Return to Transcripts main page

New Day

Soon: Prosecution To Call More Witnesses In Chauvin Trial; Georgia Governor Blasts Voting Law Backlash As Cancel Culture; CNN Live In Myanmar As Military Crackdown Intensifies. Aired 7:30-8a ET

Aired April 05, 2021 - 07:30   ET

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

[07:30:00]

L. CHRIS STEWART, ATTORNEY FOR GEORGE FLOYD FAMILY, MANAGING PARTNER, STEWART MILLER SIMMONS TRIAL ATTORNEYS (via Skype): The testimony from these officers. For once, in a trial we're hearing officers stand up for themselves and say what he did was wrong. Normally, you don't hear from officers.

ALISYN CAMEROTA, CNN ANCHOR: Is this the first time that you've heard something like that in a trial?

STEWART: Yes. You know, think about Walter Scott. You know, I think you and I used to talk during that trial. We didn't have officers stepping forward like we do now, which is something to be proud of for them.

You know, they're acknowledging this should not have happened, which is all the community wants. All the nation wants is for officers to step forward, be honest about it, and say look, this is not how policing should be done.

CAMEROTA: Is it your understanding that police chief -- the Minneapolis police Chief Arradondo will be testifying today?

STEWART: I'm not exactly sure what day he'll be testifying but we're sure he's going to be testifying. And if it's like Zimmerman's testimony from last week it's going to be powerful.

CAMEROTA: Here is what we know about how Chief Arradondo feels because he has spoken out. This was back in June. This is what he said June 22nd, 2020.

He said, "Mr. George Floyd's tragic death was not due to a lack of training. The training was there. Chauvin knew what he was doing. The officers knew what was happening. One intentionally caused it and the others failed to prevent it.

This was murder. It wasn't a lack of training."

Wow! I mean, what more -- what more could the jury need to hear than that from the police chief?

STEWART: Exactly, and it's the truth. You know, it's just -- I think the whole nation is, daily, going

through the pain and suffering of watching this happen again and again and again. And don't look away -- you know, don't turn the channel. Don't get sad and not pay attention to it.

Look at this death and realize this is what people are dealing with and suffering with daily. Embrace it and then we'll change.

CAMEROTA: But how does it make sense? When you watch Derek Chauvin in the courtroom and you watch everything that has come out, what does that say?

If this wasn't about his lack of training or training gone wrong or him thinking that this was policy, which is what some of the defense has said, that would suggest that Derek Chauvin is, I mean, basically, a psychopath. But that's not -- I don't know that we know that in his history.

So how do you explain what happened?

STEWART: Well, it's the air of superiority. Look at him. Look at his expression and his just presence while he's killing another human being.

There's no remorse. He clearly thinks he's going to get away with it. He has a history of doing things like this before and that type of air and arrogance can't wear a badge and can't be walking the street. So that's the issue.

You know, he felt he could get away with it. He felt the crowd wasn't going to do anything. He never thought he'd be on CNN getting talked about. And he could just walk away from killing an African-American and it's not going to happen this time.

CAMEROTA: I want to play for you the audio that we heard for the first time this week and it is of Derek Chauvin, in the moments after George Floyd's death, calling his supervisor.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DEREK CHAUVIN, FORMER MINNEAPOLIS POLICE OFFICER CHARGED WITH MURDER: Hello, 230 here.

Yeah, I was just going to call you and have you come out to our scene here. Um, not really, but we just had to -- had to hold the guy down. He was -- was going crazy and wouldn't go back in -- coming off here a moment (ph) -- wouldn't go in the back of the squad.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CAMEROTA: He wouldn't go back in the squad, he says -- squad car -- meaning.

I know as an attorney, you hear something there incriminating. What do you hear in that audio? STEWART: How nervous he is. He sounds like a child that's broken something and they're trying to explain it to their parents and they're lying.

You know, he's nervous, he's coughing, he's swallowing his words. He says he held someone down when really, on the use of force scale he had already gone to the top tier. I mean, he clearly knew he had taken it too far but didn't think he'd get caught -- but he did.

CAMEROTA: You had a different take on the presence of drugs in George Floyd's system than I had heard before. It sounded like Chauvin was trying to suggest -- or his defense -- because there was a presence of drugs, because he was in an altered state we had to take sort of extra -- we had to use extra force. He's saying he was going crazy, as you hear him saying to his supervisor.

You're suggesting that when police know that there is some sort of -- that somebody is under the influence of some sort of substance, they actually need to take more precautions. Tell us what you mean by that.

STEWART: Exactly. You know, he can't have it both ways. If he's saying that they suspected George Floyd of being on opioids or whatever it may be, which is a health crisis, they should have treated him with greater care.

[07:35:08]

That's where you know you can't hold somebody down for an extended period of time. You can't choke somebody out. You can't do something because they're already dealing with something in their system. So you monitor their breathing and they're held constantly.

So you can't have it both ways. This wasn't a situation where they're arguing later -- oh my God, we had no idea he was on something. No -- your excuse was he was under the influence of something.

So you can't have it both ways. You take care of someone you know is in a medical crisis, if that's what you're going to allege. But he can take notes constantly in this trial but he couldn't take someone's pulse? It's ridiculous.

CAMEROTA: Chris Stewart, we really appreciate your time. Thank you very much. We're obviously following this very closely.

STEWART: Any time.

CAMEROTA: OK, the MLB All-Star Game pulled out of Georgia. Other major corporations facing pressure to do that same. Now Georgia's governor is speaking out about the backlash his state is facing after signing that new election law. That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[07:40:22]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) GOV. BRIAN KEMP (R), GEORGIA: Georgians and all Americans should know what his decision means. It means cancel culture and partisan activists are coming for your business. Secure, accessible, fair elections are worth the threats. They are worth the boycotts as well as the lawsuits.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: That's Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp remaining defiant over Major League Baseball's decision to move the All-Star Game out of Georgia. The decision came after that state passed a restrictive new voting law.

Joining us now is CNN legal analyst and Republican election lawyer Ben Ginsberg. Ben, thanks so much for being with us.

BEN GINSBERG, CNN LEGAL ANALYST, REPUBLICAN ELECTION LAWYER (via Skype): Thank you.

BERMAN: So when states around the country -- and there are many states now considering actions not unlike Georgia -- some more restrictive than Georgia's -- when they see Major League Baseball moving the All-Star Game out, when they see Coke and Delta and other corporations speaking out against the law, how much of an impact do you think that will be on lawmakers as they weigh the decision to pass new restrictive voting laws?

GINSBERG: Well, it has an impact on some state legislators, John. My guess is that it drives something of a wedge in Republican caucuses. There will be a group of Republicans who are very adamant about pushing through these regulations.

But there will also be more moderate, sensible, business-oriented Republicans who know that there is a valid point made in the Georgia law because it does have some good provisions that are needed in election law, but also just some completely mean-spirited political provisions that don't stand up -- not giving people food and water in line being the greatest example of that.

CAMEROTA: But then about that -- about those good provisions that you're referring to in the Georgia Law. Since it's more of a mixed bag, I think, than some Democrats say it is, do you think that the corporations are going too far by taking these actions in Georgia?

GINSBERG: Well, I think it may have been too far, other than the fact that this was the first bill. It was really handed in a way that was wrong -- the whole signing ceremony, the arrest of the legislator. A bunch of provisions in it really hid the positive election law administration changes that were in the bill.

So it did become a symbol. It is in Georgia, which is obviously kind of ground zero for election disputes. And I think corporate America saw its role as a citizen in needing to express itself about the bad provisions in this bill and the fact that these other legislative provisions could spread in other states.

BERMAN: And how much power do these corporations have, do you think, Ben?

GINSBERG: Well, I think they have power in the sense that they are leaders of the -- of the communities, right? And in polling, the most trusted voices in communities these days are often corporations -- the people who provide jobs, who provide help to the community generally. And so, corporations -- it depends -- varies from state-to-state -- do have a lot of sway.

And, John and Alisyn, the interesting political twist right now is that if you look at the Biden infrastructure bill, Republicans are going to have to rely on corporate America for help in defeating tax increases. So now, this fight over voting laws, which after all, are based on the unproven allegations of voter fraud, sets up a really odd dynamic over something far more substantive coming down the pike, which is infrastructure.

CAMEROTA: I mean, this is what -- I think that you've just hit the nail on the head that the fiction, OK, of vast voting fraud is what this is predicated on. But Republicans -- I mean, polling suggests -- believe it -- I mean, believe that there has been vast voting fraud. As you know, President Trump talked about it ad nauseam.

And so, is there some potential upside to some of these laws that it will assuage the anxiety of Republicans?

GINSBERG: So the answer to that is yes. I think there are a series of common-sense reforms that you could put into state laws that will give Republicans more comfort. And it is a huge problem that so many people don't believe in the accuracy of the election results.

[07:45:04]

But can put a set of common-sense solutions into bills, and some of those are in the Georgia bill. They're just hidden beneath the sort of more ones that are designed to stop Republican opponents from voting.

BERMAN: You shouldn't have to assuage a lie. I mean, assuaging a lie is not good legislation. It doesn't seem to be where we should be directing our attention around the country, Ben.

And there's another side to that argument though, too, which is could this backfire? Now, I'm not saying this is a reason why people should be happy about the law or not because whether or not it's effective is a different story. But could it backfire on Republicans?

GINSBERG: Well, sure, it could backfire on Republicans.

There are common-sense, generally supported laws like people need identification to vote. You have to make them universally available. But people identifying themselves at the ballot place is an important provision to give people confidence that only legitimate voters -- those duly qualified are voting.

But yes, it can backfire. I think what Republicans are missing in many of these states is that they're alienating both the business community but also more moderate Republicans in the suburbs, which is the area where Donald Trump lost the election. So being so sort of adamant on the more unnecessary parts of the voter law in the name of the big lie is wrong.

But every cycle there are common-sense solutions that can be agreed on in a bipartisan manner to make elections better.

BERMAN: Ben Ginsberg, thank you for being with us this morning. Appreciate it as always.

GINSBERG: Thank you. You bet.

BERMAN: Hundreds of protesters killed in Myanmar as international condemnation grows over the military coup there. Up next, CNN's Clarissa Ward is now live in Myanmar with an exclusive report on what's happening. Stick around.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[07:51:18]

BERMAN: We have a CNN exclusive this morning -- remarkable access inside Myanmar, which is the midst of a bloody military coup.

One advocacy group says at least 550 people have been killed in the past two months. Protests continue -- they did throughout the weekend, which security officials have been responding to with this brutal crackdown detaining thousands. At least 11 people were arrested Friday after being interviewed by CNN.

Our Clarissa Ward joins us now live from Myanmar with the permission of the military who we do want to note is escorting our team. So, Clarissa, what's happening now? Tell us why it's so important for you to be there.

CLARISSA WARD, CNN CHIEF INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, as you said, John, two months ago a democratically-elected government was overthrown by the military in a coup after the military suffered what can only be described as a humiliating defeat in the elections back in November.

That coup has given rise to an enormous protest movement that has swelled across the country. Put simply, the military does not have the support of the people of Myanmar. And as those protests have swelled and as people have become more angered about this coup, so too has the violent oppression of that protest movement by the military.

As you said, hundreds have been killed. Among them, dozens of children.

We wanted to come here to report on the ground because simply put, John, no other journalists -- international journalists have been allowed into Myanmar since this coup happened. Now, we came with permission from the military with all of the complications that entails, but we still felt that it was of vital importance to come here ourselves to see what was happening and to confront the people responsible for the violence. CAMEROTA: And so, Clarissa, I mean I know all of this is delicate but since you're under the auspices of the military are you able to report freely?

WARD: We have been assured prior to coming here that we would have independence and freedom of movement.

We wanted to stay in a hotel in Yangon. That was not allowed. We're staying, instead, in this military compound that's completely walled off. We cannot come in and out and move freely.

On our first day, we were moving around with a convoy of six trucks full of soldiers. In addition to that, we have many minders following our every move.

Whenever we do have the opportunity to be on the street -- which is very rarely, Alisyn -- our minders are constantly filming everything with their cell phones, making notes, making phone calls. Taking records of every single person we talk to and every single movement we make.

So it has not been without its challenges, Alisyn.

BERMAN: Well, they're taking pictures and they're taking names, apparently, Clarissa. So tell us about the people who've been detained after speaking with you.

WARD: So this was a very distressing incident, John. On one day we were finally allowed to go to a public space -- to an open market. And it's important to underscore here that we have not solicited contact with any activists -- with anyone who is part of the protest movement because we know given the context that we're hearing just how dangerous that could be.

However, when we took our cameras out in this market and started shooting video, people started coming up to us. People started giving the three-fingered "HUNGER GAMES" salute that has become the emblem -- the symbol of this defiant movement.

And they came up and started telling us their stories. They told us they were frightened. They told us there is no peace there. And we let them say their peace. We felt it was important to give them the opportunity to have their side of the story on the record.

[07:55:08]

Shortly afterwards, however, we found out that many of them were detained. One woman actually ran after me while we were still at the market, trembling like a leaf, on the phone with someone who said that three people we'd spoken to had already been arrested.

We had the opportunity, however, to sit down with Myanmar's senior military -- senior military leadership -- the government spokesman himself. And we asked him why on earth these people had been arrested and we urged him to release them. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

WARD (on camera): We went to a market in Yangon and a lot of people approached us because they wanted to talk to us. They wanted to tell their side of the story.

We subsequently found out that at least five of them were arrested. We have verified this independently. We have seen photographic evidence, in some cases, to confirm this.

Can you please explain why you would be arresting people for talking to us? What possible crime did these people commit?

MAJOR GENERAL ZAW MIN TUN, TATMADAW SPOKESPERSON (through translator): They haven't committed any crime. I saw it on the news yesterday and I asked how many were arrested. Eleven got arrested.

The security forces were worried that they would provoke others and start the protest in the market and that is why they got arrested. However, the government is arranging to release them as soon as possible.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WARD: We are now very relieved to be able to confirm that at least eight of those 11 people and all eight that CNN knew about have now been released and that is really, truly great news.

But still, this just gives you such an idea of the situation that these people are confronting here. They can't even say on camera that they're frightened, that they want a better future, that they want democracy without being arrested. That's how threatened the military is by these people and by this enormously popular protest movement -- John, Alisyn.

CAMEROTA: And so, Clarissa, why does the military want you there or why have they agreed to allow CNN to be there if they're just going to arrest everybody that you talk to?

WARD: The military wants to get its side of the story on the record, too, and that's important. And we gave them the opportunity to do that.

They see the protest movement as being violent, as being dangerous, as being disruptive to the economy. They say that if people allow the process to play out that there will be elections again within the next two years.

They paraded a series of victims before us who told us stories about being threatened by the protesters, by -- humiliated by the protesters. They took us to buildings that they said had been vandalized by the protesters.

But when it comes to the idea of this two-year process before which there will be elections, you can understand why very few people here have any faith in that. There were democratically-held elections back in November. There were independent observers who attended those elections who did not make note of any egregious fraud or anything of that nature. And yet, still, the military intercepted and took -- and this coup took place.

So very few people here actually believe them when they say that there will be another chance at elections. And after more than half a century of repressive military rule, simply put, they're not willing to give up. They're not willing to let go of the hard-won freedoms that they have enjoyed in the last decade.

BERMAN: Clarissa, do you have a sense if the military regime -- their power is coalescing or growing at this point? Where is it on the curve as you look towards these elections two years from now?

WARD: From what we've seen on the ground the military does not have anything in the way of strong support from the people. What they do have is sophisticated weaponry. What they do have is a large fighting force. There is no comparison in the scale of what you're seeing from the protesters versus what you're seeing from the military in terms of armaments, in terms of funding.

And so, the military does have that on its side and it may well be that brute force wins the day here.

What's very concerning to so many people, including the United Nations who warned that this could turn into a blood bath, is that as the protesters become more incensed, as the protest movement becomes more violent this country could be on course for real civil strife, and nobody wants to see that happen.

BERMAN: Clarissa Ward, we are lucky to have you there. The world is lucky to have you there so we get a window as to what is happening. Please stay safe, you and your team. Thank you for being there.

You're going to be back live on "THE LEAD" at 4:00 eastern time here in the United States. Appreciate it.

Remarkable, as always.

CAMEROTA: Incredible -- I mean, getting that exclusive. That's the first time that we are seeing that and hearing that because she's there on the ground.

BERMAN: And to have the military around her all the time.