Transcripts For KQED Charlie Rose 20151210 : vimarsana.com

KQED Charlie Rose December 10, 2015

See, i believe after iowa starts voting, after february i think the field will winnow very quickly. Candidates are either going to come in first and second or fifth and sixth and the ones that are fourth, fifth, sixth will drop out. They will not be able to raise money, organization an organization, they will start dropping out. I think trump will still be stuck around 30 . Ask yourself this question, after what trump said yesterday, if youre not already for trump or two days ago, if you are not already for trump, after what he said the other day about muslims, what new voter is he going to get. Rose also this evening nancy gibbs, the editor of Time Magazine talks about their selection of Angela Merkel as the person of the year. She would poll all the time, really try to make sure she never got out too far ahead of the german people. Very, very careful about building. Rose calculated risks. Very kal claitd but are the refugee crisis something very out of character and so many people we talked to without worked with her for years were themselves surprised by the boldness of that position. The fact that it was politically extremely risky, strategically risky and yet they felt that it arose from some really viseral powerful feeling in her about walls, about barriers, about freedom, that speaks to her personal history as much as to her political. Rose we conclude this evening with Charlotte Rampling and the director andrew haigh talking about their film 45 years. Thats what is so extraordinary about life, about how if you just shiftd things a little bit, and you shift your point of view on something, it can change. And it can change dramically. And then can change, and then can change other things because its changed. Rose an update on the San Bernardino shootings, a conversation about donald trump and the muslim ban, Time Magazines person of the year, and charlotte ramp long and andrew haigh talking about their new movie. All of that when we continue. Funding for charlie rose is provided by the following al and by bloomberg, a provider of multimedia news and Information Services worldwide. Rose from our studios in new york city, this is charlie rose. We begin this evening with an bo shootings. Federal authorities have learned that the husband and wife that killed 14 people last week were radicalized at least two years ago. That is before isis emerged as a major terrorist group. Heres what fbi director james comey told a senate juddishary committee during his appearance on capitol hill earlier today. Our investigation to date which i can only say so much about at this point, indicates that they were actually radicalized before they started courting or dating each other online, and online as late as early as the end of 2013, they were talking to each other about jihad and martyr dom before they became engaged, married and lived together in the united states. We also believe they were inspired by foreign terrorist organizations, were working very hard to understand exactly their association and the source of their inspiration. Were also working very hard to understand whether there was anybody else involved with assisting them, with supporting them, with equipping them. And were working very, very hard to understand did they have other plans, either for that day or earlier, and that work continues. Rose the investigation is also focused on the couples former neighbor Enrique Marquez who supplied them with the assault rifles they used. Review of the attackers financial records reveal a cash loan of 28,500 from an online bank about two weeks before the massacre. Joining me now from san francisco, esme deprez of blookberg news, welcome back. Hi, charlie. Rose there is a lot we want to do in a small amount of time. James comey just sort of laid out the questions that we all ought to be asking. And that the fbi is asking. Let me just talk first about this radicalization. Its a surprise, i think, to many people. Its a surprise that its been as extensive, i think, as it was. Mr. Comey said it could have been as recent as late 2013. So that gives them quite a bit of time since the attack last week. Now that would indicate that ms. Malick, the female shoolter in San Bernardino was radicalized before she came to the u. S so one of the Big Questions that is raising today is how she was able to obtain that fiance visa she was able to obtain to come to the. Is and marry mr. Farook and live with him in southern california. She came in july 2014. So there are questions today, what that process is like. She would have had to pass criminal and Homeland Security background checks. So there are questions today about whether those were enough or whether authorities missed something in granting her that visa. Rose or whether we should change that process. Exactly. Rose the interesting thing to me too was that there was always an assumption that or some people raised the question, did she radicalize him. I think we still dont know that yet. I mean that was the thinking initially, perhaps. That is still an open question. One thing that mr. Comey also did raise in that system today was this idea of computer encrip shun, that terrorists w woe know terrorists like to use encrypted online messages to communicate with one another, mr. Comey spoke about the deficit, if not the impossiblity of federal officials being able to intercept those messages and know what, you know, what folks are saying in between themselves. Its unclear whether, though, the San Bernardino attackers used encrypted messages in this case either to talk to people in the u. S. Or abroad. Rose what is the current thinking about what they what groups they might have either been in communication with or might have known about, or be maybe aligned with. Well, as you mentioned, if this couple were radicalized as early as late 2013, that would predate the rise of isis, as kind of this household name of International Terror group. So you know, of course there are plenty of extremist islamist views to align themselves with that before. You mentioned mr. Marquez, this is the neighbor and the relative that federal investigators are speaking to. He bought two of those rifles that were used in the attack. So the New York Times is reporting some new information on him today that youll find very interesting. He has told investigators that he knew this couple was radicalized. He didnt say that he knew of this attack in particular in San Bernardino. So its not really clear the role that he played in this attack but he is proving a crucial link as we know to investigators to learn more about the couple and their motivations and how they were able to carry these attacks out. I will note that he has since checked himself into a Mental Health facility. So there are questions being raised about his capacity to talk about these issues as well use in the San Bernardinoleed attack last week. Do they know or do they suspect that they may have been in communication with others that might have been a part of their overall planning . Well, on that note, we do know that mr. Farook and mr. March kez had been planning plotting an attack as far back as 2012. So this would be before miss malik came to the u. S. To marry mr. Farook, obviously before the planning of this attack. Now obviously that plan of attack between mr. Farook and mr. March dwez marquez was not carried out. We dont know why that was not carried out. Rose what surprises you so far beyond the radicalization issue with respect to where we are now in this investigation . Well, you mentioned the loan. I mean we are doing some reporting on the loan today too. That 28,500 loan. That was made by an online lending platform called prosper. So they are not the actual issuer of the loan. Its still a bank that issues the loan but thats an Interesting Development since we last talked. Now the company isnt commenting citing privacy laws and there is no indication that loan was given out to mr. Farook with any wrongdoing. But stoaking this existing debate about these online lenders whether they should be regulated more heavily, you know, investigators will definitely be looking into whether he used that loan to purchase the guns. One source did tell us at bloomberg that mr. Farook said, indicated he would use that loan to consolidate some debt. Now thats a pretty common reason for applying for a loan like this, the deficit for banks is you can apply for a loan saying you are going to use it for whatever you want and actually end up using it for something quite different. Rose you know what surprises me still, even though they were as radicalized as they were, a lot of people say well, i didnt notice anything. Certainly, right. Were hearing from a lot of family members. A lot of people that knew them, they didnt notice anything. They noticed that they were devout muslims. They went to mossq quite a bit. But you could say that about any number of muslims of american muslims in this country. So right, the family is still saying we never noticed, i mean i think thats something that you hear a lot about after these mass attacks. The family members and friends coming out and saying we had no idea. So it just, it makes officials, you know, jobs harder. We talked about the fbi did not have this couple on any terror watch list. Obviously they didnt catch any clues when they were processing mismaliks visa to come into the u. S. So this really just samp fies how dangerous and how under the radar people like this can operate in todays day and age, especially with social media, using those encrypted messages mr. Comey talked about. Rose esme, thank you again for joining us. Thank you, charmie. Rose esme deprez, Bloomberg News in san francisco. Back in a moment. We continue now with our coverage of the republican president ial race. Donald trumps controversial proposal to ban muslim immigrants temp regardly is still grabbing headlines. Trump has stood by his statement despite widespread criticism, both at home and abroad. Joining me now is dan senor, a former advise tore mitt romney and paul ryan. Also an official in the George W Bush administration. And ed rollins is a go pcam pain consultant who served in the administrations of four u. S. President s. I am pleased to have them back on this program. Heres what i want to know. You both are insiders on the Republican Party. And what is the conversation . Taking place privately today . Privately the conversation is that this race after two terms of barack obama which consensus among republicans an many people who arent republicans, after two terms of obama it is hard to believe that the country is going to go for a third term of obama which is fengtively how the race will be fraimed, what Hillary Clinton will represent. It was a gld inopportunity. Rose because she was a member of the administration. Member of the administration. And supports many of his policies. In fact wants to move to the left on some of them. And we have a strong field. I mean you look at most of the candidates in race, these are very successful governors, very successful senators, people who have won elections in the obama years. People who are very good at waging the argument at prosecuting the case, an effective field. And in comes donald trump and has with inflammatory rhetoric tapped into a very, in many respects, understandably angry sentiments with voarts whose primary issues are immigration and traild, and koirded that segment of electorate while the rest of this very talented field is tragmenting the rest of the electorate. So chopping up into small pieces the rest of the electorate. So you have trump on the one hand dominating and these other very talented candidates dividing up the rest. Rose and they cant get traction, with a few exception exceptions, marco rubio has some traction, he gained some in New Hampshire and ted cruz a lot in iowa. Correct, but there has to be a winnowing of the feel here. I dont think it will really happen before february for the iowa caucus, before you really, some of these candidates start to support. Right. But im wondering, im asking, are people saying look, were committing suicide. Yes. Rose we are committing suicide here. Yes, yes, i mean the people are, i think des pond ent. Its not just worrying about trump being the nominee or trump being the president. Its wiping out the senate. A fiveseat margin of the senate. Weve got seven or eight very serious senate races all on our side. Were not going to lose the house because i think were in pretty good shape here but at the end of the day we can lose the senate and could destroy a party if the rhetoric conditions continues. All the thingses you need to build a party for the future, demographic charges, trump is out there alienating every day. Rose do you know any republican leader, any republican person of stature who is not serious about this and who is not wondering what can we possibly do because it will be disastrous . I would say worry more than fur yus, a lot of people anticipated him going away earlier and obviously he hasnt. I think theyre really beginning to worry seriously about the issues i just raised. I think people thought he would selfdestruct. He hasnt. I think no one, everyone underestimated the power of Free Television. He has had Free Television since june 16th when he announced, i will say to you, if someone is going to get 50, 60, 70 of all television coverage, cable, mainstream, what you have, as he has, you can run a campaign without money. And he hasnt spent much money. I think to a certain extent the three candidates that are still in the race that have money and organization, are cruz, rubio and him. Carson obviously has money but hes fading fast. Rose and bush. And bush but bush, the problem with you were about, bush has money. He spent 35 million and hes dropped. So my sense is he it is going to take a real collapse of everything for bush to come bablg. I would say just to congratulate the Republican Leadership here. You know, almost all i think of the 13 president ial candidates have come out and criticized what trump and very strong terms, has said over the last couple of days. The speaker of the house, paul ryan has come out. Out. He hasnt commented at all on comments by president ial candidates, he responded, made a strong statement, the party chairman. Mcconnell. The chairman of the state party in iowa, the chairman of the state party in South Carolina, these are conservative parties have come out. If you think about, i mean obviously what trump has said in terms of banning all muslims from coming is such a crazy notion. American muslim who served for the u. S. Military in iraq returning home, is he banned. An american businessman who is a muslim is returning from a business trip, is he banned . When you start to think operationally how crazy this idea is. He is for tearing part, tearing up the 14th amendment. Ending ending birth right citizenship. Deporting 11 million people. I mean when you really start to step back, these are extremely damaging things for the partiment and i try to think how did this happen. Right . Rose thats exactly the question. I, you know, in many respects, if you look at 1984, the reagan reelected. Rose you had something to do with that. Yes, he did. You lock at, the democrats going into 84ee as you know, thought, oh, reagan, were going to beat him. Hes a door nobody as they said, hes not serious, a warmongerrer, crazy. And boom election day happens, ed and his team and republicans won 49 states. Rose it was morning in america. I want to correct that. Ronald reagan won 49 states. I lost minnesota. Rose and. Democrats, the psychological aftershocks that the Democratic Party went through after that, and i think psychological aftershocks that many republicans went through after romney lost in 2012, 2008 they almost said look, it was a unique moment, after two terms of bush, obama was this very unique, talented candidate. They kind of understood. Mccain was not as good as romney. In 2012, they thought we had it. They thought it would be like reagan in 80ee, in closing days he would win it. When we lost t the Republican Base was sitting there scratching their head saying how on earth did we lose this thing. We lost the race. Maybe were losing our country. And they wanted fight. That is what all these fights over obama care b shutting down the government. They wanted fielt. And that fight was drectsed as much as barack obama as it was against john boehner, and mitch mcconnell. And now that has extended into this president ial cycle where if you are not trump, among a certain segment of the electorate, you are part of problem. You have toyed with running and in fact did run an independent campaign. I did ross per ots campaign for eight weeks. In 1992. And im ol enough to remember the George Wallace in 1968. And in which he basically, people forget, he actually won. A couple of things i want to state. First, is his threat to do you think that if in fact he begins to lose in the republican primary, that say big if, that he would run as an independent . I dont think he wants to lose. I think he can make the threat. Certainly if he did run cobasically have a big impact on the race and probably cost the republicans, but it cost a lot of money to get on the state ballots and what have you. Im not sure hes willing to spend 300 million or 400 million of his own money with no guarantee of doing any better than 8 or 10 of the vote. Right today if you took all the voters and the people, it would be about 8, so . That is basically what wallace had, half of what per ot had. Mentioning George Wallace, people are comparing done all trump to George Wallace. Theyre tapping too some of the same voters i think to a certain extent. Theyre older voters today. With some of the same premise t is kind of the blue clar,s less educated, people more worried about jobs and those kinds of things. Jobs and security. You know, he understands the electorate better than the people in washington. And i think to a certain extent we both have lived in washington. The problem with washington is everybody get

© 2025 Vimarsana