to now, he has steered clear of criticizing you for the most part.

But first thing this morning, he was on Twitter. "How is Chris Christie running the state of New Jersey which is deeply troubled when he is spending all of his time in New Hampshire? New Jerseyans are not happy."

You say?

CHRISTIE: I'm just so glad to be noticed by Donald. Ain't that nice? It's great. And I'm happy to take whatever input he wants to give me in 140 characters or less, which is apparently the way he communicates best. So, fine.

GANGEL: Is this a compliment that he is now taking a punch at you?

[06:55:00] CHRISTIE: Who knows? You know, Jamie, I think -- I'm not going to play into the business of spending the precious time you and I have together, you know, talking about Donald Trump.

GANGEL: Oh, yes, we are.

CHRISTIE: He is just one of a number of candidates for us to talk about and chew over and -- I'm not worried about it.

GANGEL: Right. He is the frontrunner. You have avoided criticizing him.

But he insists he has now doubled down and tripled down, that he saw thousands of Muslims celebrating after 9/11 in Jersey City. Then he says from four miles away in his office, he could see people jumping from the World Trade Center.

Do you believe that either of those things happened?

CHRISTIE: No. All I know are the facts, you know, that what went on that day in New Jersey was not anything of like what he said and there's no film or video to prove it. He said he saw it on TV. It didn't happen.

GANGEL: But the first time you were asked about it, you said you didn't think it was true, but you didn't recall it. And as a former prosecutor, you know when a witness says I don't recall that, it sounds as if they don't want to answer the question.

CHRISTIE: No, It's an honest answer.

I was not focused on everything in New Jersey that day. My wife and brother were trapped in Lower Manhattan. I didn't know if they were dead or alive. So, I said, I don't think it happened, but I have to put that qualifier in there because I was not completely focused on what happened.

GANGEL: Did it happen?

CHRISTIE: No.

GANGEL: Absolutely not?

CHRISTIE: No.

GANGEL: So, why don't you call Donald Trump out on this? He has doubled down. He has tripled down.

CHRISTIE: Everybody knows it didn't happen. So, what's the use? To join the cacophony? I'm about distinguishing myself and making myself different from everybody else from a 14-person field. Not the same.

GANGEL: Yes or no? Is it outrageous that Donald Trump keeping saying these things?

CHRISTIE: It's wrong. It's just wrong. It's factually wrong.

Everybody else can determine what they think is outrageous or not outrageous. I mean, in the context of Donald, outrageous is a high bar.

GANGEL: His latest is that he is mocking a "New York Times" reporter who has a physical disability. He now claims that he didn't know that the reporter had a physical disability. But if you watch the video, it's pretty hard --

CHRISTIE: I saw the video.

GANGEL: Do you think he knew what he was doing?

CHRISTIE: It appears that way. But, you know, he's got to answer for himself. I mean, I think part of the folly of all this, is that we are answering for him.

He said what he said. Now the people who vote will judge him. He shouldn't be making fun of people's disabilities. It's not just -- it's just not worthy of someone running for president of the United States.

GANGEL: For someone who says sit down and shut up, not to say what Donald Trump is doing is mean, outrageous, seems very un-Chris Christie.

CHRISTIE: Pick whatever adjective you want.

Wait a second, if I say something that is not worthy of coming out of a mouth of a candidate for president of the United States, when the person who's saying it is a candidate for president of the United States, I think that's pretty strong.

GANGEL: You think that is strong as sit down and shut up?

CHRISTIE: Well, in a different context, yes. Sit down and shut up is a guy yelling and screaming at you in the middle of the speech. If Donald starts yelling and screaming at me in the middle of the speech, you could be sure that I'll say, sit down and shut up.

GANGEL: Will you go after him?

CHRISTIE: I will do what I think is best to win this race, and to be the next president of the United States, because the stakes are too high to have a vanity exercise.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

PEREIRA: I was just saying it's so interesting, Jamie, measured reaction from him. But to that point about how he is taking on Donald Trump, do you think that will change? You think the relationship between the two will change the closer we get to New Hampshire primary?

GANGEL: Absolutely, especially if Christie starts going up in the polls. Watch out in January.

PEREIRA: Yes.

GANGEL: If he becomes a real threat, Donald Trump's going to go full New Jersey on him and Christie will counterpunch. So I think January will be the test.

PERIERA: All right. We'll be watching. Thanks so much.

GANGEL: Thank you. Yes.

PEREIRA: We have part two of your interview with Governor Christie. You'll come back in the 8:00 hour with us. We look forward to that.

Certainly a lot of news to get to this morning. So, let's get right to it.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

CUOMO: One hundred and fifty world leaders hoping to forge a deal to reduce carbon emissions.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The two leaders are still at odds and appear to be looking right past each other as they met on the sidelines.

BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: We all have a common enemy, and that is ISIL.

DONALD TRUMP (R), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: There's only one way to get to the top and it's all through Trump. Let's face it.

CHRISTIE: In the context of Donald, outrageous is a high bar.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I've never come across a situation where Mr. Trump said something that's not accurate.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Americans in Afghanistan told of an imminent attack.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Al Qaeda affiliated terrorists may be behind this threat.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It's believed to be that this attack would be in part in competition with ISIS.

(END VIDEOTAPE)