Return to Transcripts main page

CNN NEWSROOM

Pulse Nightclub to Host Street Party As Fundraiser, Spirit- Lifter; Orlando Shooter Had Long History Of Weapon Use Knowledge; Democrats Sit In To Force Gun Control Legislation Actions; Supreme Court Deadlocked 4-4 on Obama Executive Immigration Order; Gunman Opens Fire in German Cinema; Caesar Goodson, Driver in Freddie Gray Death, to Receive Verdict. Aired 10:30-11:00a ET

Aired June 23, 2016 - 10:30   ET

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


(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:31:25] CAROL COSTELLO, CNN ANCHOR: And good morning, I'm Carol Costello, welcome back. Tonight in Orlando the owners of Pulse Nightclub will again host Latin night. The nightclub holding a dance party not inside the bar but on the street tonight. Raising money for those who were shot in that terror attack less than two weeks ago.

This as a chilling new report says the Orlando gunman was an expert marksman and a near perfect shot. Boris Sanchez live in Orlando to tell us more. Good morning.

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Good morning Carol. Yes as you said the Orlando Sentinel reporting that the shooter was an expert marksman. A former instructor who tested him once to retain his security guard license says that he was an elite shooter and consistently scored high marks on tests.

To give you an idea, the tests range from zero to 240 points. He said that routinely the gunman would score more than 235 points. He also did very well on written tests, often getting perfect scores. So it's clear that the shooter was not only familiar with these weapons but extremely deadly proficiently with them as well.

And as you said Carol, there is lighter news today in Orlando. The owner of the Pulse Nightclub is going to hold a party about 2 miles from here, the scene of the shooting. It's going to be a street party. There are performers and dancers that are going to be going all night. And it's supposed to be a way to show that the Pulse Nightclub is still strong. The community is still strong.

As you said, the theme is going to be Latin Night, the same theme of that night that was cut short just over two -- or almost two weeks ago. Tonight they're going to be celebrating once more to raise funds and also to bring joy back to a community that desperately needs it, Carol.

COSTELLO: All right, Boris Sanchez reporting live from Orlando. OK back to Capitol Hill, 23 hours into a sit-in. House Democrats demanding a vote on gun control. CNN's Manu Raju is live on Capitol Hill to tell us more. Hi Manu. MANU RAJU, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL REPORTER: Hey Carol. I was just on the House floor and there are probably about a dozen House Democrats now giving speeches. A little bit more subdued atmosphere than that raucous scene that we saw last night when House Democrats were actually shouting down House Speaker Paul Ryan as he tried to move forward with the legislative business.

As we know, the House has recessed. They're gone until -- from doing any legislative business -- until after the 4th, July 4th holiday. Republicans, a lot of them are gone, but the Democrats are still carrying on giving speeches. Some of the scenes we're seeing on Periscope carried on live but not on C-Span cameras.

Now there is a meeting of Democrats later this morning. And the House Minority Whip, Steny Hoyer, is leading this meeting at 11:30 a.m. And that's going to be kind of a decisive moment about Democrats deciding whether or not to move forward, whether or not to carry forward with these speeches. Or exactly how they want to try to continue to elevate this issue knowing that the House is out of session, that they're on recess.

And they're made -- they're obviously not going to get a vote anytime soon or if at all. So that's going to be a key moment to watch here but right now these Democrats are trying to keep this issue alive. Knowing that they have not gotten a vote and trying to pressure Republicans who believe that what Democrats are doing is nothing more than a publicity stunt, Carol.

COSTELLO: All right, Manu Raju reporting live from Capitol Hill. We're still awaiting a decision from Baltimore from a judge in the latest Freddie Gray case. The officer who was driving the van on trial. His trial is over. We expect the judge to hand down a verdict at any moment. I'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:39:05]

COSTELLO: All right the U.S. Supreme Court has handed down yet another big decision. This one concerning immigration. Let's go to Washington and Wolf Blitzer, hi Wolf.

WOLF BLITZER, CNN LEAD POLITICAL ANCHOR: A very important decision, Carol, indeed. A decision a setback for the President of the United States as far as immigration is concerned. Pamela Brown you've got the decision, update our viewers right now.

PAMELA BROWN, CNN JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: Well Wolf the High Court is deadlocked over President Obama's controversial executive action on immigration. Which means that this program will not be able to move forward. It will now go back to the lower courts. And it is exceedingly unlikely that it will move forward while President Obama is in office.

This program would have allowed more than 4 million undocumented immigrants in the United States to stay here and to apply for work benefits, and receive work authorization. It was controversial among many Republicans who said this was an overreach of the President's executive power. That this is an issue that should have been settled by Congress, not the President.

But advocates of the program said it would bring these millions of undocumented immigrants out of the shadows. Those who came to the United States as children, parents of U.S. citizens, those are among the people who would have been under consideration for this program.

But now the High Court is deadlocked 4-4 which means that this program will not go into effect.

BLITZER: Pamela thanks very much, stand by. Jeffrey Toobin, this is not the decision the White House wanted. The President had signed those executive actions giving some 4 million undocumented immigrants here in the United States the ability to live here legally, to get benefits, be tried. It was -- there were like 25 State Attorneys General that fought this. He has been rejected, at least for now.

JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: At least for now. And at least for the remainder of his presidency. You know we talk about this in terms of a victory or defeat for the President. The real people who are at issue here, who are affected, are these 4 million people. For the most part they are the parents of American citizen children, or they are children who -- they were children brought here before they were -- before they were 18 years old.

The President, using his executive authority over immigration said, I am going to make a policy of not -- enforcing of not throwing them out of the country. The court said -- the lower court said -- we -- you can't do that.

BLITZER: They said it was illegal.

TOOBIN: They said it -- they said you don't have the authority as President. And that now has been confirmed. It is worth noting that this only applies in the fifth circuit, which is the -- one of the 13 circuit courts of appeals. Because it's a 4-4 ruling, it's not a ruling on the merits but just as a practical matter, this really ends the Obama administration's chance to do immigration reform through executive power.

BLITZER: Yes the President signed those two executive orders. And they have long names, deferred action for parents of American citizens and permanent residents. And deferred action for childhood arrivals. Both of those executive actions have been stayed and they will remain. They won't be implemented. 4 million people here in the United States are impacted immediately.

[10:42:20]

JONATHAN TURLEY, PROFESSOR OF LAW, GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY: Yes and it's a major loss obviously for them. It's a major loss to the administration. They were trying desperately to get the court to take an off ramp in terms of what's called standing. To say that really these Attorney Generals shouldn't be in front of the court at all. They lost that bid.

And so the result is these programs are dead. But it moves it into a more precarious position for the administration. The administration could still slow-walk enforcement. And that would create questions. They've already been accused of circumventing Congress. They can be accused of circumventing the court.

But the administration's always argued that this is a creature of prosperitorial discretion. They're allowed to prioritize who they're deporting and who they're not. So I think what you're going to see is pressure in Congress saying, all right, this is going back. You're program is frozen in amber. We want proof that you're going to carry out these laws.

And that's going to add a political dynamic. I think of all the cases this week, this one has the biggest throwing (ph) ...

BLITZER: Right with 4-4 we assume the four liberal justices went one way, the four more conservative justices went the other way.

TOOBIN: When they announce opinions 4-4, they don't announce who's on which side. They just say "affirmed by an equally divided court." But ...

BLITZER: You assume, yes.

TOOBIN: You don't have to be a Supreme Court expert to know that the four Democratic appointees and the four Republican appointees split on this issue. Again as we were discussing earlier, what issue is more central to the presidential campaign than immigration. This again, places immigration very much in the lap of the voters.

Because these 4 million people are now very vulnerable. They can be, they can be thrown out or they can be ...

JEFF ZELENY, CNN SENIOR WASHINGTON CORRESPONDENT: No you're absolutely right Jeffrey. I mean this is -- the affirmative action is an important decision. But this immigration decision is squarely what this presidential campaign is about. You could argue that Donald Trump perhaps would have not even been the Republican nominee but for the immigration issue in this country.

And it's Texas and 25 other states here. This is a red state-blue state issue. But Hillary Clinton already has moved farther to the left of the President on these proposals here. This is going to be a challenge for her though, as well here. If the Obama administration decides to try and do a few things here. She will be -- it's a split between her and the White House as well.

But for Donald Trump, I expect a reaction from him, we haven't gotten one yet. He's flying to Scotland this evening. But this is fully, squarely in the middle of what this presidential campaign is about in many respects. The demographics of this country will play a huge role in this campaign. I think this is a very, very, very important decision for this presidential race. BLITZER: Do you think the President was surprised by this decision?

He's a former Constitutional Law Professor, I assume he was bracing for it.

TOOBIN: Sure I mean remember he lost in the lower courts ...

BLITZER: That's right.

TOOBIN: ... So he knew that it was a possibility he was going to lose. This was always a tough case because there was -- there were two parts to it. There was the issue of standing, which is a technical legal doctrine about who has the right to sue. That was an argument that the administration pressed very hard in the Supreme Court. They obviously didn't get a majority.

Also on the issue of executive power. Did he have the power to do this? This has been a court, especially the conservative majority, that has slapped the President around several times on the issue of whether he has the authority to do whatever he wants to do. He didn't get five votes here.

BLITZER: Can we assume, Jonathan Turley -- and you're a law professor at George Washington University -- if Justice Scalia had still been on the court it would have been a 5-4 decision?

TURLEY: Absolutely.

BLITZER: Justice Kennedy would not have been impacted the other way. Because he's often a swing vote.

TURLEY: No you are really feeling today the absence of Scalia on this court. And it is also a very significant historical moment even at 4- 4. As Jeffrey talked about, the court has previously slapped down this President for exceeding his authority. The Canning decision involving recess appointments was a unanimous decision that the Court -- that the President had exceeded his authority to give appointments to officials.

This is going to fuel this argument that the President has become a type of uber-president. That he is going it alone and violating these key constitutional provisions. But in the short-term, I think that obviously we're going to be looking at the increasing political tension over immigration.

This is a 4-4 split and it sort of reflects the country. The country's split, the Court is split. And this is going to fuel the issue for who's the next President.

BLITZER: Here's the question I guess a lot of people are -- the 4 million who are directly impacted. The President signed these executive orders back in 2015 and before the lower courts ruled that it was unconstitutional, people were coming forward and signing up for this program.

They were worried at the time, is this something that could hurt them down the road, will this hurt them now that the program has -- for all practical purposes, at least for now -- been rejected by the Supreme Court.

[10:47:15]

TOOBIN: That's a very important question and it is not clear what the answer is. Just to make -- to put a fine point on it, the District Court judge in this case, Andrew Hanen from Texas who is a very conservative judge, he said to the Justice Department, show me the names of the people who will be affected by this. And the Justice Department is fighting him on that. But if the Justice Department has to produce the names, will they all be deported? Will they all cooperate with the Justice Department? I mean the practical significance of this ruling is very complicated and not entirely clear. But it certainly puts these 4 million people in a great deal more peril than they were in this morning.

BLITZER: Do those people now have to be worried?

TURLEY: I think it's very unlikely that the list will be used for deportation. I -- it's not that I disagree with the analysis. I think that from a practical standpoint, the Justice Department is not likely to use the list. Because these people came forward ...

BLITZER: If they give the list to states, those states could then move to deport these people.

TURLEY: Well they were relying upon the assertions of the administration that they could cooperate in this program and not be penalized. What I think is the more interesting question is what Congress does. Because Congress has been chomping at the bit over what they viewed as overreach here.

You have a court that says this program is no longer enforceable. People in Congress are likely to say, "show us you're enforcing it. Show us that you're not achieving the same result by another means, by just slowing down." And there I think the list might actually come up.

TOOBIN: But if I can just make a bold prediction about Congress. Congress is going to do nothing. I mean Congress doesn't have trouble passing -- I mean has trouble passing a budget much less the immigration laws. So sure there will be many press conferences held but in the very limited time left before Congress -- before the election, Congress is not going to pass an immigration law.

BLITZER: Two very, very important decisions by the United States Supreme Court today on immigration and affirmative action. Now we're going to continue to watch the reaction, get more on that. But Carol back to you. I understand there's what? Been another terror attack, this time in Germany?

COSTELLO: Oh it's a terrible story, Wolf. It, it's a terrible story. We do have breaking news out of Germany. At least 25 people have been wounded after a shooting at a cinema in Germany. Very sketchy details right now but it's just a terrible story. Fred Pleitgen is in London. He has a little bit more information to pass along. What can you tell us Fred? FRED PLEITGEN, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Hi Carol, yes

we're monitoring the situation, getting information from the authorities and from German local media as well. And it seems as though, at around 3:00 p.m. local time there in Germany, a man entered into a theater, a movie theater complex in a place South of Frankfurt, in the district of Hessen.

He then opened fire, he was apparently armed with a gun as well as with an ammo belt. Now the local media there are reporting that there might be up to 25 people who are in some way, shape, or form either injured or wounded. There's other media who say that it could be up to 50 people who have been injured or wounded.

But they also say that at this point in time, things still quite chaotic there. There are some media who are saying that it might be some sort of gas that was also released that may have injured some of these people. So at this point in time, the authorities really still trying to piece together what exactly is going on.

We do understand however, that there are special units of the German Special Police that are moving in there. And I've seen those units in action. They'll be on their way right now. Apparently some of them with helicopters really moving in, in force into that theater. Because apparently this person who appears to be a single person, is still hiding inside that theater complex.

It's unclear at this point in time whether the police actually know where he is inside there but he certainly is still very much at large, is what we understand from various German media and from German authorities as well, Carol.

[10:51:00]

COSTELLO: So what you're saying, Fred, that there's still an active shooting, right? Police are still trying to find the suspect so we don't know what he looks like. I read some reports he had covered his face with something ...

PLEITGEN: Yes.

COSTELLO: ... what are you hearing?

PLEITGEN: Well that's the thing. We know that he apparently covered his face. That he was hooded so he was definitely trying to hide his identity. We don't know whether or not he went in there -- or we know that went there -- in there on his own. We don't know what a possible motive could be. We don't also know whether anyone was possibly killed in that shooting. Again these are all things that we're still trying to find out in this very fluid situation.

But you are absolutely right, the police don't know the identity of this person. They believe at this point in time that he is acting on his own. It's unclear whether or not this is a terrorist attack, or whether or not there's some sort of other background to all of this. Because right now at this point in time the police still very much quardening that area off. It's a very big shopping center, actually, with a sort of multiplex

cinema inside it. So they're quardening the area off. They have their special forces on the scene there, moving in additional special forces with helicopters to try and come to terms with that situation there. But certainly something that is causing a lot of stir, obviously, in Germany right now, Carol.

COSTELLO: This is -- is this unusual in Germany, Fred?

PLEITGEN: Yes. Yes, it's absolutely unusual. It's absolutely unusual to have first of all, shooting incidents in Germany. Very few happen. There have been some high-profile shootings in the past. Most of them were people who were disgruntled at work. There were some school shootings as well.

But over the past couple of years the Germans have become very, very restrictive with their gun laws, and so you haven't seen very much of it. But at the same time, of course, there is an increased security posture right now all across Europe and in Germany as well. After we've seen the Paris attacks, after we've seen the Brussels attacks.

It is of course a big fear of the authorities that some sort of major shooting incident or major attack could happen in Germany, especially in light of the fact that of course, you've had those big refugee movements into that area. That you have had people who were staying in Germany. Who were for instance part of the terror attacks. So certainly the authorities are very well aware that there is an increased security situation.

But again, at this point in time they don't' know what this is. This is certainly something that is not common at all in Germany. Gun prying (ph) generally, is not something that's very common. At this point in time, totally unclear what's behind all this, Carol.

COSTELLO: All right I want to go to Atika Shubert now. She's actually in Berlin. What more can you tell us about this shooting, Atika? Atika, can you hear me?

ATIKA SHUBERT, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yes I do hear you. What we know at this point from police is simply that it's an ongoing situation. Up from local broadcasters we understand from ARD, the official broadcaster, that 25 people were injured.

Now what we know is that a masked man apparently entered the cinema -- it's a ways outside of Frankfort -- stepped in and began shooting into the cinema. People ran outside. We still don't know if the shooter, what has happened to the shooter, and what kind of weapons he used. This will determine a lot about where the investigation goes and what happens next.

But the area, as you can imagine, is heavily sealed off by police and a number of armored vehicles. And heavily armed police are also surrounding the cinema complex.

COSTELLO: Atika is this a tiny town? Can you tell us something about the town? SHUBERT: It's not a very big place. Frankfurt is the biggest main

city, this would be kind of like a satellite suburb where people might commute into Frankfurt. So Kinopolis is your average cinema complex where you might go in to catch a movie on a Saturday night. Probably not as many people in on a hot afternoon like this, there.

But it would have had a number of people in sort of a shopping mall kind of center. So this is somebody who was clearly targeting a civilian area, or a residential civilian area. Very concerning. We don't know if it was a terror attack or a criminal attack at this point. Police aren't giving any further details.

COSTELLO: And talk about the mood in Germany. Were people afraid that this might happen in light of what's happened in France?

SHUBERT: Absolutely. People here have been very concerned that Germany could -- is a terror target. And in fact, police and officials here have repeatedly warned that Germany is very much a target by groups like ISIS. And there was special concern when, with the refugee flows that were coming into the country -- remember last year more than a million people came in -- that among those people coming in could be ISIS operatives using fake passports.

And we know in fact, that they did enter. Because some of them actually participated in the Paris attacks. And they came and traveled to Germany. So the concern has always been that there could be cells here operating that the police have not yet detected. So this is what many of the public would be worried about. We do not know at this point if this is a terror attack. But it is certainly one of the biggest concerns in the minds of not just the public, but police and other officials here.

[10:56:10]

COSTELLO: All right, all right Atika Shubert, Fred Pleitgen, thanks to both of you. We have more breaking news this morning, it's a busy morning. And it's a stunning verdict in the city of Baltimore, at least if you're the State's Attorney. Let's head there now and check in with Miguel Marquez. What has the judge decided?

MIGUEL MARQUEZ, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: The judge has decided in the case of Caesar Goodson. This was the van driver, the officer facing the most serious charges in the Freddie Gray matter. He is not guilty of all charges. He was charged with seven different crimes from second degree murder to reckless endangerment.

The judge saying that the State just did not prove its case on any of them. That the standard for the criminal negligence and the negligence that they are talking about here is just too high. And the State wasn't able to prove it. I want to show you what's happening outside the courtroom here in Baltimore.

Now you can see that large crowd, that is mostly reporters. It was a packed courtroom and it was a very tense courtroom. When Marilyn Mosby, the State's Attorney walked into that courtroom there was a hushed sort of response. Everybody quieted down. Officer Goodson, as those charges were read off and as the judge said, "not guilty" to each one, he sat there without moving at all.

His family members in the crowd were in tears. And I think many people in that crowd were just stunned. Marilyn Mosby sitting there listening to the judge read these off, just bowed her head, shaking her head throughout the proceedings. Just sort of in disbelief that this has happened.

The concern now that Officer Goodson has been acquitted of all charges, is that this was as tough as it gets for the defense, certainly, and for those other officers. It is hard to see how the State moves forward now and gets a conviction against any of the officers if Caesar Goodson can get off.

This is a long-awaited -- and going into this courtroom today felt like this was the, in some ways, the final day of what happened here just over a year ago to Freddie Gray. So ...

COSTELLO: OK I want to ask -- thank you, Miguel, you stay right there, I want to bring in Jean Casarez now. Let's talk about this from the State's Attorney's angle. Did Marilyn Mosby overcharge these officers? What happened here?

JEAN CASAREZ, CNN CORRESPONDENT: You know I guess Marilyn Mosby would have to respond to that. There is a gag order. But when a prosecutor brings charges they must believe they can prove them beyond a reasonable doubt. Now in the case of this Caesar Goodson, the police officer that drove the van, four of the charges were second degree murder, involuntary manslaughter. Manslaughter, in other words, Carol, one of the elements is they had to show beyond a reasonable doubt that Caesar Goodson caused the death. That he actually caused the death.

That's a very difficult standard right there. So they're not as easy to prove as you might think they are. Misconduct in office, that is a common law crime right there. Prison is probably not the answer for that, it's a probationary type of situation. And that's during, as you're having your duties as the officer driving the van, that you are not doing your duty as you should.

Even not guilty on that.

COSTELLO: It's just ...

CASAREZ: And this is the judge, this is not a jury.

COSTELLO: Right, right. You know just the effects that the Freddie Gray case had on the Baltimore Police Department -- there were many changes made within the Baltimore Police Department. And I want to go out to Baltimore and ask Miguel Marquez this question. How are Baltimore police reacting to this?

MARQUEZ: I'm sorry, say your question again, Carol?

COSTELLO: How are Baltimore police reacting to this?

MARQUEZ: Well I don't -- I haven't seen Baltimore police. I can tell you that the police officers who were in that room, Edward Nero, specifically, who was acquitted earlier on a charge, sort of clasped his hands, smiled and said, "yes," as that last verdict was read, of "not guilty," in this case.

Officer Goodson hugged his attorneys, there is clearly great relief, at least among police that were in that room, Carol.

COSTELLO: All right, Miguel.