Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

IDF Admits Mistakenly Killing Three Israeli Hostages In Gaza; Missing Intelligence Binder Raises Questions About Trump's Declassification. Aired 2-2:30p ET

Aired December 15, 2023 - 14:00   ET

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

[14:00:00]

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN ANCHOR: We start this hour of CNN NEWS CENTRAL with breaking news on Israel's war on Hamas. The IDF saying that it mistakenly killed three Israeli hostages in Gaza.

PAMELA BROWN, CNN ANCHOR AND CHIEF INVESTIGATIVE CORRESPONDENT: Yeah, and an IDF spokesman says the victims were misidentified as a threat and shot dead. CNN's Jeremy Diamond is in Sderot, Israel, with more on this tragic development. Jeremy, what more is the IDF saying about this?

JEREMY DIAMOND, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yeah, it's very sad news, and the Israeli military is admitting that soldiers effectively mistakenly identified these three Israeli hostages as a threat and shot and killed them during combat operations being conducted in Shejaiya, which has been the scene of very heavy fighting between Israel and Hamas over the course of the last week.

Two of the three hostages have been identified. One of the families of one of the deceased hostages asked that their name not be broadcast, but the two who we can tell you are Yotam Haim, who was kidnapped from Kibbutz, Kfar Aza on October 7th, and the second is Samer Talalka, who was kidnapped from Kibbutz Niz Am, also on October 7th.

The Israeli military effectively recovered these bodies in Gaza, moved them to Israel, where they were taken to a forensic center, and then subsequently positively identified as the bodies of three hostages who were kidnapped by Hamas on October 7th. Now, we should note amid all of this that, this comes as the Israeli military had loosened its rules of engagement as it began this war in Gaza following those October 7th attacks, allowing Israeli soldiers to fire upon suspected terrorists while conducting fewer checks than they normally would have.

The Israeli military, we're told, is taking lessons from this incident and transmitting them to soldiers in the field. They also say that they, quote, expressed their deep remorse over the tragic incident and send the families their heartfelt, condolences. This also comes as we know that some of those former hostages who were freed as part of that week-long truce between Israel and Hamas, they angrily confronted the Israeli prime minister last week with one of those former hostages, accusing the Israeli government of having no information and no intelligence about the whereabouts of these hostages, noting that the location where she was being kept by Hamas was actually shelled by the Israeli military.

And today, we are learning of a far more tragic and direct incident where Israeli forces appear to have fired upon Israeli hostages in Gaza, believing that they were a threat, and then ultimately realizing later after the fact that they were indeed hostages. Boris, Pam.

SANCHEZ: Jeremy, you mentioned the loosened rules of engagement. Obviously, U.S. National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan is in the Middle East right now. He's expressed the Biden administration's concern about the intensity of the IDF offensive. Of course, President Biden's desire for Israel to tone it down. How do you think this news is going to play into the tone of these talks?

DIAMOND: Well, we'll have to wait and see. I mean, hostage negotiations are one of the key elements of Jake Sullivan's visit and meetings with Israeli officials. But as you noted, one of the other focuses is indeed the civilian casualty count. I mean, we have watched as now nearly 19,000 Palestinians have been killed in Gaza. Some of those combatants, many of those non-combatants, including over 7,000 children who are believed to be among those who were killed in Gaza, including those who have been killed in Gaza, according to the Palestinian Ministry of Health.

And Jake Sullivan said earlier today that he believes Israel intends to distinguish between Hamas targets and civilians, but that that intention does not always line up with the reality on the ground. And that reality, that mismatch, has really, up until now, mostly applied to Palestinian civilians. But in this case, it appears to also be matching up to a reality that has now affected and resulted in the loss of life of three Israeli civilians. who were held hostage by Hamas and, unfortunately, today killed by Israeli forces.

BROWN: All right, Jeremy Diamond, thank you so much. And joining us now is IDF spokesperson, Lieutenant Colonel Jonathan Conricus. Jonathan, how did this happen? What can you tell us?

LT. COL. JONATHAN CONRICUS, IDF SPOKESPERSON: Yes, good evening. It's night here in Israel. A very sad and tragic event, one that the IDF, of course, terribly regrets and has told that to the families. But we are investigating how it happened. One of the contributing factors are obviously related to the fact or can obviously be related to the fact that so far what we have encountered on the battlefield are many Hamas combatants that have been dressed in civilian clothes.

[14:05:09]

And I'm quite sure that that has been part of the issue here, but it's still very early to understand and to say certain things. What we can say and confirm is what we have issued officially, a very sad event, tragic event. It, of course, goes against everything that what we have been trying to do for the last two months, more than two months. It's day 70 of the fighting. But even a sad event like this will not shake our resolve and it will not divert us from the focus, which is clear, to dismantle Hamas.

SANCHEZ: Sir, you broke up there at the end, but I'm curious because you mentioned that the IDF is still trying to get details on exactly what transpired. In a statement from the IDF, it says that immediate lessons from the event have been learned, which have been passed on to all IDF troops in the field. Can you share what those lessons were, if there's going to be a different approach by the IDF now?

CONRICUS: We're looking into how it happened, how it came about that these hostages were out and trying to understand how that happened, whether it was intentional or by Hamas or whether it wasn't intentional. And what we have told our troops is, to exercise a little caution when being confronted with people in civilian clothes. Again, part of the complexity here is that we're fighting in a civilian environment where almost all of the RPG crews and the AD crews that are attacking our tanks and our troops have been dressed in civilian clothes. So, it creates a very dynamic and challenging combat environment.

And what we have told our troops is to be extra vigilant and do one more safety check before dealing with kinetics with any threat that they face on the battlefield. And it is a very challenging environment that our troops are in.

BROWN: Just to follow up on what you said, you said these hostages were out. Can you just expand on that a little bit? What do you mean by that? Just the circumstances around this? And as we just heard, our Jeremy Diamond talk talk about the fact that the rules of engagement have been loosened since the October 7th attack. Do you think that could have played a role in the killings of these three Israeli hostages?

CONRICUS: Yeah, I don't know what Jeremy bases that on, and I am not aware of any different rules of engagement. Our rules of engagement are those of a military at war against a terrorist organization that uses civilian infrastructure, uses schools and hospitals and mosques and ambulances and all the things that we have seen and you have reported on during the last two months. So, I'm not aware that we have changed any of our rules of engagement.

They are according to the laws about conflict and according to our standard practice in war. We will have to look into and analyze exactly what happened. And what I can say so far is that these, the three Israelis, former hostages, they were above ground in Syria, in close proximity to one of our units in the area and then were misidentified as posing a threat. And therefore, Israeli troops fired and unfortunately killed them.

SANCHEZ: What do you make of the calls then from National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan for Israel to exercise more caution when it comes to civilians in Gaza? CNN had reporting this week that indicated that roughly half of the munitions that Israel was using in the enclave were so-called dumb bombs. They were unguided, imprecise missiles. We also heard from another hostage that was released that she was afraid that she was nearly hurt or she saw someone hurt by an Israeli bombing. I'm wondering, does that at all make you rethink the approach in Gaza when it comes to being more cautious with civilians that are there? CONRICUS: Yeah, I think it's being handled by the enemies around the

world and by others and echoed, unfortunately, elsewhere. I think that's a narrative which is very dangerous. And I think it kind of flips the situation perversely, I would say. The ones that are using civilians as human shields, the ones that are embedding themselves within the civilian population, abusing humanitarian facilities for military purposes and conducting systematic war crimes on a daily basis are Hamas, not us. We are fighting against them and we are doing everything we can in order to distinguish between combatant and non- combatant. And I understand how this event, of course, will be used to---

(CROSSTALK)

[14:10:09]

SANCHEZ: I don't think there's any question that Hamas uses civilian shields. I think that's been established as one of the war crimes that they commit. But it's not some random entity that's making the claim that Israel can do more to shield civilians, to save civilian lives. It's the National Security Advisor of the United States. It's the White House. So, I'm wondering what your response would be then to Jake Sullivan as he's in the region right now asking Israeli officials to do more.

CONRICUS: Yes, I saw him as he left a few hours ago and had what I understand to be very important meetings and fruitful meeting with Israeli counterparts, one that, of course, are less military and more political in nature. What I know is that we continue to respect the laws of conflict. And to listen, to listen to professional and well- intentioned criticism of our operations, including the ones that you mentioned, and to adapt where applicable, where feasible, and where it is possible to do so while still fighting and beating the enemy.

It would, of course, be very, very much easier to fight in an area where the enemy is not embedded within the civilian population. But again, if we understand and I think that enough people around the world understand what the challenges that we are facing are. In order to defeat Hamas, we have to take them out where they are. We would like to fight out in the open in the deserts of Sinai if we could, metaphorically speaking, not now going into Egypt. But to fight in open areas would be great, not to have civilians at risk. But that is not where the enemy is. And we saw that on October the 7th, they came from these very same tunnels.

These very same strongholds where they are now hiding underneath the civilians. This is where they operate from. And if we don't take them out there, then we will invite additional October 7th attack on our civilians. And that cannot happen. And I agree. And, you know, we've been listening to critique. We do take extra precaution. We do use ammunition that is tailored to certain areas. And we take a lot of preventive steps in order to minimize collateral damage. Had we not been doing that in this very difficult, almost impossible situation, I can assure you that the number of non-combatants that would have been affected would have been much, much higher. But we are moving civilians out of the battlefield. We are warning ahead of time. We're providing humanitarian assistance. We opened the Kerem Shalom crossing just a few hours ago, again, at the request and based on the guidance of our allies and our friends around the world. We are listening. But at the end of the day, when everything is said and done to defeat Hamas in order to provide security for our civilians, that needs to be front and center. And for us, that is front and center of everything that we're doing.

BROWN: You say that Israel is doing everything, and it is abiding by international law and that it is doing everything to prevent the civilian deaths. But we just heard President Biden, for his part, say that Israel is engaged in indiscriminate violence. And as Boris pointed out, our reporting indicates that Israel has used nearly half of its bombs that it's been using has been the so-called dumb bombs that can be, you know, they can have certain kits to make them more precise.

But the bottom line is you heard what President Biden said. Are you saying that that he was wrong to say that Israel is engaged in indiscriminate bombing? And what would be an appropriate ratio to you for civilian deaths, every civilian deaths for a Hamas fighter? What? What would be the number that you would think would be appropriate, given the challenges?

CONRICUS: I think that we have to be a little more careful and a little more precise when we quote the president. And I don't think that he said what you said. I think that he referred to the need to be careful.

(CROSSTALK)

BROWN: He said Israel has been engaged with doing -- He did say that. He said indiscriminate bombing.

CONRICUS: I think that maybe it's different, but the reference I saw, I think it even was on CNN. That there are claims that and Israel needs to be careful so that it isn't perceived as. But the bottom line is that we are indeed careful. And you alluded to part of the part of what my answer was going to be. We will have an official response to that CNN story about the sources of munitions and the types of munitions. It'll be corrected.

[14:14:59]

And part of it is, yes, as you say, there are various kits that are add on kits, GPS kits that are added on to various munitions that we use that turn them from inaccurate or imprecise bombs to very smart and guided and accurate bombs. And hopefully in the future, we will have figures in order to be able to confront that claim as well, professionally and based on numbers and figures. At the end of the day, I think that when this war will be over, we will, everybody who is honest enough, will be able to see and judge and actually verify what we have been saying all along. We have many more other weapons that we could have been using that cost much less, that have much more yield, that we are not using specifically because we're striking military targets with precision. And I'll share something about, you know, total Israeli discussions.

Two days ago, we had a mass casualty event. Of 10 Israeli soldiers that were sadly killed in a Hamas ambush that was staged inside a house. Israeli troops were sucked into it. And the event ended with a few dead terrorists and unfortunately 10 dead Israelis. The Israeli public says very clearly, why didn't you just bomb the house before sending troops in? And what the IDF has responded is that we do not bomb indiscriminately, but that we search on the ground. And when there is reason to use air force capabilities and bigger munitions, we do so. But I think that is the extremely sad response that I can bring as proof to the fact that we do not just use munitions in order to strike various locations, but we use them only when there is a need to. And even when it would be easier for us just to bomb suspect locations. And sadly, that also comes at the price.

SANCHEZ: We look forward to seeing that detailed response to CNN's reporting, Lieutenant Colonel Jonathan Conricus, we have to leave the conversation there. Thanks for sharing your perspective.

CONRICUS: Thank you for having me.

SANCHEZ: Of course. We're going to continue following this breaking news. The IDF says that they mistakenly killed three Israeli hostages. The very latest when we come back on CNN.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:20:09]

BROWN: Turning now to exclusive new CNN reporting about highly classified intelligence that went missing at the end of the Trump administration. CNN has learned that the intelligence relates to Russian election interference, information that was deemed so sensitive it could only be accessed at the CIA, and the people working with the intel had to keep their notes locked, in a safe, at CIA headquarters.

SANCHEZ: Yet in the final weeks of the Trump administration, a binder of this intel was brought to the White House at the request of the president as part of an effort to declassify documents. And in the final chaotic hours of his presidency, it went missing. Bradley Moss is a national security attorney, but let's begin with CNN's Evan Perez, who's part of the team that broke this story. Evan, walk us through what you've learned.

EVAN PEREZ, CNN SENIOR JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: Well, Boris, you know, we know that this binder was brought to the White House, and it contained raw intelligence that the US and its NATO allies collected on Russia's efforts to meddle in the 2016 election, including sources and methods, some of the most sensitive information in the intelligence world. What we're talking about here is the underlying intelligence that formed the basis for the US government's assessment that Vladimir Putin sought to help Trump win the 2016 election.

The disappearance of this binder was so alarming to intelligence officials that they briefed the Senate Intelligence Committee about the situation last year. Now, we're told by one US official that this was not among the classified items that were found in last year's search of Mar-a-Lago. More than two years later, it does appear that this binder is still missing.

BROWN: All right, so how did this intelligence end up at the White House?

PEREZ: Well, you know, so Trump was, was, spent years trying to declassify material that he said would prove his claims that the Russian investigation was a hoax. Now, this is intelligence that was part of a massive collection of documents that Trump ordered brought to the White House. There was a frantic scramble in the final days of the administration to redact documents so they could be declassified and released publicly.

On his last full day as president, Trump did issue a declassification order for some of the materials, and the FBI has since published at least some of it on its website.

SANCHEZ: So are there any clues about where this missing intelligence is?

PEREZ: Well, we don't know what exactly happened to the binder that went missing. There is one theory that emerged from the testimony of Cassidy Hutchinson. That's the former aide of Chief, former Chief of Staff Mark Meadows. She told the January 6th Committee that she was, quote, almost positive it went home with Mr. Meadows. She said it had been kept in a safe in Meadows' office when it was not being worked on. And Hutchinson also wrote about this classified intelligence in her new book, claiming that on January 19th, the final night of the Trump presidency that she saw Meadows leave the White House with an unredacted binder tucked under his arm.

Now, Mark Meadows' attorney strongly denies this. He said in a statement to us that Mr. Meadows was keenly aware of adhered to requirements for the proper handling of classified material. Any such material that he handled or was in possession of has been treated accordingly. And any suggestion that he is responsible for any missing binder or other classified information is flat wrong. So look, you know, at this point, this is a mystery about this binder. It still remains a mystery.

BROWN: Certainly does. Wow. What fascinating reporting that I know you and the team. It took a long time to pull this all together. And the mystery continues, doesn't it? All right. Thank you so much, Evan. All right. Right up -- I'm going to go to Bradley now. Bradley Moss, right up until the end, there's a mad dash to get details from this binder release. Bradley, why would Donald Trump, what this out there so badly, even as he's landing in Mar-a-Lago and Joe Biden is getting inaugurated?

[14:25:19]

BRADLEY MOSS, NATIONAL SECURITY ATTORNEY: Yeah, well, Evan sort of teed it up there. We've heard all this reporting. It came out about those final days and the final hours of the Trump administration. They were planning to filter out these detailed aspects that were being declassified from Crossfire Hurricane, from the Russia investigation to various friendly reporters and media outlets who would then push all these stories in the weeks and months after Biden took over, in which it would try to reframe the narrative about what had happened in 2016, try to prove Trump's point that the whole original investigation was a joke, that it was a hoax, that there was no legitimacy to it.

This was part of his ongoing media campaign, but because they kept waiting to the last minute, because it was literally, as Evan was saying, the last full day that he was putting out this declassification order, but then directing the attorney general to implement it, there was no time for this to be put into effect. The political appointees were gone. Civil servants were preparing for the turnover the very next day with Biden becoming president, and it never happened. And so those documents and that information within it remains currently improperly classified.

SANCHEZ: So, Bradley, as Evan pointed out, the binder didn't come up while federal authorities searched Trump's Mar-a-Lago estate. There's no reference to it in the classified documents indictment, but Trump's lawyers are now asking for some of this classified intelligence, apparently to help them defend him against the election subversion charges. Help us make sense of that.

MOSS: Yeah, well, that's been part of his political slash legal argument in that D.C. case, which right now, of course, is on hold pending the immunity appeal, which is that he's going to prove his intent wasn't corrupt. He's going to prove that dating back to 2016, there was evidence of all this foreign exploitation of our elections, that he was more within his rights, his authority and the proper mindset and intent to push what he did in 2020. So that's part of the reason they've been, no doubt, going after this information, try to push this argument at trial if it gets there.

But part of the more interesting thing is, and Evan mentioned this as well, we have that testimony from Cassidy Hutchinson saying that Mark Meadows walked off with it. Mark Meadows' lawyer gave this like non- denial denial statement, not really saying they don't have it, just saying we didn't mishandle anything. So, it's entirely possible it's there. Who knows where it is? The fact that this stuff was sitting around the White House, this sensitive raw intel was sitting around is ridiculous. It never should have happened like that.

BROWN: And notably, despite Trump's declassification order, several efforts to redact it and now multiple lawsuits, the Justice Department still has not released all the documents. What's at risk if they do, in your view?

MOSS: In terms of the criminal trial, you're asking?

BROWN: Yeah, if everything's out there, the declassification order that Trump, you know, says he did.

MOSS: Sure. So, the reason that this has not been put out there and the reason that even if it gets disclosed to Trump in the criminal trial, it will be done in a classified manner. There will be limits on the published versions of it to the extent the public can see it is because it implicates some of our most sensitive intelligence collection methods, whether it's signals intelligence, communication intelligence, human intelligence, spies, you know, what you think of in the movies. It's not even necessarily half the time the sensitivity of the data or the information. It's the sensitivity of how we collected it. And you don't want a foreign adversary like Russia or really anybody to know what we're able to do. You're happy to let them speculate. You don't tell your opponents how you're collecting information unless you think they need to know. And this is not one of those situations.

SANCHEZ: Really a fascinating story. The mystery of the missing binder. Bradley Moss, thanks so much for the expertise. Appreciate it.

MOSS: Not a problem.

SANCHEZ: Of course. Up next, more on our breaking news out of Israel. The idea of saying it mistakenly and killed three Israeli hostages in northern Gaza. We're going to speak to a former operations chief of the FBI's hostage rescue team when we come back. Stay with CNN.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)