Return to Transcripts main page

At This Hour

Ukraine Tensions Escalate As Biden Weighs Military Options; U.S. Supreme Court To Hear Challenges To Affirmative Action; Former Attorney General Bill Barr Speaks With 1/6 Cmte. Aired 11-11:30a ET

Aired January 24, 2022 - 11:00   ET

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

[11:00:00]

ANDY SCHOLES, CNN SPORTS ANCHOR: A thriller in that one, Brady said after the game, he's going to take it day by day, no decisions yet. But I imagine he doesn't want to go out like that and he'll be back.

JIM SCIUTTO, CNN ANCHOR: My Giants had a shot at Josh Allen, they whiffed. Andy Scholes, thanks very much.

BIANNA GOLODRYGA, CNN ANCHOR: Thanks Andy.

SCIUTTO: Thanks so much to all of you too, for joining us today, lots of news. I'm Jim Sciutto.

GOLODRYGA: And I'm Bianna Golodryga. At this hour with Kate Bolduan starts right now.

KATE BOLDUAN, CNN ANCHOR: Hello, everyone, I'm Kate Bolduan. Here's what we're watching at this hour. Drumbeat of war, President Biden now considering military options to stop a Russian invasion of Ukraine as Europe moves closer to conflict.

Violent crime, New York City's new mayor facing a major challenge to make streets safer after a 22-year-old police officer is killed in the line of duty.

And Abigail Disney joins me live on her new film that takes on the company her grandfather founded, why it's become her mission to fight for higher wages for workers.

Thanks for being here everyone. We begin with the big developments and growing fears that Europe is closer to the brink of war. This morning, the State Department is reducing personnel at the U.S. Embassy in Kyiv, Ukraine, starting with the departure of non-essential staff and family members, NATO allies are sending additional ships and fighter jets to Eastern Europe and putting forces on standby. A move the Kremlin is slamming as hysteria.

President Biden is also considering deploying several thousand U.S. troops to the region, which would mark a major escalation from him. Secretary of State Tony Blinken now is also warning that if a single Russian unit enters Ukraine, it would trigger a swift, severe, and united response from the U.S. and Europe. We have every angle covered on this rapidly developing story with reporters in Ukraine, Russia, and Washington at this hour. Let's begin with CNN's Matthew Chance in Kyiv. Matthew, what is the latest there?

MATTHEW CHANCE, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, the latest Kate is there's been quite a strong reaction, I think, from the Ukrainians to that decision by the U.S. State Department to allow non- essential diplomats to leave the country and to order the families of diplomats out of the country. They're saying there's no need for that kind of action to be taken at this stage. The security situation in the country on the border, they're saying has not changed significantly in the past several days or even longer than that to warn that. And they're calling it, you know, an overreaction, essentially, an excessive amount of caution, I think is the phrase that the foreign ministry used.

And it kind of exposes, once again, the difference of opinion, the frustrations, the disagreements that exist behind the scenes between the United States and Ukraine, even though this is close military and diplomatic partnership, there is, you know, a certain amount of blue water between, you know, how they see this conflict developing. The Ukrainian leadership is starting to play down, the possibility of the being impending Russian invasion, saying the security situation, the threat has not changed really for years.

And they've been seeing this buildup of Russian forces on their border since last year. And they're playing down the possibility. This is something that's going to happen imminently. But that's not supported by the United States. And it's not supported by the Ukrainians owning jets (ph) either, which I've seen, which indicates more than 100,000 Russian troops still poised on that border near Ukraine. Kate?

BOLDUAN: Matthew, thank you so much for that.

The U.K. is also sounding the alarm. British Prime Minister Boris Johnson warning this morning, a Russian invasion of Ukraine would be a painful, violent, and bloody business. It's how he put it. It comes as Britain claims that it has intelligence Russia has been plotting to install a pro Kremlin leader in Kyiv, replacing the democratically elected president of Ukraine. CNN's Nic Robertson is live in Moscow with this side of it. Nic, what's the view from there?

NIC ROBERTSON, CNN INTERNATIONAL DIPLOMATIC EDITOR: The view from the Kremlin is and we heard from the President Putin's spokesman Dmitry Peskov today is that this is informational hysteria, false information are the words that he used to describe the information coming from the British about Russia trying to back a puppet leader for Ukraine after they've invaded and decided to occupy the country.

What we're hearing from the Kremlin is their interpretation of what's happening in NATO, in the United States, in London as well, is that there's a pretext amongst those countries being created for some sort of military action around Ukraine. So they're really pushing back very hard as they have been all along. But the strength of clarity of message that's coming from Europe and from London today from Boris Johnson is absolutely made very clear for President Putin in particular to read, this is what Boris Johnson said about how painful an invasion could be.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BORIS JOHNSON, BRITISH PRIME MINISTER: We need to make it very clear to the Kremlin to Russia that that would be a disastrous step. But we also need to get over the message that invading Ukraine from a Russian perspective is going to be a painful, violent, and bloody business. And I think it's very important that people in Russia understand that this could be a new Chechnya.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

[11:05:18]

ROBERTSON: And U.K. today sending its foreign secretary to meet with the NATO Secretary General in Brussels as well, just a button up the unity really tightly.

BOLDUAN: Nic, thank you so much for that.

All of this has President Biden weighing his options now as well possibly boosting troop levels in Eastern Europe and possibly moving away from the his administration's do not provoke strategy, as we've seen so far. CNN's Jeremy Diamond is live at the White House for us. I know the President just got back to the White House, Jeremy. What are the options that are being considered at this hour?

JEREMY DIAMOND, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Well, Kate, we know that President Biden is mulling options for sending additional troops to Eastern Europe and Baltic Allies, as many as 5,000 troops, 1,000 to 5,000 troops is one of the options under consideration. And we're now learning from our Pentagon correspondent Barbara Starr, that the Biden ministration is also in the final stages of identifying specific military units it wants to send to Europe and drafting up the military orders for those deployments.

So it certainly seems like something that is being seriously considered by the President at this hour. And that does signal a shift in strategy from the Biden administration, which so far has really focused much more on the threat of sanctions as a deterrent to Russia, potentially invading Ukraine, but not so much actions and military movements of forces that would come before any potential invasion.

One thing that has been consistent, though, is that U.S. forces are in no way intended to go to Ukraine to fight Russia. That's something the President made clear last month, listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOE BIDEN, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: With the idea that the United States is going to unilaterally use force to confront Russia invading Ukraine is not on the -- in the cards right now. But what will happen is, there will be severe consequences.

(END VIDEO CLIP) DIAMOND: And those troops though that would go to Eastern European and Baltic Allies, not Ukraine would be intended to shore up those allies and also to have them available to help potentially evacuate any civilians from the area. We know that already the State Department has ordered family members of staff at the Embassy in Kyiv to evacuate, to leave the country. But they are not doing military evacuations at this point. Kate?

BOLDUAN: Jeremy, thanks very much.

Let's see what comes to the White House today. Joining me now in the meantime, to discuss is CNN national security analyst, David Sanger. He's a national security correspondent for The New York Times, of course. David, last week, we were talking about diplomacy living to fight another day after the meetings that we were seeing. And this week starts, it seems just in a very different place with NATO ships and troops moving into the region. And this, and let me play now the warning from Tony Blinken and once again, the warning from the U.K. Prime Minister.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ANTONY BLINKEN, SECRETARY OF STATE: If a single additional Russian force goes into Ukraine, in an aggressive way, as I said that would trigger a swift, a severe and a united response from us and from Europe.

JOHNSON: We also need to get over the message that invading Ukraine from a Russian perspective is going to be a painful, violent, and bloody business. And I think it's very important that people in Russia understand that this could be a new Chechnya.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BOLDUAN: And David, you have the new reporting of the U.K. intel on a Russian plot going further into Ukraine. I mean, is this getting hotter rather than cooling off?

DAVID SANGER, CNN POLITICAL & NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: Oh, it's certainly getting hotter, Kate, I think it's fair to say that we are probably closer now than we've been in many decades to a really major war in Europe, that does not mean that it's going to happen. There are still diplomatic off ramps to this. And you're going to see the United States and NATO offer back to the Russian some written responses in coming days that I think are going to make some proposals.

But there's clearly been a pivot underway here in Washington, because I think a week or two ago, people were saying, let's not do anything militarily that will make the Russians -- give the Russians a pretext for invasion. And now I think they think that moments kind of passed that the Russians, they believe are so close to invasion, that you want to get troops rolling to the rest of the NATO nations.

BOLDUAN: And why do you think, I kind of along that same vein I was going to ask you looking at what's coming out of the U.K., you're reporting as well as from the administration. Why do you think the administration is releasing kind of classified intelligence on Russian intentions here? Is there, as you're talking about a shift in strategy, is there a strategy to this?

[11:10:00]

SANGER: I certainly think there is and it's quite coordinated particularly between the United States and Britain. About a week and a half ago you saw the U.S. release information that suggested that the Russians might attempt to create an incident of some kind. The British intelligence on Saturday night, suggested something different that, in fact, what the Russians might do was try to stage some kind of pain to government. And the reason you're seeing all of this come out, is that they're trying to under talk Russian disinformation that they anticipate here. They're trying to say, they're trying to cut off an avenue for the Russians by saying, yes, yes, we know already that you're trying to install this puppet we've been. We know already that you're trying to go create an incident to try to defuse it.

BOLDUAN: It was in response to your question last week that President Biden said that Putin is likely to move in, that he's got to do something. And you asked him at the time during the press conference about a possible off round. Does an off ramp seem any more likely now?

SANGER: You know, that all depends on what Vladimir Putin's real ultimate goal here is. If his goal is merely to make sure that during the time that he is president of Russia, Ukraine does not join NATO, well, he's got that already. Because you heard the President say in response to that question, Ukraine wouldn't be ready to join NATO for some time. If the issue is with the United States put major weaponry, offensive weaponry in Ukraine, the U.S. have said it has no intention to do that.

But if his goal is actually a bigger one, Kate, if his goal is actually to stop countries from freely deciding in the future other countries that they want to join NATO, if his goal is really to get all nuclear weapons out of Europe, American nuclear weapons, I don't think that's going to work. And what we just don't know is, what's his real goal here? Is it about Ukraine, or is it something bigger?

BOLDUAN: So it's interesting because Fiona Hill, former White House Russia adviser who we all got to know very well during Trump's first impeachment, she are using a new piece in "The New York Times" that Putin has already factored in another round of sanctions into his calculation. So that's not going to deter him. But she writes, she writes about what she thinks will deter him. She writes in part, U.N. censure, widespread and vocal international opposition, and countries outside Europe taking action to pull back on their relations with Russia might give him pause. What do you think of that, David?

SANGER: I think she's right. I mean, I think the question here is, can the message, series of messages sent to Putin before he sends troops over the border, be so unanimous that he thinks the cost of it will just be too high? And then to go back to when you had the British prime minister saying earlier, that if he does invade, that it will be so long and bloody the sort of porcupine strategy that Ukraine would be hard to swallow, that he would have great, great casualties, but they're basically saying to Putin is the cost of this will be so high that it will destabilize your own regime and Russia. And the question is, does he believe it? And we don't know. Because that's all in Putin's mind.

BOLDUAN: Good to see you, David. Thank you so much.

SANGER: Thank you.

BOLDUAN: We also have some breaking news coming in, that the U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear a pair of cases challenging race based affirmative action policies at two major universities, the cases could decide the future of affirmative action in college admissions, CNN's Supreme Court analyst Joan Biskupic, she's joining me now with more on this. Joan, tell us more about these cases?

JOAN BISKUPIC, CNN SUPREME COURT ANALYST: Sure, Kate, good morning. It is a major development because it sets the stage now for a major reversal of precedent that dates back to the 1970s that has allowed universities to look at race as one criteria when deciding who gets a coveted spot on campus. The cases were brought against Harvard and the University of North Carolina. So we have a private university and a state school. So the ultimate ruling could be quite sweeping. The justices will hear these cases in the session that begins in October with a ruling likely by June of next year.

And what's crucial here is that we have a Supreme Court that has engaged in a trend against race based policies. So this challenge plays right to where our court is today. And it was originally started back in 2014 by challengers led by a man by the name of Edward Blum, who was who engineered the 2013 case that led to the ruling against the Voting Rights Act. So this is a very serious case brought against these two universities. And it's based on what they say the Challenger say is that any use of race in admissions violates the Constitution's equal protection guarantee and federal law that prohibits schools that receive federal funds from using races any criteria.

[11:15:07]

In both cases they're challenging policies that have helped through the years, especially black and Hispanic students. And in the Harvard case, there's a twist there that says that those practices have actually hurt Asian American applicants. So, really momentous case coming now and for group of justices that have already shown their hand even before we had the three new Trump appointees to the court. So, as I said, a momentous challenge, and especially given the track record of the challengers who were behind the Shelby County versus Holder case of 2013 that scaled back significantly, the Voting Rights Act. I think that that is at least where we're headed at this point, Kate.

BOLDUAN: All right, Joan, definitely one to watch. Thank you very much. I appreciate it.

Coming up for us, congressional investigators have now talked to another key Trump ally, former Attorney General Bill Barr, what could he reveal to their probe, details next. (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[11:20:28]

BOLDUAN: To the latest now on the Capitol interaction, the House Select Committee investigating the siege has spoken with former Trump Attorney General Bill Barr. That's according to the panel's chairman. You'll remember, Barr resigned just days before the Capitol attack after rebuking Donald Trump's claims about widespread election fraud. Joining me now for more on this is CNN senior legal affairs correspondent Paula Reid. There's a whole lot to get to with this to, Paula. But on this, what could the committee want from Bill Barr? What are they saying about this?

PAULA REID, CNN SENIOR LEGAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: Well, the Committee Chairman Bennie Thompson has said they've had preliminary conversations. We know from our reporting that during these discussions with the former attorney general, they asked if he had any information that would be relevant to their investigation. And Barr didn't believe he really had much to offer them because he left in December 2020. But important context here, Kate, we know that the committee's work extends far back well, well far back before January 6th, all the way to the election, even the days leading up to the election.

Over the weekend, of course, we're learning also about this draft executive order that was presented to President Trump's suggesting that the Secretary of Defense could seize voting machines. Now Thompson says they are aware of that draft order, but they don't believe there was any operational plan to follow through. But it's clear, Kate that Barr's value, potential value as a witness is not in any way diminished just because he left in December 2020. And he could certainly potentially have a lot of valuable information for the Committee especially as they talk to more witnesses. They learn more have more questions.

BOLDUAN: Yes, exactly who I was -- I mean what all was going on in the Justice Department even but is below Attorney General Bill Barr. Let me ask you about the Oath Keepers founder, Stewart Rhodes. He's in a courtroom today for a detention hearing. He pleaded not guilty to charges of seditious conspiracy. Everyone will remember when this came out. Why would anyone, I have to ask Paula, anyone charged with sedition be allowed out on bail. I mean, what could happen today?

REID: Well, the federal prosecutors in the case would agree with you, Kate, they argue that there are no conditions that can guarantee his release. And they are arguing to this judge that will hear this today in Texas, they point to the fact that he tried to allegedly destroy evidence conceal the identities of co-conspirators. And they say that there is no reason that he should be let out. So they would absolutely agree that there are no circumstances that would allow his safe release, or the fact that to guarantee that he would actually return to court for subsequent hearing. So again, that'll be up to a federal judge in Texas later today.

BOLDUAN: And back to the congressional investigation, though, the new Attorney General of Virginia has fired the top lawyer for the University of Virginia which wouldn't typically grab so much attention except that this lawyer is also the top staff investigator for the House Committee investigating the attack. What is going on here?

REID: That's right. Important to note that the University of Virginia is a public university in the state of Virginia, and Tim, Tim is a top lawyer at the University of Virginia. He took some time out to lead the investigative efforts by the House Select Committee investigating January 6th. Now he was fired on Friday by Virginia's new Republican attorney general. Now, the Attorney General's Office insists that this move has nothing to do with January 6th. And that these top lawyers at universities serve at the pleasure of the state attorney general.

But if you look at his resume, it's very impressive. He's a former U.S. Attorney. He led the investigation into Charlottesville's handling of the Unite the Right rally, so some Democrats are calling foul, arguing that this was in some ways a politically motivated. But Kate, we expect the Committee's work to go through the summer potentially even the fall, so he'll still be busy.

BOLDUAN: Very interesting. OK. Paula, thank you so much for the updates. I really appreciate it.

[11:24:20]

Coming up still for us, New York City's new mayor planning to address the rise in violent crime in the city this afternoon after an ambush killed one police officer and critically wounded another, details on a live report next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BOLDUAN: Developing right now opening statements have begun in a federal courtroom in Minnesota. Three former Minneapolis police on trial charged with violating George Floyd civil rights when they failed to stop Derek Chauvin from murdering Floyd, failed to stop Chauvin when he kept his knee on Floyd's neck for more than nine minutes during that deadly arrest. CNN's Omar Jimenez is live in St. Paul watching all of this play out. Omar, what's the very latest from there?

[11:30:01]

OMAR JIMENEZ, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yes Kate, so as you mentioned opening statements have begun today.