Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

U.K. Raises Terror Threat Level Over ISIS; Tony Stewart Breaks His Silence; Joan Rivers' Condition "Remains Serious"; Obama: "No Strategy" On ISIS In Syria; NFL's Tough New Domestic Violence Penalties

Aired August 30, 2014 - 12:00   ET

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

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Why?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Because you're Johnny football.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

FREDRICKA WHITFIELD, CNN ANCHOR: All right, well, that commercial has received more than 700,000 views on YouTube already and those are our viral video of the week. Hope we made you laugh a little bit. We've got so much more straight ahead in the NEWSROOM and it all starts right now.

All right, happy Labor Day weekend, everyone. I'm Fredricka Whitfield. Welcome back to the CNN NEWSROOM. Here are the stories that we're following right now for you.

The first lawsuit has been filed against authorities in Ferguson, Missouri. But it isn't directly over Michael Brown's death.

And race car driver, Tony Stewart, back on track. He's breaking his silence three weeks after being involved in a deadly accident on the dirt track. His emotional words straight ahead.

Plus, comedian, Joan Rivers, in serious condition after suffering cardiac arrest. Her daughter, Melissa, giving new details on her mother's condition.

All right, we'll get to those stories in a moment, but first, the growing concern over Russia's actions in Ukraine. European leaders described the situation as dramatic, serious and possibly heading to a point of no return.

Here's what happening on the ground right now. A British government source tells CNN between 4,000 and 5,000 troops are now engaged in battles in Eastern Ukraine. The British source says 20,000 additional troops are on the border.

European Union leaders are meeting in Belgium right now to discuss the situation. Their response could include new sanctions on Moscow. The European Commission president says he has spoken directly to Russian President Vladimir Putin. And urged him to quote, "change course," but Putin's rhetoric is getting even more defiant. During an appearance at a youth forum, Putin called Russia a powerful nuclear nation that shouldn't be messed with.

So, how will the U.S. respond to the latest provocations? Our Erin McPike joins us now from the White House. So Erin what is the White House saying about Russia's decision to send as many as 5,000 troops into Ukraine?

ERIN MCPIKE, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Fredricka, the White House is reacting quite harshly and President Obama addressed this in his news conference on Thursday, hinting that there may be more to come from the United States. Listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: Putin and Russia have repeatedly passed by potential off ramps to resolve this diplomatically. And so, in our consultations with the, our European allies and partners, my expectation is that we will take additional steps, primarily because we have not seen any meaningful action on the part of Russia to actually try to resolve in diplomatic fashion.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MCPIKE: Sanctions are not stopping Putin, however, the Obama administration does maintain that they're taking a serious financial toll on Russia -- Fred.

WHITFIELD: And so, are White House officials revealing anything about how they might resolve this crisis, even diplomatically?

MCPIKE: Well, this is a big item on the agenda for the NATO Summit that's going to start next week in Wales. President Obama is traveling there as well as Secretary of State John Kerry and Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel and one of the big sessions is going to be how to curtail Russia's eastward march.

They want to make sure and send a big message to Russia to not do any of this provocation into the Baltic countries of Latvia, Estonia and Lithuania. Now, on top of that, President Obama will be traveling to Estonia after the NATO Summit.

But the big thing that we may see come out of the NATO Summit is that NATO is looking to send more troops and equipment to some of their eastern European bases to send a bigger message to make Russia now.

They have to make sure that they don't violate a treaty with Russia. That's why we'll be seeing some movement, but not a permanent presence -- Fred.

WHITFIELD: All right, Erin McPike, thanks so much at the White House.

All right, two GOP senators have a message for President Obama. In today's "New York Times," Senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham say the ISIS threat is growing and they accused the administration of quote/unquote, "dithering" and say ISIS must be confronted militarily.

President Obama plans to send Secretary of State John Kerry to the Middle East following next week's NATO Summit to drum up support for an international coalition against ISIS. Also, in today's "New York Times," Secretary of State Kerry wrote his own op-ed.

And he says he's calling ISIS a cancer, which must be stamped out. U.S. ally Britain meanwhile is ramping up its terror threat level to severe in response to ISIS. And that level means a terror attack is highly likely, although not imminent.

Let's go to London now where CNN's Atika Shubert is live for us. So Atika, for now the U.S. plans no changes to the terror threat in this country. Homeland security says it's unaware of any specific credible threat from ISIS in the U.S.

But quite the difference in terms of a response there in the U.K. Do people feel that in their everyday lives or what is their point of view on what Cameron had to say recently?

ATIKA SHUBERT, CNN CORRESPONDENT: It's not affecting their everyday lives. As you can see, I'm near Oxford Street, this is one of the main shopping areas. People are just going about their business, sitting outside in the cafes and pubs.

So they are not letting it affect their daily lives and you have to remember this is a place where they've seen the terror threat rise and fall, and so this is something they've taken in stride.

Having said that, there is extra security, especially around train stations and airports. Even yesterday when I was coming into London at the train station, I saw a number of police there with sniffer dogs, for example. You know, not armed, but just basically putting out a greater security presence. So that is what's happening on the streets here.

WHITFIELD: So, British Prime Minister David Cameron, he plans to talk some more on this. He's going to be addressing parliament on Monday. Is there any feeling how his message might be you know, further expounded on? What do we think he might be saying?

SHUBERT: Well, what he's clearly going to be doing is laying the groundwork for possibly new legislation, new anti-terror measures. There's been a lot of discussion ever since that video of the murder of James Foley came out and that militant in that video has a very distinct British accent.

There's been a lot of discussion about how to prevent British fighters in entering Syria. There's about 500 that have gone. How to prevent -- and then when they come back, how to make sure to keep an eye on them so that no other -- they don't use their violence here, but also, how to prevent extremism here.

So, what he'll be talking about is legislation to do that. To take away passports, to put people in jail if they come back, for example, but also how to control those who are committing an extremist message, preachers for example, will they be put under house arrest? Will they be monitored? These are all things will be discussed on Monday.

WHITFIELD: All right, Atika Shubert, thank you so much there in London.

All right, straight ahead, we'll get an update on comedian, Joan Rivers' condition after she was rushed to the hospital in New York suffering from cardiac arrest. We'll tell you what her daughter is saying today.

And for the first time since his fatal accident, we'll hear from race driver, Tony Stewart. He's back on the track this weekend.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

WHITFIELD: Big holiday weekend and that means a tradition in Atlanta at the motor speedway. Big race car weekend and in fact, race car driver, Tony Stewart is returning to that very track and he's breaking his silence along the way.

Three weeks after being involved in a deadly accident during a dirt track race. It was a pretty emotional moment. I think everyone agrees on that. Rashan Ali has more on what was said. We're now into this afternoon's "Bleacher Report." He's going to be on the track tomorrow, though, but he broke the silence yesterday.

RASHAN ALI, CNN CORRESPONDENT: He did and I think this could be part of his healing process to get back on the track. After sitting out three races, the three-time NASCAR champion will return to the track tomorrow. It will be Tony Stewart's first race since the tragic incident that killed a fellow driver.

Stewart hit and killed Kevin Ward Jr. during a dirt track race in upstate New York back on August, the 9th. Tomorrow night, he will race again in the NASCAR Sprint Cup series at the Atlanta Motor Speedway.

Yesterday, Stewart delivered a tearful statement for the first time since the deadly accident.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TONY STEWART, NASCAR DRIVER: This is something that will de definitely affect my life forever. This is a sadness and a pain that I hope no one ever has to experience in their life. That being said, I know that the pain and the mourning that Kevin Ward's family and friends are experiencing is something that I can't possibly imagine.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ALI: NASCAR released a statement saying Stewart was cleared to return to all racing activities. After Ward's death, NASCAR is requiring drivers not to exit their cars while stopped in the track unless they face fire in the cockpit or other imminent danger.

Now, the investigation into Ward's death is still ongoing, but detectives say they do not have any evidence to support criminal intent. Tony Stewart does not face any charges. That's where we are now.

WHITFIELD: Yes. So, Tony Stewart really revealing a lot by showing emotionally how this has impacted him. He reached out, of course, to Ward's family, but at the same time, are there critics within the circles of NASCAR racing who were saying it's too soon for him to race or is this perfectly. What is the reaction, I guess?

ALI: I think that people have been giving him a lot of support. If there are critics, they've been very, very silent. I think NASCAR's kind of standing together as a family, especially the Stewart house family with Danica Patrick and so many other racers.

That they're really trying to just kind of forge for him and forger together and support him in this so we shall see. But let's not take away from Kevin Ward's family. They lost a 20-year-old son.

And the fact that he did reach out to them, I'm not sure if he's spoken to them. I know he's sent flowers and a card, but to probably talk to the person responsible for the death of your son, that's going to be hard.

WHITFIELD: Well, it is a big tradition, this race, and for him to make that comeback at this race, you know, really I think will be embraced by the fan base. I know my son and husband are going to be out there. Speaking of family tradition.

But any way, speedway, it's going to be an incredible weekend on the track. Meantime, it's an incredible weekend, too, as we say good-bye to summer, hello to fall with football. You're into it.

ALI: I love it. It's a great time of year for college football. We got UGA taking on Clemson. Also, Wisconsin and LSU, a big ten against the SEC. That's a great match-up there.

West Virginia and Alabama, huge match-up there. Just because you know, SEC, everybody -- you know, me personally, I love SEC football. It's just fantastic. Then tonight, Oklahoma State takes on Florida State. They have the Heisman Trophy winner in Jameis Winston. We shall see, he claims he's better than he was last year. We shall see.

WHITFIELD: You're supposed to talk like that.

ALI: Of course.

WHITFIELD: You're supposed to say I'm all that and a bag of chips and bring it on. What are you supposed to say? I'm not ready? We don't want to hear that. Certainly not a Heisman Trophy. No, no, you've got to be confident.

ALI: You got to be big, bold and brass.

WHITFIELD: Absolutely. OK, Rashan, thanks so much. You're making me excited about college ball.

ALI: You should be.

WHITFIELD: I never am.

ALI: Come on!

WHITFIELD: I'm sorry. I love sports, but I didn't go to a university that was huge on football.

ALI: Yes.

WHITFIELD: It was more of the social end of football. I was into that.

ALI: So, you liked to go to the tailgating, but wouldn't walk into the game.

WHITFIELD: I did, but I really wasn't watching the game. True story. That's the way it is, but maybe you'll get me hooked. All right, Rashan, thanks so much.

ALI: Appreciate it.

WHITFIELD: Still ahead, the latest on the condition of comedian, Joan Rivers. We have a reporter outside the hospital where Rivers' daughter is keeping us updated.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

WHITFIELD: We're closely monitoring the condition of comedian, Joan Rivers. The comedian remains hospitalized in serious condition this morning. The 81-year-old Rivers stopped breathing during throat surgery at a clinic on Thursday.

And CNN's Alexandra Field is now at Mt. Sinai Hospital in New York where her daughter, Melissa, has been updated you and everybody else. So what is the latest?

ALEXANDRA FIELD, CNN CORRESPONDENT: She came here -- Joan Rivers came here in critical condition. We were told that she was critical but stable. And Melissa Rivers has been communicating. There are a lot of fans who were out there wanting to know the latest and we've got a statement from her.

I'm going to read it for you. She says quote, "My mother would be so touched by the tributes and prayers that we have received from around the world. Her condition remains serious, but she is receiving the best treatment and care possible. We ask that you continue to keep her in your thoughts as we pray for her recovery."

And Fredricka, earlier this week, Melissa put out another statement saying that her mother was resting comfortably. Now Joan Rivers is a lifelong New Yorker. She was at a nearby clinic having a throat procedure done when she went into cardiac and respiratory arrest and was rushed to Mt. Sinai Hospital.

Melissa Rivers, her daughter, lives in Los Angeles. Melissa and Melissa's young son, both came across the country right away to be at Joan Rivers' side and they have been continuing to give updates for fans really around the world, who have been hoping for the best and hoping for some news of signs of a recovery from Joan.

WHITFIELD: And so Alexandra, were there other people or have there been other people who have been visiting her or strictly the grandson and Melissa who had access?

FIELD: Well, it's been kept a pretty private sort of family matter. We did see on the first night that Joan was in the hospital, black SUV come up. We believe that Melissa and her grandson were in there. They were escorted into the hospital.

They've been sort of kept out of the glare of the media spotlight. There have been a lot of cameras that have been camped out here over the last couple of days. People are really sort of freely expressing themselves.

Some going to Twitter, getting online and just sending out their thoughts and prayers. A lot of statements from a lot of celebrities, who have also been sort of sending their best to Joan along with her fans, who really are of all ages now.

Because Fred, you know that Joan has been a leading female comedian for many decades, getting her start with Johnny Carson, and doing the red carpet show, moving on to "Fashion Police," which she's just known, you know, sort of by the generations now.

She's got fans of all ages who has been admiring and following her work for a long time. She performed here in New York City on Wednesday night, just hours before she had that procedure, which ended up sending her here -- Fred.

WHITFIELD: Indeed, the trail blazer, I described her as such during my interview with her. Everyone knows and loves her worldwide, so I know her fans support people have been sending all kinds of messages to her in the course of the last few days. Alexandra Field, keep us posted. Appreciate that.

All right, the U.K. raising its terror alert level, but is the threat to the U.S. homeland just as severe and how will it influence President Obama's strategy?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

WHITFIELD: There are renewed concerns today about a terror attack in the U.K. with ISIS and other militant groups threating the west. The British government is raising its terror alert to severe.

It means an attack may not be imminent, but it is believed it's highly likely. Here in the U.S., President Barack Obama caused a bit of a stir this week with his comments on dealing with ISIS in Syria.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PRESIDENT OBAMA: I don't want to put the cart before the horse. We don't have a strategy yet. I think what I've seen in some of the news reports suggests that folks are getting a little further ahead of where we're at than we currently are. (END VIDEO CLIP)

WHITFIELD: All right, Josh Rogin is a CNN political analyst and senior national security correspondent for "The Daily Beast." So, the president's comments opened the door for Republican criticism.

But in reality, should the president be taken literally for his words, we don't have a strategy yet or was it just that perhaps he doesn't want to reveal it publicly?

JOSH ROGIN, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: They say in Washington, a gaffe is when you accidentally tell the truth and I think that's a little bit of what's going on here.

The White House was very quick to clarify after the president's press conference that he wasn't saying we don't have a strategy for ISIS at all, he was saying we don't have a strategy for ISIS in Syria.

As we know, the administration has been bombing ISIS targets in Iraq for a few weeks now. That's had some moderate success, but ISIS lives in Syria. That's where they have 10,000 soldiers, two cities, a bunch of oil refineries.

A lot of American-made weapons that they stole from Iraq and it's true that we don't have a strategy to deal with that. That's just the president being honest about where they are. That's a problem. Now, the Republican --

WHITFIELD: How big a problem in your view?

ROGIN: Well, you know, it's a huge problem for the people of Syria. It's a smaller problem for the people of the U.S. after the British raised their alert that Department of Homeland Security is very quick to say we don't have any specific intelligence that says these Jihadis in Syria are going to attack America.

But eventually, that's going to be the case. Eventually, that's what they aspire to. So, it's not an immediate threat to the U.S., but on the other hand after the killing of James Foley, about a week ago, very senior U.S. officials including Chuck Hagel, John Kerry, who said that we have no choice.

We have to destroy ISIS. That means in both countries in Iraq and Syria. The president passed two national security teams to come up with option for bombing Syria --

WHITFIELD: That's what really kind of raise the stakes, isn't it? The killing of James Foley. That made the administration, if they had been considering it, maybe was not brought to the front burner about coming up with a strategy and idea of how to eliminate if not try to I guess cripple ISIS.

ROGIN: Exactly. We all know that the American people are war weary and don't want to go war in Syria. There was a call for the administration to do something and administration officials talked very tough. And so that led a lot of people both inside and outside the administration to believe that we were about to do something in Syria and the president sort of tapped the brakes on that.

Said we may do something in Syria, haven't decided yet. That cautious is arguable. That's fine. The Republican criticism is partially because they see a situation in Syria that has gotten worse and they blame the president for not doing more to prevent us from getting to this point.

I think as we look forward, there's going to be a huge debate over whether or not attacking ISIS inside Syria is really going to make the problem better or worse. There are a lot of people inside the administration who say it would make it better.

There are some say it would make it worse. There's only one vote that matters, the president. He gets to decide and he hasn't yet, so everyone both in Iraq and Syria and the United States and in Britain are waiting to see what President Obama wants to do.

WHITFIELD: In order to look forward when we reflect on how this administration has not acted on Syria for a number of reasons. It's been unclear who or what makes up the opposition so the administration wasn't sure who it would be empowering.

And also, made it unclear, Assad may ultimately be empowered by the U.S. getting engaged. So, now, as we look forward, are all of those potential risks still relevant?

WHITFIELD: Right. I think they are. We're doing here is balancing the risks of action versus the risks of inaction because when you don't decide, that's a decision. That has consequences. The White House has believed we don't have a partner in Syria. That the moderate Syrian rebels just can't be trusted and we can't

work with them on this problem. There are a lot of people in the State Department, for example, who disagree with that.

The bottom line here is that as this threat gets worse and worse in Syria, the risks of inaction will rise and the risks of action will lessen, so the president eventually is going to have to get to the point where he does something in Syria. Because eventually, we're going to be in the same place as Great Britain --

WHITFIELD: So you do think it's imminent that this administration would have to do something. And you're saying militarily or you're saying that includes diplomatic measures.

ROGIN: It has to be both. It has to be both, militarily, diplomatically, politically. Right now, we're not seeing a lot of anything. There is no political process in Syria. There is a diplomatic process that's not working and there is no military process in Syria.

So it's going to have to be all of these things. The question is, how long can we wait? President Obama wants to take his time and make sure he makes a very educated and studied decision. That's fine. We want the president to think this through before he attacks another country. But if you, it's a race against time and ISIS is not waiting. ISIS is expanding. They're committing atrocities and they are preparing to hit us.

So whether or not those preparations come to fruition today, next week, next month, eventually, we're going to have to confront that. What a lot of people are saying is President Obama has run out of time.

We'll have to see how long it takes him to come up with a strategy and what that strategy is we're all standing by.

WHITFIELD: Interesting. Josh Rogin, thanks so much. Always good to see you. Appreciate it.

ROGIN: Likewise.

WHITFIELD: All right, next, our legal guys are here to talk about the first lawsuit in Ferguson, Missouri. But this one is not directly related to the death of Michael Brown.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

WHITFIELD: All right, five people were arrested during the protests in Ferguson, Missouri have filed a $40 million lawsuit against police. The suit alleges police used excessive force and made unnecessary arrests during the protests in the days after Michael Brown was shot and killed by an officer.

The lawsuit lists Ferguson Police Chief Thomas Jackson, St. Louis County Chief John Belmar and several unnamed officers. Also listed as defendants are the city and county governments.

One plaintiff says she was arrested with her 17-year-old son while in a McDonald's. Another says he was just trying to visit his mother when he was shot with rubber bullets and beaten by police.

This suit was not filed by Michael Brown's family. Just protesters who were arrested after the shooting. Let's bring in our legal guys, Avery Friedman, a civil rights attorney and law professor in Cleveland. Good to see you.

AVERY FRIEDMAN, CIVIL RIGHTS ATTORNEY: Hi, Fredricka.

WHITFIELD: And New York criminal defense attorney, Richard Herman, and law professor, joining us from this time Los Angeles. All over the place, you guys. Good to see you.

RICHARD HERMAN, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Been a long time, Fred.

WHITFIELD: I feel like it's been way, way too long.

FRIEDMAN: Way too long.

WHITFIELD: We got to stop that. OK, Avery, you first on this. Does this lawsuit kind of meet the standards of a successful federal suit?

FRIEDMAN: Well, barely. There was such a rush to get this case filed that the lawyers for the plaintiffs in my opinion, missed all the major claims under the constitution, missed them all.

WHITFIELD: Like what?

FRIEDMAN: Missed the first amendment claim, missed the due process claim. It's not in there. The case was rushed to federal district court and on top of it, the civil plaintiffs are all criminal defendants and ordinarily, in federal civil rights practice, you get the criminal case out of the way, then you file it.

So given the sobriety and the seriousness of what went on in Ferguson, it was right the file the case, but the lawyers have a lot of work to do in cleaning the mess up that they got filed and they have a right to amend. They need like the NAACP or ACLU backing them up and get some responsible experience lawyers in there.

WHITFIELD: So then, Richard, if you agree with that, is it too late to amend? Does it make it messy to amend or even incorporate other attorneys at this point?

HERMAN: It's not too late, Fred, and messiness is not a legal term here.

WHITFIELD: The non-legal mind here.

HERMAN: I like your term. You know, I looked at the complaint, studied it, and my opinion I think a couple of causes of action are going to be dismissed. Avery makes a point that these are going to be criminal defendants.

That means that their Fifth Amendment rights are down the drain. They're going to be deposed in a civil case. It's going lay the foundation for criminal convictions for them and anybody can file a complaint. You get an index number, make all the allegations you want.

WHITFIELD: And you're saying they are criminal defendants because they were arrested, apprehended, and even though this lawsuit is claiming they were, it was a mistake that they were apprehended.

That they were innocent. They still have the charges imposed against them. So it makes it very difficult to move forward to involve them in this now federal case. Back to the non-legal speak. That's me talking.

FRIEDMAN: One of the plaintiffs said she was at McDonald's and she was arrested for failure to disperse and she has an $11 million lawsuit. And actually, isn't a particularly responsible way of bringing a very serious civil rights case, Fredricka. You don't do it that way.

HERMAN: If you read the complaint, it's like, you know, these are near riot conditions going on and people are taking a lovely stroll down the street and all of a sudden, they're told to move and they ask why and they get arrested, get shot with rubber bullets.

The facts are going to be severely different than what's alleged in the complaint here, I think. But I think some of the causes of action will immediately be dismissed.

WHITFIELD: Isn't it the case in many jurisdictions, it's nearly impossible to sue a city. In this case, the suit is being imposed against the city. The city leaders and county leaders, does that already create an obstacle? Avery, for any lawsuit?

Even if it was spelled out as you put it, you know, where there were real constitutional rights that were violated here. Aside from that, does it make it nearly impossible to sue a state or city or local government?

FRIEDMAN: Well, in terms of punitive damage claims, the U.S. Supreme Court said in 1981, that's 33 years ago, that you can't give punitive damages off the city of Ferguson or St. Louis County.

The lawsuit asked for that. So, in respect to the viability of the claim, that goes right out the window and the answer to your question is absolutely. Because of the new board of facts decision in 1981, it makes it very difficult to recover substantial damages off of municipalities.

WHITFIELD: All right, last word --

HERMAN: Fred, as a general rule, there is sovereign immunity. However, there are so many exceptions to this role and there's a flood of litigation against municipalities and cities and states. There is a lot of litigation in this area, Fred. They could be found liable. They could get hit for substantial damages here. Will it happen? We'll see how this thing unfolds.

WHITFIELD: You know it's been a while since we've had a chance to talk, that's why we're not going to let you go just yet. We have got another case to tackle with you all. This involving the NFL as football season gets underway. We'll talk about that right after this.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

WHITFIELD: The NFL is getting very tough on its employees who were involved in domestic violence incidents. It comes after Ravens running back, Ray Rice, was suspended just two games after he was seen dragging his unconscious wife out of a hotel elevator. Fiance at the time, now wife.

The league was criticized after other players got longer suspensions for drug violations and something you don't see often, NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell said Rice should have gotten a longer suspension.

Saying this, quote, "I didn't get it right, simply put. We have to do better and we will," end quote. So, the league announced a new policy. A first offense will get a six-game suspension. A second could mean a lifetime ban. The program is not just for players.

All employees will be subject to the new policies. Our legal guys are back. Avery Friedman in Cleveland and Richard Herman in Los Angeles. All right, Richard, let me begin with you. Really tougher penalty here, but even people would argue that, whether this is enough. How compelling is this new policy?

HERMAN: Well, let's just step back and think about what we're talking about here. That the NFL has to impose this type of stuff for domestic violence. I mean, where are we as a society here, as a football league? It's just unbelievable.

But having said that, it's a step and you have to compliment Goodell because he made a mistake. Everybody blasted him. We all blasted him for how light he was on Ray Rice. So he acknowledged he made a mistake. He is trying to rectify it.

He is trying to make things better. You know, in the end, it's the criminal justice system that should take over and take the lead ere, not the NFL and Ray Rice got a slap on the wrist by the criminal justice system.

If they get convicted as a felony conviction in court, that will destroy them in the NFL. So, you know, Goodell, it's great, it's a nice message, he's mending his ways. We have to compliment him on that, but again, the criminal justice system has to take the lead here.

WHITFIELD: At the same time, while you say the criminal justice system has the take the lead, isn't it the reasonability of the league, this company, to also impose I guess tougher restrictions on the behavior of its employees, but do you see the two going hand in hand?

HERMAN: I don't know the due process that's involved when you sign these contracts because they have these morals clauses. There is no due process in the NFL. So you could have harsh decisions without even having proper due process. I'm not so sure. It's a nice statement, a nice message to send here. I just think the court system has to be the responsible party here.

WHITFIELD: Avery?

FRIEDMAN: No, Fredricka, the idea that the NFL did absolutely nothing and gave a guy who literally hit his girlfriend so hard he knocked her out, knocked her out. Roger Goodell says two games suspension and said you know, I might have screwed this up.

So if you engage in a misdemeanor sexual assault or first degree rape, it's six games. How about if you engage in sexual assault, you don't get to play professional football. I don't think, I think he tried to split the baby is what he did and it's inadequate.

It's a wrong. It's a step in the right direction, but I don't congratulate the commissioner. I think the NFL's got a long way to go in punishing sexual assaults. This is not adequate. WHITFIELD: Richard, you were inferring. There is an acknowledgment. The NFL is acknowledging that this is a problem and this is a thing that some of our players are engaged in and so, based on that, we now have to come up with a policy on, I mean not trying to stamp it out or not trying to say this is completely you know, unacceptable.

But now let's figure out a way that we can all work together knowing this is a problem that some people might engage in. Is that ultimately what the interpretation becomes?

HERMAN: I don't know, Fred. Is it epidemic proportions? Is it a problem? Does it preface throughout the NFL? I don't know. I haven't read a lot of articles about domestic violence by NFL players, so if it happens once or twice or three or four times, you're going to impose insane regulations against all these players here?

FRIEDMAN: Yes, absolutely.

HERMAN: Where's the validity of the complaint? How do you verify the truthfulness and accuracy of an allegation here in the NFL? That's all I'm saying. At least the court system provides that foundation.

WHITFIELD: So then, Avery, why wouldn't -- zero tolerance policy. Why wouldn't the NFL entertain that?

FRIEDMAN: There should be. But what the policy doesn't say is that based on allegations, based on an indictment, based on a conviction, what is it based on? What the commissioner said, the sexual assault, whether it's an allegation or conviction, six games and that kind of rigidity just doesn't work. If you engage in sexual assault, you're out of the league and that's what the rule I think should be.

WHITFIELD: OK, still not sure if you guys are --

HERMAN: Convicted of sexual assault.

FRIEDMAN: The rule doesn't say that.

HERMAN: Right. It's wrong. Fred, the only thing we're in agreement is we missed you. It's been too long.

FRIEDMAN: Exactly. Agree on one thing today.

HERMAN: And your tie. Finally, you're wearing a nice tie.

WHITFIELD: I like it. Look at that harmony.

FRIEDMAN: Mine's brighter than yours, Richard.

WHITFIELD: You're both very bright, I love that and the feeling is mutual. Boy, have I missed you all. So glad we're back together again. Have a great holiday weekend.

FRIEDMAN: You, too.

WHITFIELD: All right, thanks, guys. All right, what would you do in a situation like this? The passenger seated behind you on a flight actually blocks your seat from reclining. The controversial device some people are actually using. Should it be banned?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

WHITFIELD: All right, I think travelers entertain this kind of question all the time. Do you have the right to recline your seat on a plane? The answer depends on which airline you're actually on. You would also be smart to check before you fly because mid-air battles for leg room are getting pretty extreme these days.

On one recent flight, passengers started arguing over the use of a simple gadget, known as the knee defender. Here's CNN's Jeanne Moos.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

JEANNE MOOS, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): A new air war has broken out in the air space over your knees.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The knee defender is a device that keeps people from reclining their airline seat into your knees.

MOOS: You put what amounts to two hunks of plastic on the legs of your tray table to stop the seat in front of you from going back.

(on camera): Do you get your knees crunched?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Sometimes. I grin and bear it.

MOOS (voice-over): But no one was grinning on a United flight from Newark to Denver that had to be diverted to Chicago after a fight broke out. A 48-year-old male passenger deployed the knee defender to stop the seat of a female passenger in front of him.

(on camera): When she couldn't recline, she flagged down a flight attendant, told the guy to remove the gadget. He refused. The female passenger threw water in his face.

(voice-over): They were both kicked off the plane. Well, sure, when it happens to others -- it's funny, but as this reviewer of the knee defender joked --

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The captain has turned off the seat belt sign, please feel free to move about the cabin and punch in the head the guy with the knee defender.

MOOS: The device was invented by 6'3" Ira Goldman.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I was tired of being bopped in the knees by reclining seats.

MOOS: This was one of the early versions.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Seat won't recline.

MOOS: Now it looks like this and sells for $21.95. In the words of Conde Nast Traveler, "As devious as it is ingenious" and everyone we talked to agreed.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It sounds terrible.

MOOS (on camera): Why is it terrible?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Make someone else uncomfortable.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: This causes confliction, problems. People pay for their seats and they want to push it backward or forward. That's their God-given right.

MOOS (voice-over): The Knee Defender comes with a courtesy card for you to hand to the passenger in front of you. I have provided you with this card because I have long legs and if you recline your seat, you will bang into my knees. The FAA doesn't prohibit the knee defender, though, airlines can and United does.

(on camera): But the story about the plight on the plane seem to be great for the Knee Defender's business.

(voice-over): The web site crashed due to unexpectedly heavy demand. But whether you consider it a Knee Defender or knee to the flying public's groin, can't we all just remember what Louie CK says about the wonder of flying?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You're sitting in a chair in the sky.

MOOS: Jeanne Moos, CNN, New York.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

WHITFIELD: All right, so, should this controversial Knee Defender be banned? CNN's Christi Paul and Victor Blackwell put that question to Mark Murphy, a travel expert and author of "Travel Unscripted."

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

MARK MURPHY, TRAVEL EXPERT: Some guy behind me is going to tell me sorry, I've got long legs. Guess what, I got long legs, too, so let's have a leg comparison, but meantime, get that thing off the back of my seat and the lady on that flight did the right thing.

She got the flight attendant involved and the guy with that device should indeed be thrown off and it's ridiculous that people would disrupt an entire plane of travelers for something as silly as this.

CHRISTI PAUL, CNN ANCHOR, "NEW DAY": Do you think these should be illegal?

MURPHY: They are banned frankly by alternate carriers, so the vast majority of airlines will not even allow it and will tell the passenger to remove it. The FAA doesn't get involved with these silly devices. That just becomes a mask. But in the meantime, each airline can have its own policy and they do ban things like this.

VICTOR BLACKWELL, CNN ANCHOR, "NEW DAY": Let me ask you this. The seats and leg room, that's decreasing. Americans are getting bigger. Are you expecting we'll see more of this?

MURPHY: Yes, once you have an agitated flying public. My gosh, it's going to cost 100 for this flight that I didn't anticipate. Then you get on the plane, a full flight. There are no open seats. You're jammed in. People bringing the kitchen sink on to avoid that first checked bag fee.

They are jamming stuff in the overhead. They are hitting you with backpacks as they go by. Flying used to be a decent experience.