Return to Transcripts main page

Legal View with Ashleigh Banfield

Bergdahl Arraigned; Trump Takes Aim at Clinton; Retaking Ramadi. Aired 12-12:30p ET

Aired December 22, 2015 - 12:00   ET

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

[12:00:00] KATE BOLDUAN, CNN ANCHOR: Have to announce a very sad moment. This is our last day together of 2015.

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: That is sad.

BOLDUAN: I'm sad.

BERMAN: But we have 2016 ahead of us, so they say.

BOLDUAN: Thanks for joining us "AT THIS HOUR."

BERMAN: LEGAL VIEW with Ashleigh Banfield starts now.

ANNOUNCER: This is CNN breaking news.

ASHLEIGH BANFIELD, CNN ANCHOR: Hello, everyone, I'm Ashleigh Banfield and welcome to LEGAL VIEW.

We're going to start with this breaking news out of Fort Bragg, North Carolina, where Army Sergeant Bowe Bergdahl has just been arraigned ahead of his court-martial process. This is brand-new video into CNN of Bergdahl leaving the court proceedings. He was clean cut, he was shaven, in his uniform. This was an important hearing. He could be facing life in prison for the allegations of desertion and endangering fellow soldiers and here's why.

Back in June of 2009, he walked away from his base post in Afghanistan and he walked right into the hands of the Taliban. They held him in captivity for nearly five years, but he was finally freed last year after the United States released five Taliban detainees in what was a very controversial prisoner exchange. U.S. Army Spokesman Colonel Daniel King just addressed the media about today's hearing.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

COL. DANIEL KING, U.S. ARMY COMMAND SPOKESMAN: Today, Army Judge Colonel Christopher T. Fredrickson (ph) convened an Article 39-A arraignment hearing December 22nd on Fort Bragg in the case of U.S. Army versus Sergeant Robert B. Bergdahl.. the military judge discussed the rights held by the accused, inquired on the record regarding current military counsel and civilian counsel. Sergeant Bergdahl indicated he was satisfied with his defense counsel.

The judge explained Sergeant Bergdahl's right to be tried before a panel or a military judge. The judge also inquired if Sergeant Bergdahl wished to enter any motions or a plea at this time. Sergeant Bergdahl deferred all of these decisions to a later hearing. Colonel Fredrickson also announced that Army Judge Colonel Jeffrey R. Nance (ph) has been detailed for all further judicial hearings in this case, and the date for the next scheduled hearing will be January 12, 2016, here on Fort Bragg.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BANFIELD: Our Nick Valencia was in the courtroom and he watched the process live. He joins me now on the telephone from Fort Bragg.

So, Nick, get me inside that courtroom. There was no camera in there. We have a couple of sketch. But there is an entirely different feeling when you are just feet away from the accused.

NICK VALENCIA, CNN CORRESPONDENT (via telephone): Certainly, and we were just feet away from Bowe Bergdahl. He made his way into that courtroom, Ashleigh, just about 10 minutes before the arraignment got underway. He was flanked by his defense counsel, his eyes downcast, seemingly intentionally not making eye contact with any of the press corps, about 50 people inside that - that courtroom, including members of the press, as well as some - some soldiers, escorts essentially, that took us to and from the parking lot to the courtroom area.

Bergdahl had clean shaven - he was clean shaven wearing his military dress. He was in military blues. He also, interestingly enough, had hash marks on his right sleeve. Each hash mark, we're told, marking six months that he was deployed, so his five-years of captivity counting towards his deployment it seemed. He had a slight limp, Ashleigh, when he entered the courtroom and when he exited. A slight limp in his right leg. And also his head was shave so closely that you could actually see a small right scar in the back of his head. Whether or not that is a result of his torture during his captivity with the Taliban, that - that is unclear.

You mentioned it was a relatively expeditious hearing. It lasted about ten minutes. The judge asking him a series of questions to which he responded, sir, yes, sir. He said very little other than that. (INAUDIBLE) plea, which we expected that to happen. And he also said he was OK with the counsel that he had defending him. He did waive - or defer, I should say, whether or not he wanted a jury trial by at least five officer members, his peers, or a trial by judge, and he did waive the right to hear the charges that he is facing. Of course, one of those charges desertion. The other, misbehavior before the enemy, which could carry a life in prison sentence.

And, of course, part of the controversy in all of this is the timing of this and the preliminary hearing where a lieutenant colonel actually recommended a special court-martial hearing where if convicted Bergdahl would have only faced up to a year in confinement. Instead, he's gone forward with this court-martial hearing, where, as he mentioned, he could be facing life in prison.

And also perhaps worth mentioning, all of this happening after the release of audio in a popular podcast, "Serial," where, for the first time, we hear from U.S. Sergeant Bowe Bergdahl why he left his post during that fateful day in June 30th of 2009. It is very odd some of the thing that he said. He equated himself to Jason Bourne, an action movie hero, saying that he believed he was that, wanted to prove to himself and others that he could be that. And it seemed about 20 minutes into him leaving his post, the levity of what he had done hit him. He improvised, he says in his own words according to this podcast, a new decision to try to get information on the Taliban and it is during that process that he was captured by Taliban members.

[12:05:29] Now, all of this will be the cornerstone and the focus of the trial. Why did he leave? We know that he left his post on his own volition, but the big reason is why did he do it? Was he deserting? Is it for something else? That, of course, is going to be what the judge considers in this - in this process. His next court hearing, a government motions hearing to be held here in Fort Bragg, North Carolina, on January 12th.

Ashleigh.

BANFIELD: All right, Nick Valencia, thank you for that reporting. He was live inside that courtroom. As we said, it is a military proceeding, no cameras inside.

But there's a lot of evidentiary issues that are going to come up and we've already heard some of them because in a recent episode of that popular podcast "Serial," Sergeant Bergdahl decided to talk about his motivation for walking away that day. Have a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SGT. BOWE BERGDAHL, U.S. MILITARY (voice-over): I was trying to prove to the world, anybody who used to know me, that I was capable of, you know, being that person.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Like a super soldier, you mean?

BERGDAHL: Yes, capable of being what I appeared to be. Like, doing what I did was me saying I am -

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Right.

BERGDAHL: Like, I don't know, Jason Bourne.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Right.

BERGDAHL: Right.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: A character in a book or whatever?

BERGDAHL: Well, I had this -

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: A character.

BERGDAHL: Yes. So I had this fantastic idea that I was going to prove to the world that, you know, I was the real thing.

(END VIDEO CLIP) BANFIELD: I was the real thing. Well, he's going to have to prove to the world a whole lot more. And Steve Raiser is a defense attorney and former attorney for the United States Army. We call them JAGS for a reason. He's joining me live now.

Steve, I want to talk through some of these issues that we just -

STEVEN RAISER, FORMER ATTORNEY FOR THE U.S. ARMY: OK.

BANFIELD: That we just heard from Nick Valencia. But first and foremost the optics -

RAISER: Right.

BANFIELD: Because he walked out of that courtroom with a slight limp, as Nick mentioned. His right arm doesn't seem to be moving quite as much as his left. I don't know if he's got an injury. That's been quiet up until now. But those hash marks on the right-hand side of his lower sleeve, I cannot count them, but if he was in country for about five years, I would have thought there would be more hash marks than that. And I'm not sure if he's allowed to wear that in front of a process, in front of a judge or a jury, whatever he chooses.

RAISER: Right.

BANFIELD: Do you know anything about that?

RAISER: Well, he can wear it because he hasn't been stripped of anything yet. That's what this whole procedure is about, to determine whether or not - and only - not only if he's going to be incarcerated, whether he's going to stay in the military, whether he's going to be busted in rank and whether he's going to be deprived of any of the awards that he has received by virtue of him being in country.

BANFIELD: OK. So one of the - the things in American jurisprudence we all often have a choice of is a bench trial, where you just appeal to the judge to make a ruling for you, or a jury of your peers, which we get in our Constitution. He also gets this choice.

RAISER: Right.

BANFIELD: And we don't know what he's going to do. But given the fact that so many of his peers despise him because they were stuck in country longer, many of them went out and risked their lives, some say other died because of this risk, does it suit him to have a jury of his peers?

RAISER: Well, it depends, because what his defense counsel is going to have to do is determine, first of all, whether or not the military judge will give him a fair trial. And he's going to the have to feel him out a little bit, do some research on him and make that determination. As far as the panel goes, which is the equivalent of the jury in the military system, there is a vetting process there. Number one, he could ask that enlisted members be in it or he could ask that they not be in it by simply being silent, because, ultimately, you put officers on the panel. Now, when you're selecting a jury, you do it in the same way in the

military law as you do in the civilian law, you're able to vet all the panel members and determine whether or not they have prejudice against him, whether they've already been poisoned by the information that's been out there and -

BANFIELD: Or softened by that podcast, woe is me podcast that has been released, right?

RAISER: Right. And that's for the prosecution to determine as well. I mean it's going to be a two-sided process, trying to pick fair -

BANFIELD: Could the prosecution ask to suppress that podcast and not allow that to be played in court?

RAISER: Sure they can, and they - and they probably will because, obviously, the way it's going to be seen from the prosecution angle is going to be that these are self-serving statements.

BANFIELD: Yes.

RAISER: All right, they're not taken under oath. So, yes, they're going to try and avoid those coming in for sure.

BANFIELD: So many more questions I have, but clearly we're only just beginning this process. He didn't even enter a plea today. I suppose not too surprising, but that's coming.

RAISER: Yes, that's correct.

BANFIELD: Yes. OK.

RAISER: He put that off as well. So we'll see what happens there. But, ultimately, we expect him to enter a plea of not guilty, at least initially.

BANFIELD: Steve, thanks so much. Thanks for your service as well.

RAISER: Thank you very much.

BANFIELD: Merry Christmas. Appreciate it.

RAISER: Merry Christmas to you, as well.

[12:09:58] BANFIELD: Coming up next, in his latest attack on Hillary Clinton, Donald Trump chose to use a word that you probably thought even he would never utter on the campaign trail. I dare say your children aren't allowed to utter it at the dinner table. So, will this stand? Will it make a difference? Find out, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BANFIELD: The 2016 race for the White House is getting nastier and nastier and a little dirty, too. This time, Donald Trump, aiming at Hillary Clinton, and using some pretty vulgar language, all the while in the heat of battle with Ted Cruz, who is on Trump's heels for the GOP nomination. Confused yet? You don't need to be. CNN's senior Washington correspondent Joe Johns sorts it all out.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

DONALD TRUMP (R), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: And you see Hillary - I mean did you watch that - what happened to her? No, she's terrible.

JOE JOHNS, CNN SENIOR WASHINGTON CORRESPONDENT: Donald Trump unleashing yet another tirade against Democratic frontrunner Hillary Clinton at a rally in Michigan.

TRUMP: Hillary, that's not a president.

JOHNS: The billionaire coming under fire for using a R-rated derogatory term when referring to her 2008 defeat by Barack Obama.

TRUMP: She was favored to win and she got shlunged (ph). She lost. I mean she lost.

JOHNS: And weighing in on her much discussed bathroom break from Saturday's debate.

TRUMP: I know where she went. It's disgusting. I don't want to talk about it. No, it's too disgusting. Don't say it, it's disgusting.

JOHNS: Trump then going after Clinton's claim that ISIS is propagandizing the GOP frontrunner.

TRUMP: Donald Trump is on video, and ISIS is using him on the video to recruit. And it turned out to be a lie. She's a liar.

[12:15:07] JOHNS: Clinton's press secretary doubling down.

BRIAN FALLON, CLINTON CAMPAIGN PRESS SECRETARY: It is a confirmed fact that the footage of Donald Trump making those hateful comments earlier this month was played all across the Middle East.

JOHNS: Trump also discussing the controversy over Vladimir Putin's praise and allegations that the Russian president has ordered the killing of journalists.

TRUMP: They said, oh, Trump should have been much nastier, that's terrible, and then they said, you know, he's killed reporters. And I don't like that. I'm totally against that.

JOHNS: The GOP frontrunner then reconsidering.

TRUMP: I would never kill them. I would never do that. Ah, let's see - no, I wouldn't. But I do hate them, and some of them are such lying, disgusting people.

JOHNS: Trump continues leading in the latest national poll, but Texas Senator Ted Cruz is closing in. The rest of the GOP field making the rounds in the battleground states of New Hampshire, where Trump rival Jeb Bush again went on the attack.

JEB BUSH (R), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: This is not a serious man that has serious plans.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

JOHNS: Sam Clovis (ph) of the trump campaign said on our air this morning they've gone out of their way to be very direct in their language with the American people, and that one of the things that has attracted so many people in such a diverse group into the rallies is the fact that they speak plainly. So, no backing down by the campaign.

Ashleigh.

BANFIELD: Joe Johns, thank you for that.

Certainly a lot to chew on here, and with me are two of the best in the biz, CNN's political director David Chalian and David Gergen, former presidential advisor to Presidents Nixon, Ford, Reagan, and that's not all, President Clinton as well.

All right, you two, look, we've heard a lot of junk coming out of Donald Trump's mouth and the polls keep going up every time he does it. I keep wondering what will be the tipping point. But the language that was used to describe Hillary Clinton's defeat to Barack Obama, I can't use it here, sorry, folks, you're going to have to Google it, we wouldn't allowed our children to say this at the dinner table and I dare say, David Gergen, that if you were interviewing someone for a job, you would not hire a person who would uses it. But this doesn't seem to matter.

DAVID GERGEN, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: You would not only not hire someone who uses it, you would not have a CEO use it in particular because people who lead organizations, CEOs or presidents, are supposed to be role models. And, you know, I don't know what to make of the polls. This new Quinnipiac poll showing that - that his lead has shrunk to 4 percent, therefore the polls out since - taken since December 10th, in the last 10 days, that show he has a double- digit lead still. So - but -

BANFIELD: Yes, we can pop up the numbers if you want.

GERGEN: Yes. But they go back to -

BANFIELD: It shows a significant lead still, Trump, 28 -

GERGEN: Yes.

BANFIELD: Over Cruz, 24.

GERGEN: Yes. but, still, the overall point here is, sinking into vulgarities I really think takes him to a different place, especially against Hillary Clinton, especially when it's so clearly sexist in nature and I think people are going to be repulsed by that.

BANFIELD: Is it much of a difference from what happened to Megyn Kelly, though, and it didn't seem to turn anyone off, and Megyn Kelly is sympathetic to conservative voters? DAVID CHALIAN, CNN POLITICAL DIRECTOR: Right. I mean I actually think

that is the difference here, actually. Yes, it's vulgar, and it's not the language we are used to hearing from our presidential candidates.

GERGEN: Right.

CHALIAN: But I think Donald Trump, in taking on Hillary Clinton this directly, even with vulgar language, is something that actually allows him to broaden his reach beyond his hard core supporters, because it is all about focusing fire on Hillary Clinton, and that's something Republicans can rally on (ph).

GERGEN: Yes. Well, clearly it may help him in the - in the pursuit of the nomination -

CHALIAN: Yes. Well, that (INAUDIBLE) -

GERGEN: But it hurts him towards the general.

CHALIAN: No doubt.

GERGEN: And you -

BANFIELD: Well, thank you for mentioning that, because we actually want to put up a poll about how people feel about him as president. I think it's very telling. When people were polled, would you be proud or embarrassed if Donald Trump were your president, 50 percent said embarrass, 23 percent said proud.

But I want to put up another poll, and that is the people who have not decided what they're going to do yet. Those who may be thrilled with what he is saying, there are many who haven't made up their mind. Fifty-eight percent of them said they might change their mind, although 41 percent said we're - we're done. We know what we're doing. We don't need any more news from you, Ms. Banfield. And I'm not sure where that number really fits in, in the history of things and this particular point, just a month or two away from all the most important primaries. Does it tell you anything, David?

CHALIAN: I mean I think 41 percent made up is a pretty large number actually. I think that some support is truly solidifying. Remember that 50 percent embarrassment number, which no candidate wants to see.

GERGEN: Right. Right.

CHALIAN: I mean that's - that's not a number anybody wants.

BANFIELD: No.

CHALIAN: That is the general electorate. That is a - that is the nation overall. He - right now Donald Trump is laser focused on pursuing the Republican nomination. When he started this process, Republicans, by a large majority say they would never support him. His unfavorables were very high among Republicans. That all changed as he focused solely on courting Republican votes. One would imagine he may have a pivot ahead of him, although I think it's going to be very tricky for him.

GERGEN: Yes.

CHALIAN: And he will take a different approach should he be the nominee and start courting (ph) (INAUDIBLE).

[12:20:02] GERGEN: And, David - I'm sure David will agree with this, but if you look at who has made up their mind, it tends to be disproportionately in favor of Trump. In other words, his people are more solid for him than they are for others. But I still think there is room in this - in this campaign for somebody, whether it's Cruz or somebody else, to overtake him. He's not there yet. He's (INAUDIBLE).

CHALIAN: No.

BANFIELD: By the way, I want to just read to you what the Clinton campaign put out. And, again, I'm very sorry that I can't report for you what the actual comment was, but it's too dirty. And I never thought I'd not be able to talk about what politics are because the language is too vulgar, but this is what the Clinton campaign put out. "We are not responding to Trump, but everyone who understands the humiliation this degrading language inflicts on all women should #imwithher." It confounds me. Never stop to confound me again. Dinner table conversation? You can't discuss it with your kids. Job interview, you would never hire anybody. You would not see a CEO use that language and get away with it. And yet nothing seems to change.

Gentlemen, we will have to revisit this at another time, specifically next month when we're really counting down the days. Thank you.

GERGEN: Thanks, Ashleigh.

CHALIAN: Thanks, Ashleigh.

BANFIELD: Happy holidays. Thanks for coming in. Appreciate it.

GERGEN: OK. Same to you.

BANFIELD: Coming up next, he is being remember as a selfless public servant who dedicated his life to protecting others. One of six U.S. troops who were killed in an Afghanistan bombing yesterday. He was a New York City police detective. He was the husband and he was the father of two. That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[12:24:55] BANFIELD: Iraqi troops are moving steadily towards Ramadi's city center after a surprise raid that began this morning. They're fighting ISIS forces, but they've had some trouble because ISIS is using the civilians in that city as human shields. ISIS took that city back, back in May, in fact. In the meantime, in Afghanistan, Afghan forces are holding out against a Taliban assault in southern Afghanistan, in Helmand province. The forces are reportedly running out of weapons and supplies, despite the pleas for more help from the Afghan government. All of this after six Americans were killed yesterday in a suicide bomb attack. With me now, Pentagon correspondent Barbara Starr and CNN military

analyst, retired Lieutenant General Mark Hertling.

Barbara, I'd like to get the latest on the circumstances in Afghanistan, if I can. I know that they're trying to get us the information about those who were killed. I can just show our audience "The New York Post" this morning, people in New York greeted with this headline, "NYPD Cop Killed." This is the first to be identified. When are we going to find out more about the other five who were killed in Afghanistan?

BARBARA STARR, CNN PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT: Well, some information may slowly start to come out through social media, newspapers or their families, but the rule at the Pentagon is they will make a public announcement with an official press release 24 hours after the last family member of all six is notified. They take this business very seriously in the military. They want to ensure all family members know what has happened before they come out publicly with their names. That could come in the next several hours, Ashleigh.

BANFIELD: Understand. And then walk me over, if you can, miles and miles to the west, and that is Ramadi, this fight to get that city back has entered the closed quarter phase where you're fighting building to building, family to family. And this is going to be ugly. So tell me exactly what those coalition troops have been able to do to get where they are now.

STARR: Well, these are mainly Iraqi troops on the ground fighting, as you say, house by house, block by block. They've been in the outer neighborhoods of Ramadi from some weeks, but overnight and earlier today they did stage that initial lightning raid into the center of the city, coming in via a bridge, a floating bridge essentially, that the U.S. trained them on, that they put over to the river and were able to enter Ramadi.

It is going to be a tough fight. The ISIS fighters that they are confronting are using civilians as human shields. Getting Ramadi back from ISIS, though, is only going to be the first step. What they're going to have to do may be the most difficult military part of all, they're going to have to be able to hold on to it. They estimate 500 ISIS fighters in the city. A big insurgency there that they are confronting and those people are not going to give up easy. It could be weeks of running gun battles until they get it fully under control. But it is the holding it and providing security for the civilians and getting civilians back into Ramadi that is really the major challenge coming down the road.

BANFIELD: Yes, because it's been lost before.

Barbara, hold that thought for a moment.

General Hertling, you put some great perspective to what this actually means for those in America who are wondering about Ramadi. It's the size of Tucson. I mean putting a ring around Tucson and trying to keep Tucson in the instance where there are people going house to house, building to building in Tucson and holding all those civilians as human shields. This is a remarkable feat. And still there's Mosul. And after that, there's another city. And here we are 13 years later in the same country. I'm starting to wonder, how long and how much effort is it going to take, not just to get these cities, but as Barbara said, to hold them?

LT. GEN. MARK HERTLING (RET.), CNN MILITARY ANALYST: Well, I'm the eternal optimist, Ashleigh, and I - and I actually think we're seeing some very interesting things happening right now because these are Iraqi soldiers doing this. Not only are they Iraqi soldiers, but let's add some more nuance to it. These are green Iraqi soldiers. These are the individuals who have been stood up in a couple of brigades since we started the training and advising mission in Iraq. So these are soldiers, Iraqi security forces, that have been trained by Americans.

You can also see from a military perspective, I'll tell you, that laying of the bridge, the entering of the city by the special operations forces first on in one side that was unexpected, tells me there's a whole lot of advising going on by Americans on how to best maneuver into this city. You're right, there's going to be an interesting fight left inside this very big city that normally houses about 400,000 people, but let me add something else on this. I think you're going to see a great deal of confidence instilled in these green Iraqi forces when they get their first victory. And ISIS has been pounded in and around Ramadi for the past couple of months. So their morale is going to be very low.

[12:29:55] I think you're going to see coming out of this that they certainly are going to have fights going door-to-door, ISIS has probably laid mines in buildings and laid explosive devices throughout the streets and inside the houses that are going to cause a lot more casualties, but I think you're going to see an Iraqi security force and an Iraqi government that comes out of this a lot more