Return to Transcripts main page

New Day

A Look at the Bombing Suspect's Wife; Obama at U.N.; Trump & Clinton on Terror. Aired 8:30-9a ET.

Aired September 20, 2016 - 08:30   ET

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

[08:30:00] ALISYN CAMEROTA, CNN ANCHOR: Is she back in Pakistan?

EVAN PEREZ, CNN JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: Did she know - we don't know if she's in the UAE or made it back to Pakistan. That's one of the things that they're trying to figure out right now. The FBI is expecting that they're going to be able to question her and ask her what she knew, whether she saw anything that might have raised some concerns. And, you know, that will help put together a picture of what happened before this.

CHRIS CUOMO, CNN ANCHOR: What are your circles of curiosity as you're taking a look at this case and you want to expand your understanding of why he did this and who might have helped him?

PHIL MUDD, CNN COUNTERTERRORISM ANALYST: Look, people typically look at the center of the circle, that is the individual or individuals who committed the attack. You've got to go at least two levels out. The second level is, are there people who supported the attack? Go down that list of kinds of support they might provide, money, documents, even radicalization. And then you get a third tier, was there somebody aware who should have done the see something, say something thing. That is, pick up the phone and say I'm worried in this case that my husband might be doing something wrong. So I think the question here might not be, was she a co-conspirator. The question might simply be, did you know something? In that case, she's in trouble.

CAMEROTA: Paul, there's always a question of whether or not this guy was truly radicalized or was he just disgruntled. He had lots of brushes with the law here in the U.S. You know, he worked for his family's fast food chicken restaurant. They were always having issues with the neighbors and with the law. He had a domestic violence, a couple of them, issues here in the past. What are you learning about whether or not he had gone overseas and actually gotten some sort of official training and become radicalized?

PAUL CRUICKSHANK, CNN TERRORISM ANALYST: We don't have a full picture yet of the degree to which he had become radicalized, but some of those musings in that note about the Boston bombers suggest that he was influenced by radical Islamist ideology. They're examining the overseas trip, that lengthy stay in Quata (ph), Pakistan, between 2013 and 2014. Whether he might have had the opportunity to join up with some kind of terrorist outfit and get some kind of training. I've got to say that as we learn more about the pressure cooker bombs, these were different. The Boston devices significantly more powerful, potentially. The

ingredients, aluminum powder, ammonium nitrate, HMTD would have packed a power full punch. And HMTD is pretty tricky to make. We've seen very, very few cases of Islamist terrorists in the west managing to do this without getting that training overseas. But there have been a few where they managed to get the instructions off the Internet and build this powerful detonating substance, but not many cases. So that may point to some overseas training given the types of bombs he was able to make (ph).

CUOMO: But you have a curveball with that also, because the Taliban, while we have had some impact from them in this country, not very much, they deny knowing who this guy is. That's unusual also.

CRUICKSHANK: Yes, well that's the Afghan Taliban. There are plenty of other Taliban out there.

CUOMO: Right.

CRUICKSHANK: The Pakistani Taliban, for instance, haven't issued any kind of statement yet. And they were the ones -

CUOMO: Right.

CRUICKSHANK: Who were behind that Times Square bombing attempt, that car bomb in Times Square.

CUOMO: Faisal Shahzad.

CRUICKSHANK: Faisal Shahzad. They train him. They direct him. They communicated with him for that attack.

PEREZ: And the U.S. has carried out drone strikes against that group. So that is - that - that is still an open question there.

CAMEROTA: Evan, Senator Lindsey Graham is calling for this guy to be categorized as an enemy combatant. In that case, he wouldn't be given his Miranda rights. What have you learned about where police are with that?

PEREZ: Well, you know, the question that - that this always arises in these cases, and the issue is, I think, the critics would say, you want to spend more time questioning him before you read him Miranda rights and before you start the legal process. In this case, they haven't had a chance to even Mirandize him. Yesterday he was uncooperative. But then again, he had surgeries for three different bullet wounds. So that process was still ongoing. He hasn't been Mirandized. They expect - the authorities expect that they're going to be able to talk to him today.

Obviously there's always a wrinkle. His family could get a lawyer and could try to stop this. But we've seen from previous cases that they have been able to get plenty of intelligence from these guys before you start the legal process. And even after you Mirandize them, you find that sometimes they talk. So the process that we have, again, a couple hundred years of experience in our legal system, shows that it does work. I'm not sure that we want to change that just yet.

CUOMO: ISIS winds up being something everybody wants to know about right away in this.

MUDD: Yes. Yes.

CUOMO: And, again, there's this curveball that he was hanging out in Taliban areas, not ISIS.

MUDD: Yes.

CUOMO: May have radicalized, His letters kind of all over the place.

MUDD: Yes.

CUOMO: What's your nose on this?

MUDD: I'm looking at this saying, look, ISIS wasn't around when he was - in Pakistan when he was there. I think we're trying to make this too simple. Was it ISIS? Was it Taliban? Try a different perspective, Chris. He goes out to Pakistan. His family, people around him, the Taliban, talk about American operations in Afghanistan that kill civilians. They talk about drone operations that kill civilians. He comes back home. Maybe he's disaffected in the neighborhood. He's in an area - a restaurant, for example, where we see from legal proceedings there are questions about Muslims in the neighborhood. I think we're trying to say ISIS, not ISIS, Taliban, not Taliban. Sounds to me like we've got somebody who's disaffected in several areas and finally decided for some reason it's time to move.

[08:35:05] PEREZ: I think investigators are - right now the picture emerging is simply somebody who might have a mix of ideologies that might have inspired him. And we do see that in some of these cases. You - we - as Phil said, I mean, we sometimes immediately go to ISIS, but so far nothing has emerged of the hallmarks of ISIS. Usually, you know, these guys leave behind something. They're very proud of the ISIS claim. And ISIS is usually very quick, especially if they've gotten something on social media saying that we're doing this in the name of. And so we haven't seen any of those things. And the more time that passes, it tells us that perhaps this is a little bit more complicated.

MUDD: Yes.

CRUICKSHANK: They claimed t link to the -

MUDD: Minnesota.

CRUICKSHANK: Minnesota attack, that they'd inspired that, very, very, very quickly.

MUDD: Right.

CRUICKSHANK: Deafening silence on this one makes it, I think, at this point pretty unlikely that there was any ISIS link, any sort of communication back and forth. CAMEROTA: Gentlemen, thanks so much for sharing all of your reporting

with us.

CUOMO: All right, President Obama is set to make his farewell address before the U.N. General Assembly. What's he going to say? We're going to take you live to the U.N. for a preview.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[08:40:01] CAMEROTA: About an hour from now, President Obama will deliver his final address before the United Nations General Assembly as president of the United States. White House correspondent Michelle Kosinski is live at the U.N. with a preview.

Good morning, Michelle. What's he going to say?

MICHELLE KOSINSKI, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Hey, Alisyn.

Well, you know, we've seen him on his farewell tour. Well, this is his farewell speech in a sense. The last time we'll see him in this venue speaking to the world. And he is going to speak to legacy. I mean in the sense that he feels his approach of greater international cooperation and diplomacy have accomplished much over the last eight years. When you look at the Paris climate deal, the Iran nuclear deal, recovery from the economic crisis, the coalition against ISIS, he's going to make the case that those examples are going to be templates moving forward in solving the big problems that - that still haven't been solved through diplomacy. I mean North Korea and Russia.

But, of course, he's doing this in the context of additional terror attacks on American soil. We've heard him, you know, in the very city where this happened say while he's here that the biggest ingredient for fighting terrorism will be not giving in to fear. So we may well hear him reiterate that today and address the specter of terrorism, although you know critics are quick to counter that fighting terror will take a lot more than that.

Chris.

CUOMO: It's one of the things that people want most and for that reason they exaggerate it to the simple when it is very complex.

Thank you very much, Michelle Kosinski.

Hillary Clinton poking fun at a budding political bromance. She and tonight show host Jimmy Fallon used Donald Trump's admiration of Vladimir Putin for late night laughs. Have a giggle.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JIMMY FALLON, LATE NIGHT TALK SHOW HOST: This is a framed photo - that must be of his wife or something. Is that - no, that's not Melania, is it?

HC: No, that's his - yes -

FALLON: No, are you sure? That's him. I don't know if this is -

HILLARY CLINTON (D), PRESIDENTIAL NOMINEE: Yes, the most famous bromance going, right?

FALLON: Besides me and Timberlake. But, yes, the -

CLINTON: But Justin's worthy of your attention.

FALLON: I appreciate that.

CLINTON: Yes, last I checked, he hadn't, you know, killed off his adversaries.

FALLON: Yes. No, I don't think he has either. A CD. Why would he have a CD in there? We don't even have a CD player in the back there? Oh, I see, this is Pink Floyd, "The Wall." So I understand why he's (INAUDIBLE). Well, he must be really into that.

CLINTON: Yes. That's as - that's as close as he's going to get to the wall.

FALLON: (INAUDIBLE). Is there anything else? Is there anything - you want to see what's in here.

CLINTON: Well, let me see what else you've got in here.

FALLON: Well, I don't know. This is just -

CLINTON: It's a pretty beat up bag.

FALLON: I - b cause he carries that around with him.

CLINTON: It's like a homeless person's bag, you know. Oh, look. You know what?

FALLON: What?

CLINTON: He left these for you, softballs.

FALLON: Oh, is that - no, no, I didn't - no, those are my gift to him.

CLINTON: No -

FALLON: Yes, that's what - yes, that's what I gave him.

CLINTON: Yes, you gave him.

FALLON: Yes, actually I gave - well, I'll give them to you - to you later in the interview.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CUOMO: That was the bag of things that he left behind. That was the gag, that Trump left this stuff behind.

CAMEROTA: That's good. That's a good gag. CUOMO: Softballs meant that Jimmy was not going to ask any tough

questions.

CAMEROTA: Thank you. Thank you for giving me that punch line.

I think that they both equip themselves well when they go on there. They both had quips that were pretty funny. I can't tell if the writers gave them them or if they're really that - that fast.

CUOMO: Yes, you are suspicious of their comedic timing.

CAMEROTA: A little bit.

CUOMO: I am not. I don't think you give the politicians enough credit for their ability to come up with this.

CAMEROTA: Color me impressed.

When it comes to keeping the country safe, who has a better terror plan? We'll compare Clinton and Trump's strategies, next.

CUOMO: But first, now that he is in his 90s and beat cancer, you'd think former President Jimmy Carter is ready to finally settle into retirement, right? Wrong. Not when the president can still impact your world. Take a look.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

CUOMO (voice over): Former President Jimmy Carter and his wife Roslyn are still building homes for Habitat for Humanity, an annual tradition they started more than 30 years ago.

JIMMY CARTER, FORMER U.S. PRESIDENT: We built almost 5,000 houses now. It's been one of the most gratifying and challenging and difficult things we've ever done, you know, physically speaking because we've gotten steadily older. I was a lot younger when I first started.

CUOMO: He was 56 and fresh out of the White House when he first took up the hammer as a volunteer home builder.

CARTER: We hope it will go like this all over the world. We're now building one home each day for poor people in need.

I happen to be a Christian and it's a practical way to put my religious beliefs into practical use, and this is the best way I know to cross that very difficult chasm between rich people and people who've never had a decent place in which to live.

CUOMO: Habitat for Humanity fields 1,400 different groups in more than 70 countries. They raise awareness of the need for more affordable housing and bring volunteers together to build and renovate homes.

CARTER: There's a habitat organization needing some volunteers to raise money, or to serve food, or to build a house in almost everywhere people live in the United States. Just the idea of volunteerism where you actually do some work side by side with people in need has been put on the forefront of people's consciousness through Habitat. And that's a good thing.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[8:48:56] (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

HILLARY CLINTON (D), PRESIDENTIAL NOMINEE: We're going after the bad guys and we're going to get them, but we're not going to go after an entire religion and give ISIS exactly what it's wanting in order for them to enhance their position.

DONALD TRUMP (R), PRESIDENTIAL NOMINEE: But I'm not using the term Muslim. I'm saying you're going to have to profile them.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: All right.

TRUMP: We're going to have to start profiling. And it's - it's a - you know, I don't know if it's that bad, but certainly it's not a wonderful thing.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CUOMO: Profile who? Who was he talking about profiling?

Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump both say they know how to prevent future terror attacks at home and abroad. So, whose strategy against terror is stronger? Let's discuss. We have CNN political analyst and "USA Today" columnist Kirsten Powers and CNN political commentator S.E. Cupp.

Sarah Elizabeth, who's he talking about? Who you going to profile? If not Muslims and Arab men specifically, who's he going to profile?

S.E. CUPP, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: That's a great question. I think it's pretty clear that Trump hasn't really thought this out to its logical conclusion. He started with a blanket ban on Muslims that changed to a ban on people from regions where terrorism is sort of a big thing and now he's just talking about sort of generic profiling. On the other hand, I'm not sure we fully know what Hillary Clinton means when she says we're going to go after the bad guys. How? In what ways? She has said in a number of cases that she's basically going to continue the policies of the Obama administration.

[08:50:25] Well, I don't know that that's reassuring to a lot of people. And her claim that ISIS is praying for Trump to win really kind of defies logic. ISIS has thrived under the previous - the current administration. And if she plans to continue those same policies, I think ISIS would be - would be praying for more of the same. So I think both candidates have been very sort of muscular in their rhetoric on terror, but very weak when it comes to specific.

CAMEROTA: Kirsten, your impression of their different plans?

KIRSTEN POWERS, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: Well, I mean, so Trump says he's going to knock the hell out of them, right, but that's essentially what the administration has been doing. We've had 10,000 airstrikes against ISIS in Iraq, and so they actually have lost territory. It's true that under the administration they've expanded, but since we've really started this targeted attack on them and they've lost territory.

So I - what Hillary has said is, she is going to be probably a little more hawkish than the president. She wants to increase the number of airstrikes. She wants to continue providing aid to people that are on the ground. To compare that to Trump, we don't really have any specifics except for the fact that - what is he saying really differ that much from what the administration is doing. He even said -

CAMEROTA: Well, he is saying profiling. I mean let me - because that was different.

POWERS: Well, in terms of - I'm talking in terms of military strategy. So then, yes, and let's add in, he wants to basically ban Muslims from America. He's treating this as an immigration problem, which it patently is not. This is not an immigration problem. The people who are doing these attacks for the most part are American citizens. This is not an issue of people sneaking into the country. For the most part, they're either here because they were born here or they - or they are here on an overstayed visa. You know, the exception - you know, there's an exception here and there where somebody - you know, the attacker in Minnesota came here as a child.

CAMEROTA: This - the guy here, too, he came here as a child and he became a nationalized citizen.

POWERS: Yes.

CAMEROTA: I mean, you know, so Donald Trump i saying, stop those things.

CUOMO: So we're showing - we have different punch points for you. This is tackling terror at home. This is Trump. Extreme vetting of immigrants. We don't know what that means. We've talked to his surrogates. They haven't figured it out yet. Treat American terrorists like enemy combatants. There is legal authority for that. It hasn't been done, frankly, because the intel community tells you, it works fine the way the system is now. And that was abroad, the punch points there. How about the Clinton ones?

CAMEROTA: OK. Let's bring up - let's pull up the Clinton ones. At home, here's what she says that she would do differently. She says intelligence surge to identify lone wolves, work with Muslim American community, give first responders, law enforcement at home - give them more tools. And then abroad she says intensify the current fight, as you said, Kirsten, with airstrikes in Syria, dismantle terror network and fundings, arms and fighting, combat online propaganda.

But, S.E., I want to talk about what he said about profiling because I think the profiling gets a bad rap in this country. Everybody bristles when they hear it. But it is working in Israel. And that's what he talked about. Israel does it to great effect so, you know, his supporters say, yes, let's do that. CUPP: I actually think a lot of people would be comfortable with the

idea of some kind of profiling if you could explain exactly what the criteria is. What are the red flags? And Trump is so vague all the time when he talks about these proposals. The rhetoric becomes a distraction. And so we're not talking about actual - actual policy or actual proposals, we're just talking about his heated rhetoric. But I actually think if you explained to people the fact that we already do some kinds of profiling and the ways in which profiling can work, I think most people would be comfortable with it. But when Trump talks about -

CUOMO: Well, you have - you have two things here. You have two things that you're saying there that are both worth a beat, S.E. We do this already.

CUPP: Right.

CUOMO: To the extent that you can constitutionally, you know?

CUPP: Exactly.

CUOMO: And people leave that out of the analysis. The reason that profiling gets a bad name -

CUPP: Right.

CUOMO: Is because it's often unconstitutional. That's why we don't do it. And that's something people have to remember about Trump's ideas. He throws things out there that often would not be legal.

CUPP: Well, and also not just limited to the Constitution. He has talked about wanting to bring back water boarding, which would defy the Geneva Convention and which you'd need, I think, 147 other countries to sort of ratify again if we are going to allow for water boarding and much worse as he has said. So I always want to sort of say to his supporters, I understand that you think he speaks your language, but can he actually do a lot of the things that he's proposing? The answer is no.

CAMEROTA: Kirsten, your last thoughts?

POWERS: Right. Well, we have to know what he means by profiling because when some people think of profiling, they think of randomly picking out people based on the way they look. I don't think most people support that. If it's a type of profiling that's more specific, then maybe, but he needs to tell us what he means.

CAMEROTA: Kirsten, S.E., thank you very much for helping us try to analyze all of that.

[08:55:04] "The Good Stuff" is next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CUOMO: That was not the question.

All right, today's "Good Stuff" shows that the worst of times can often bring out the best in people. Take a little look.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (INAUDIBLE) I started walking towards this way. That's when they started getting everybody that was injured together.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CUOMO: All right, so that man was injured by the explosion in New York City on Saturday. He was on his way to get into an ambulance, OK?

CAMEROTA: Oh.

CUOMO: On the way there, a young boy, also injured in the back of the ambulance, saw him coming. The kid gets up, puts his hand on the man's back, trying to help him and make room to give him a seat where he was seating - sitting.

CAMEROTA: Awe.

CUOMO: You see the little kid?

[09:00:00] CAMEROTA: Yes.

CUOMO: You see that. Even though he was hurt, too, this kid, he wanted to help the older man -

CAMEROTA: Oh, but, look, he's helping him.

CUOMO: And make sure that he was OK. The best of us during the worst of times. Short and sweet, but it told it complete. What - what song is that a reference to?

CAMEROTA: I don't know. What is it?

CUOMO: Oh, who knows