Return to Transcripts main page
New Day
Trump: Profiling Muslims Is "Common Sense"; Anti-Trump Delegates Plot New Effort To Stop Trump; Senate To Vote On Gun Control Measures Today; Interview with Sen. Amy Klobuchar; Are Lawmakers Willing To Challenge NRA On Gun Reform? Aired 7:30-8a ET
Aired June 20, 2016 - 07:30 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[07:30:00] JIM SCUITTO, CNN ANCHOR: He fathered two more children with the now 18-year-old girl. A neighbor called police after she saw two girls outside Kaplan's house looking unhappy and sad.
ALISYN CAMEROTA, CNN ANCHOR: Oh my goodness. Well, the United Nations is putting the world's migration crisis in a new context. A just-released report finds the number of displaced persons climbing by nearly 6 million last year to more than 65 million people. That breaks down to one out of every 113 people on earth being displaced. Officials says the ongoing conflicts in Afghanistan, Syria, and South Sudan are key factors behind that increase.
SCUITTO: Well, the wife of Mexican drug lord, El Chapo, traveled to Washington, D.C. earlier this month. Emma Coronel, a U.S. citizen and a former beauty queen, seen there, wants an international investigation launched. She claims that her husband's rights are being violated while he awaits extradition to the U.S. Coronel met with the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights. She claims that prison guards are depriving El Chapo of sleep in his Juarez prison cell.
CAMEROTA: Well, forgetful fish swimming circles around the competition at the box office. Disney's "Finding Dory" making a big splash this weekend, hauling in an estimated $136.2 million. The sequel to "Finding Nemo" now holds the opening weekend record for an animated film, surpassing the 2007 debut of "Shrek the Third" -- Jim.
SCUITTO: Donald Trump says he hates the concept of racial profiling, but in the wake of the Orlando nightclub terror attack Trump says it is something the U.S. should start looking at to prevent future attacks.
Joining us now is senior fellow and director of development for the Center on Global Policy, and senior correspondent for religiousdispatches.org -- that is Haroon Moghul. He's the founder of the Constitutionalists For Gays & Immigrants, Miguel Ali. Thanks to both of you for joining today.
Haroon, I wonder if I could talk with you just to get your reaction. Beyond the Muslim travel ban, now you have Donald Trump suggesting racial profiling, meaning, really, religious profiling for Muslims. Let me ask for your reaction. HAROON MOGHUL, SENIOR FELLOW & DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT, CENTER ON GLOBAL POLICY: What scares a lot of Muslims and a lot of other minorities in the U.S. is that this isn't the farthest he's gone. So when it comes to Muslims, specifically, he's talked about special I.D.'s, databases, surveillance. He's talked about war crimes, he's talked about torture. He's used pretty inflammatory language and his policies are pretty far.
So the fear in my mind is not just that racial profiling could become a reality under him, but that it would be a lot worse than that because if you accept the premise that Muslims are somehow uniquely violent, then why would you stop with the idea of a travel ban? Why would you stop with the idea of profiling? Is it really that illogical to then say well, if we shouldn't let Muslims into the country, why do we have Muslims in the country in the first place?
SCUITTO: Right, right. Miguel, I want to ask your reaction, as well. We talk a lot about the Muslim ban but so seldom do we talk about it to Muslims who would be affected by that ban. Let's say that tomorrow -- and the president does have enormous powers to enact something like this if Donald Trump were elected. What would that mean to you?
MIGUEL ALI, FOUNDER, CONSTITUTIONALISTS FOR GAYS & IMMIGRANTS: Well, I just want to say, first of all, when you looked at the end of Osama Bin Laden's reign and leadership over al Qaeda, the golden unicorn really became the white, blonde-haired, blue-eyed terrorist. We saw this with Adam Gadahn from Marin County, with Jihad John from Australia and, of course, Jihad Jane from Colorado.
We apprehended Jihad Jane, specifically, because George W. Bush banned racial profiling at a federal level. I don't think ISIS is as intelligent as Osama bin Laden. But eventually, if you're a Muslim extremist group you're going to start looking for white, blonde, blue- eyed people to carry out your attacks. Jihad Jane represented someone who had 99 percent access to American facilities and we caught her, specifically, because we don't employ racial profiling.
So, I feel like to even suggest racial profiling within this era right now, it's kind of like doing crime-fighting from the 1950's. It doesn't work anymore. As a tech entrepreneur, what I can say -- we could have found this Orlando shooter if we had just employed an algorithm over Twitter that looked for certain key words publicly, not even privately.
Public data key words over Twitter and Facebook, the frequency at which some of these words were being typed and exchanged, and then geolocate them. We could have found that Orlando shooter. Oddly, the people who can write this algorithms, who are good at big data and good at this coding -- it's Muslim immigrants mostly from Muslim countries.
Google just opened up a tech accelerator in Lahore, Pakistan specifically to find talent there. My own tech team is based on Pakistan, Dubai, and India. This is excellent talent, and if we issue a travel ban to Muslim immigrants or ban immigrants we're going to lose out on the top tech talent, and this is the talent we really need to fight terrorism.
Haroon, I want to ask you because a big issue here is cooperation with the authorities because it is a delicate balance to strike because law enforcement does want Muslim communities to say hey, if you see something, say something, right? I'm worried about this guy. He's been saying stuff.
[07:35:00] Here, you have a case where, clearly, the family knew something was going on, at least the wife, certainly, and she didn't speak out. Obviously, people have loyalties within families and so on, but in terms of Muslim communities, is there fear about cooperating with authorities, about pointing out one of their own, the repercussion, et cetera, or is that happening?
MOGHUL: Well, there's definitely fear. I mean, obviously, there's this thought that goes through your mind that if there's nothing here, have I ruined this person's life forever?
SCUITTO: Yes.
MOGHUL: Nobody wants to necessarily make that decision. But I will say that there were a lot of different Muslim responses to the Orlando shooting -- to the attack. Some of them were very positive, I think, in the direction they took. I was deeply appreciative of where some major institutions went.
But I saw one trend that was little bit disturbing and I saw it on social media, not just with the average person on Facebook, but people in leadership positions whose first response was this is so close to Muhammad Ali's death it strikes me as suspicious. Now, that bothered me because a healthy skepticism is good.
SCUITTO: Right.
MOGHUL: Everyone should have a decent amount of skepticism of any narrative in order to have a robust conversation on an issue. But if you're in a leadership position and you're first instinct is this is a conspiracy, one, you have no sense of agency so why are you a leader? And two, do you really believe, then, that there is any such thing as a terrorist attack? And if that's the case, then can you actually see something and say something?
A person who is in a position of community leadership who immediately thinks that there's a false flag operation -- and this isn't obviously limited to Muslims, but within a Muslim community it's even more alarming because then you're not paying attention or maybe you're just ignoring evidence. And that really just --
SCUITTO: Or imagining that there's not a real problem there. Miguel, I wonder if you hear that, too? I spent a lot of time in the Middle East and I would often hear that -- the conspiracy theory. Oh, it was really the CIA, et cetera. Do you hear the same thing? That same sort of skepticism going on in Muslim communities?
ALI: Well, I mean, sometimes I do. I think Islam, if -- you know, when you read the Quran it's such a long book and it offers ten different opinions on every topic, so I think anyone who practices Islam is already conditioned to have long and in-depth discussion and naturally some skepticism will come up.
I would actually say the fact that some Muslims have skepticism -- let me put it this way. I would rather see a group of global Muslims saying look, we didn't do that, someone else did it, rather than them celebrating it.
So, whenever I see Muslim -- it's a funny point, but whenever I see Muslim skepticism take place I actually think that's a positive thing because it shows groups and large groups of Muslims who don't want to take ownership of an attack and are basically saying well, someone else did it. We had nothing to do with that. So, in an odd way, I actually think that's a healthy thing.
SCUITTO: All right, we know conspiracy theory is not confined to any group in this country, anywhere. Miguel Ali, Haroon Moghul, thanks so much for joining us. It's a difficult topic. What is your take on Trump's call for racial profiling? Please tweet us @NewDay or post your comments on facebook.com/NewDay. It's an interesting, difficult conversation but we want it to continue.
CAMEROTA: All right, thanks, Jim. Could the #NeverTrump folks pull off a convention coup? We'll tell you what they're planning, next on NEW DAY.
[07:38:30]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[07:42:25]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KENDAL UNRUH, REPUBLICAN DELEGATE: I am working daily on getting the votes and I have a very good group of Rules Committee members. In fact, two called me right before this and they have signed on.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CAMEROTA: All right, there's new info this morning that the #NeverTrump movement has a new plan. Some GOP delegates plotting how to block Trump from becoming the party's nominee. What exactly are they planning? Let's bring in two people at the center of this movement.
Spokesperson for the Courageous Conservatives PAC, Steve Lonegan. He formerly supported Ted Cruz, and, Eric Minor. He is a GOP delegate from Washington State who also supported Cruz. Gentlemen, thanks so much for being here.
So, Steve, we've heard that there was this phone call of 1,000 people last night where you discussed trying to stop Trump from becoming, officially, the nominee. What was the upshot of this phone call?
STEVE LONEGAN, SPOKESMAN, COURAGEOUS CONSERVATIVES PAC: Well, the upshot is that we're taking this grassroots movement and organizing it into a very concise organization with a strategic plan to make sure that we nominate the candidate best suited to defeat Hillary Clinton and support the Republican Party platform.
CAMEROTA: Yes.
LONEGAN: So, on last night's call we had representatives from across the country. We've set up our --
CAMEROTA: You got some delegates on that call?
LONEGAN: We had number of delegates.
CAMEROTA: How many?
LONEGAN: We estimate about 200 delegates on the call.
CAMEROTA: Were people from the Rules Committee on the call?
LONEGAN: People from the Rules Committee and --
CAMEROTA: How many?
LONEGAN: We're not -- about 10 to 12 that we're sure are with us. They were on the call at this point. Remember, we need 57 votes on the Rules Committee for our -- for Kendal's moral consciousness amendment to it. But I want to remind people, this is very, very important going into the convention. There are no rules right now. These candidates are not bound going into this convention. It's up to the Rules Committee to pass rules to bind them.
CAMEROTA: I see. So you're creating the rules and this is where you think that you are -- the wrinkle is that if you create a new rule,that it isn't Donald Trump, well then, so be it.
LONEGAN: Well, we think the real wrinkle is this. That the Republican convention is a group of delegates to be able to represent all the Republicans in the Republican Party, not just the minority of those who voted for Donald Trump and suddenly think they've taken over our entire party. That's not going to happen.
CAMEROTA: OK. Eric, so this call --
ERIC MINOR, GOP DELEGATE FROM WASHINGTON STATE: Yes.
CAMEROTA: -- sounds like it went well. What is the plan --
MINOR: Yes.
CAMEROTA: -- now?
MINOR: Well, the plan, in general, is to reach out to leaders in all 50 states and the territories -- delegates -- and try to get them to query their delegations and get support from a grassroots movement of delegates that want to stand up and have the delegates be unbound. And, as Steve was mentioning, the status quo is already that the delegates are unbound.
If we look at Curly Haugland's book, "Unbound", they go through chapter and verse from 1864, where delegates are, in fact, unbound naturally and there are attempts from time to time to bind them --
CAMEROTA: Yes.
MINOR: -- but the Supreme Court has been very clear that it's not legal to bind them.
[07:45:00] CAMEROTA: But, Eric, I want to stick with you for one second because you're in Washington State. I understand that technically they're unbound, but voters who voted for Donald Trump feel that you would be --
MINOR: Right.
CAMEROTA: -- subverting democracy. They went to the polls, they pulled the lever for the --
MINOR: Yes.
CAMEROTA: -- person that they felt they wanted to be their president, and now you're saying that their votes don't count. And the reason that I wanted to stick with you in Washington State is that 75.8 percent of the people who voted in Washington State -- the Republicans -- voted for Donald Trump in May.
MINOR: Uncontested.
CAMEROTA: He got 41 -- all 41 of the bound --
MINOR: Sure.
CAMEROTA: -- so-called delegates.
MINOR: Yes.
CAMEROTA: So, your state, in particular, has a tough time making that argument.
MINOR: Yes. Well, I think I can provide you a good answer and the answer comes in several layers, actually. The Indiana primary was on May 3rd, and after the Indiana primary all of the candidates left the race except for Donald Trump. The Washington primary was May 24th. That's three weeks later. Donald Trump was, essentially, running against nobody and he still only got 75 percent of the vote.
So, I might take exception with your assertion that that's some powerful mandate. And if I was being honest with you, I might go in the other direction and say that it's a very weak showing. Having said that --
CAMEROTA: Yes.
MINOR: -- the point is there's new information that has been made available to me, and by that I mean the fact that now I'm aware of this "Unbound" book and I've read it. I always assumed, like everybody else, that what you say is true.
CAMEROTA: Yes.
MINOR: That the primary processes do bind me to a certain vote. Now that I'm aware of something, I have a responsibility. I have to act according to my conscience.
CAMEROTA: OK.
MINOR: I can't pretend that the voters said such and such a thing. It's up to 2,472 delegates and I'm one of those delegates --
CAMEROTA: OK.
MINOR: -- and I have to take my responsibility very seriously.
CAMEROTA: Yes. Go ahead, Steve.
LONEGAN: Well, look, like Eric said, besides since the Indiana primary in Washington, a lot has happened with Donald Trump. We've seen that he's no conservative. We've seen the things he's doing to destroy the Republican Party. The guy is doing anything but unify the party. He seems to almost relish in taking it apart piece by piece --
CAMEROTA: Yes.
LONEGAN: -- and claiming hey, I'm going to win on my own. Well, if he thinks he can win on his own, go win on your own.
CAMEROTA: OK.
LONEGAN: But don't come into our convention and try to take over the party.
CAMEROTA: Steve, here's the fly in the ointment. Who's your candidate? Who's your other candidate?
LONEGAN: We have a lot of great candidates.
CAMEROTA: Such as?
LONEGAN: Well, such as Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz, Jeb Bush. Anybody --
CAMEROTA: They lost.
LONEGAN: Well, not when they go to the convention because if you open it up to a true robust convention they can put their platform forward, demonstrate why they're the best candidates, and those delegates can vote and they can have ballot after ballot after ballot. I don't care if we go to five, six o'clock in the morning, 35, 36, 37 ballots. We're going to pick the candidate best suited to beat Hillary Clinton and advance the Republican Party. We can't allow Donald Trump to take the Republican Party down to -- CAMEROTA: Are those guys interested in running? At the convention, Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz, Jeb Bush -- are they interested in throwing their hat in the ring?
LONEGAN: We're not -- we're not advocating for any single candidate. We're advocating for a full and open primary that will -- convention that will defend the Republican Party platform against Donald Trump's assault.
CAMEROTA: Eric, is Jeb Bush involved in your movement because Donald Trump has asserted that?
MINOR: No, absolutely not, and I just have to touch on the previous statement. The Cruz team leadership here in Washington has been absolutely clear on this to us starting four weeks ago. Senator Cruz is not interested at all in having people revolt on his behalf and nominate him.
CAMEROTA: OK.
MINOR: And they gave us two common --
CAMEROTA: Well then, I mean -- but, then back to my question.
MINOR: Well, let me explain, if I could.
CAMEROTA: Yes, quickly. I mean, my question is just --
MINOR: Well, I was going to say, the --
LONEGAN: I can answer that.
CAMEROTA: Hold on. Go ahead, Eric, go ahead.
MINOR: Yes, I would like to answer, and that is the logic is that Sen. Cruz didn't think that, even if it succeeded and gave him the nomination, it might make it very difficult to succeed in the general and it might damage future prospects for him. But, whether that's meritorious or not, the Cruz leadership has been absolutely straightforward, telling us no, don't do this.
CAMEROTA: Got it.
MINOR: And, in fact, I got a fairly scathing email. And as far as whether Jeb Bush or any other establishment person, no. I am as grassroots as they come.
CAMEROTA: OK.
MINOR: I have never so much as ever been to a Republican caucus meeting or anything else before three months ago.
CAMEROTA: But, Eric, I need a two-word answer.
MINOR: This is me standing --
CAMEROTA: Just a two-word answer. Then, who is the candidate, if not Trump?
MINOR: Don't know, don't know. It's a -- we will see who decides to put their hat in the ring if this effort is successful.
CAMEROTA: Got it.
MINOR: Right now, the key is will enough delegates stand up to try to stop this? And when that happens then we'll see who wants to be considered.
CAMEROTA: OK. Eric, Steve, thank you very much. I appreciate it. And he did give me a two-word answer, don't know. So, thank you very much, Steve, for being here.
LONEGAN: Thank you.
MINOR: Thank you.
CAMEROTA: We will follow this. Let's get over to Jim.
SCUITTO: Coming up next, a Democratic senator pushing hard for gun control measures. How she feels about the chance of success when the Senate votes later today.
[07:49:55]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[07:53:20] SCUITTO: The Senate will vote today on several gun measures just one week after the worst mass shooting in modern American history. Four separate bills, including two aimed at preventing those on terror watch lists from buying weapons, as well as two others on expanding background checks. Will anything change after this horrible tragedy?
Here to discuss is Democratic senator, Amy Klobuchar. She is from the great state of Minnesota. Senator Klobuchar, thanks for joining us this morning.
SEN. AMY KLOBUCHAR (D), MINNESOTA: Thanks so much, Jim.
SCUITTO: So, Senator, I know that you've been active on this issue for a number of years. In the wake of Orlando you support Sen. Feinstein's proposal which would allow the attorney general to deny a gun sale of there's any reasonable belief that the buyer was likely to engage in terrorism. That, of course, a lower standard than probable cause. What do you say to the Republican response that this is a slippery slope? That's it's designed to sort of chip away at the Second Amendment rights?
KLOBUCHAR: Well, first of all, this is a set group of people that have been suspected of terrorism. Someone just didn't make it up that day. They've been on one of the lists. Either they are on the list or they have been on the list in the past. And it simply gives our law enforcement that kind of discretion. I'm actually kind of surprised. Our Republican presidential candidate
has said that people that are on the terror watch list shouldn't be able to go out and purchase a weapon. And you have the fact that they have repeatedly talked about not just going after terrorist groups, like ISIS and al Shabaab, where they are in the enclaves, but also here at home and they influence people, either in an organized effort or by social media. And I agree with our Republican colleagues that that has to be part of the focus.
[07:55:00] But clearly, then, you have a set list of people that our law enforcement has identified as having been suspected that they might go into and commit some kind of incredibly violent act, as this man did and massacred 49 people at this club. It's an unbelievable story and I don't understand why they wouldn't want to go to where we know this guy was. He had been suspected of terrorism and you at least want to give law enforcement that ability to deny him a weapon, and then this never would have happened.
SCUITTO: Let me ask you. I had the opportunity, a short time ago, to speak to Democratic congressman, Steve Israel. I asked him the question of the chances of something passing this week on the Hill. Here's what he had to say.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SCUITTO: You've been in Congress a long time. What's your betting that something gets passed this week?
REP. STEVE ISRAEL (D), NEW YORK: My betting right now is it will not get passed --
SCUITTO: Yes.
ISRAEL: -- because Paul Ryan has said we were not even going to have a vote on it.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCUITTO: So, that's the read from the House side. I wonder if you feel the same on the Senate side. What are the chances of something getting passed in the wake of this horrible tragedy?
KLOBUCHAR: Well, first of all, we are having votes in the Senate. Now, so far, I don't know that it's going to be different than when we had votes in the past, but there is one thing that's different. People are starting to talk. There are starting to be negotiations gone on. I think that's very important.
And we not only have the bill to ban people who are on that terror watch list from purchasing a weapon, but we also have the background check bill that was put out there, similar to the version that was put out there by two NRA-rated legislators in the past, Sen. Manchin and Sen. Toomey. And what that bill would say is look, at least close this loophole that allows people to buy these guns at gun shows without any kind of a background check, and more and more of the sales are gravitating. We are not saying don't buy guns. I come from a huge hunting state. I look at all these proposals and say would this hurt my Uncle Dick in his deer stand. He loves to hunt. And my answer is no, it wouldn't hurt him because he's not on the terror watch list, and because he would be able to pass a background check.
SCUITTO: You'd have to think that this would be the sweet spot, right? The political sweet spot on the gun issue wetting everyone's fear. Both parties want to be tough on terrorists. They want to keep guns out of terrorists' hands. That this would be the one that could get passed. But I have to -- echoing -- I've been talking to a lot of folks in Orlando and elsewhere. This sort of amazement that even now, 49 people dead in that club. If not now, then when? When is something going to get through?
KLOBUCHAR: That's what we said after those dozens of children --
SCUITTO: In Newtown.
KLOBUCHAR: Those little first-graders were killed in Newtown. And you just keep bringing it to the American people. We know that the vast majority of American people want to see better background checks and they also don't want people that are on a terror watch list to go out and purchase a weapon. We also know the vast majority of gun owners agree with that.
And so that's what we are working to convince our colleagues we are open to talking with them, to negotiating. But I can tell you one thing, Jim, and that is that we don't want to just pass something that doesn't make any difference at all, that wouldn't save a child, that wouldn't save the next nightclub from being attacked. And so, we want to do something that means something, that still preserves the Second Amendment right.
You're right, there are those sweet spots and that's what we want to convince our colleagues of over the next few days. If we don't make it tonight it is not the end because there is still room to continue to work with them, and to the American people, contact them and tell them we must do something here.
SCUITTO: Let me ask you. As you know, your Republican colleagues -- they catch a lot of flack for not standing up to the NRA. But it's true that, really, both parties share that fear of standing up to what is a very powerful lobby. Is it fair to say that the responsibility is shared across the aisles?
KLOBUCHAR: There are, of course, Democrats that have also been endorsed by the NRA in the past. I would think if you look at the numbers, though, the bulk of them are on the Republican side. And I think whatever people -- whatever endorsements they've had, whatever support, our job is to stand back from that and just say OK, regardless of what one interest group says, what is the right thing to do?
And we even have polls saying that the majority of NRA members believe we should have better background checks and terrorists shouldn't be able to get weapons. Just walk into a store and buy a weapon if you're on a terror watch list. So, my hope is that my colleagues will step back and do the right thing.
I remember those parents of the kids that were massacred in that school in Newtown. They were in advocating for background checks, right? They knew that wouldn't have saved their babies but they decided it was the provision that could get agreement that would save the most people's lives because states that have background checks have much-reduced suicide rates, much-reduced homicide rates related to guns, and that is why they were there.
And they had the courage to do that. To put aside their personal belief that they would have done even more, and say let's just get this done. And that's what we're asking our colleagues to do today.
SCUITTO: Saving lives seems a simple goal. Amy Klobuchar, thanks very much.
