Return to Transcripts main page
ANDERSON COOPER 360 DEGREES
Statistical Tie Between Cruz and Trump; Cruz, Trump Wooing Evangelicals; Video Shows Military Raid On; When Lives Fall Apart After A Lottery Win; David Bowie Dies After 18-Month Battle With Cancer. Aired 8-9p ET
Aired January 11, 2016 - 20:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[20:00:11] ANDERSON COOPER, CNN HOST: Good evening. Thanks very much for joining us.
Tonight on the eve of President Obama's final state of the union address, surprising new polling numbers in the race to succeed him not national polling, either, which only starts getting useful a little bit later on.
State polling in the first two states to vote Iowa and New Hampshire. As you will see, they are showing tight races especially in Iowa. Iowa, of course, you will remember is supposed to be Ted Cruz country and last week Donald Trump started implying the real Cruz country is Canada. It's become a daily part of the stump speech, nobody knows he keeps saying if Senator Cruz is eligible to be president. Well, in a little while, we will explore the legal merits of exactly that.
But first, our chief national correspondent John King breaking it down by the numbers -- John.
JOHN KING, CNN CHIEF NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Anderson, what these new polls shows us that in Iowa among the Republicans, we have a two-man race and a very close race. First, the new Quinnipiac University poll out today, Donald Trump on top at 32 percent, Ted Cruz at 29 percent. Over the weekend we had a brand-New NBC Marist/"Wall Street Journal" poll. That one had Ted Cruz at 28, Donald Trump at 24, essentially within the margin of error. So it is statistical tie between Trump and Cruz at the top of the pack. Both surveys have Marco Rubio in third place and Ben Carson in fourth. But this a two-man race in Iowa.
And let's look. The big determining factor on caucus night who votes and in what percentages? Because Cruz at the moment has the lead among evangelicals. That tends to be the biggest slide of the caucus - slice of the caucus electorate who is also winning big, 49 to 27 over Trump with among tea party voters and those who described themselves as very conservative, 44 percent for Cruz and 26 percent for Trump.
Here is the big challenge for Donald Trump. Thirty seven percent of Republican whose say they are moderate or liberal say they are Trump supporters. Only seven percent for Ted Cruz. Can Donald Trump get new voters, moderate and liberal Republicans to come up on caucus tonight? That's the key test for him if he wants to offset the Cruz strength and other conservatives than other conservatives.
Here are some numbers that suggest all, Anderson, that Ted Cruz has more room to grow, if you will, in the final days. Thirty-four percent of the Iowa Republicans say they view Donald Trump unfavorably. So they are unlikely to vote. But only 17 percent say that about Ted Cruz. And more than a quarter of Iowa Republicans, 26 percent say they would never support Donald Trump. Only seven percent say that about Ted Cruz. So that suggestions room to go.
Finally, let's bring up the average of the reputable polls in the past 30 days and what does it show you. As we discussed, it shows you a two-man race at the top with Cruz and Trump here. Rubio looking for what they traditionally called the third ticket out of Iowa.
But this gap is very important. Remember, if Trump can stay close or win Iowa, it's a big lead in New Hampshire right now. If he sinks a little bit, we will see if the polling in New Hampshire changes. But with the days counting down to Iowa this is a two-man race and it is heavy weight battle, Anderson.
COOPER: Yes. Sure is. John King. John, thanks very much.
Joining us now, Trump national campaign co-chairman and Iowa Sam Clovis. Also with us id former Romney presidential campaign strategists Stuart Stevens and "Washington Post" syndicated conservative columnist Kathleen Parker.
Sam, good to have you on the program. The sense over the last couple weeks is that Donald Trump was losing ground in Iowa. Now you have the latest polls indicating basically a dead heat. Do you think the questions that Donald Trump has been raising about Cruz' eligibility are having an impact?
SAM CLOVIS, CO-CHAIRMAN POLICY ADVISER, TRUMP NATIONAL CAMPAIGN. No. I don't think it is very much of that, Anderson, as much as I think it is. It is just the shifting sands. I mean, this is -- look at what happened in 2012. We had a massive breakout that occurred exactly three weeks before the primary there and Rick Santorum was at four percent and ended up winning that. I think there is a lot of shifting to go.
I think one of the things that's important, though, is to look at who the people are and they are committed to their -- who they are supporting and I think Donald Trump's position is very strong with people committed to him. And I also think that there are still a lot of shifting to go on. I have seen it on caucus night myself that people get up and make those presentations and people change their mind sitting in the seats on caucus night.
COOPER: Steward, I mean, you've been on the program before. I know you are no certainly no Trump fan. Your business, though, winning elections. A, do you think Sam is right that is not necessarily the questions about Trump is raising about Cruz's eligibility? And also, do you think Sam is right about the strength of the commitment by Iowans to Donald Trump? STUART STEVENS, FORMER ROMNEY PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN STRATEGIST: Look,
disagreeing on Iowa with Sam is a dangerous thing. Trump is very lucky to have him. I -- listen, I think the way this is going to sugar out as they say in New Hampshire is that Cruz is going to win this and I think he's going to win it easily. I think he will be somewhere north of 30. I think Trump is going to prove to have a top of around 24. So I think that they will be more than five points spreading them apart.
You know, this idea that you can show up and register and have now voters, you know, reminds me kind of 1999 when everybody said the Nasdaq was going to go to 10,000. I just don't think it will happen. Pets.com didn't take over the world and I don't think we are going to have anything new. Typically, it's more repeat customers than not show up at the Iowa caucus.
[20:05:27] COOPER: Kathleen --
KATHLEEN PARKER, SYNDICATED COLUMNIST, WASHINGTON POST: Do I get to talk?
COOPER: Yes, go ahead.
PARKER: OK. So when the guys start talking numbers, you know, I feel like we are talking sports and I'm not going to argue with them because they know their stuff. But I do have a couple of thought.
One of the thought is I do think that Trump is doing a little bit of damage to Senator Cruz because he understands the audience so well. And to those people who respond to the birther message, it is something that would appeal to them. That would resonate with them.
What I think Donald Trump is actually doing something more than just merely challenging Ted Cruz, I think he is sort of laying the groundwork for a general election should he become the nominee. In that, he is challenging this person on his natural born citizenship just as he did President Obama. But when he challenged President Obama, it was -- there was many who saw that as having sort of a dog whistle racial under tone. So this way, you know, he's free and clear from that. He is sort of inoculated himself against that challenge or those questions the democratic nominee might raise. And he can just say, look. You know, I'm just after the truth here. I really care about people's natural born citizen ship.
COOPER: Well, Sam, it is also interesting because, I mean, Trump is not just talking about Cruz in terms of eligibility, he is also talking about ethanol which is obviously very important. There is also another debate this week. And until now, Sam, any dustups between Donald Trump and Senator Cruz have been put aside once they are actually on that stage together and Donald Trump repeatedly said look, I like Ted Cruz. I'm just raising these questions. Do you think we are now at the state of this race that people are past that point of not confronting each other directly on a stage?
CLOVIS: I do think you have seen the shift. I think you have seen the shift in not just Mr. Trump but you have seen it in some to other candidates, shift away from going after each other as viciously as they have. I think that they are now talking substance and policy in a lot of these different issues and bringing up those differences, which is very hard when you have this many people in the field.
But I also I want to go back to one point. I think that the new people showing up, I think, you know, you raise a great point there about new voters showing up. And I would agree with that. But I think what we are going to see is a lot of Republicans coming off the bench that haven't participated in caucuses for a long time. Those 04s and 14 voters that we call. And if you want to get in the wax up my ear, but those are the ones that I think that are going to start showing up. So I do think we are going to have a lot of registered Republicans that haven't caucus before that are going to show up.
COOPER: And Stuart, I mean, the fact that everyone is talking about a two-man race in Iowa, Trump still has such a big lead, obviously, in New Hampshire. Who, if anyone, has room to maneuver here and what is their move?
STEVENS: Well, I think we see that the huge shift in these primaries based on what happens in the previous primary. We saw a 35-point shift within a matter of a month in Florida in 2012. You know, I was part of the genius crew for George Bush that we took a 65-point lead in New Hampshire and lost by 19 and went into South Carolina 20 points down and still managed to win. So I think it's very fluid.
On this debate, the key here is, you know, Donald Trump is trying to disqualify Ted Cruz. Ted Cruz should go into that debate with the same mission. He should disqualify Donald Trump as president of the United States. All of this I'm going to be nice to you, I mean, Donald Trump isn't playing by those rules. He's literally saying that Donald Trump, that Ted Cruz should -- is not qualified to be president of the United States.
Now there is plenty of reasons I would suggest that Donald Trump is not qualified to be president of the United States. It doesn't rely on some caucus-mania legal theory.
Ted Cruz and others should make that case. They shouldn't be about who is nice to each other. It should about why I should be president of the United States, why the other person shouldn't be. It's time to move to that in this race. That's how you win races. You don't win races by being nice and trying to have the most friends. It's not a Facebook competition. You win races by going out and showing why you should win and the other person shouldn't.
PARKER: Anderson, I'd like to make another point.
COOPER: Go ahead, yes.
The same Quinnipiac poll found that, I think, more -- the most likely people to go to the caucuses believe that Ted Cruz is the more likely, correct me if I'm wrong on this, the more likely to be able to win a general election and I think that's completely wrong. I don't think there is any chance Ted Cruz can win a general and here is why. One observation, this seems to have slipped through the cracks a
little bit but I -- you know, Ted Cruz said something that I found rather astonishing. He said, you know, it's time for the body of Christ to rise up and support me. I don't con who takes their religion seriously who would think that Jesus should rise from the grave and resurrect himself to serve Cruz. I know so many people who are offended by their comment. And you know, if you want to talk about grandiosity and messing on self-imagery, I think he makes -- Ted Cruz makes Donald Trump look rather sort of like a gentle little lamb so --
COOPER: Do you think Donald Trump would win a general?
PARKER: Well, I think -- I don't think he should but I think he has a better chance in a general election because he is not so far right as Ted Cruz. You see that his support comes from people very conservative, the evangelical community, many of whom may disagree with what I said and may see it less offensive than I did but, you know, I think the middle of the road people, moderates, more liberal Republicans would find that a kind of little much and I don't see independents falling in line behind Ted Cruz.
COOPER: Yes. Sam Clovis, Stuart Steward, Kathleen Parker, always great to have you on. Thank you very much. Great discussions.
Evangelical question shortly tonight. Quick bit of breaking news, though, as well right now. FOX business announcing the lineup for the next GOP debate. The only major headline, really, Senator Rand Paul and Carly Fiorina demoted to the under card with Senator Paul then deciding as he has been promising to skip the whole thing.
A lot more ahead. Coming up next, the legal angle on the Cruz citizenship allegations. The question is does Donald Trump have a point? Would anyone have a case against Ted Cruz? Two Harvard legal scholars join us, one of them taught Ted Cruz the law.
Mater, inside the raid that got "El Chapo" and put him away here in the U.S. Up close video like you haven't seen before.
[20:15:52] COOPER: Welcome back. We talked before the break about the polling impact and perhaps the voting impact as well of Donald Trump's ongoing effort to dip Ted Cruz in maple syrup and wrap him in the Canadian flag. And the mere fact that we are discussing comes to something of a Trump political victory. There say, however, a legitimate legal question at the heart of all of this, one that Mr. Trump answered over the weekend on NBC's "Meet the Press."
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CHUCK TODD, NBC HOST, MEET THE PRESS: Your chief competitor is Ted Cruz. You brought up the Canada citizen ship issue. Let me ask you. In your opinion. Do you believe he is constitutional eligible? I know the Supreme Court has never weighed in on the phrase, natural citizen. What does that mean? But you yourself, do you yourself think he should be eligible?
DONALD TRUMP (R), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: So what happens is I was watching Lawrence Tribe of Harvard who is a constitutional expert, one of the true experts and according to him, it's a real question mark and he is the, you know, I would say he was is one of the great authorities on this subject.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COOPER: Well, it just so happened we have professor Tribe with us tonight who taught Senator Cruz, President Obama, Chief justice Roberts and of course, senior legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin who served as his research assistant and Jeffrey also joins us tonight.
Professor Tribe, why in your opinion is Senator Cruz's eligibility still an open question? Why is it unsettled?
LAWRENCE TRIBE, PROFESSOR, HARVARD LAS SCHOOL: I think it is unsettled because the Supreme Court has never resolved it and because there are really two approaches, two very different approaches to a question like this. One approach is to ask what the original meaning of the constitution is trying to figure out what the framers intended and what people understood in 1788. If that's your approach, then it really looks like you have to have been born on American land in order to be a natural born citizen. Now that's not my approach. My approach is to look at the ark of history, look at how we have understood that term as a people over time and it's very different under my more flexible approach a guy like Ted Cruz would be eligible.
But what makes this important is very different from the birther issued raised about president. What makes this important is that the constitutional is important than your approach to what is important.
Now, when Cruz was my student, he was at least consistent. He and I argued back and forth. He ended up acing the class even though he had different views. I was in favor of a flexible living constitution. He was in favor of a kind of frozen one that has one meaning back then it was an act of industrial change. Except when it helps him to say it changes.
The amazing thing, the reason I got interested in this is not that I, you know, want to study his birth certificate or his mom's birth in Delaware, it's the fact that he says he wants to put justices on the court who will take this at aquarium deal of the constitution. And ironically the kinds of justices as he says he wants are the ones that say he is not eligible to run for president if the issue came before them.
On the other hand, the justices I want are the ones that would say he is eligible because as he himself says, in the intervening years Congress has done a number of things. We've had the gold water case where he was born in Arizona before it became a state. We have the McCain case where he was born in military base outside the U.S.
This is important because the way this guy plays fast and loose with the constitution. He is a fair weather originalist and I have an op- ed in the "Boston Globe" that is online now called the constitution on Cruz control which explains why this issue matters.
It matters not because it's likely that some court will yank Ted Cruz off the campaign trail or out of the White House, it's important because it gives us a window to what this guy might do and what the judges he picks might do to our constitution. And if that doesn't matter, than I don't know what does.
COOPER: I want to bring in Jeff Toobin. Jeff, do you agree with your former professor?
[20:20:00] JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: I certainly agree with Donald Trump that Larry Tribe is the great authority on the constitution. But on this question, I'm really not sure Larry is right about this. You know, there was a lot of few article by two former solicitor generals, Neil Kathiel (ph) and Paul Clement. And they looked at this issue and what they concluded was their understanding of the original intent of the constitution was that if you had to go through a naturalization ceremony like Arnold Schwarzenegger did when he moved from Austria, you are not a natural born citizen. But if you were a citizen at birth like Ted Cruz in Canada, like John McCain in Panama, you are a natural born citizen.
I find that frankly more persuasive than Larry's argument. But I also think this is never going to come up before a court because I don't think anyone has the right to bring it to court, so this is really as usual more of a political argument than a legal argument, and Donald Trump has muddied the waters, which is what he wanted to do.
COOPER: Professor, do you agree, nobody has the standing to bring this up?
TRIBE: That's unclear. It is not clear because an opponent would theoretically have the standing because the opponent is injured. I mean, there was, after all, Bush v. Gore. Though many of us don't enjoy remembering it where a court even though everybody said no court is going to get involved, the court did get involved because George W. Bush said that I'm being hurt by this guy's putting a cloud on my presidency.
But the main point is that I have read that article by two other friends of mine, Neal and Paul, Neal Kathiel (ph) and Paul Clement, it's a pretty good article but not as good as what these two professors wrote. And the fact is it's not as good because it's asking the wrong question. It's asking, what's the best answer all things considered? The question of whether he should be eligible or someone like him.
That's not the issue. The issue is do the kinds of judges that he says he would insist on, the kinds who would overrule (INAUDIBLE) who don't believe in gay rights or women's rights but who think the constitution is frozen, if he really believes in their philosophy, then he's not really the philosophy of Paul Clement and Neal Kathiel (ph) or Larry Tribe or Jeff Toobin. It is an inadequate philosophy but it turns out that Ted Cruz drops that when it doesn't serve his purposes.
TRIBE: I think it's -- the constitutional hypocrisy may be disqualifying even if birthing Canada is not.
COOPER: Professor Tribe, it's really a pleasure to have you on. Thank you very much.
TRIBE: Pleasure to be on.
COOPER: Jeff Toobin, as well. Great discussion.
Yes. And just ahead, we are going to drill down on the voting block that could determine who wins the Republican nomination. Evangelicals, how and why are they splitting votes among the candidate or which candidates has the best chance of winning the biggest slice of their votes? That's just ahead.
[20:27:07] COOPER: As we have said a new Quinnipiac poll shows Donald Trump and Ted Cruz neck and neck in Iowa, evangelicals, of course, a key voting bloc in the hawk eye state. And when Cruz and Trump talk with voters about their faith, the contrast, well, it is pretty stark. Listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. TED CRUZ (R), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: At the spirit of revival that is sweeping this country that it continue and in particular that conservatives continue to unite.
TRUMP: We have so many pastors and so many ministers in favor and it is just very important.
CRUZ: We have to awaken and energize the body of Christ.
TRUMP: I even brought my bible, the evangelicals, OK? We love the evangelicals. We love the art of the deal but the bible is far, far, far superior, right, yes.
CRUZ: So in Joshua 2415 on the wall, choose you this day whom you will serve as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.
TRUMP: To the best of my knowledge not too many evangelicals come out of Cuba, OK. Just remember that.
CRUZ: Well, I would be more than happy to invite Donald to come to church with me anytime he likes.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COOPER: Well, in the new poll, Senator Cruz won more than a third of white born again evangelical vote in Iowa. That's evangelical voters and not a monolith when it comes to presidential election certainly. It always splitting votes among the Republican candidates. Joining me now is Russell Moore. We are happy he is in the program,
author of "Onward, engage in the culture without losing the gospel." And president of the Southern Baptist Convention Ethics commission. Also (INAUDIBLE), director of the Paulson and Public policies, former political reporter for the Des Moines Register.
Dr. Moore, I want to ask you about something that you said last week that has got a lot of attention I know. You said that when it comes to the GOP candidates and the evangelical vote, the quote "Ted Cruz is leading in the Jerry Falwell wing. Marco Rubio is leading the Billy Graham wing and Trump leading the Jimmy Swagger wing." Can you explain what you mean by that?
RUSSELL MOORE, PRESIDENT, SOUTHERN BAPTIST CONVENTION ETHICS COMMISSION: Well, I think sometimes when people from the outside look at evangelicals, they assume that evangelicals are all just one thing. When in reality there are multiple tribes within evangelicals. By the Jerry Falwell wing, I mean, the politically activated mobilized sort of constituency that we typically think of when we think of the religious right going all the way back to the pre-Reagan era. I think Ted Cruz has organized that wing of evangelicalism very well. And that's really important in places such as Iowa especially because these are the people who are very likely to get out and vote and even more so to get out and caucus.
By the Billy Graham wing, I mean, the broader sense of evangelical of people who are not as inclined to define themselves politically or to think of themselves as political activist. The sort of people that are tempted sometimes to disengage from the political process because they want to preserve the gospel and to preserve the mission of the church. I find it that many of these people, the younger evangelicals are very taken with Marco Rubio and his optimistic hopeful vision of the future.
[20:30:04] And then by the Jimmy Swaggart Wing, I mean the sort of health and wealth prosperity gospel sort of evangelical that tends to not focus very much on the personal morality or character of an individual as long as that person is selling of what they like. And I think Donald Trump is doing very well with that sort of evangelical.
COOPER: And when you talk about leading the Jimmy Swaggart Wing, how do you see -- I mean, is that a day to Donald Trump because obviously, Jimmy Swaggart is best known nowadays for the scandal that brought him down ultimately.
MOORE: Yeah, well, I mean, what you have is Donald Trump has been doing so much of his out reach at the leadership level with prosperity gospel sorts of leaders...
MOORE: ... the kind of people that most rank-and-file evangelicals would see as heretics. And you have a candidate who is completely dismissive of personal virtue and personal character in a candidate or in a president when it comes to himself. He's very focused on it when it comes to the other candidates. But when it comes to himself, the very thing that conservative evangelicals and other social conservatives has said for years matters when it comes to electing leaders.
COOPER: And even that notion of asking for forgiveness that's clearly not something, I mean, Donald Trump has said it's not something is really done a lot of. David, I mean, it's not surprising that Cruz is leading with the evangelicals in Iowa, you look at how much time, how much effort he'd put into cording them obviously what he himself believes in him to say. The fact that Trump is trailing him by only seven points when it comes to evangelicals, what do you think is behind that?
DAVID YEPSEN, DIRECTOR, PAUL SIMON PUBLIC POLICY INSTITUTE: Well, I think Donald Trump has an appeal to a lot of different Republicans for a lot of different reasons and I think sometimes we treat evangelicals as a world into themselves and they are motivated by the same things that a lot of voters are motivated by.
And Donald Trump has tapped into the nation's anger and some of the disaffection that people have about politics. And many evangelicals here in Iowa and elsewhere agree with that.
So, I also think that Donald Trump support is a little soft in general. I think the challenge that he has is a lot of new people that are coming to his banners to somehow turn those people out.
And I thought Sam Clovis had a very good point earlier in your program when he talked about the dynamic of what happens on caucus night. This is not an election where you go into a voting booth. This is a caucus. This is where you go to a neighborhood meeting.
And what do people do there? They talk and evangelicals are talking with non-evangelicals and neighbors and so fort and there will be a lot of people who change their mind.
COOPER: Dr. Moore, it's always good to have you on the program, David Yepsen, I appreciate you being with us as well. Thank you.
Coming up next is breaking news tonight. Dramatic new video showing the deadly raid on El Chapo's hideout. Five people were killed incredibly the drug lord managed to actually get away again. But then he was captured a short time later. We'll have the details ahead.
[20:37:04] COOPER: Well, there's breaking news tonight. Mexican drug lord Joaquin Guzman, known to many as "El Chapo" is awaiting extradition to the United States. We take a while after his capture early Friday. These pictures were taken shortly after his arrest. The cartel leader is being held in the same prison he escaped from six months ago. He faces seven drug related charges in the United States. Though as I said, it could take months for him about to be extradited for that process.
Over the weekend, the story took an interesting twist when "Rolling Stone" published an article by Actor, Sean Penn who interviewed El Chapo in October while he was still a fugitive, when he was still on the run. And tonight, there's new video showing the deadly raid that ultimately put El Chapo back behind bars but only after he got away again.
Martin Savidge now joins me with the latest. Let's talk first about this video of the Mexican military released. What does it show? What do you know about it?
MARTIN SAVIDGE, CNN CORRESPONDENT: That's pretty astounding video I have to say. I mean, I've seen some entry videos, but this is really remarkable because it's helmet camera footage from one of the officers obviously of the soldiers that makes the entry into the building but you are right there. I should warn you, it's three minutes of video, you're going to see right now. It's actually 14 minutes that was released. They had things under control in about 10 but take a listen how it violently began.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE (Through Translation): Hands up, Security
UNIDENTIFIED MALE (Through Translation): Hands up.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE (Through Translation): Cover yourself. We have one injured.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE (Through Translation): Careful, careful, careful.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE (Through Translation): Bring it.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE (Through Translation): Go.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE (Through Translation): Throw it.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE (Through Translation): Turn around, turn around.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE (Through Translation): Stay calm man.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE (Through Translation): Two more.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE (Through Translation): Stay calm man.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE (Through Translation): Two more.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE (Through Translation): Go enter.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE (Through Translation): Ready.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE (Through Translation): Go ahead.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE (Through Translation): Grenade.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE (Through Translation): Enter. Look for the stairs.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE (Through Translation): Here is another one.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE (Through Translation): Lock that door. That door.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE (Through Translation): Go through that one.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE (Through Translation): Give him a hand.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE (Through Translation): Go ahead.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
[20:40:03] COOPER: Martin, the video it's pretty incredible. We didn't actually see "El Chapo" in the video. Had he already escaped?
SAVIDGE: Right. It appears that, you know, part of this sort of gun fire that was taking place at least coming from his own gunman was at delaying tactic. In other words, they engaged these soldiers as they came in to allow their boss apparently time to escape. Because what was found was that there was, get this, a tunnel, no surprise with "El Chapo." It was apparently hidden in a closet. He went down there. The marines found it that tunnel led to a sewer system. They chased him through the sewer system but he was able to get out, get to a vehicle and drive off. He was captured a short time later so in the end, that mission was successful.
COOPER: And as we said, he's awaiting extradition. Martin, thanks very much. Going on trained odd raids like the one we just saw in the video looks like sheer chaos. It's hard to tell exactly what's happening and sometimes to a seasoned further looks a lot difference.
I'm glad we'd be joined right now by former FBI Assistant Director Chris Swecker, also Former Navy Seal, Daniel O'Shea, Former Coordinator for the hostage working group at the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad. He's now vice president of GROM technologies.
Chris, I mean, you spent several years working with FBI working on drug cartel cases. When you see this raid, what do you make of it and the importance that this guy is back in custody and facing extradition?
CHRIS SWECKER, FORMER FBI ASSISTANT DIRECTOR: Well, one -- yeah, sure, one thing is for clear, they were trained by the U.S. special forces,, DELTA or SEALS, or both. They were moving well. They were -- this very sound tactically. You know, what we're looking at in here is a mass murderer and I think a lot of people lose -- I think it's lost when you see actors like Sean Penn sort of becoming cartel groupies. But the El Chapo has killed thousands of people. So, we're not looking at a lovable little drug smurf here. We're looking at a mass murderer.
COOPER: Dan, the video of the raid, I mean, it starts out with the Mexican Special Forces throwing looks like flash bang type grenades. Can you get them walk us through what kind of tactics they're using here?
DANIEL O'SHEA, FORMER NAVY SEAL: Well, you know, as was pointed out, these guys have been -- there's been exchange training with special operations forces around the world. No specificity on who exactly trained the Mexican commandos likely probing ABC or simply put the NAVY component there.
But these guys, they -- the initial -- and I listened to the whole video. The initial -- they actually crashed the door. They had a crash door with a metal barricade to get in through and I took four or five of those before they've been in.
And from the moment, they initiated the raid, you can bet that Guzman was jumping through that rear door, that secure door to get on his way and the enemy themselves, his men behind were trying to do a delaying tactic.
And so, as these guys are moving forward, once they've lost that element of surprise, then they try and gain the upper hand. And that one of those tactics is to throw flash crash into the room before you go in that room because that it's basically a fourth of a stick in dynamite. It's a huge flash, it's a huge explosion. It will disorient you, your vision and your sound and it gives that unit to make penetration into the room as was seen throughout the whole video, a guy orchestrating the whole moment in terms of calling in for extra soldiers, stacking them on each door.
I mean, their moments weren't as choreographed as you would expect that from, you know, some of the topnotch units out there but they did a good job moving systematically room by room clearing the house and as they were going through the house, they were collecting intel.
I mean, at one point, they stopped a woman and were interrogating her saying, "How many people left? how many hombres, how many hombres?" And, you know, ultimately six total was her comment.
So, they try to clear the house, make accountability for everyone. But of course the one hombre they were looking for was Guzman who'd already made his exit out through the sewer systems.
COOPER: Dan, I mean, in a case like this, how quick -- how important is speed, is the clock or is it more important to just be kind of systematic to move systematically to know what you're heading into?
O'SHEA: Well, it's orchestrated violence like a ballet. You have to clear room by room because one, if you leave a room behind or a closet or a door that hasn't been checked or screened, a bad guy can be in it and come in and take you from the rear security.
So, you have this systematically clear every room and units, you know. They clear the house relatively quickly but, you know, at one point, they got caught up in the very initial barrage. You could hear that initial 30, 40 seconds, the enemy, you know, that Guzman's men fired back the heavy volume of fire into that fatal funnel, that fatal funnel being the doorway, the entry.
So of course, wall of led coming out your way is going to stop the train. But ultimately, they gained a higher initiative using flash clashes and then they systematically went through and they had a barricade shield that actually their point man who is going room to room. So, a lot of bravery shown by the Mexican commandos. My hats off to them. They did a good job and from what reports, only one was injured. It's pretty remarkable. The reports are saying five to six of El Chapo's men were killed on site and only one commando wounded which is pretty remarkable.
[20:45:06] So, they did a very good job systematically clearing the house room by room, collecting intel as they went and clearing it from top to bottom. They went from the bottom up to the top floor and they did it in a pretty systematic matter.
COOPER: Chris, I mean, first of all, he's now been sent back to the same prison that he escaped from. I assume different jailers, a lot more, more security while he awaits extradition. Will this really don't make any impact, I mean, as long as there's demand in the U.S., will this make any impact on this cartel, on the other cartels or will someone just try to fill the void?
SWECKER: Someone will probably try to fill the void, although, many of his family members and his chief lieutenants remain and putting him in jail back in the same prison is a little bit surprising. That seems to me to speak volumes about the commitment of the Mexican government to hang on to him.
He knows a lot about official corruption and I'd be very surprised to see him come out of that jail and actually get extradited. So yeah, the cartel will -- they'll be rivals that will come forward. That's what happened over the last few years when they took out other cartel leaders. Young, you know, young bucks will come up and try to fill that void. They'll be more violence within that cartel and between other cartels.
Unfortunately, Mexico has got a real problem here and this is just a small step in the right direction.
COOPER: Chris Swecker, good to have you on, Daniel O'Shea, as well.
Just ahead, the Powerball Jackpot has now grown to over $1 billion, billion with a B. The highest ever. Got a sure far away to win, next. I don't know about that, really. I'm not sure.
[20:50:29] COOPER: All right. So you didn't win the record-breaking jackpot in the Powerball over the weekend. Now we know you didn't because nobody did. So now the pot has grown from the estimated $1.4 billion for Wednesday's drawing.
Now, if you want to be sure to win, here's all you have to do. Spend $584 million on tickets in every possible combination. Now, there's a couple of glitches. You'd only clear a measly $576 million in profit, which won't seem like that much if you're kind of person whose got $584 million to spend on lottery tickets in the first place and even if one other person gets the numbers, you'll end up in the red.
Even more of a buzz kill winning the lottery does not guarantee smooth sailing for the rest of your life. Quite the contrary as Gary Tuchman reports.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GARY TUCHMAN, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: To win huge amounts of money in the lottery you have to be lucky. To keep your life in order after winning that money, you have to be skillful.
This is David Lee Edwards.
DAVID LEE EDWARDS, LOTTERY WINNER: I never have to worry about a hotel room again. What I have to pay for it. I never have to worry about a menu. Yeah. That's amazing.
TUCHMAN: Edwards in his bends soon to be wife Shawna, won one quarter of the Powerball Jackpot. It represented with a $41 million check at the ceremony in Louisville Kentucky in 2001 and received 27 million after taxes.
Edwards had served time in prison and was unemployed.
I interviewed them in their luxury hotel suite after they got the check.
EDWARDS: When I went up there and played that lottery, I was sincere when I asked God to help me because I was desperate. I felt just desperate in my soul, just desperation.
TUCHMAN: They had become very rich very fast. And Edwards told me, he would turn his life around, give money to charity, his children and already had a plan in mind for themselves.
EDWARDS: It's an R series Bentley Rolls Royce convertible.
TUCHMAN: And Shawna, you told me you would get a car too. Tell me about that.
SHAWNA MADDUX, DAVID LEE EDWARDS FIANCE: Well, it's between three actually.
MADDUX: Dodge Viper, Lamborghini or Ferrari. I really haven't decided which one yet.
TUCHMAN: They got the Ferrari and many more cars and a leer jet and mansions. In one year, Edwards said he spent $12 million. He ultimately lost all his money, filed for divorce from Shawna and died in hospice care two years ago.
His story is not unique.
Was this bad judgment or what would you like to say?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It was bad judgment, bad choices.
TUCHMAN: Do you want to say a few words Amanda? The woman not commenting was Amanda Clayton, won $1 million in the Michigan State lottery. She got into legal trouble after continuing to collect welfare benefits. She had said she was entitled to welfare because she still needed help. One year after she won the lottery, Amanda Clayton was found dead in her home from a suspected drug overdose.
JACK WHITTAKER, LOTTERY WINNER: I just want to thank God for letting me pick the right numbers.
TUCHMAN: Jack Whittaker of West Virginia won nearly $315 million in the Powerball in 2002. What was then the largest jackpot ever won by one person in U.S. history. Like so many big winners, he couldn't believe his good luck.
WHITTAKER: Let me see that ticket and I looked at that ticket and sure enough, we had the winner and we were very excited.
TUCHMAN: Less than a year later, he had over $500,000 in cash stolen from his car. Later his granddaughter and daughter died untimely deaths. And a few years back, more of his money was stolen from various branches of the bank where he kept his accounts according to legal complaints against him at the time.