Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

U.S. Okays Spy Flights Over Syria; Attorney Audio Shows Pause During Brown Shooting; Obama in Charlotte to Address American Legion

Aired August 26, 2014 - 10:00   ET

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

NISCHELLE TURNER, CNN ENTERTAINMENT CORRESPONDENT (on camera): And Billy Crystal said Robin Williams had been present in his life for 40 years, so it was so hard for him to even speak words about him last night, but he was poignant, he was classy, and he was heartfelt. And it was a wonderful tribute.

Carol, you brought up so many story lines of the show last night. I understand we'll have a chance to chat about that.

CAROL COSTELLO, CNN ANCHOR: Yes, we will, in just about 50 minutes. Thanks, Nischelle. I'll catch you later. Second hour of NEWSROOM starts now.

Happening now in the NEWSROOM, President Obama green lights American surveillance flights over Syria to gather intel on radical Islamic targets.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It's not an easy task. An aerial recognizance you normally back up with human intelligence that spies on the ground.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COSTELLO: But what comes next?

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOSH EARNEST, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: The president has not made a decision to pursue any sort military action in Syria.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COSTELLO: The White House now weighing air strikes to combat the Islamic state then -- listen closely, a taped cell phone call could hold clues about the last moments of Michael Brown's life. Why 3 seconds might completely change the case, plus --

Plus this is what it looks like when an earthquake hits a winery.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We only have one shot of making wine every year.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COSTELLO: The big question.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KYUNG LAH, CNN CORRESPONDENT: So will this disaster affect the price of your wine?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COSTELLO: Admit it, you are wondering the same thing. Let's talk live in the CNN NEWSROOM.

Good morning. Thank you so much for joining me. I'm Carol Costello. This morning, the White House takes a major step to put ISIS in the cross hairs and possibly nudges the United States closer to new military action against the terrorists.

U.S. officials tell CNN that at any time reconnaissance flights could launch over Syria. That could set up airstrikes against the group that has vowed to kill Americans at home and abroad.

ISIS as you know has already made good on that threat and underscore his reputation for savagery with the beheading of captured American journalist, James Foley.

This morning, there are new questions about that tape including the possibility of a second terrorist depicted in the video. We'll talk about that in a few minutes.

But first the recon flights and the possibility of American airstrikes over Syria. Barbara Starr is at the Pentagon to tell us more. Good morning, Barbara.

BARBARA STARR, CNN PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT: Good morning, Carol. U.S. Officials have indeed those surveillance flights have now been authorized by the president. Question maybe what will trigger the next step. When will airstrikes happen? Will they happen?

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

STARR (voice-over): U.S. reconnaissance flights could begin over Syria at any time, according to U.S. officials using possibly drones, U2 spy planes or F-18s. The Pentagon is drafting options to strike inside Syria.

But the U.S. won't warn the Syrian government, who says carrying out airstrikes without their consent would be a breach of its sovereignty and an act of aggression.

It's unclear, however, how much the president's top military adviser, General Martin Dempsey, supports immediate U.S. military action. A spokesman confirmed Dempsey is preparing options to address ISIS, both in Iraq and Syria, with a variety of military tools, including airstrikes. But the lack of action so far is prompting critics like hawkish Republican Senator Lindsey Graham to charge the White House is trying to minimize the threat we face in order to justify not changing a failed strategy. Before any bombs could fall, the U.S. has to get fresh intelligence.

REAR ADMIRAL JOHN KIRBY, PENTAGON PRESS SECRETARY: We don't talk about reconnaissance and intelligence matters, but in general when you are thinking about conducting operations like that, you certainly want to get as much of a view on the ground as you can.

PETER THEO CURTIS, AMERICAN JOURNALIST: My name is Peter Theo Curtis and I'm a journalist in the city of Boston, Massachusetts.

STARR: The debate comes as American, Peter Theo Curtis, held hostage by the Islamic militant group, Al Nusra for nearly two years in Syria gets his first taste of freedom.

NANCY CURTIS, MOTHER OF THEO CURTIS: He was over-the-top excited. I think obviously he's -- he has to decompress. He's been through so much.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

STARR: And the senior U.S. official tells me if air strikes are ordered by the president, the military goal for the United States will be what you would expect, to disrupt ISIS, to go after their troop formations, their training camps, their leadership areas.

Perhaps the ones closest to the border with Iraq and disrupt their ability to reinforce themselves and keep their control over this wide area of Northern Syria and Iraq that they now have -- Camera.

COSTELLO: All right, Barbara Starr, reporting live from the Pentagon this morning. So how valuable would that surveillance be in targeting ISIS forces? You heard the problems. Barbara Starr out lined them expertly for us.

But let's talk about this some more with Mike Baker. He is a former CIA covert operations officer. He's now president of Diligent LLC, a global intelligence and security firm. He joins us now from Boise, Idaho. Good morning, Mike.

MIKE BAKER, FORMER CIA COVERT OPERATIONS OFFICER: Good morning, thank you.

COSTELLO: So these American reconnaissance flights, these spy planes flying over Syria, what specifically will they look for?

BAKER: Well, you've got to put together target packages. You've got to have, specific details, not just a general idea of how you are going to -- what you are going to when and where you are going to attack.

Specific sites, and you know, we've got an array of options in terms of how we would conduct these strikes, but at the very front end of it, you've got to have information that allows you to pick and choose which ones with specificity.

So the unmanned or manned surveillance that we're talking about now over Syria and this all started in Syria quite some time ago, ISIS has been very busy consolidating their territory, they own a province in Northern Syria.

They are moving into Aleppo in that area. Obviously along the border in Iraq, they moved right through there, as they put their boots on the ground in Iraq. So this is a very important move. My concern is that air strikes alone are not going to handle this problem.

COSTELLO: Well, the big problem at least from my perspective and you know more than I do obviously, is that ISIS has moved into Iraq, for example. They have taken over a town. They are integrated with Syrian citizens, innocent civilians, so how do you target your air strikes?

BAKER: Well, it's a great question and it's not a town again. It's an entire province. So you're right. It's not just one city or one town. It's many, many areas.

And they have proven they are very good at adapting. Once we started the air strikes, they adjusted their tactics, they blended in with the local population. It makes it very difficult to do surgical strikes and not have the risk of civilian casualty.

That's going to happen. Somebody, whether it's us or our allies, somebody has to put boots on the ground in Syria and Iraq if we're going to take care of this problem.

If we're all we're talking about is containing ISIS and we're willing to allow an extremist Islamic state to exist then fine then that's what we have to deal with. If we want to defeat the problem, then we're going to have to a very aggressive effort that's going to include boots on the ground.

I'm sure the administration is hopeful that somehow they are going to be able to convince the Turkish military, the Jordanians, whoever, get out there and take the lead in an allied force that will do this.

COSTELLO: But let's talk about boots on the ground for just a second. The president has said absolutely not. In order to do that, you would have to sort of talk with Bashar al-Assad, the Syrian president, who the United States accused of using chemical weapons on its own people. He's not exactly our best friend. Can the United States effectively fight ISIS without somehow getting involved with Mr. Assad.

BAKER: You've raised one of the most intriguing and complex issues we've got at this point. How do we do this? How do we target ISIS within Syrian borders? Again that border with Iraq is broken down.

We can cross back and forth along that border area with some guarantee that we're not going to worry about Syrian air defense as an example and thanks to Vladimir Putin, the Syrian military has a very robust air defense system that they have had for years. This plays right into Assad's ever since the civil war in Syria started, Assad has been painting it as a contest with terrorists. When he talks about ISIS, he's right in some regard, but there is likely very little chance.

That this White House is going to do a complete left turn and decide that they are going to work somehow with Assad in combating ISIS. It may be a pragmatic choice in the sense if your objective is to defeat ISIS, but it's not really realistic given our history with Assad and everything that he's done.

We should be sitting down with the Turkish military and government and say you understand how serious this threat is to you and the Jordanians and others, you better pull yourself together, gets your boots on the ground and solve this problem.

I don't know whether that's something we're capable of doing right now because we've had a situation over the past few years, where we've been losing leverage and influence in that region.

COSTELLO: I know. Like I said, it's a tall order. Mike Baker, thanks so much for your insight. I appreciate it.

Now let's shift our focus a little to the ISIS video that captures the moments before and after American James Foley is beheaded. In an odd twist, there is a growing suspicion that the masked terrorist shown, the man with the British accent is not actually the person who killed Foley.

U.S. and British analysts are poring over every detail and possible clue. CNN's Nick Paton Walsh is in London to breakdown three haunting inconsistencies. Tell us about them, Nick.

NICK PATON WALSH, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, Carol, that video really is the strongest set of clues that investigators have to try and work out who abducted and ultimately murdered Jim Foley in cold blood.

But there are some things that forensic experts point out in that video that make that job a little hard he -- harder. The first one if you look at the man who is delivering the speech in the English accent.

He is physically different to the man on the right who ultimately seems to carry out the beheading. That makes some people think that perhaps there was a change in character during that video and there was a clear edit in the video, a fade to black be between the speech and the actual apparent execution.

COSTELLO: Fascinating. Analysts are focusing on the knife too, right?

WALSH: True. If you look at the knife in the hand of the man who is delivering that English accented lecture, it was very different to a knife that was sadly discarded next to the body of the deceased toward the end of the video. Again, making some think that different individuals were involved or there's some changes in circumstances between the speech and the actual killing -- Carol.

COSTELLO: The third inconsistency involves the holster. Tells us about that.

WALSH: If you look at the man delivering the speech, if he's dressing how he normally might have done, the gun is holstered for access by his right hand to reach across the chest. If you look though at the man who does the execution, he appears to prefer to use his left hand.

Now there could be many explanations for that or it could be different people. But a key point one analyst made to me was the man capable of giving the speech in English with that English accent.

Does he also potentially have the experience and I'm afraid the will power too to carry out such a gruesome execution as the one we ultimately saw? All these questions very tough sadly for the family of James Foley to hear. Essential things investigators must be asking themselves as they pour over that video -- Carol.

COSTELLO: Nick Paton Walsh, many thanks to you. I appreciate it.

Still to come in the NEWSROOM, startling new audio allegedly tied to the shooting of Michael Brown. Why one forensic experts say it could challenge the credibility of Officer Darren Wilson.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COSTELLO: New audio has emerged in the shooting death of Michael Brown. It appears to starkly illustrate exactly how many times Officer Darren Wilson shot at Brown as he ran from that police cruiser.

What you are about to hear is audio recorded in a nearby home while a man was talking to a friend on a video chat service. You'll hear that man's voice in the background. You'll also hear the gun shots. Listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You are pretty. You are so fine. Just going on. How could I forget?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COSTELLO: All right. The FBI has questioned this man that you heard in the recording, but CNN has not independently verified the authenticity of this tape. Let's talk about it. CNN legal analyst, Joey Jackson, joins me now. Welcome, Joey.

JOEY JACKSON, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Good morning, Carol.

COSTELLO: So we had this forensic expert analyze the tape and apparently he heard ten gunshots in 9 seconds. What does that tell you if anything about the shooting?

JACKSON: Well, listen, it could be spun different ways, Carol. So let's start here, right? When the grand jury examines this, it's going to come down whether it was necessary and necessary in order for Darren Wilson to take these steps against Michael Brown?

You have to assess the threat, what was the immediacy of the threat, and what's the proportionality of the threat. The prosecution will spin it one way. They will say it was excessive, overkill. Certainly in the sense you are firing against someone who is unarmed.

The defense will say it was necessary and proper and appropriate for Darren Wilson to discharge his firearm. Why? Because Michael Brown although unarmed was coming towards him. You have to analyze this, Carol, in conjunction with all the other evidence.

COSTELLO: Everybody says there's a little gap after six shots and four more shots. Everyone says that gap is the most important thing you hear in this tape.

JACKSON: It's an important thing perhaps not the most important thing. It's all important because you are going to look at the amount of the shots and why was it necessary to fire all those shots.

With regard to the force, Carol, why was that necessary and what was happening during this pause? Was it a pause wherein Michael Brown was going down to the ground such that it would be excessive and criminal to continue to shoot or was it a pause where Michael Brown was advancing towards him.

So the intent of the officer at the time, whether there was an immediacy of the threat at the time all of that is going to play huge and ultimately again it has to be evaluated in terms of the other evidence.

What do the eyewitnesses and forensic say and what does that say about the reasonableness or unreasonableness of Darren Wilson's actions at that time he fired that gun and killed Michael Brown.

COSTELLO: Something I learned from listening to the Trayvon Martin case that sometimes evidence like this only confuses things further.

JACKSON: You know, there's a lot of evidence. There's a lot to sift through and there are always varying perspectives and obviously the prosecution has their perspectives and they could use this towards intent and motivation and ill intent as a result.

And get a, you know, perhaps murder indictment and conviction. At the same time, the defense could say he was really in fear for his life. He had no other alternative. Darren Wilson that's why he discharged the firearm.

We'll see what the grand jury says and if there's an indictment, we'll see what that jury says.

COSTELLO: Yes. Hopefully by October, right?

JACKSON: Indeed.

COSTELLO: Indeed. Joey Jackson, thanks so much.

Still to come in the NEWSROOM, an inspector general's report finds no conclusive link between deaths in a VA hospital and delays in care. What you say? Well, we said that too.

CNN's Drew Griffin is following the latest developments for us. Hi, Drew.

DREW GRIFFIN, CNN SENIOR INVESTIGATIVE CORRESPONDENT: Hi, Carol. The president expected to speak here in Charlotte, telling the nation's veterans to expect better treatment, but haven't they heard that before? I'll be back with a live report in Charlotte.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COSTELLO: President Obama is on his way to Charlotte, North Carolina, to speak before the American Legion National Convention, but as the president prepares to address the veterans group, we're learning new details about the investigation into the crisis over VA Health Care.

An inspector general's report found no deaths of veterans at the phoenix hospital could be conclusively linked to delays in care there. CNN who reported on appointment delays and veterans deaths and joins us from charlotte. Does this make sense to you, Drew?

GRIFFIN: You know, what is being leaked are the VA's comments about an inspector general's report that we have not seen yet. Congress will be briefed on that report later this afternoon. So we don't know the details and the devil is in the details.

But whistle blowers we've talked to who have provided evidence to the VA are calling this a whitewash. The Concerned Veterans of America are very much stunned by the comments that were released this morning.

It could be that they just could not find a definitive cause relationship between a wait, a sick veteran waiting for care and a person who passed away, whether or not that care actually caused his death.

We'll have to see what that report says, but many, many people are already skeptical about these leaks that have come out of the V.A. apparently this morning.

COSTELLO: OK. I can understand why. So what exactly is President Obama expected to announce today?

GRIFFIN: Well, the president is coming to Charlotte, to the American Legion, speaking to all these veterans. He's going to announce better access to health care. He already has that $17 billion bill that he signed into law, which provides emergency funding, more doctors, et cetera.

He's also going to announce some executive actions, which are going to target homelessness among the vets, mental health access, trying to handle all these veterans, who are in crisis to try to figure out how we can better care for these veterans. Of course, they have heard it all before. Candidate Obama promised this back in 2007, so I must tell you there's a great deal of skepticism, but he is coming to announce major programs and he does have $17 billion in his back pocket that could alleviate some of the waitlines and the pressures on some of these veterans seeking care.

COSTELLO: All right, Drew Griffin reporting live for us this morning. Still to come in the NEWSROOM, Napa's wine industry shaken by Sunday's earthquake. So will the price of wine be going up? We'll talk about that next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)