Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Legal Move Argues For Trump's Presidential Immunity In Georgia Case; Ashcroft Warns Of Ballot Removal In Response To Trump's Disqualification; Alaska Airlines Plane Incident Sparks Urgent FAA Inspections. Aired 2-2:30p ET

Aired January 08, 2024 - 14:00   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:00:15]

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN HOST: What went wrong? A fast-paced investigation into how a door plug blew off an Alaska Airlines plane 16,000 feet above the earth. We are waiting to learn more after the FAA grounded more than 150 Boeing jets. And President Biden warning against extremism as he visits the site of the 2015 Charleston church shooting, another step in his re-election campaign where he says democracy is at stake.

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN HOST: Plus, a growing mystery surrounding the hospitalization of the Secretary of Defense. How could so many people, including President Biden, not know that Lloyd Austin was rushed to the ICU? We're following these major developing stories and many more all coming in right here to CNN News Central.

KEILAR: It is the top of the hour. I'm Brianna Keiler alongside Boris Sanchez today. And investigators have now recovered a critical piece of evidence as they're trying to figure out why a chunk, a key chunk, of an Alaska Airlines plane tore off mid-flight. The NTSB says the missing door plug that fell from the plane shortly after taking off from Portland was found in someone's yard. That's right, their yard. Federal officials say two cell phones that were likely flung from the plane were also found and turned over to investigators.

SANCHEZ: All of this as we're learning that Alaska Airlines restricted the plane from flying over the ocean on long-haul flights after its pressurization warning light went off three times before Friday's incident. Let's bring in CNN's Mike Valerio, who's in Portland for us. Mike, the public is playing a huge role in this fast-moving investigation because a schoolteacher named Bob apparently found the plug in his yard and your team is now hearing from the man who found one of the cell phones that apparently came off of the plane. What else are you learning?

MIKE VALERIO, CNN NEWSOURCE NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, Boris, that's right. First of all, Bob is taking the Internet by storm, the hero of the hour. Late about 9 p.m. last night, we had a news conference from the NTSB. Everybody was packing their laptops up, and the chief of the NTSB, the chair of the NTSB, said, nobody move. We have breaking news. She just learned about it moments ago, called everybody in and said, Bob, the schoolteacher, found a 63-pound chunk of the plane, the door plug, in his backyard. Sent two photos.

So, something that we're waiting for, Boris and Brianna, in the hours ahead, are photos of that door plug, the biggest piece of the puzzle. But you're right. In addition, smaller items, can you believe it? Not one, but two cell phones that fell from 16,000 feet. At least one of them was found in good working order. And, you know, listen, the NTSB went all over the airwaves Saturday and yesterday calling for people in the Cedar Hills community, it's about a 15-minute drive away from where we're standing here at Portland International Airport, to walk around their neighborhoods. It's a very packed suburban neighborhood, not in the middle of the forest by any means, and start looking for this door plug.

This man, Sean Bates, who you'll hear from in a few seconds, he uses that as an excuse, he says, to go out, take a nice weekend walk, and he finds the iPhone. Listen to what he told us.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEAN BATES, FOUND CELL PHONE BELIEVED TO BE FROM ALASKA AIRLINES FLIGHT: The NTSB had asked people to go and report anything that looks like it had been fallen out of the recent Alaska Airlines accident. Thankfully, no one was injured or got sucked out, but they did lose some belongings. They were still looking for the door. And I found a phone sitting on the side of the road that had apparently fallen 16,000 feet. And I was, of course, a little skeptical at first. I was thinking this could just be thrown out of a car. Someone dropped it while they were jogging. But I found it. It was still pretty clean. No scratches on it. Sitting under a bush. And it didn't have a screen lock on it. So, I opened it up, and it was an airplane mode with a travel confirmation and baggage claim for Alaska 1282.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

VALERIO: Lo and behold, an amazing discovery. So, as we talk about the latest with what the NTSB is thinking about in terms of how this happened, we're going to push in looking across the runway. This is the aircraft in question, flight 1282 in the fog and the mist, winter in Portland, everybody. So, you know, after being at all of the NTSB news briefings, there are three buckets that are starting to come into focus as to how this happened. The first one, this could have been, according to the NTSB investigators, an issue with installation of the door plug at Boeing.

The second bucket could have been perhaps a maintenance issue at some point when the aircraft was owned by Alaska Air. And the third bucket, it could have perhaps, Boris, as you mentioned in the introduction to this story, a pressure issue inside the cabin. They are not sure yet.

[14:05:09]

They are not sure yet which bucket it is, if it is perhaps in another area that they are yet to discover. Now that they do have that door plug in their possession, they're expecting another news conference within the next few hours, and we should get more information later this afternoon, Boris and Brianna. SANCHEZ: Really incredible that no one was hurt. So many interesting angles to this, 16,000 feet and not a scratch on that phone. I feel like I dropped my phone out of my pocket and it gets cracked. Mike Valerio, live from Portland, thank you so much. So similar Boeing 737 MAX 9 planes remain grounded nationwide for emergency inspections, which the FAA says will include looking at things like the cabin door exit plugs, door components and fasteners, all this causing major air travel disruptions with hundreds of flights cancelled today.

Let's dig deeper now with CNN's Tom Foreman, who joins us from the airport. We're live at the Magic Wall. So Tom, walk us through the key steps that the NTSB is going to take now to figure out how all of this happened.

TOM FOREMAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, a little hint there from Mike. Basically what they're going to do is look at the timeline of events, how it happened. Bear in mind, this is a new plane. It only started flying in October, so you're not talking about the traditional years of wear and tear and maybe something built up over time. This is something that is relatively new. So, what they're going to be doing is exactly what we're talking about.

They're looking at the components involved, say how did this actually, how did this actually break loose? Were there related things leading to it? That's why finding the door was so important, because NTSB traditionally sort of brings all these things together and just sort of recreates everything and says, okay, so how did it come together? Was it pressure? Was it the seal on the door? Was it the door? I say a door. It's not a door.

This is as if, in very crude terms, if in your home you decided you didn't need an entrance from the kitchen to the dining room and you sealed it all up, that's what this is. It's not a door. It's a place that's meant to be permanent, not to be removed, unless you want to.

SANCHEZ: Unfortunately, not the first Boeing incident involving the 737 MAX 7 and also the MAX 8 as well.

FOREMAN: Oh, absolutely, yeah. If we look at some of the recent incidents in the past few years, very, very troubling for Boeing. Look, we had these fatal accidents in Indonesia and in Ethiopia, big, big, big accidents on the MAX 8. We've had other incidents involving the MAX 9, all of which have raised alarm bells. Look, these are all different. Every air crash is different from the other one. But they do raise alarms out there. And that caused all these cancellations as all these airlines have to look at what they have here and say, look, is there something endemic to this plane that's a problem. And, of course, big problem for Boeing. Look at what their stock did. It was doing pretty well crashing down there.

SANCHEZ: So, in your experience, Tom, I mean, there could be a multitude of explanations for this. What are you looking at closely to see that would point as to how this happened or why this happened?

FOREMAN: Well, I mean, the only thing really to do is rely on the experts. The NTSB goes in there and they are very quick to say you cannot draw associations until you know they are associations. They had these three warnings, pressure warnings in just December, January that indicated there was something wrong with the pressure in the cabin or maybe something wrong with a sensor in the cabin. And maybe it had nothing to do with this.

So, they're very careful about saying let's look at all of these elements. Let's look at the force of what happened, the sequence of what happened, when it happened, where it happened, and then say what actually related to something else. They will gradually pull that together. It will take time, but then we'll get a much clearer indication as to why this went wrong. That will help the airline industry and all of us who have to fly to have faith in what's going to happen moving forward.

SANCHEZ: Yeah, certainly. Tom Foreman, appreciate the expertise. Thanks so much. Brianna?

KEILAR: All right. Joining us now to understand or at least try to understand all of this, we have CNN transportation analyst, Mary Schiavo. She is also the former inspector general for the Department of Transportation. Mary currently has ongoing litigation against Boeing for a crash in 2019, we should mention. All right, Mary, Federal investigators now have this missing door plug that fell from the plane, as we mentioned. What kind of information are they going to be able to determine with this missing piece?

MARY SCHIAVO, CNN TRANSPORT ANALYST: Well, with the missing piece and the doorframe that was there, it's going to be very critical pieces of information as to what is the shape of those fasteners. When you look at the pictures, the circles where the fasteners would have gone or the latches or the bolts still look pretty intact. They look completely round. They look in really great shape. So, they do not look to be defective.

So, by then getting the door and the other pieces, they will hopefully be able to pinpoint exactly where the failure point was. It remains to be seen if all the fasteners, bolts, or latches are still on that piece. But from what was on the plane, those attach points look to be, you know, pretty pristine, pretty intact. They were still circular. When I was an aviation professor, another professor literally got to cut apart a 727. And round holes were not still round after a lot of pressures or incidents and years of service. So that's going to be important to look at those two pieces very carefully.

[14:10:09]

SANCHEZ: And yet, as Tom pointed out, this is a relatively new plane, one that had had pressurization warnings three separate occasions before Friday's incident. Mary, what do you make of that? Do you think there could be a correlation between the warning lights and the plane's blowout?

SCHIAVO: I do. Now, Tom's right, of course, 100% right to say you cannot jump to conclusion. And that's called investigation bias. And you shouldn't do that. But, you know, in air, I like to say in air safety and air accidents, you know, things just are not coincidence. And so, if you had a problem where this door plug was not sealing property or was not latched properly or didn't have all the fasteners, you might have indications that you are not pressurizing properly.

And, you know, clearly when this door plug came off, now that we've learned that even the pilot's headsets were ripped from their heads and didn't work after that and the cockpit door was slammed into the bathroom door, this was a much more violent event than initially thought. This was, you know, just a catastrophic depressurization. So, you know, those are a lot of things that will take into consideration. But yes, I think, and I'm not, I'm not an investigator, so I can say this. I think that they are related, the pressurization problems and the loss of the door plug.

KEILAR: When an airplane is having repeated pressurization problems like that in such close proximity and time, I mean, late December and then two here in recent days, you know, just a few days ago, it makes, it kind of makes you wonder. I think the lay person looks at those dates, Mary, and says, why was this plane flying?

SCHIAVO: Exactly. Well, one, because it's allowed to, but two, the airline did limit its flights, long flights over water, what's called ETOPS, you know, flying over bodies of water. If you had a pressurization problem, if you had an issue over water, you wouldn't be able to divert and get down in a hurry. And they said it couldn't make the route to Hawaii, for example. But, you know, the Federal Aviation Administration has lots of rules of when you can continue to fly something with an issue and when you cannot. And we can only assume that the aviation regulations pertaining to Alaska Airline Operations allowed it to continue to fly because otherwise, obviously, it's an un-airworthy aircraft and that is a huge FAA violation.

SANCHEZ: Another thing about the story that struck me, Mary, the NTSB saying that the cockpit voice recorder was completely overwritten. Walk us through first what that means and how that might impact the investigation.

SCHIAVO: Right. So when you're, you know, getting ready to fly a plane, when you power up the plane, you know, you do, pilots do the walk down and the plane doesn't have its power on often. Then you get in the cockpit, you turn on the power and you power up the plane. That cockpit voice recorder starts recording right then. And it keeps recording until the plane is powered down. You know, basically you turn off the power. Now, in this instance, it got back on the ground and it got on the ground very quickly. So, once it was powered off, that recording would have stopped right there.

If someone keeps, you know, -- if the power is still on, it'll keep recording. And after two hours, it'll just record right over what was there before. This is a mistake. Whether the mistake was made by the airline and they didn't power it down, or the mistake was made by the NTSB who powered it up and had it powered when they started their investigation, that remains to be seen. But critical information was lost. But in this case, you can make up for that loss because both pilots are alive and can tell you what happened and can tell you how, you know, violent the decompression was and what happened to their things. But it was a mistake. It was a mistake probably in the investigation.

KEILAR: Yeah.

SANCHEZ: Yeah. Really frightening moments in the sky. Again, fortunate that no one was hurt. Mary Schiavo, appreciate your perspective. Thanks.

SCHIAVO: Thank you.

SANCHEZ: Still to come, former President Donald Trump says he is protected under presidential immunity. He wants the criminal conspiracy case against him in Fulton County, Georgia thrown out. But does his argument have any legs? We're going to discuss with a former federal prosecutor. Plus, Missouri's Republican Secretary of State, threatening to kick President Biden off the ballot there as payback for Trump being removed from two other states' ballots. He's going to join us live in just a few minutes.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:15:09]

KEILAR: Former President Donald Trump navigating a slew of legal issues, now trying to get his case in Georgia thrown out. Today, his lawyers filed a motion to dismiss the election subversion case in Atlanta saying that Trump has presidential immunity and was conducting official acts when he was investigating unfounded election tampering allegations back in 2020. A D.C. appeals court will hear the same argument in court tomorrow.

We have former federal prosecutor Renato Mariotti with us now. Okay, Renato, so Trump's lawyers invoking this supremacy clause of the U.S. Constitution, they've done this time and again, hoping to shield him from criminal prosecution. Also saying, though, that state-level justice systems cannot interfere with federal duties. So, is he saying that calling Georgia to find the votes is his duty?

RENATO MARIOTTI, FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR: That's what he's saying. It's not a very good argument. I guess I could call it a novel argument because it's never been made before. But just so our viewers understand, the federal government has a very limited role in the oversight of the U.S. state elections and even federal elections, which are conducted by the states. So, our actual federal election system is actually conducted for the most part by state officials, which is why some states might have issues with hanging chads and others use electronic voting systems. So, you know, it's a very, I'd say it's laughable on its face, but it's nonetheless a novel argument that courts are going to have to consider.

[14:20:09]

KEILAR: And, you know, we've seen him use this time and again. Until he can't use it, he seems to want to use it. Is it just a delay tactic?

MARIOTTI: I think it's partially a delay tactic. It's partially an opportunity to advance an argument that since it hasn't been rejected by courts, I suppose there's some theoretical chance it could be accepted. I also think, Brianna, you know, as you mentioned a moment ago, this case is before the court of appeals, the federal court of appeals in the District of Columbia right now. The Georgia courts, of course, are in a different, you know, are a different system. He might be hoping for some inconsistency in the rulings that could help him or eventually get this case up to the Supreme Court. That's really what I imagine is on his team's mind right now.

KEILAR: Yeah, in tomorrow in Jack Smith's federal election subversion case against Trump. The D.C. appeals court is going to be hearing arguments about this same question, as I mentioned. Likely, as you said, goes all the way to the Supreme Court. But how do you expect the federal ruling will affect the Georgia state case? How quickly?

MARIOTTI: So, I think there's going to be a federal ruling very quickly there. The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals has a very expedited schedule. And because there's a trial in the District of Columbia right now that's on hold, a case that's on hold. In part because of this issue. And then I think there's a real question, Brianna, of whether the Supreme Court takes the case or whether they let the ruling stand by the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals.

If they don't take the case at all, this would be a case that I would say would have what we call persuasive authority for a court in Georgia considering this. In other words, the court in Georgia would look at what the judges in D.C. decided, but they wouldn't be bound by what they decided. If the Supreme Court ultimately takes the issue, that might take at a couple months at least to the schedule, if not more. But then when the Supreme Court came out with its ruling, there would be at least portions of that ruling that would be controlling on any court in Georgia.

KEILAR: Renato, great to have you. Thank you so much.

MARIOTTI: Thank you.

KEILAR: Boris.

SANCHEZ: Missouri's Republican Secretary of State is threatening to take President Biden off the state's 2024 presidential ballot as payback for Maine's and Colorado's ruling that Donald Trump's actions leading up to the Capitol Hill insurrection disqualify him from the primary ballot. Jay Ashcroft posted on X that the rulings are disgraceful and that they undermine the republic. Secretary Ashcroft joins us now live. Sir, thank you so much for coming on with us. First, I want you to walk us through your legal reasoning, the reasons for your opposition to the decisions in Colorado and Maine. Why do you think they're flawed?

JAY ASHCROFT, MISSOURI SECRETARY OF STATE: Well, thank you for having me. It's not just that I think they're flawed. They are flawed. In Maine, you had not a court, not an elected statewide official, but an appointed bureaucrat that decided she did not like one of the opposition candidates to be on the ballot. So, she, of her own volition, removed them. That is a terrible thing. SNACHEZ: That is part of Maine's state constitution, though. It

mandates that the Secretary of State hold a hearing to determine whether a candidate should be on the ballot. So that is the process for Maine, though.

ASHCROFT: Okay, so that's the process that you would like if one of your children was being prosecuted for a crime in Maine. That's the process.

SANCHEZ: Sir, I don't want to interrupt. I just want to point out, I don't have kids, but that's what's in Maine's state constitution. It's not according to me. It's what's in the constitution for Maine. ASHCROFT: The constitution of the United States gives the criteria for individuals to run for president. The Maine constitution does not do that.

SANCHEZ: But Congress gives the states the ability to determine how their elections are run.

ASHCROFT: But it does not give them the authority to add conditions to who may run for president. The Supreme Court has held that multiple times. What we saw happen in Maine was a total lack of due process, a total misunderstanding of the 14th Amendment, and a decision made by someone that's not even an attorney, much less a judge. If you look at Colorado, once again, there was no due process. There wasn't the right to cross-examine all witnesses.

The president didn't have the right to call the witnesses that he wanted to call. There was hearsay evidence that was allowed in. He's never been convicted by a court of competent jurisdiction of insurrection. And, of course, the 14th Amendment, on its plain language, if you read it, you'll see it, does not apply to him. It's that clear. And I'm happy to go through the 14th Amendment if you want.

[14:25:09]

But my real concern is this. My real concern is that Colorado and Maine have decided that they themselves can suddenly throw off political parties or political individuals that they don't like. That is not good for our country. It's not good for Republicans to do that. It's not good for Democrats to do that. And we should not have secretaries of state making that decision. But if they're going to, it will be applied equally.

(CROSSTALK)

SANCHEZ: Well I do believe -- I want to get to that. But I do believe that when it comes to due process, the president, former president's team had the ability in Colorado to be part of that hearing and present evidence, as they did in Maine.

(CROSSTALK)

ASHCROFT: They didn't have SANCHEZ: They chose not to present evidence to the secretary of state in Maine. And she ultimately sided with the folks that were trying to get him off the ballot.

(CROSSTALK)

ASHCROFT Allowing someone to show up

SANCHEZ: They are going by the process of their state constitutions though.

ASHCROFT: They are not going by the process of the United States Constitution.

SANCHEZ: I understand your point that the Supreme Court hasn't made a decision.

ASHCROFT: Was the president, -- was hearsay evidence allowed in the Colorado and Maine cases? Simple question. Was it? Yes, it was.

(CROSSTALK)

SANCHEZ: I'm not in a position -- I'm not in a position. I haven't gone through all the evidence. I haven't gone through all the evidence myself to answer the question. Nevertheless, my point, the point behind the question was to get your perspective on why you felt, that these legal arguments didn't work. You mentioned that the 14th amendment doesn't specifically mention the presidency.

You mentioned that you believe that President Trump needs to be convicted in order for it to potentially apply to him for insurrection. In other words, you think that when the Supreme Court takes this up, they are going to side with President Trump. Is that correct?

ASHCROFT: They are going to side against people being thrown off the ballot in this sort of manner. The brief that I will be filing with the United States Supreme Court is not going to say that President Trump is a bad person. It's not going to say that he's a good person.

SANCHEZ: Sure.

ASHCROFT: What it's going to say is that this extrajudicial means of removing people from the ballot is catastrophic to our country if it's allowed to continue. Because if Democrats can do it, you know that Republicans will do it. And if Republicans will do it then Democrats

(CROSSTALK)

SANCHEZ: To that point, Secretary, in order to remove President Biden from the ballot, according to your state constitution, you would need to go to court. What do you think would be your strongest argument?

ASHCROFT: No, not at all. Not at all. If you look at --

(CROSSTALK) SANCHEZ: Your state constitution actually states that the secretary of state lacks authority to assess qualifications of a candidate to determine whether to place a candidate's name on a primary ballot.

(CROSSTALK)

ASHCROFT: Sir --

SANCHEZ: That's according to section 115-387 of your state constitution.

ASHCROFT: Sir, what I'm saying is, if the Supreme Court upholds the ruling out of Colorado, and what happened in Colorado

SANCHEZ: Which went to court to disqualify Donald Trump from the ballot. So, you, according to

ASHCROFT: Sir, you're not listening

SANCHEZ: your state constitution, would need to go to court.

ASHCROFT: Sir, sir, sir, let's just be clear. First of all, you've already said you're not an attorney, and you don't know what happened in Colorado.

SANCHEZ: I know what happened in Colorado, sir. What I said was that I didn't read through all of the evidence specifically to be able to qualify whether there was hearsay or not. To get back to my question, --

(CROSSTALK)

ASHCROFT: (INAUDIBLE)

SANCHEZ: -- you said that you would decide to remove Joe Biden from the ballot in your state. According to your state constitution, which I just read to you from, it says you need to go to court. I'm asking you what you think your strongest argument is.

ASHCROFT: And I continue to try to answer your questions, and you continue to try to tell me stuff that just isn't true.

(CROSSTALK)

SANCHEZ: That's not factual, sir. You made an accusation about me not knowing something. I'm trying to clarify it for you.

(CROSSTALK)

ASHCROFT: Well I keep trying

SANCHEZ: You can choose to answer the question or just continue deflecting. What is the strongest argument you would make in court to remove Joe Biden from the ballot? Go.

ASHCROFT: What has happened is, what I said in my statement was, if this becomes the law of the land and the Supreme Court

SANCHEZ: That a state can choose how to qualify candidates --

(CROSSTALK)

ASHCROFT: Sir, are you going to let me explain it or not?

SANCHEZ: -- on the ballot according to their state's constitutions? I'm just trying to clarify the point. I'm trying to clarify the point.

ASHCROFT: Sir. The United States Constitution is supreme over state constitutions. I hope you at least understand that.

SANCHEZ: I do.

ASHCROFT: Now, I have to talk a little bit about the Colorado case. In Colorado, that lawsuit started because there's a law that prohibits the election authority, the Secretary of State, from doing something -- well, in the vernacular, from doing something they're not supposed to do. That's how the lawsuit started. That same law, or a very similar law, applies to me in Missouri. If anyone can say so-and-so isn't supposed to be on the ballot and it's wrong for you to put them on the ballot, then we're going to see secretaries of state, elections authorities, maybe even counties.