Return to Transcripts main page

NEW DAY

Ron Goldman's Sister Speaks Out 25 Years After His Murder; CNN Examines America's Infrastructure Crisis; Masked Gunman Killed In Shootout At Dallas Courthouse. Aired 7:30-8a ET

Aired June 18, 2019 - 07:30   ET

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


(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[07:31:45] ALISYN CAMEROTA, CNN ANCHOR: It has been 25 years since Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman were brutally murdered in Los Angeles. Their murder led to the trial of the century in which O.J. Simpson was ultimately acquitted.

Simpson joined Twitter this week and has already issued some curious messages.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

O.J. SIMPSON, ACQUITTED OF THE MURDERS OF NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON AND RON GOLDMAN: This should be a lot of fun. I got a little getting even to do. So, God bless and take care.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CAMEROTA: Joining us now to talk about this and more is Kim Goldman, Ron Goldman's sister. Good morning, Kim.

KIM GOLDMAN, RON GOLDMAN'S SISTER, HOST, "CONFRONTING O.J. SIMPSON" PODCAST: Good morning.

CAMEROTA: When O.J. says, "I've got a little getting even to do" how did you and your family interpret that?

GOLDMAN: I giggled. You know, I -- it's par the course. I mean, I think he hates not having his voice heard, you know.

He'll take any opportunity he can, so this is just the newest form for him and we'll see what that means. I love the mystery behind it but I think it's all a bunch of B.S.

CAMEROTA: And what do you -- what do you think of him watching his new Twitter habit on the 25-year anniversary of the -- of the double murder?

GOLDMAN: You know, one of his attorneys said that it wasn't a coincidence. I think it's kind of disgusting. I think the fact that he didn't even pay attention to that.

He did an interview saying that he's in a no-negative zone. They don't even talk about it in his house. We're pretty proud in our house to always be talking about my brother and we're really sensitive to special moments in our family. So the fact that he chose to make this his introduction to the world, I think it's pretty disrespectful to Ron and Nicole, actually.

CAMEROTA: So many millions of us, Kim, just remember 25 years ago vividly. I mean, I remember so well the night of the murders or certainly, the hours afterwards and hearing about them and being so struck. And then, the days that followed and all of the drama and everything that happened.

And I'm just wondering how you and your dad feel 25 years later? What's happening in your lives? How do you all mark this moment?

GOLDMAN: You know, we do our best every day to mark moments that are about my brother and about our family. The 5-year, 10-year, 20, 17 -- whatever year it is that we're acknowledging that my brother has been gone is hard. Every day is hard. It just happens to be more public on the bigger dates.

But we really just try to -- try to hug each other a lot and tell each other how much we love each other, and try to continue to do good work in the community. And that's how we're going to be honoring Ron's legacy.

CAMEROTA: You have a new podcast and it's called "Confronting: O.J. Simpson." And you go back to the main players -- even jurors who were involved in this trial and in this case.

And we have a little snippet from your sit-down with Kato Kaelin that we just want to play a portion of. Listen to this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GOLDMAN: Did you ever talk to Simpson after the murders?

KATO KAELIN, WITNESS IN O.J. SIMPSON MURDER CASE: O.J. pulled me into the kitchen by myself and said, "You know I was here with you." And I said, "No, I don't."

GOLDMAN: Oh.

KAELIN: He just kind of shook it off. And then I was like, is he trying to use me --

[07:35:00] GOLDMAN: Yes.

KAELIN: -- for something that I think he could have done? I think he's guilty. I wanted to move out immediately.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CAMEROTA: OK. I don't think I've heard that before. That was a fascinating insight from Kato Kaelin.

GOLDMAN: Yes. I -- you know, I was really lucky that everybody that participated in the podcast was really forthcoming and candid. I'm grateful for the honesty.

Kato was really, you know, very willing to share and talk and expose his heart. I was interested to hear from him because I think he's been made out to be this goofball for all of these years. But it's really impacted him and it's really affected his life. And I think people will learn a lot about him and how it impacted him emotionally, too.

CAMEROTA: And all of these years later, why did you want to go back and revisit all of this?

GOLDMAN: You know, speaking of the killer wanting to be heard, it's been important for my family and I to make sure that Ron's memory is visible and for me personally, that I get to reclaim some control in my life.

This case has been completely out of control and it was important for me to lead the questions -- to ask questions from a place of compassion and from a place that I think people are really interested to hear, which is what really went into your mindset. Not highlighting moments that failed or were successful, but really understanding what went into each decision, why some decisions were made and why some weren't, why witnesses were called and why some didn't get on the witness stand.

These are people that have an integral part of my life and I really just wanted to get deeper into what was going on and how impacted all of us.

CAMEROTA: And to that end, you interviewed some jurors and you say that they basically confessed that, in some ways, their process was a scam. What did they tell you?

GOLDMAN: Yes. I have to tell you, the jurors were the -- probably the more difficult conversations that I had throughout this process.

They confirmed what my father and I always believed, which is that the jury didn't do their job. That they stopped listening, they wanted to go home. They were angry that they were sequestered for so long.

And that 3 1/2 hour farce of a deliberation time period was just that. And one of the jurors admitted to me that they just pulled a random piece of testimony so that it could look like they were actually doing something in the room.

CAMEROTA: That is remarkable. It is remarkable that 25 years later you got them to tell you that and it confirmed your suspicion.

Well, Kim, we are thinking of --

GOLDMAN: Yes.

CAMEROTA: -- your family this week.

And again, the podcast is "Confronting: O.J. Simpson" and it is out tomorrow. It looks fascinating. You've gotten lots of really interesting revelations from people. So, thanks so much for sharing it with us today.

GOLDMAN: Thank you, Alisyn -- thank you.

CAMEROTA: John --

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: They work so hard to keep the memory alive and it's hard work.

All right, severe turbulence caught on video. A flight attendant slamming into the ceiling. A beverage cart crashes into passengers. Oh -- we'll tell you how this all ended, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[07:42:16] BERMAN: "Jasper Jaws" (ph) meets the news.

This morning, we have a CNN special report in a weeklong series on America's crumbling infrastructure. The Society of Civil Engineers says our roads, bridges, and airports, and schools are in such a state of disrepair it will take trillions of dollars over the next decade to fix them.

Tom Foreman is live in Washington with the kick-off of this special report -- Tom.

TOM FOREMAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: You know, John, you could go to anywhere you want in this town and find Democrats and Republicans, progressives and conservatives all agreeing the infrastructure needs fixing. The roads need to be repaired, the bridges need to be repaired, the power grid needs to be strengthened. But that's where the agreement ends because they cannot agree on how to get the job done.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

FOREMAN (voice-over): Airports overloaded and outdated, roadways overburdened and buckling --

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Holy (bleep).

FOREMAN (voice-over): -- power grids, parks, schools, broadband service, public transit, and water systems.

According to the American Society of Civil Engineers, which grades all those categories, the aging infrastructure has been crumbling for years, slowing travel, stifling business, endangering Americans.

CASEY DINGES, SENIOR MANAGING DIRECTOR, AMERICAN SOCIETY OF CIVIL ENGINEERS: Fifteen thousand dam structure in the United States are considered high-hazard. We still have 55,000 structurally-deficient bridges in the United States.

FOREMAN (on camera): And this is costing America real money in terms of jobs, and lost productivity, and lost private time.

DINGES: The average commuter loses 42 hours a year sitting in traffic. That's like losing a week's vacation.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The President of the United States.

FOREMAN (voice-over): President Trump has promised huge improvements from the start.

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: New roads, bridges, tunnels, airports, and railways. Safe, fast, reliable, and modern infrastructure. This is not an option, this is a necessity.

FOREMAN (voice-over): And, Democrats say they want it, too.

SEN. CHUCK SCHUMER (D-NY): It's clear that both the White House and all of us want to get something done on infrastructure in a big and bold way.

FOREMAN (voice-over): The result, however, has been a big, bold, bipartisan failure.

TRUMP: This is what it takes to get something approved.

FOREMAN (voice-over): Part of the problem is each time Trump has announced an infrastructure initiative, it has been derailed by an unrelated controversy.

But there is more.

RON BROWNSTEIN, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: You have a governing party and an opposition party, and the goal of the opposition party is not to reach deals with the majority party. It's to discredit their ideas, beat them, and become the majority party themselves.

FOREMAN (voice-over): Democrats balk at the idea of a blank check without assurances their constituents will get a share of the jobs, and that improvements will respect and protect the environment. Republicans recoil from the idea of regulations holding too much sway and would like to privatize many of these public projects. And both sides are nervous about the price.

[07:45:09] FOREMAN (on camera): Just to catch up to all these deficiencies, the American Society of Civil Engineers say it will take $2 trillion over 10 years and then, $200 billion annually to keep up.

FOREMAN (voice-over): There has been talk of a higher federal gas tax, prioritized spending of tax money already in the bank, and more fees for everyone everywhere.

REP. NANCY PELOSI (D-CA): We stand at a pivotal place in terms of building infrastructure for the future.

FOREMAN (voice-over): Yes, there has been talk, but not much else.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

FOREMAN: Make no mistake about it, this is a monumental task that would take a lot of money. But every time you hit a pothole in the road, every time you run into an unexplained delay at the airport because it's overtaxed, when the power goes off for big areas, when a dam fails, and all of that happens, that does belong at the doorstep of both parties who refuse to start by doing the one thing they must do first -- build a compromise, which is a dirty word here in Washington -- Alisyn.

CAMEROTA: Yes, the crumbling bridge is a metaphor, Tom -- I agree.

FOREMAN: It is.

CAMEROTA: I mean, the one thing that both sides agree on, they can't even do.

BERMAN: No, they can't even do what they agree on.

CAMEROTA: Thank you very much, Tom, for that report.

Meanwhile, after what Russia did to the U.S. elections in 2016, passing legislation to beef up our election security would also seem to be a layup, but it is not.

John Avlon explains in our reality check -- John.

JOHN AVLON, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: Speaking of things people should be able to agree on, there should be some things that transcend petty partisan politics and at the top of that list is stopping foreign powers from interfering in our elections.

Remember this?

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ROBERT MUELLER, SPECIAL COUNSEL, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE: There were multiple, systematic efforts to interfere in our election, and that allegation deserves the attention of every American.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

AVLON: That's every American, regardless of party. But, Robert Mueller's warning is, again, falling on willfully deaf ears.

We know that foreign powers continue to try to meddle in our elections. Trump's own FBI director and director of National Intelligence have made that crystal clear.

But when Trump's former Homeland Security secretary tried to discuss plans to protect our elections with the president, she was waved off by his chief of staff. And now, we have an even clearer indication of why, because President Trump just said he'd entertain foreign offers of assistance in our elections, a comment his campaign has said it would take as a directive.

At the same time, there are reports that election security task forces within DHS have been scaled back, all while President Trump has repeatedly floated the absurd idea that we should have a joint cyber command with Russia to safeguard -- wait for it -- our election security.

But surely Congress will step up and act responsibly to secure our elections, right? Just kidding.

Instead, a key group of Republican lawmakers are doing everything they can to block these efforts and the ringmaster of this circus of denial, Sen. Mitch McConnell.

Now, he's been careful to say that "These threats and challenges are real. Our responsibility to strengthen America is serious." He's just not going to actually allow the Senate to do anything about it.

Remember, it was McConnell who stopped any bipartisan statement condemning Russian interference in 2016, according to former DNI James Clapper. And now, the man who calls himself the "Grim Reaper" has killed common-sense legislation from every side of the aisle on election security.

This list includes efforts to report imposed mandatory sanctions on anyone who attacks an American election. A billion dollars to state and local authorities to strengthen election security. The Honest Ads Act, which would require big tech platforms like Facebook to disclose who is buying political ads.

Bills that would require backup paper ballots, and duty to report legislation that would require campaigns to report foreign interference.

Now, the last effort was blocked singlehandedly by Tennessee Sen. Marsha Blackburn, who said that no one wants foreign interference of any type in our government, but then said that that bill was overbroad and should be done in a bipartisan way.

Well, the unanimous consent effort she killed was bipartisan and her Heisman was immediately hailed by President Trump. Now, she's being joined by Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski.

But make no mistake, this Senate inaction is a dereliction of duty. It has the effect of empowering our enemies at a time when FBI director Chris Wray says that more countries like China are getting into the game and what we've experienced in the past is just a "dress rehearsal" for what's coming next.

Any senator who is blocking election security efforts is playing short-term politics with the integrity of our elections and they're betting you won't notice or remember until at least after the next election. At that point, it may be too late.

Bottom line, there can be no political excuse for failing to defend our democracy, period.

And that's your reality check.

BERMAN: John, you say surely Congress will take action on election security. To that, I say no -- and don't call me Shirley.

CAMEROTA: And stop calling him Shirley.

[07:50:00] BERMAN: All right, John.

CAMEROTA: Thank you, John.

BERMAN: A terrifying midair scare --

CAMEROTA: I'm already scared.

BERMAN: -- caught on camera. This is really awful.

Severe turbulence --

CAMEROTA: Oh my gosh.

BERMAN: -- hit a flight --

CAMEROTA: Oh.

BERMAN: You can see what it did. A flight attendant crashing into the ceiling, the beverage cart falling onto screaming passengers. This happened on a flight from Kosovo to Switzerland.

Ten people on this flight were sent to the hospital with minor injuries.

CAMEROTA: Oh my gosh, this is terrifying.

BERMAN: Right.

CAMEROTA: I was on a flight yesterday that I also thought had bad turbulence for about four minutes, but everybody else was sleeping and reading their papers.

BERMAN: Yes.

CAMEROTA: So I don't know what they weren't feeling that I was feeling.

BERMAN: You weren't on this flight.

CAMEROTA: It felt to me like that.

BERMAN: You weren't on this flight.

CAMEROTA: It felt like that but it didn't have the same effect on anyone around me.

BERMAN: I'm so glad you made it through.

CAMEROTA: Thank you.

All right, massacre averted. A masked gunman attempted to shoot up a federal courthouse in Dallas. What do police know about why he wanted to do this?

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Holy crap.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[07:55:00] BERMAN: We're getting new details this morning into what could have been a massacre in downtown Dallas.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

(Gunshots)

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BERMAN: Right now, the FBI is scouring the social media and military history of a 22-year-old masked gunman who opened fire outside a federal courthouse before he was shot dead by police.

I want to bring in Josh Campbell, CNN law enforcement analyst and former FBI supervisory special agent.

Josh, there are 200 FBI agents now working on this case. If you were one of them, what questions would you be asking?

JOSH CAMPBELL, CNN LAW ENFORCEMENT ANALYST, FORMER SUPERVISORY SPECIAL AGENT, FBI: Well, so many questions. And let me say at the outset John, if I can, that we herald the work of law enforcement in this country. We hold their feet to the fire whenever required.

This is one of those days that all of us should be honoring the work of a federal agency that most of us have never heard of -- the Federal Protective Service. They're charged with protecting federal buildings in Washington, D.C. and around the country. And but for their quick actions in engaging the shooter, we may be talking about a mass murder right now.

As you mentioned, the FBI special agent in charge indicating over 200 agents assigned to this case. Essentially, the entire Dallas field office is being told this is their top priority. They're going through this subject's social media.

Questions I would have, obviously, is to get to motivation. Did he signal in advance his intentions to attack this target? Were there people that were in his orbit that may have known about him?

A lot of questions for law enforcement and we can be assured that they worked throughout the night and this investigation will be continuing.

BERMAN: You say that this looks like what law enforcement might consider an injustice collector. What do you mean by that?

CAMPBELL: Yes, exactly.

So when you think about what the subject could have done -- and again, it's chilling to think about, but he was well-armed -- a high-powered rifle, hundreds of rounds of ammunition on his waistband that we saw in these photos and these images. He could have caused mass loss of life if his goal was to indiscriminately kill people.

There's a lot we don't know at this point but I think one thing that we can take away is that his goal wasn't just to cause mass loss of life because you wouldn't go after a federal building. Think about what this institution represents -- power, authority. Sure, law enforcement in this country enforces the law, but it's in these courthouses where justice is ultimately handed down.

So, I think what we're probably going to learn with this subject is he had some kind of grievance with law enforcement. Again, a lot of that will come from his background, looking into details of his life. But there was something that motivated him to come after this and we've seen those instances in the past where someone feels slighted, they collected these injustices, and sadly, some of them actually act on them with violence.

BERMAN: But this is a hard target. As you say, this is a federal courthouse here. This person had to know it would be heavily guarded. And even if he had 150 rounds of ammunition and wanted to make a lot of noise, he wasn't going to get very far.

CAMPBELL: Yes, exactly. Anyone who has been in these federal buildings, they know that they're highly protected. There are armed guards in and around the building.

I don't think that there's any way -- again, we can't get into the mind --

BERMAN: Right.

CAMPBELL: -- of the shooter, but there's no way he would have made his way past these layers of security, up the elevators, into a judge's chamber or courtroom, for example. And so, again, his main grievance may have been just to attack this institution -- to attack this building.

We know the FBI is currently working with the Department of Defense, again, to go back through his life. He's a 22-year-old former Army infantryman. So there will be a lot of possible clues that they'll be able to develop as far as what happened in this person's past. Did he have run-ins with law enforcement --

BERMAN: Yes.

CAMPBELL: -- or some type of authority figures? Again, all of that will be part of this investigation.

BERMAN: Very quickly, you bring up this man's military history. He was an infantryman in the Army from 2015 to 2017. So what kind of information would the military be able to provide here?

CAMPBELL: So, inside the military, they do these analyses of members of personnel, fitness reports. There are supervisors, again, who will file reports about their observations of these people. So again, they want to talk to his superior to try to figure out was he someone who was in trouble?

We know that he served two years, which isn't a lot of time, so I would want to know what caused him to be discharged. And again, all of that will come from talking to his last employer, which would have been the Department of Defense -- and again, to gather those clues.

What was this person like? What -- how did he act around others, around authority figures? Again, to get to that motive. Why did he decide to conduct an attack on the U.S. government?

BERMAN: An important thing I think you say today is to give thanks to the Federal Protective Services, preventing what might have been a massacre there. Terrifying images.

Josh Campbell, thank you so much for being with us.

CAMPBELL: Thanks, John.

BERMAN: Alisyn --

CAMEROTA: OK, John.

As you know, all morning we've been pressing the White House to give us some response to the president's latest threat via Twitter to deport a million -- well, actually, millions, he said, undocumented immigrants. So we have some answers now. Let's get to it.

All right, good morning, everyone. Welcome to your NEW DAY. It is Tuesday, June 18th, 8:00 now in the East, and we begin with the breaking news.

Overnight, President Trump announced a major new operation targeting undocumented immigrants. He tweeted that ICE will begin deporting millions of people living in the U.S. illegally, beginning next week, but it is unclear if any actual plans are in place.

The president returning to his signature anti-immigrant rhetoric just hours before he kicks off his 2020 reelection campaign at a big rally in Florida.

BERMAN: There are huge developments overseas as well. The United States is sending an additional 1,000 troops to the Middle East after Iran backed off some of its commitments in the Iran nuclear deal.

Russia's deputy foreign minister has responded just a little while ago this morning.

END