Return to Transcripts main page

New Day

Piece of Airplane Could Be from MH-370; Trump on Immigration: 'Get the Bad Ones Out'; Senators Grill Cabinet Members on Iran Deal. Aired 7-7:30a ET

Aired July 30, 2015 - 07:00   ET

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

ROBYN KRIEL, CNN CORRESPONDENT: The debris, bearing the marking BB- 670, which could help in the identification process.

[07:00:10] DAVID SOUCIE, CNN AVIATION ANALYST: If it is indeed part of a 777, then we're pretty clear that it would be then also part of MH-370.

KRIEL: Flight MH-370 vanished without a trace in March of last year with 239 souls on board shortly after takeoff from Kuala Lumpur en route to Beijing.

The Malaysian government ultimately declaring the missing plane an accident. Everyone on board presumed dead.

Now after almost 500 days of empty leads, this may be the first piece of physical evidence, bringing authorities one step closer to unlocking the mystery of the ill-fated flight's disappearance.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: All right, thanks to Robyn Kriel on Reunion island. You can see on this map exactly how far away it is from Australia.

The new discovery comes after nearly 17 months of nonstop search efforts for the missing plane. The search largely focused here off the western coast of Australia. You can see right over here where they've been looking. How could the debris end up all the way from over here to Reunion Island?

CNN's Andrew Stevens joins us now from Kuala Lumpur in Malaysia on the exhaustive search efforts since the plane vanished -- Andrew.

ANDREW STEVENS, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Who would have thought it would be 500 days and only now they're just started to get that -- what looks like debris linked to 370. So extraordinary.

Flight 370, taking off from K.L. on the way to Beijing, disappeared shortly after its takeoff. And the search began. And it was an enormous search, too, to begin with.

If you looked at what most people would say the time, it must have gone down somewhere on its flight route. But as the information came out that it had doubled back on itself, the search area got bigger and bigger.

One stage, 4.6 million square kilometers in search zone. That is just an enormous area. Twenty-six countries were involved in that search at that stage. John, the U.S., China, Malaysia, of course, Indonesia, Australia, Pakistan, India, Thailand, the list goes on and on, searching and searching.

But as the analysts looked closer and closer at what they see on the radar -- and these are just radar shadows, remember -- and linked up information that we're getting from the satellites talking to the plane automatically, that search started to move south into the deep southern Indian Ocean. And it got smaller; only three countries at the end now looking for that plane.

Malaysia, of course, Australia, which is leading the search in that area, and China, as well. With just two ships now involved. It has been an extraordinary 500 days, as I said, $100 million spent so far, Alisyn, and only now we're starting to get what looks like a clue.

And very important to remember: If this is part of the -- of 370, it's still going to take a long time to actually pinpoint where the actual plane went down, Alisyn.

ALISYN CAMEROTA, CNN ANCHOR: Absolutely. But it could be an important clue, Andrew, as you said. Thanks so much for that.

Anxious family members of the 239 people on board the flight holding their breath this morning that the debris will provide concrete answers about the fate of their loved ones. CNN's Will Ripley is in Beijing, where Flight 370 was headed before going off course -- Will.

WILL RIPLEY, CNN CORRESPONDENT: More than 150 of the passengers were from China, Alisyn, and we've been speaking with many of their families, who are saying their urgent need right now is information. Information they are not getting from Malaysian Airlines or the Chinese government.

The hotline has been shut down, and their information center has been closed for more than a year. They are having to watch television and scan the Internet for updates about their loved ones. They say they're getting no official information. It's anguish. It is heartbreaking, and it's very angering for them. It's brought many of them back to when the plane disappeared in March of last year.

I want to read you a quote from a group of Chinese families who came together. They've been communicating on social media. They put out this statement saying, "No matter where the debris is found, we care more about the whereabouts of our family members. Whether or not the debris of MH-370 is found, all parties should not stop or give up their previously pledged search effort."

We're also hearing from Jacquita Gonzales. She is the wife of Patrick Gomez, as you know, the in-flight supervisor of MH-370. She's saying, quote, "I'm torn. If it's confirmed to have come from 370, there will be some closure for us, but I am still hoping it's not the plane. That Patrick is still alive." John, there are many family members, some 500 days in, who still have

hope that somehow everybody made it out OK, even with the discovery of the debris.

BERMAN: Will Ripley for us. Closure will not be easy to come by for any of these families after these 500 days. Thanks so much, Will.

Joined now by Mary Schiavo and Richard Quest. Mary is a CNN transportation analyst, a former inspector general of the Department of Transportation. Richard is a CNN aviation correspondent, host of "QUEST MEANS BUSINESS."

And Richard, a man you've spoken to before, the Malaysian prime minister, just a few minutes ago says he believes it is very likely that this piece of debris found on Reunion island is from a Boeing 777. So, Richard, if it is from that type of plane, and MH-370 was a Boeing 777, doesn't the piece of debris almost have to be from MH-370?

[07:05:09] RICHARD QUEST, CNN AVIATION CORRESPONDENT: It doesn't have to be, but yes, there is a very high degree of probability. Planes don't lose flaperons or flaps. And when they do, you tend to know about it. It's not an incidental piece of equipment on the aircraft. It's a fundamental piece that we are talking about. And there's no other 777s that have been lost. And as far as the experts will tell us, they haven't received any reports of that piece of equipment being lost from any other aircraft.

So yes, I mean, there are a lot of other possibilities out there. One could conjure up a variety of scenarios that says it's not from MH- 370, but the experts did tell us about a year ago that when the -- in about eight months to a year, if debris there was, it would start washing up on the East African coast. And that's what we're seeing with this.

It's going to take time. Because, you know, look, this is -- I know we've said this a million times. But listening to the other people talking, this is unprecedented. We've never really had a situation where a plane has been lost where no one knows where it is, where only debris turns up 500 days after. And now you're having to reverse engineering where it might have been all that time ago.

So that is why this is going to take time. And it's fine to blame people for not talking to this person or that person, John, or to actually say it should have been done this way or that way. But you're damned if you do, and you're damned if you don't. If you don't say anything, you get criticized. If you say what you think it might be, you get criticized.

BERMAN: Well, they're not even at the reengineering stage at this point, Richard. They're just trying to confirm whether this piece of debris is from MH-370.

Mary Schiavo, there's some kind of maintenance number on this flapper. It's not a serial number. It's a maintenance number. How long will it take to trace that back to MH-370? An Australian official told NEW DAY just a short time ago their timeframe right now is 24 to 48 hours before they get confirmation.

MARY SCHIAVO, CNN TRANSPORTATION ANALYST: Well, you know, a lot of people say that planes actually go flying on the amount of paper that back them up. And the importance of these serial numbers is not only to track the parts but to track the maintenance. And it's required by law in all developed aviation nations that you track the parts and the maintenance numbers on those parts.

So the part numbers also could be traced to Boeing, but they could also be traced back to the airline. And so that's what they were referring to as the maintenance number. And it should be in the maintenance logbooks, which are kept electronically. And then, of course, Boeing would have all the part numbers and would be very readily available to be checking them.

BERMAN: And Mary, if and when they do officially connect this to MH- 370, it doesn't tell you everything but it starts to tell you some things. It is official confirmation, then, that the plane went down in the Indian Ocean. But this 7-piece foot -- this 7-foot piece of debris can tell you more than just that.

SCHIAVO: Oh, absolutely. And I mean, as debris goes, this is a very large piece. I mean, I've worked cases where the largest piece of debris was the size of a couple fists. So it's a very large piece, and you can get a lot of clues.

And remember, on Pan Am 103, the telltale piece that they finally found to unlock the clues of what happened was the size of a thumbnail. So they can get a lot of clues. There's some things they can rule out.

For example, they would be able to rule out explosions and fire, at least in that part of the plane, because there would be characteristic hitting in the metal and scorching on the metal. So there are some things that they can rule out.

And they can also possibly rule out a fall from altitudes of, you know, 35,000 feet to end up with a part this big. But they can't tell, for example, at this point whether the entire wing was ripped off and then this part came off the wing later.

But it is a very, very important clue, especially to use drift models to then go back up the chain and see where the drift might have originated.

BERMAN: And Richard Quest, it doesn't necessarily tell them exactly where on the bottom of the ocean floor the rest of this plane might be, the fuselage. How much -- how many clues in this reengineering process you were talking about does it begin to give them?

QUEST: I think, first of all, you've got the drift, the reverse drift, which will take you back to roughly the same area where they're already searching.

Then you've got the barnacles and you've got the sea damage that will tell you how long it was in the ocean for. And that helps you. But they already believe, because of the Inmarsat data, they're in,

quote, "the right area." But that right area is vast; it's 120,000 square kilometers, 56,000 square feet -- miles. Can they get it any closer, John, as a result of this piece of debris? I think the answer is no. It does not take them to where "X" marks the spot. No.

BERMAN: Mary, how careful are they being right now? You know, Richard says you're damned if you do; you're damned if you don't. But some of the families already complained to our Andrew Stevens that they're getting their news from the media. You've worked with families of crash victims. How careful do officials need to be now?

SCHIAVO: Well, officials need to be very careful, but they also have to have an organization that is set up to provide the information to the families.

[07:10:07] And the families were getting information from CNN almost from day one because of the censoring and the lack of information that the -- their government gives them on a daily basis.

And so, you know, what we have in the NTSB is we actually have an assistance office for families. And it is their job to keep families advised of what's going on. And we're here because the part was picked up on Reunion Island and went back, of course, to the BEA, is the cognizant agency there. And they are one of the parties to the Malaysia investigation. There are some 13 parties to the Malaysia investigation.

So it takes time for the information to trickle back to the families, but they've shut down the official offices. Even the airline has shut down the initial office to give them information. And the head of the airline was quoted as saying they thought it was a wild goose chase. Not a very good thing to be telling the families of those who were lost on that flight.

BERMAN: Well, officials now from all over the world headed to Reunion Island to get a look at this piece of debris. And we could learn much more over the next 24 hours. Mary Schiavo, Richard Quest, thanks so much -- Alisyn.

CAMEROTA: OK. We'll get back to that with all the developments as they come in.

Meanwhile, let's talk politics. Donald Trump making his first overseas trip and firmly establishing himself as the Republican frontrunner in 2016. There's a brand-new Quinnipiac University national poll. It shows Trump head and shoulders ahead of the Republican presidential pack at this point. His controversial comments clearly not hurting him, including when he angered many after describing Mexicans who come to the U.S. illegally as criminals and rapists.

So what is his plan for immigration reform? Let's ask chief congressional correspondent Dana Bash, who sat down with Trump one-on- one. Fascinating interview, Dana. DANA BASH, CNN CHIEF CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Thank you. You

mentioned immigration. This really is the issue that propelled him initially with the conservative base. So now that he's doing so well, the questions are, what will he actually do about it? Particularly I wanted to know about the, maybe 11 million, maybe more undocumented immigrants in this country.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

BASH: Let's talk about immigration. You have said that when it comes to the 11 million -- we're not sure how many are here.

DONALD TRUMP (R), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Nobody knows. Nobody knows.

BASH: You have said that those who are criminals should be thrown out of the country. I think everyone pretty much, you know, would agree with you on that.

TRUMP: No, I don't think so. A lot of people think they should stay here.

BASH: OK. Well, let's just -- let's just, for argument's sake -- for argument's sake, let's say you're president, you would do that. What happens to the other people? What do you do?

TRUMP: No. 1, the first thing we would do is get the bad ones out. We have a lot of bad dudes, as I said. You have a lot of really bad people here in our prisons and they're clogging up the prisons. I want them to go back, and not only in Mexico. I want to get them back to the country where they are, and I want them to be in their prisons.

So I want to get the bad ones out. Not only the ones in the prisons. And by the way, and they're never coming back. Not only the ones in the prisons but the ones that are going around like in San Francisco and shooting Kate, and shooting Jameel (ph) and shooting people that should not -- that should be with us, OK.

Then, we have a law, right? You're supposed to come in legally. I would get people out, and I would have an expedited way of getting them back into the country so they can be legal.

BASH: OK. Hold on that point right there. When you say "get people out," are you talking about, like, a mass deportation?

TRUMP: We don't even know who these people are. No one even knows...

BASH: But how do you find them?

TRUMP: We've got to find them.

BASH: How do you do that? I mean, you're a business guy.

TRUMP: Excuse me. We've got to find them. Politicians aren't going to find them, because they have no clue. We will find them the. We will get them out. BASH: When you say, still, get them out, just the process of that.

There are a lot of smart people who have been focused on it for a long time, say it's just not feasible.

TRUMP: It's feasible if you know how to manage. Politicians don't know how to manage.

We have to bring great people into this country, OK? And I want to bring -- I love the idea of immigration. But it's got to be legal immigration.

Now, a lot of these people are helping us, whether it's the grapes or whether it's jobs, and sometimes it's jobs. In all fairness, I love our country, but sometimes it's jobs that a citizen of the United States doesn't want to do. I mean, there are jobs that a lot of people don't want to do. I want to move them out, and we're going to move them back in and let them be legal. But they have to be in here legally.

BASH: Legally like...

TRUMP: Excuse me, otherwise you don't have a country. You don't have a country. If people can just pour into the country illegally, you don't have a country. But I would expedite the system.

BASH: When you say legal, do you mean legal status or can they be eligible for citizenship?

TRUMP: Legal status.

BASH: No citizenship?

TRUMP: No citizenship. I mean, we'll see later, down the line, who knows what's going to happen? But legal status.

BASH: So you're open to...

TRUMP: It's something to think about but I would say right now no, I'm not open to it. I would say legal status.

BASH: What about the DREAMers? What about people who came here when they were children? They didn't know what they were doing. They came with their parents, who brought them here illegally.

Now many of them are upstanding citizens. We -- again, you're right, we don't know how many people, but about maybe even 1.8 million people fall under this category. Should they be able to stay legally?

[07:15:10] TRUMP: We're going to do something. I've been giving it so much thought. You know, you have, on a humanitarian basis, you have a lot of deep thought going into this, believe me. I actually have a big heart. Something that nobody knows. A lot of people don't understand that.

But the DREAMers, it's a tough situation. We're going to do something. And one of the things we're going to do is expedite. When somebody is terrific, we want them back here. They have to be legally.

BASH: So they have to leave, too?

TRUMP: They're with their parents. It depends. But look, it sounds cold, and it sounds hard. We have a country. Our country is going to hell. We have to have a system where people are legally in our country.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BASH: Now right now Donald Trump is not in our country. He left the city, left the United States shortly after our conversation for Scotland, as many presidential candidates do when they go and visit their own golf courses, which he did. Because he's having a big golf tournament at his Turnberry resort in Scotland for women's golfers. So that's why he decided to keep it, because he said it was very important. He's going to be there for a few days.

Of course, we're coming up on the debate next week, the first big debate. I asked if he's going to be studying on the plane and he said, "I am who I am. We'll see what happens."

CAMEROTA: Maybe it's his way of relaxing before the debate. So it will be interesting to see what happens a week from now. Dana, thanks so much.

BASH: Thank you.

CAMEROTA: Let's talk about what's going on on Capitol Hill. The attempt to sell the Iran nuclear deal to Congress continued this morning with Vice President Biden is hosting members of the House Democratic Caucus. This comes after yet another congressional hearing, this one with Secretary of State John Kerry going toe-to-toe with lawmakers opposed to the Iran deal.

Joining us this morning is Republican Iowa Senator Joni Ernst. She is a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee.

Senator, it's great to have you on NEW DAY and on CNN. Welcome.

SEN. JONI ERNST (R), IOWA: Great to be here. Thanks so much, Alisyn.

CAMEROTA: OK, let's talk about this hearing yesterday. I know that you were a part of it, and you are opposed to the Iran deal. What have you learned that makes you so opposed to this?

ERNST: Well, first, this to me is a pathway to nuclear armament for Iran. This deal does not stop them from developing nuclear capabilities. It only freezes it for a short time.

Second, we have dollars, billions of dollars that will flow into Iran. And we know that they are a state sponsor of terrorism. So we can't allow that to happen.

These people are not our allies. They are not going to change overnight. I see it as a pathway to nuclear armament, not getting rid of it.

CAMEROTA: What the administration has said is that this is the best chance to monitor Iran. That the IAEA being able to go into sites is the best chance that the world has of knowing what Iran is up to. In fact, it just this week, as you know, Joint Chiefs Chair Martin Dempsey and Defense Secretary Ash Carter both said that they support this deal because it is preferable to any sort of military alternative. What's your response?

ERNST: Well, and my take on that, and I reject this premise, because the president has stated over and over again that the only other option to this deal is war. And again, I reject that. And I asked that specifically of General Dempsey yesterday. And he stated that he did not advise the president that it was either war or this deal. And that there are many other options on the table.

CAMEROTA: Such as, sorry to interrupt, but such as? I mean, what would you have done differently?

ERNST: Well, I think that we still have those diplomatic options. I reject that they are not going to continue working with us, especially if we are able to work with many of the other countries that are negotiating this deal.

We have to look at what we are doing to stop nuclear armament and protect other countries around the globe. That is not happening with this deal. As I stated, it provides a pathway to nuclear armament for the Iranians. It doesn't stop them at all. They are still -- still a state sponsor of terrorism.

CAMEROTA: And when you say diplomatic options, what does that mean?

ERNST: Well, that means that our world leaders need to get together. They need to continue with those economic sanctions. There are military options which are always left on the table, but that should be last resort.

So we do have to keep those discussions going. We have to intensify the economic sanctions. They are working. However, Iran will continue to push against those that we consider allies. They will continue to call for death for Americans. We can't allow that to happen.

CAMEROTA: I mean, of course, with the administration we say that we have had economic sanctions. And during the time of sanctions, Iran has exponentially grown their centrifuges. So the sanctions didn't seem to be keeping them from moving forward.

ERNST: Well, but it did slow them down, but now what we are doing, again, we are allowing them to continue with their -- their enrichment. They will be able to purchase conventional weapons in a short period of time. So now not only have we not stopped their nuclear capabilities and development, but we've also escalated a conventional arms race in the Middle East.

[07:20:31] CAMEROTA: Senator, we -- we also want to ask you about Planned Parenthood. So much in the news in this past couple of weeks. You have sponsored a bill to defund them.

And of course, the argument against that is that Planned Parenthood provides a whole host of services beyond abortion services. They provide birth control. They provide cancer screenings that, you know, tens of thousands of women and men rely upon. So what's your answer to that?

ERNST: Well, my answer to that is that, yes, we are planning on defunding Planned Parenthood through this legislation. But we are not decreasing the dollars that are available for those very important screenings and other services offered to women and to men, as you mentioned. That money can be applied for by other -- other facilities such as hospitals and community health centers. So those services are still available.

And if you look at the wide range of services that are available, Planned Parenthood only does about 10 percent of those screenings overall in this nation. Very, very small participant in those types of activities.

We want to make sure that women still have access to health care, and that can be done through many other means. We are not planning on lowering the number of dollars. Those dollars are still going to be there. Just not available for Planned Parenthood.

The videos that have been released are extremely disturbing. We want Americans to speak out against this.

CAMEROTA: What Planned Parenthood would say is that what women, particularly low-income women need, is access. And the clinics provide access. So every time you close a clinic, it makes women have to go further to find that hospital or further to get that birth control. And that, without the clinics being open, that there will be exactly what you don't want, which is more unwanted pregnancies.

ERNST: No, I reject that, because there are many, many more thousands of community healthcare centers, hospitals, easy access to those types of activities.

Planned Parenthood, I believe, has maybe around 800 clinics nationwide. There is still easy available access. Even in the rural areas. I come from a very rural area. We have many community healthcare centers as well as county hospitals and so forth where we can receive those services.

CAMEROTA: Very quickly in our remaining time, we do want to ask you about the presidential race. In the all-important state of Iowa, your home state, there's a new poll out just this morning that shows, once again, Donald Trump in the lead. This is from the Quinnipiac poll. He has 20 percent. His closest rival, Scott Walker, has 13 percent. He has twice as much as Jeb Bush, who has 10 percent. Do you believe that Iowans will make Donald Trump a leader?

ERNST: Well, today I'm not going to speak for all of Iowans, because we do have a very interesting caucus process, which will be coming up at the beginning of next year. I think it's an exciting time. We have a lot of candidates that bring

a lot of different skills and abilities to the table. We'll see what Iowa says here in the next six months or so.

CAMEROTA: We sure will. At the moment, I should say that the latest we have from Iowa shows Scott Walker in the lead at 19 percent. Donald Trump with 17 percent.

So Senator Joni Ernst, thank you so much for making time for NEW DAY. It's great to talk to you.

ERNST: Thanks, Alisyn. Have a great day.

CAMEROTA: You, too.

Let's get over to John.

BERMAN: Good conversation there.

Much more ahead of our coverage of a major development in the search for Flight 370. How will investigators be able to find out if this newly-discovered piece of debris, how can they connect it to the missing plane? That's ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[07:27:24] PEREIRA: We are following this major development in the search for the missing Malaysian Airlines Flight 370. A piece of debris recovered at an island in the western Indian Ocean off the coast of Madagascar, thousands of miles from the search zone, appears to be likely from Boeing -- from a Boeing 777. Australian officials say we could know within 24 to 48 hours if it indeed belongs to Flight 370.

Tom Foreman has more now on how officials can make that determination --Tom.

TOM FOREMAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Hey, Alisyn, John, Michaela.

This piece of debris is about 7 feet long, 3 to 4 feet wide. And we're told by Boeing that it is consistent with what they would expect to find on one of their 777s. The engineers have looked at this, and they see elements that match up to the things they build. So it matches the first part of our criteria, that it could come from this plane.

If you roll it around, I can show you that our industry analysts say they believe it would be from the backside of the left wing over here.

First match: it's the right type of thing to be from the Malaysia Air plane. It's also the right color; it's in the right condition. It's covered with barnacles. That would suggest it could have been at sea for some 500 days. So now they'll have to look for the identifiers, the serial numbers that you would find in almost every part of a major plane like this. This is from a seat cushion, for example, from another plane. If they find the serial number on this new piece that they found, and

it matches the Malaysia Air plane, that's it. That will be proof that the plane definitively crashed and there wasn't some other strange thing that happened to it.

It doesn't answer the question, though, how it wound up where it was, this piece that has been discovered. Remember, throughout this process we've been talking about the search area as being down at the end of a long flight where the plane ran out of fuel and then went into the water somewhere off the coast of Australia. All the search areas have been over here.

So why is this one piece way over there, some 2,300 miles away? Well, could it have flown that direction? Could this whole theory be wrong, and should the line actually be going straight over toward Reunion Island? Not likely. Because honestly, this part right here that you're looking at, that's where it would have run out of fuel. It wouldn't have come even close.