Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Ukrainian Forces Spare Life of Russian Soldier Who Surrendered During Drone Operation; Washington Post Reports, Trump Rejected Lawyer's Advice to Make a Deal with DOJ and Avoid Classified Documents Indictment; Mayor Francis Suarez (R-Miami, FL) Announces White House Run. Aired 10-10:30a ET

Aired June 15, 2023 - 10:00   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:00:00]

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: An exclusive look from the frontlines of the war in Ukraine. CNN joins up with Ukrainian Special Forces, this as we're learning new details about new military help coming from the United States.

RAHEL SOLOMON, CNN ANCHOR: Also, did former President Donald Trump miss out on his chance to avoid federal charges? The details we are learning from a Washington Post report highlighting a deal his own lawyer urged him to take.

BERMAN: And a CNN exclusive, artificial intelligence could pose an existential threat to humanity in the not too distant future, the new warning for business leaders. This is CNN News Central.

New details this morning of the surrender of a Russian soldier caught on camera. Video obtained by the Wall Street Journal shows him running from Ukrainian drones. This happened in the eastern city of Bakhmut. CNN has now confirmed that Ukrainian forces spared his life after the commander says the man threw his machine gun aside, raised his hands and said he would not continue to fight.

CNN is also getting an inside look at the work of Ukrainian Special Forces and how they are now using technology provided by the west, including night vision.

CNN's Sam Kiley joins us now from Kyiv with that exclusive reporting. Sam, what are you learning?

SAM KILEY, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, John, isn't it interesting? You've got the war on the mind with that piece of propaganda that The Wall Street Journal have put out from the Ukrainian Ministry of Defense showing mercy to an embattled Russian soldier. And then on the other side, in the shadows of this war, there are specialists, as you rightly point out, using thermal imaging cameras and other high technology equipment from NATO and elsewhere to conduct a campaign to kill senior elements of the Russian Armed Forces. I met up with one of them.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

KILEY (voice over): A Special Forces night operation, the objective, to bring a special kind of misery to Russian troops. As they arrived alongside Ukrainian regulars, the Russians attacked. A night vision recording of a routine assault that the Special Forces needed to shrug off.

How long did you spend under fire like this before you could move?

BRABUS: (SPEAKING FOREIGN LANGUAGE).

KILEY: And then what did you do?

BRABUS: (SPEAKING FOREIGN LANGUAGE).

KILEY: Electronic surveillance pinpointed their victims. First, they killed two paratroopers approaching on their left flank to get to the group's main targets, Russian commanders near Bakhmut. A sterile record of an all too gritty event in March. First, one officer is shot, then another down.

He says, Radio intercepts revealed that the Russians lost two officers and five others to their sniper team that night.

BRABUS: (SPEAKING FOREIGN LANGUAGE).

KILEY: Formed when Russia invaded Ukraine last year, this team of experienced veterans works in a secret realm under the intelligence services. They're tasked with tactical work seeking strategic effect as Ukraine's counteroffensive takes shape.

Here, using a modified heavy machine gun in a hidden bunker last month close to Bakhmut. Drone operators more than a mile away are directing Brabus onto Russian troops.

How many Russians have you killed in this war?

BRABUS: A lot of -- a lot of -- for example, here's, a lot of Russians.

KILEY: And this is when you're on with this gun? How many more or less there?

[10:05:00]

BRABUS: I don't know. We didn't calculate in this time.

KILEY: It's the Russians they want to do the counting because Ukraine's best hope is that Russian troops run rather than fight.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

KILEY (on camera): Now, collapsing the Russian Armed Forces, routing them in the way that they did in the summer and fall last year with the other very successful Ukraine counteroffensives I think will be much harder tasks now. The Russians know this is coming and they still dominate the air.

And I think that's why it's so important. We've just learned this new round of military gifts from Europe amounting to short and medium range antiaircraft missiles. Those are going to get put mostly to use on the frontline to try and keep the Russian aircraft away from attempts to advance by the Ukrainians, John.

BERMAN: Sam, that was really interesting, a notable look at how so much of this war is being fought on screen, even as soldiers and civilians dying on the ground. Sam Kiley, thank you so much for that reporting. Rahel?

SOLOMON: Well, John, this morning a stunning report from The Washington Post now raising new questions as the federal case against Donald Trump begins. According to The Post, Trump Lawyer Chris Kaise, who is still a member of Trump's defense team, wanted to strike a deal with the Justice Department last fall, this as an attempt to try to help Trump avoid charges that could put him in prison for decades.

Now, this plan was allegedly crafted after the FBI found more classified documents during the August FBI search at Mar-a-Lago. But Trump ultimately rejected the advice. And we should note that CNN spoke to sources close to Trump's legal team who are casting doubt on whether there was ever really an opportunity to settle.

Also, just into our newsroom, a new rally is now on the books for Trump. The 2024 GOP frontrunner will host a campaign event in Pickens, South Carolina on July 1st. It is his first rally since being federally indicted.

Let's now bring in CNN's Paula Reid now for more on what else CNN is learning. Good morning, Paula. Paula, we also just heard from within the last day or so A.G. Merrick Garland. What is he saying?

PAULA REID, CNN SENIOR LEGAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: That's right, Rahel. This is the first time we've heard from the attorney general since former President Trump was indicted. Of course, Merrick Garland appointed Jack Smith as special counsel after Trump announced he would be making another run for the White House.

Now, of course, the special counsel and the Justice Department as a whole has been under considerable attack from the former president and his allies. Let's take a listen to how Garland defended Smith.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MERRICK GARLAND, ATTORNEY GENERAL: As I said, when I appointed Mr. Smith, I did so because it underscores the Justice Department's commitment to both independence and accountability. Mr. Smith is a veteran career prosecutor. He has assembled a group of experienced and talented prosecutors and agents who share his commitment to integrity and the rule of law.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

REID: So, there, Garland defending not just Smith, but also the entire organization, the Justice Department that he oversees. I mean, they have been under relentless attack by the former president, who has been ramping up his rhetoric in the wake of this indictment.

The attorney general also emphasizing how the special counsel operates independently. Under the regulations, the point of a special counsel is to take over an investigation where the Justice Department could have a conflict of interest. They operate under the same rules as the Justice Department, but, ultimately they are an independent body.

And while they do technically answer to the attorney general, the Garland staff has repeatedly said over the past few months they like to remind us that under the regulations, any prosecutorial decision by a special counsel is granted broad deference by the attorney general. And if any decisions are overruled by the attorney general, he has to inform Congress.

And, Rahel, I think that's part of an effort to prepare people, right, to try to insulate the Justice Department from these attacks about partisanship, emphasizing that, look, if Trump wasn't indicted, that wasn't likely to be Garland's decision. And if he was, that was also likely to be a decision that came from Smith. But it's, of course, highly unlikely that even Garland's remarks are going to stop the relentless attacks from former President Trump and his allies.

SOLOMON: That's a fair point, Paula, but, certainly, using that opportunity in front of cameras to try to emphasize the independence. Paula Reid in Washington, thank you. John?

BERMAN: So, tonight, the newest candidate to jump into the 2024 presidential race, Miami Mayor Francis Suarez, is set to speak at the Ronald Reagan Library in California. This morning, he kicked off his bid with a campaign video announcement.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MAYOR FRANCIS SUAREZ (R-MIAMI, FL): In Miami, we stopped waiting for Washington to lead. America's so-called leaders confuse being loud with actually leading. All Washington wants to do is fight with each other instead of fighting for the people that put them in office.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

[10:10:03]

BERMAN: CNN Chief National Affairs Correspondent Jeff Zeleny with us now. Jeff, I can't help but notice he is literally running in that campaign video. It doesn't seem like an accident.

JEFF ZELENY, CNN CHIEF NATIONAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: For sure not, John. I mean, clearly trying to present himself as the candidate that he says he is, of a new generation, a generational change he is offering here.

And, look, he certainly does not have national profile, but at 45 years old, he's been re-elected as the mayor of Miami after first being elected in 2017. He's the son of the first Cuban-American mayor of Miami as well, Xavier Suarez.

And he certainly has been making the rounds as the leader of the U.S. Conference of Mayors. He's been traveling across the country with this optimistic message, talking about it's time for Republicans to turn the page to a fiscal conservatism but one with optimism as well.

We caught up with him last year to talk about what he believes is the moment for this Republican Party. His words are instructive. Let's listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SUAREZ: There's absolutely no doubt that re-litigating the 2020 election is not going to be a recipe for success for the Republican Party. I think having a vision, understanding that this could be a generational moment for the country where people are passing the baton from one generation to the next creates generational opportunities for many people in this country.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ZELENY: Now, he's the only Hispanic candidate on either side of the ballot, Republicans or Democrats, and he said that is needed as well.

John, there's no doubt that he faces an uphill challenge here, not only so many other Republican candidates in the race, but his first hurdle will be to qualify for that debate stage in August. That requires 40,000 donors from 20 states across the country, as well as being 1 percent in either national or state polls. So, that is a bit of a high burden there.

But he'll be giving his -- a speech this evening at the Reagan Library in California, that is no accident either. He presents himself in the mold of Reagan. He said he calls himself a Reagan-esque. Of course, he was a very young boy during the Reagan years, but he said he has always looked up to him since he was, John.

BERMAN: Jeff Zeleny, thank you so much for that reporting, a notable new entry into the field. Rahel?

SOLOMON: John. Thank you. And coming up for us, Marine Veteran Daniel Penny is indicted for holding a homeless street performer in a fatal chokehold. It all happened on a New York City subway. And this morning, we have new reaction from Penny's legal team.

An Ohio man serving in the U.S. Army pleads guilty after the Justice Department says he was trying to help ISIS carry out terror attacks in New York City. Just how long he could spend in prison.

Plus, right now, NASA astronauts hard at work while an asteroid the size of the Brooklyn Bridge makes its way past Earth today, past being the operative word. These are live pictures on your screen. But coming up, it's not the first time we've seen something like this. We will have the details and explain right after this.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK) [10:15:00]

BERMAN: All right, this just into CNN. It is decision day at the Supreme Court. The justices just handed down a couple of rulings. We have been watching very closely.

CNN's Jessica Schneider joins us now with the details. Jessica, what is the big case today?

JESSICA SCHNEIDER, CNN JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: Well, John, the Supreme Court issuing decisions on three cases, two of them notable. I'll start with the one about the Indian Child Welfare Act, the Supreme Court tossing out a challenge to that. That's a 1978 law that prioritized the placement of Native American children in the foster care and adoption system, prioritizes placement with Native American families.

So, this was the case of a couple out of Texas saying that this law should have been tossed out on equal protection grounds. They said they were trying to adopt two Native American children, but they were effectively blocked from this adoption because of this law that prioritizes the placement of the children with Native American tribes or families. That is the utmost priority under this law.

So, the Supreme Court today not ruling with that Texas family that was trying to get custody of these two Native American children, instead upholding this law that has been in existence since 1978.

And, John, when this law was passed, it really was looking to preserve tribal sovereignty. It was discovered around the time this law was passed that too often Native American children, when they were placed into the adoption or foster care system, were being placed with white families, non-Native American families.

So, this law was an effort to really protect the sovereignty of tribes, and the Supreme Court today preserving that law and rejecting the challenge to it. John?

BERMAN: And, Jessica, a separate case delved into the issue of criminal charges in venue. Explain this.

SCHNEIDER: Yes. This was a really interesting case for the facts. This was the case of an Alabama fisherman who had actually hacked into computer systems and had gotten a hold of fishing coordinates. These were private reefs that fishermen pay a lot of money to actually set up for prime fishing locations. This company had gotten a hold of the coordinates of those private reefs and were actually selling those coordinates.

So, an Alabama fisherman who was actually very upset about this, he hacked into the computer systems and basically said to the company, I'm going to start telling people that you're selling the coordinates of the reefs that they've paid a lot of money for.

[10:20:00] He was brought to trial. He was convicted. However, his argument was that the government had brought his case in the wrong venue. The lower courts had said, no. Even if venue was wrong, your case still stands.

The question was, and this touches a little bit on the special counsel's case, if you bring a criminal case in the wrong venue, in the wrong place, in the wrong jurisdiction, can the criminal case be completely tossed out or should it just be retried?

The fisherman in here, the fisherman in this case, wanted the case to be completely thrown out, but the Supreme Court stepping in today to say, no, even if a criminal case is brought in the wrong venue, it can still be retried.

This might have been on the mind of the prosecutors in the Trump indictment when they decided to bring this case in Southern Florida for fear that they would bring it in the wrong venue. But now, the Supreme Court saying, even if you do bring it to the wrong venue, prosecutors, you don't need to toss the case out. You can retry it in the correct venue. John?

BERMAN: Such an interesting possible connection there, fishing locations and this new federal case against the former president of the United States. Jessica Schneider, thank you so much for explaining it all. Rahel?

SOLOMON: Well, John, a grand jury in New York has voted to indict a Marine veteran after he put a homeless street performer in a fatal chokehold. This all happened on a New York City subway train.

Sources tell us that Daniel Penny has been indicted on second-degree manslaughter charges. Prosecutors expected to make the official announcement later today.

Now, his attorneys tell CNN that they are confident that the jury will find that his actions were, quote, fully justified. Penny is accused of killing Jordan Neely, who you see on your screen here, early last month after pinning him down to the train floor and then holding him in a chokehold until he stopped breathing.

With us now, Defense and Trial Attorney Misty Marris. Misty, great to have you on a day like today. So, help us understand, first, I think it would be helpful to understand the charges here. So, second-degree manslaughter, what that implies and what standard has to be met?

MISTY MARRIS, DEFENSE AND TRIAL ATTORNEY: Really important to break this down, because something that people need to understand, this does not require intent to kill. It's what's called a recklessness standard. It means that Penny saw there was a risk, there was a known risk of death, but he ignored it and he continued with the conduct, ultimately resulting in the death of Neely.

So, a recklessness standard is a little bit less of a hurdle for prosecutors to prove. They don't have to prove that it was intentional conduct, only that he ignored a very obvious and open risk.

SOLOMON: Misty, if you're the defense, I mean, how do you prove that Penny feared for his life?

MARRIS: So, right now, we know that this is where the defense is going, right? They've said as much in the media, Penny himself releasing a video that this was self-defense of not only himself but the other people who were riders on the train on that day. And, look, the standard is the prosecution has to disprove that his force was justified.

So, the prosecution has the burden, but what they're going to be asked to do, the jury, is to look from the eyes of Penny on that day. What were the totality of the circumstances? And the best way to do that, what are the other witnesses going to say about what was happening, about the words that were used? Was there any overt act that put them in an imminent threat? And was that a fear of grave injury or death on the part of the others? The best people are going to be the ones that were on that train that day, and several of them have spoken out and said that they were fearful. So, it'll be interesting to see what happens when they're on the witness stand.

SOLOMON: Well, speaking of on the train that day, I mean, does Penny testify?

MARRIS: Yes. I really think unless there's something that we don't know -- of course, we don't know what we don't know, right? So, as lawyers are going to know about his background and what could potentially come out, because as a defense attorney, putting your client on the stand could potentially open doors to inquiries that would normally be closed.

But I think in this case, it would be important for the jury to hear from his perspective what was going on in his mind, because that's going to be the standard what was going on in his mind at the time, and was it reasonable?

SOLOMON: What about his experience, his military experience, and the time? And I think there's some debate about how long he had actually put Jordan Neely in a chokehold, but the time in which he had kept him in a chokehold.

MARRIS: These are both great questions. First of all, the military experience, especially if he takes the stand, I really see that coming into the courtroom. It's relevant because he might have specialized experience that would have -- he has more knowledge about when a chokehold becomes fatal. Because in this case, maybe the initial altercation initially restraining Neely will be found justifiable. But he has to say that every single second that he kept him in a chokehold was a justifiable action because of that imminent threat.

So, I think this timing, whether it be 15 minutes, as Neely's lawyers have said, less than five minutes, as Penny has said, there's going to be a lot of scrutiny on why did you keep him restrained for that amount of time.

[10:25:00]

And didn't you see that he was not able to breathe? And, in fact, on that video, there're passengers on the train saying he cannot breathe. Wow, that's a strong chokehold. So, his military experience really plays into a state of mind and whether or not he ignored an obvious risk.

SOLOMON: Yes. Misty, of course, as you know, this was an event that really set off a lot of strong emotions on both sides, a lot of questions, and we'll probably get some answers when we see the indictment a little bit later today. Missy Marris, thank you.

MARRIS: Thank you.

SOLOMON: John?

BERMAN: So, artificial intelligence, an existential threat, an existential threat to humanity, all of it. This is the alarming finding in a new survey.

And that a key building block of life found on one of Saturn's moons. This is the first time this substance was found anywhere but Earth. So, what does this mean for finding life out there?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:30:00]