Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

EPA Issues Drinking Water Standards For PFAS "Forever Chemicals"; Bodycam Video: Chicago Police Fire 96 Shots In Deadly Traffic Stop; British Foreign Secretary Cameron In D.C. To Push For Ukraine Aid. Aired 7:30-8a ET

Aired April 10, 2024 - 07:30   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL)

[07:30:14]

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: All right, we have an important update to a story we brought you the day of the eclipse. We talked to Professor Adam Hartstone-Rose who set out to study animal behavior during the moment of eclipse totality. He was studying, among others, Galapagos tortoises.

Now, in the eclipse of 2017, he observed that some of the tortoises started inexplicably mating, so he wanted to see what happened this time. Would they do it, literally, again?

The professor sent me some of his preliminary observations from Monday. "They did have sex," he writes, "but not during the eclipse. That group of tortoises is rather amorous."

And prior to the eclipse, the females spread out around the enclosure and one of the males basically made the rounds. He writes, "I think the answer is that tortoises just surprisingly mate very publicly and with literally zero discretion. Twenty-seventeen," he writes, "was probably an honest coincidence."

"However, the tortoises did do something else amazing," he says. As totally approached, one of the females went toward the barn where they are led in for the night, but right at totality, all of them piled up to be led in and they pushed with such force some apparently, literally, rearing up -- they jammed the door.

He writes that "Almost all of the animals they watched went into their evening routine during the eclipse, clamoring to get into their night holding areas, but none, other than the tortoises, did so with such determination as to cause a literal maintenance problem."

So there you have it. Sex, but not eclipse sex -- and some aggressive door-rushing. This is very important, Kate.

KATE BOLDUAN, CNN ANCHOR: I -- the fact that you continued to be able to do this with a straight face and expose our immaturity on this show is fantastic.

BERMAN: I felt that I owed the viewers an explanation because we spent a lot of time on tortoises having sex on Monday.

BOLDUAN: Yes.

BERMAN: And so I felt like people would want to know what happened.

BOLDUAN: The definition of with bated breath.

Can we please put that wall up where -- I just want you and this wall to be the enduring image of the show, which is a "Group of tortoises is a rather amorous one."

BERMAN: There are worse things to be called than an amorous tortoise. Believe me, I know.

BOLDUAN: Let's save that for the commercial break. You guys should only hear what we actually discuss. Thank you. Can we move on now?

BERMAN: Please.

BOLDUAN: OK. Here we go.

The EPA is issuing new rules this morning -- I can't -- I can't, John. I can't. Darn it, he did it again.

The EPA -- stop. The EPA -- the EPA -- oh man, it's seven.

All right. The EPA is issuing new rules this morning to try and make drinking water safer in the United States. The goal is to reduce the amount of toxic forever chemicals found in tap water. A recent study found that nearly half of the nation's water has traces of these dangerous substances.

Let's bring in CNN's Meg Tirrell because I'm clearly losing it on this one. Save us all, Meg. Remind us 1), what these forever chemicals are and do, and what these new rules are going to -- what impact they're going to have.

MEG TIRRELL, CNN MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT: Yeah, Kate. So PFAS stands for per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, which is why we call them PFAS. We also refer to them as forever chemicals because their chemical bonds are so strong in order to do the things we wanted them to do that they never essentially break down. And they can persist both in the environment and in our bodies and accumulate over time.

Now, these have been used since the 1940s for various things like non- staining clothing, non-stick cookware, heat-resistant items -- things like that -- and they're found in a lot of different products. Teflon is one of the famous ones, but also food packaging and many other household items. And they have been starting to be phased out, especially as their health risks have become more and more apparent.

Studies have linked PFAS to different kinds of cancer, to high cholesterol and obesity, to immune issues, essentially making your immune system not even respond as well -- as well to vaccines and to developmental issues as well. And so, today, the Biden administration and the EPA are finalizing a

rule around setting limits for how high PFAS levels can be in drinking water -- essentially, to almost not detectable levels. This is going to focus on six of these chemicals and they say that this will affect PFAS exposure for about 100 million people in the United States. They say because of the health effects here they think this should prevent tens of thousands of illnesses and thousands of deaths -- guys.

BOLDUAN: It's a lot of -- I mean, when you're talking about reducing the exposure to 100 million people is huge and obviously significant.

Are they giving any estimation of how long before they think they'll see the positive benefits of this?

[07:35:02]

TIRRELL: Yeah. So water systems have three years to complete the monitoring for PFAS levels and they have to disclose the levels that they have. If they do find levels higher than the limits, they've got an additional two years to implement solutions. So we're talking about five years there.

You know, the water authorities, in some cases, are saying this is going to be incredibly expensive and too expensive to be able to do feasibly. The Biden administration also is implementing $1 billion funding as part of this to try to help water authorities do this.

So there's a big hope that this can make a big difference as these chemicals are starting to get phased out. Unfortunately, they're still in the environment around us and folks have been saying we've got to do more.

BOLDUAN: Yeah, and wants to do more very quickly and for years.

It's good to see you, Meg. Thank you so much for bringing us that -- John.

BERMAN: All right. This morning, we have newly released body camera footage from a traffic stop that turned deadly. Ninety-six shots fired in 41 seconds. That is how Chicago police officers responded after pulling over 26-year-old Dexter Reed for not wearing his seat belt. Now, this is difficult to watch.

CNN's Omar Jimenez has the details.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

OMAR JIMENEZ, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): March 21, 2024. Chicago police are initiating a traffic stop on a driver reportedly for not wearing a seat belt, according to the Civilian Office of Police Accountability. A traffic stop being conducted by five tactical officers.

CHICAGO POLICE OFFICER 1: Roll the window down. What are you doing?

DEXTER REED, KILLED BY POLICE OFFICERS DURING TRAFFIC STOP: Nothing. CHICAGO POLICE OFFICER 2: Roll this one down.

CHICAGO POLICE OFFICER 1: Roll that one down, too.

CHICAGO POLICE OFFICER 2: What's going on? Hey.

CHICAGO POLICE OFFICER 1: Don't roll the window up. Don't roll the window up.

REED: OK, OK.

CHICAGO POLICE OFFICER 1: Do not roll the window up.

REED: OK.

CHICAGO POLICE OFFICER 1: Unlock the doors now (bleep).

JIMENEZ (voice-over): The temperature quickly escalates. One officer puts what appears to be his gun on the windshield. Reed then fires first, hitting an officer in the forearm, according to the initial investigation. Then, chaos.

(Multiple Gunshots)

CHICAGO POLICE OFFICER 3: (INAUDIBLE) his gun.

CHICAGO POLICE OFFICER 4: Shots fired.

(Multiple Gunshots)

JIMENEZ (voice-over): Reed goes down.

(Multiple Gunshots)

JIMENEZ (voice-over): Then three final gunshots. Ninety-six in total, according to investigators. A gun was later recovered from the front seat of Reed's car.

Porscha Banks had just been on the phone with her brother in the minutes before it all happened, then she turned on a police scanner at her shop.

PORSCHA BANKS, DEXTER REED'S SISTER: I'm listening to the police talking -- like, saying "shots fired." But I can hear all the shots on the scanner. Like, I could hear so many shots, so many shots, so many shots. But I didn't know that it was my brother. So get to know later on that night that those shots that I heard and then the ambulance going past my shop it was my brother was the most heartbreaking thing that I could ever feel in my life.

JIMENEZ (voice-over): One of the family's attorneys argues this never should have happened in the first place.

ANDREW STROTH, ATTORNEY FOR THE FAMILY: There was a weapon recovered in his car. However, it started with an unconstitutional, pretextual, and unnecessary stop of Dexter Reed, and that's what precipitated the entire incident.

JIMENEZ (voice-over): And questions remain over why tactical officers initiated a traffic stop for a supposed seat belt violation. As part of a brief statement, Chicago Police says this incident is still under investigation but the stop is where it all began.

ROOSEVELT R. BANKS III, DEXTER REED'S UNCLE: If you don't stop my nephew, he'll be alive today.

JIMENEZ (voice-over): Reed's uncle sitting alongside his father.

R. BANKS: When this happened to my nephew, I hope the police can understand that this is the same pain that they feel when an officer is killed in the line of duty.

JIMEMEZ (voice-over): It's a pain that manifests in memories and pain that manifests in despair.

NICOLE BANKS, DEXTER REED'S MOTHER: They took my son away from me and I don't know what I'm going to do without him.

P. BANKS: And I just wish that I could talk to him one more time. But to see him gunned down -- I never, ever thought that it would be him. I never thought that it would be him. I never thought that it would be him.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BERMAN: So tough to watch. Our thanks to Omar Jimenez for that -- Kate.

BOLDUAN: And joining us now is CNN senior law enforcement analyst, Charles Ramsey. He's a former Philadelphia police commissioner. He also served in the Chicago Police Department for nearly three decades. It's good to see you, Commissioner.

Ninety-six rounds in 41 seconds.

CHARLES RAMSEY, CNN SENIOR LAW ENFORCEMENT ANALYST, FORMER PHILADELPHIA POLICE COMMISSIONER, FORMER CHICAGO POLICE DEPARTMENT OFFICER (via Webex by Cisco): Thank you.

BOLDUAN: What does that mean?

RAMSEY: Well, I mean, it is a lot of shots fired but you have four officers firing simultaneously. They're using semiautomatic weapons. The average clip holds probably about 17 rounds. And so, it's not -- even though it's a lot of rounds being fired it's certainly understandable how that many could be fired in that short a period of time.

[07:40:15]

BOLDUAN: And talk to me about -- Omar laid out the bodycam video. You've seen -- you've seen it as well. What do you see in this encounter? What do you see in this incident?

The preliminary investigation suggests that Reed opened fire on the officers first, hitting an officer. Does that change this incident? What do you think?

RAMSEY: Well, I mean, I think it's important here. The way the family and the attorney -- and I certainly understand where they're coming from, but they're making it sound as if he was shot because he was not wearing a seat belt. He was shot because he shot a police officer. That's why he was shot.

I mean, the stop was made and we can argue whether or not tactical officers should be making traffic stops for seat belts and things like that. But it would not have occurred had he not fired first and shot a police officer, period. I mean, so, you can't shoot a cop and expect not to get shot in return. It's just the way it is. And so, I really understand what they're saying.

This is going to be investigated by the state's attorney. It's going to be investigated by the Civilian Office of Police Accountability.

The final shots that were fired are the only ones that I saw on the videos that give me some concern -- those last three shots, in particular. Now, even though the majority of shots were fired while he was in the car and had very dark tinted windows, obviously, he wasn't incapacitated because he was able to get out of the car and get to the rear of the car. They believed he was still armed. They continued to fire.

Now, the last three shots are the ones that will have to be scrutinized very, very closely. But having been in shootouts if you will before, myself, your adrenaline is pumping. And believe me, it's a very, very tense situation. And when you're firing that gun you're trying to make sure that individual is no longer a threat to you.

So not to make excuses. It does need to be looked at. I am concerned about the last three shots. But the use of deadly force, in my opinion, overall was justified in this case.

BOLDUAN: Multiple agencies are investigating, as you just mentioned.

Chief -- Commissioner, thank you so much for coming on, as always -- John.

RAMSEY: Thank you.

BERMAN: All right. This morning, if you are in the market for gold -- and based on what we hear, many of you are -- be warned. Prices just hit a record high.

CNN's Matt Egan is here. What's going on?

MATT EGAN, CNN REPORTER: John, listen, gold is having a moment right now. It is getting scooped up by everyone from central bankers in China to shoppers at Costco. That is quite the range. Gold prices up 14 percent so far this year -- up 11 of the last 12 days. Look at this -- moving closer and closer to the $2,400 range. If you take a live look at gold prices right now, they're up another .2 percent -- again moving closer to $2,400, which would be the first time ever.

So what's happening -- because this move is getting some attention on Wall Street, right? Gold is a safe haven so a spike like this could be looked at as potentially an ominous sign. There's a few factors here.

One, gold is viewed as a hedge against inflation. And we know prices have been going up. Consumer prices are slowing in terms of their growth but they're still so much higher than before COVID. Rate cuts -- the Fed may be cutting interest rates. When that happens, sometimes that tends to boost gold prices.

China is buying. Central bankers there and other countries, they are diversifying away from the dollar. That is lifting physical demand for gold.

Also, listen, these are scary times and gold is viewed as kind of a war hedge during geopolitical fears. We have the Ukraine-Russia War, the situation in the Middle East. All of that is also boosting demand.

And then there's FOMO, right -- fear of missing out. To some extent, gold prices are going up because people see the prices going up and they know other people are buying.

Suze Orman was on and speaking to Erin Burnett last night. Listen to what she said about why people are buying gold.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SUZE ORMAN, FINANCIAL ADVISER, AUTHOR: People always have this herd mentality and this fear of missing out. It happened with Bitcoin. Bitcoin is going up, it's going up, it's going up. Well, I have to buy it.

Oh, gold. Never even thought about gold before. And now, you're in Costo and people are in line. And they're running out of it and they'll only let people buy five apiece. And all of a sudden, this frenzy starts and everybody wants to be a part of it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

EGAN: Now, Suze also warned though that the thing about gold is eventually you have to be able to sell it. You also have to figure out where to store it. You might have to get insurance. So, yes, gold prices are going up but her point was no, it may not be for everyone right now.

BERMAN: Very interesting. If you need me to hold on to some of your gold, Matt, though, I will do it if --

EGAN: I might take you up on that, John.

BERMAN: I appreciate it.

All right. Download speed, upload speed, data usage, extra router feed. You need to be a rocket scientist to understand your internet bills. But there is a new rule that should make them less confusing and hopefully, save you some money.

[07:45:10]

(COMMERCIAL)

BERMAN: This morning, six former Mississippi law enforcement officers who pleaded guilty to the torture and sexual assault of two Black men will be sentenced in state court. All six previously pleaded guilty to state charges as part of a plea agreement. Last month, they were each sentenced on federal charges.

[07:50:11]

New this morning, the House will delay sending impeachment articles against Alejandro Mayorkas to the Senate until next week. Senate Republicans are trying to find more time to make the argument for a full trial as Democrats there are expected to try to quickly dismiss the articles against the secretary of Homeland Security.

And for the first time in history, the women's NCAA basketball championship game drew a larger television audience than the men's final. According to Nielsen, over four million more viewers tuned in Sunday to watch South Carolina defeat Iowa than those who watched UConn win their second consecutive championship by defeating Purdue on Monday night -- Kate.

BOLDUAN: OK. So try this one on for size. Nutrition labels for your internet plan. It sounds strange but that is exactly what the FCC is rolling out and trying to do today. New mandatory labels for internet providers all designed to help customers see exactly what their plans offer and how the costs break down, hopefully, so you can save some money.

CNN media analyst and senior media reporter for Axios, Sara Fischer, is joining me now.

This label -- we have it in the box next to you -- it looks just like the packaging labels that we see -- the nutrition labels we see on food packaging.

What is this all about, Sara?

SARA FISCHER, CNN MEDIA ANALYST, SENIOR MEDIA REPORTER, AXIOS: Kate, you have tried to buy your cable before and they're always trying to upsell you. They want to add an internet package. They want to add maybe something with wireless. They want to add something with streaming.

And I think consumers have felt frustrated that they pay a bill and then they don't know exactly what they're getting. A lot of times those hidden fees -- things like data caps or throttling, or you have to pay more for data.

The FCC, for the past seven years, has been looking at this problem and saying what can we do about it? And so, they borrowed something from the pages over at the FDA and they said we can make a nutrition label that's going to help people understand what all those hidden costs are. That way, when they're evaluating some of their cable plans -- maybe they're looking at an AT&T plan versus a Verizon or a Comcast plan -- it's much easier to see what they're actually paying for.

BOLDUAN: Do you -- what do you think of this? Do you think it's going to -- it really is going to help consumers?

FISCHER: I do. I think the hidden fees have become a bigger problem as we've moved into the digital era. Remember, a lot of these companies are now trying to package in streaming. They're trying to package in new channels. And because we're using so much data, particularly for those who provide mobile packages, there's a lot of data throttling, meaning you have to hit a certain cap and then you're going to get charged even more. So consumers don't understand what these hidden prices are.

The hope is that if it's more transparent you can make a better choice as a consumer.

And by the way, Kate, we have so many bundles in our life right now with the internet, right? Think about all the different streaming bundles or whatever. We actually are in a good position here because telecom is regulated by an agency, the FCC, that has the power to roll something like this out. Can you imagine how much easier your life would be if we had nutrition labels for all of the different types of bundles that we pay for in our life? We'd save a lot of money.

BOLDUAN: If that means I don't have to pretend like I'm reading that fine print that you end up just scrolling through and clicking agree, that's a fantastic idea. I would -- I'd love to meet the people that actually read that fine print.

Broadband providers -- they were fighting against this. What is their concern?

FISCHER: I mean, their concern is that 1) they obviously want to be able to upsell people, right?

BOLDUAN: Yeah.

FISCHER: So any transparency that you are giving to people makes it harder for them to squeeze in little things where they can make more money.

But then, 2) they say packages can be very flexible. You know, people's data usage, for example, should be something that's flexible. Somebody who is using a lot should be paying more than somebody who isn't. And trying to package everything into one nutrition label is rather reductive. But I think that there's a healthy compromise here and that they'll work through that.

Ultimately, I think this is a huge win for consumers. I think people will save money.

BOLDUAN: More transparency is definitely a win for consumers on this one.

It's great to see you, Sara. Thank you so much -- John.

FISCHER: Thank you.

BERMAN: All right. The United Kingdom's top diplomat, David Cameron, is in Washington this morning meeting with lawmakers to stress just how vital it is that the U.S. supports Ukraine in the war against Russia. The trip comes after the former prime minister made a pitstop at Mar-a-Lago to speak with former President Donald Trump.

Cameron has made his position to the U.S. clear, insisting that it is "Profoundly in your interest to pass aid to Ukraine."

With me now is Lord David Cameron. Lord Cameron, thank you so much for being with us.

Of your trip to see Donald Trump, Simon Fraser, the former head of Britain's Foreign Office, told The New York Times, "Flattering Trump about his importance and significance on this issue" -- Ukraine -- "is an astute move on Cameron's part. Let's see whether it delivers."

So, on Ukraine, to what extent has it delivered?

DAVID CAMERON, BRITISH FOREIGN SECRETARY: Well, it's a private meeting so I have to be careful what I say. And also, I think foreign politicians should always be careful about coming to the United States -- your great democracy -- and telling you what to do. So that's not what I'm doing.

[07:55:00]

The point I'm making is that it's, I think, profoundly in Britain's interest but also in America's interest that Trump doesn't get to win in Ukraine. That wouldn't just be bad for our European security, I think adversaries around the world, whether it's Iran or China or whoever, would draw lessons that we don't stand by our allies and that there would be risk of further aggression and further danger in our world.

And without saying what I spoke with about -- with Donald Trump -- I mean, fundamentally, this year -- and you heard from Zelenskyy this morning. There's a risk that Ukraine will lose more ground to Putin and no one wants to be in a situation in November where we could have acted, we could have helped, we could have beaten back Putin, we could have started the process of getting a Ukraine win and getting a just peace, but we failed to do that.

And the point I'd made to American viewers is 90 percent of what you spend helping Ukraine with defense -- that goes straight into American jobs. And in my view, it also goes straight into American security. So a very important point and that's why I'm here and having these discussions today.

BERMAN: How does the United Kingdom feel about a possible peace settlement that would seed territory to Putin that he has won in Crimea and Donbas?

CAMERON: Well look, first of all, the Ukrainians have been very brave. They've taken back 50 percent of the territory that Putin seized. They've sunk 25 percent of his Navy on the Black Sea.

I think our role is to back Ukraine. Give them the weapons and give them the support. And Europe is now doing more than twice as much as America and rightly so. It's our continent. It's our risk. But we should do that.

Get Ukraine on a winning trajectory. Show that Putin is losing. And then it's up to the Ukrainians to decide when to achieve that just peace.

And I know everyone wants to see an end to the killing and an end to the war, but you only get that by backing Ukraine and by showing strength. Peace comes through strength, not through appeasement and weakness.

BERMAN: Because Donald Trump reportedly is floating a peace plan that would seed territory for peace. That's why I was asking that specific question. Is that something that should be discussed right now, in your mind?

CAMERON: I don't think we should be discussing those things right now. We should be discussing how do we get Ukraine back on the front foot. They've shown incredible bravery. They've shown that they can win against Putin. They're not going to lose for lack of morale. They're not going to lose for lack of ingenuity on the battlefield. The only way they can lose is if we don't give them the support they deserve.

You know, our economies together outrank Russia's 25 to one. Putin has already paid a huge price for this terrible strategic error of invading Ukraine. He's lost 350,000 soldiers. He's lost so much of his fleet. He's lost a huge amount of his aircraft. It's been massively costly to Russia. A huge mistake.

And NATO has got stronger. And one of the points I'm sure, whether you're a Republican or Democrat, you'd appreciate is back in 2014, when I was prime minister, only three countries in NATO were spending two percent of GDP on defense. It's now around 20. So, Europe is doing more, and rightly so. But Europe and America sticking together and standing up against bullies and dictators -- that's good for both of us.

BERMAN: Well, let's talk about NATO for a second because Donald Trump has said he would tell Russia to do "whatever the hell they want" to NATO countries who do not spend enough on defense.

Given your record and given your support of NATO over the years, you must be worried about what Donald Trump has said about NATO.

CAMERON: Well, the point I would make is the NATO of 2024-2025 is different to the NATO of 2014. We've now got Sweden and Finland, two highly capable members who have joined. We're more united than ever before.

And where as it was three countries spending two percent, it's now around 20 out of the 32 members with many of the other members having plans. And a lot of that is because of the pressure -- the success that American presidents, quite rightly, have put on Europeans and said come on, guys -- you've got to spend more of your own money on your defense. That is happening.

So whoever is president in -- after November of this year, I want them to be in a position where they can see a strong and united NATO that's succeeding, and a strong Ukraine that is pushing back Russia and capable of achieving that defeat for Putin, and a just peace that will be so vital for America's national interests.

Because, of course, China is watching this. Iran is watching this. North Korea is watching this. Even if you think China is a more important threat than Russia -- and right now, I think Russia is the key threat that we face. But even if you think it's China, China will draw a lesson. If we can push back Putin, deliver a win for Ukraine, deliver a just peace, show that NATO is strong, show the United States is strong, that will send the clearest possible message to President Xi and to China not to take risks in the Pacific.

BERMAN: Let me quickly ask about Israel. President Biden just told Univision about Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu: "I think what he is doing is a mistake. I don't agree with his approach."